How air purifiers and cleaners may help keep you safer indoors from COVID-19

Every time we open our mouth we exhale particles that may contain the virus.

By Eden David 1 July 2020,


As states begin to adjust to a new normal and people start spending more time indoors, experts and local officials are starting to consider the role air filtration and ventilation may play in slowing the spread of COVID-19 in indoor spaces.

Most recently, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo announced that all large malls in New York will have to install “air filtration systems that can filter out the COVID virus” before reopening.

This requirement comes as infectious disease experts start more aggressively studying the ways in which the virus can spread through inhaling small particles that could hang around in the air for hours -- otherwise known as aerosolized particles.

"As we are understanding more about this virus there is consensus that aerosolized transmission plays an important role in the transmission of the virus," said Dr. Rajat Mittal, professor of mechanical engineering at Johns Hopkins University, who is studying the dynamics of COVID-19 particles and mask efficacy.

Every time we breathe or open our mouth to speak we can exhale or inhale particles that may contain infectious viruses.

“You don’t have to be coughing or doing anything vigorous for these droplets to come out of your mouth, and if you have the infection in your mouth, those particles can carry the virus," said Dr. Jodie Dionne-Odom, Assistant professor in UAB’s Division of Infectious Diseases. “They hang out in the air and someone coming after you just has to breathe the air to get the infection."

MORE: Federal records show thousands of desperate pleas from health care workers seeking better COVID protective gear

This risk of infection through these small particles is especially high in small enclosed spaces like offices, and restaurants, where the air is not being circulated as often and many people are spending prolonged, direct contact with one another. Experts agree that efficient ventilation may likely be an important part in safely resuming indoor activities.

“Obviously cleaning surfaces is still important but cleaning the air that recirculates through buildings is now a huge focus,” according to Nancy McClellan, an industrial hygiene specialist.

Effective ventilation can clean the air through recirculation while filtering out small, potentially infectious particles. Experts are also evaluating special technologies that can disinfect incoming viral particles, like UV light.

"There are some really fascinating technologies out there but they do not get established quickly or cheaply and the research putting them into place isn’t there yet," said Dr. David Krause, a certified industrial hygienist, who is the owner of Healthcare Consulting and Contracting (HC3) and currently leading the American Industrial Hygiene Association’s initiative to develop recommendations on engineering controls in non-health care work spaces.

Experts agree that the most practical method as of right now for small business and homeowners is high efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filtration systems. HEPA filters, according to the United States Environmental Protection Agency, can theoretically remove at least 99.97% of particles as small as .3 microns.

“That is potentially good because almost all the droplets that are going to be carrying viruses are all within that range,” said Mittal.

The performance of a filter is characterized by its Minimum Efficiency Reporting Values, otherwise known as MERV rating. On the MERV rating scale, HEPA filters are rated anywhere between 17-19.

“The higher the MERV rating the more efficient and effective that filter is,” said Krause.

McClellan explained, “I think Cuomo is making a fair assumption that large malls have well-developed and hopefully well-maintained heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems that are typically capable of upgrades such as improved filtration capacities that MERV filtration offers."

MORE: 'Extreme inequality was the preexisting condition': How COVID-19 widened America's wealth gap

Most HVACs found in homes or small workplaces, however, cannot accommodate these fine HEPA filters, since they do not have motors that can produce a strong enough pressure to pull air and push it through a HEPA filter. Krause said some HVACs may be able to accommodate a filter with a MERV rating of up to 13 but that still would not achieve the necessary number of air changes per hour that would effectively reduce the viral particles in the air.

He said the three most practical steps small businesses and homeowners can take to upgrade the effectiveness of their ventilation system is to install the highest efficiency filter their HVAC system can handle, increase the amount of outside air circulating through their HVAC system and buy in-room air cleaners and purifiers with HEPA rated filters that will increase the overall amount of air exchanges.

Effective infection control in small business or homes requires a 6 to 10 air exchange rate per hour, explained Krause. He said that this can be calculated for a given space's ventilation setup using the available tools online developed by the Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers (AHAM).

The United States Environmental Protection Agency also recommends running your "system fan for longer times, or continuously, as HVAC systems filter the air only when the fan is running. Many systems can be set to run the fan even when no heating or cooling is taking place."

Experts say opening a window might also be a simple yet effective solution.

“Natural ventilation doesn’t require any advanced technology or any significant change to building codes,” said Mittal.

Although these forms of interventions are promising and experts are actively working on publishing clearer guidelines for smaller businesses, many questions still remain around the virus' transmissibility that make it difficult to quantify just how effective these air control measures may actually be.

According to Dr. John Richards, president of Air Control Techniques, “The selection of the most appropriate type of control system depends on accurate data concerning the droplet size range containing the virus.”
MORE: How risky is flying during the coronavirus pandemic?

Mittal also raised concerns that maintenance teams must also develop safety measures for replacing HEPA filters, since used filters will collect viruses and could become infectious.

More importantly, experts still don't know how much exposure to the virus a person needs in order to be infected, otherwise known as the minimum infectious dose.

“I wish we knew more about the infectious dose. That would help us in understanding what’s going on when people stand close to each other,” said Dr. Lisa Brosseau, an aerosol specialist and research consultant at the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota .

Moreover, some experts theorize that small virus containing particles in the air may be more dangerous and more easily produce an infection.

“It could be that smaller droplets are more dangerous because they deposit deeper in the lungs, which is less protective to infection,” said Mittal.

To make matters even more complicated, your age, preexisting health conditions and immune system strength may also affect what minimum dose of virus is necessary to cause infection.

Experts also want to understand how long the virus stays infectious in the air and over what distances.

"We need to be able to culture the virus from airborne particles in the room," said Dionne-Odom. "Those studies are yet to be definitive to prove that these viral particles are capable of human infection."

Krause, however, said that even though these questions persist, “it should not stop us from implementing these air controls because they are available off the shelf.” He said that knowing the infectious dose is critical in quantifying the precise risk reduction but that “historically engineering controls are always effective and achieve significant reduction as has been proven in high risk hospital settings.

Ventilation may emerge as an important tool in reducing spread of COVID-19 indoors, but Krause cautioned that it should be “part of the overall new contract we have as a society.”

Crowded indoors spaces and prolonged close contact with people can still be risky even with enhanced ventilation because the virus containing particles can reach you before they have a chance to be filtered.

“You cannot ignore cleaning and hygiene and cannot overcrowd places,” warned Krause. “Engineering controls should be layered on top of distancing, minimizing occupancy of indoor environments, personal conduct and personal behaviors inside and outside the workplace.”

Eden David, who studied neuroscience at Columbia University and is matriculating to Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai later this year, is a member of the ABC News Medical Unit.

America's national parks face existential crisis over race
A mostly white workforce, visitation threatens parks' survival and public health

By Stephanie Ebbs and Devin Dwyer 1 July 2020, 

LONG READ
18 min read

Visitors watch Old Faithful erupt in Yellowstone National Park on June 15, 2020.Visitors watch Old Faithful erupt in Yellowstone National Park on June 15, 2020.George Frey/Getty Image

As millions of Americans escape home quarantine to the great outdoors this summer, they'll venture into parks, campgrounds and forest lands that remain stubborn bastions of self-segregation.

"The outdoors and public lands suffer from the same systemic racism that the rest of our society does," said Joel Pannell, associate director of the Sierra Club, which is leading an effort to boost diversity in the wilderness and access to natural spaces.

New government data, shared first with ABC News, shows the country's premier outdoor spaces -- the 419 national parks -- remain overwhelmingly white. Just 23% of visitors to the parks were people of color, the National Park Service found in its most recent 10-year survey; 77% were white. Minorities make up 42% of the U.S. population."That tells me that we've got a lot of work to do," said David Vela, acting director of the National Park Service.

The career park administrator, appointed by President Donald Trump to the post in 2017, is the first Latino to lead the agency.


Acting National Park Service Director David Vela.Acting National Park Service Director David Vela.ABC News

Government officials and environmental advocates agree that the racial disparity in the outdoors is an existential crisis.

"If we don't address this, and we don't see how all these things are interrelated, then we're going to risk losing everything," said Pannell. "You're not going to have public lands to enjoy."

The U.S. Census Bureau projects people of color will be a majority in America by 2044 -- a demographic shift that will impact park attendance and finances. Community advocates say physical and mental health for minority communities is also at risk.

"I feel like nature is a right to everyone, and we should all feel safe enough to experience it," said Lauren Gay, a Tampa, Florida, mother who chronicles her experiences as a woman of color in the wilderness on her blog and podcast "Outdoorsy Diva."

"We need better ways to cope with stress, to cope with some level of trauma. We all have some level, honestly, of PTSD from a lot of the things we've lived through as people of color -- and nature is a way to do that," Gay said.

A not-so-inclusive experience for some

Ambreen Tariq, creator of the "Brown People Camping" social media campaign, learned to camp with her family in Minnesota after they emigrated to the U.S. from India. She now advocates for representation of families like hers and people of color to enjoy the outdoors.

"The future of our country is more and more diverse, ... we're going to have more people of color in this country than white people, but our parks, our green spaces, our conservation spaces, those demographics are remaining white. What does that mean for the future of our land, for environmentalism? We need everyone to experience and then love the land so that they will stay and fight," Tariq said.

"So you think the parks are at risk? Absolutely. The parks are at risk, just like every other natural resource in this country. Land, water, air. These are resources to be preserved. And it not just takes money. It takes people fighting for it," she continued.

Still, racial profiling and stereotyping remain a big concern for Tariq and many people of color in the outdoors.

"When I was a child, I felt like an outsider trying to gain entrance, except now I am American and this is my country," she said.

However, when she camps or hikes as an adult, Tariq said she still faces assumptions that she doesn't belong and a sense of "imposter syndrome" and fear -- even facing questions from rangers about whether she has followed park rules when she doesn't see white visitors asked the same questions.


Ambreen Tariq started the instagram page Brown People Camping to... moreAmbreen Tariq started the instagram page Brown People Camping to increase representation of people of color in the outdoors.Courtesy Ambreen Tariq

Danielle Williams, a fourth-generation Army veteran who leads the "Diversify Outdoors" coalition, said people often ask her how she became interested in the outdoors, assuming she didn't grow up spending time outside and devaluing her relationship with outdoor spaces as a child.

"We have to kind of tone down the elitism and just think about our language when we talk about the outdoors, because car camping -- that's great. And camping in your backyard, if you live in a family home, that's also wonderful," she said.

Advocates like Williams and Tariq say they hope the moment since George Floyd's death in police custody brings attention to systemic racism in the outdoors as well as other parts of society and translates into a long-term change in attitudes and behavior.


Diversify Outdoors advocate Danielle Williams.Diversify Outdoors advocate Danielle Williams.Courtesy of Danielle Williams

"We are urging people who are maybe having this conversation for the first time to do the work. It's not just about a moment. It's about committing yourself to completely change your lifestyle," Williams said.

MORE: Death of George Floyd sparks conversation about race, violence and protests

The National Park Service has tried improving diversity in parks by marketing to non-white communities, training staff on racial sensitivity, and working to hire rangers from more diverse backgrounds. But despite the effort less than 20% of the 20,000 employees are non-white, the agency said.

And after years of effort the number of Black, Hispanic, Asian and Native American visitors to national parks has only seen minor improvements, according to the report shared with ABC News.
Who is under-represented and why?

In national parks, the most prominent and famous natural spaces in the country, Black Americans are consistently the most underrepresented. In 2018, only 6% of visitors identified as Black, according to the new report, a slight decline from the previous year.

"We need to communicate that national parks, one, are part of your birthright," Vela told ABC News Live in an exclusive interview.

"Two, they're places of reflection and comfort -- recharge your battery, to learn about your history, whether it's your Latino history as an example, African American history, LGBTQ history. We have those sites and places and stories in national parks."


Visitors gather at the South Rim of Grand Canyon National Park, located in northwestern Arizona.Visitors gather at the South Rim of Grand Canyon National Park, located in northwestern Arizona.Paul Harris/Getty Images

Lack of transportation to national parks and the cost of visiting were cited as the top reasons people -- especially Black and Hispanic Americans -- don't visit them more often, according to the study. Twice as many black and Hispanic Americans said they don't know what to do in national parks than whites. When asked if they share the same interests as people who visit national parks, 34% of Black respondents and 27% of Hispanics said no, compared with only 11% of whites.

Vela said the lack of transportation is an issue but they also want to raise awareness of parks closer to urban areas and online national park experiences.
A broader challenge

Advocates for diversifying the outdoors say stereotypes around who enjoys camping and hiking create a big barrier: what they wear, what gear they have and even when they do it. Combined with attitudes that people do outdoor activities to relieve stress has made it difficult to have tough conversations about race.

"When I'm walking to work with park rangers or with other campers and hikers who treat me in some sort of way that make me feel unwelcome, that make me feel unsafe, that is startling," Tariq said. "And that goes unchecked because there's, there's just no channel for us to be able to challenge that in such remote places."


Associate Director of Sierra Club Outdoors Joel Pannell discusses the program with ABC Senior Washington Reporter Devin Dwyer on June 24, 2020.Associate Director of Sierra Club Outdoors Joel Pannell discusses the program with ABC Senior Washington Reporter Devin Dwyer on June 24, 2020.ABC

Many advocates say public information about parks and outdoor activities are not tailored to communities of color. Posted signs, for example, are mostly in English rather than Spanish. Park ranger uniforms that resemble what is worn by law enforcement are intimidating to some immigrants and minorities in light of documented cases of profiling.

Williams said she adjusts her behavior in parks and public spaces, smiling or moving aside on a trail to let white visitors pass even though she's disabled and walks with a crutch. She called it an ingrained behavior to avoid any negative connotation with being a Black person in a predominantly white space.

"You're worried about somebody calling the police on you. You're worried about just having a negative interaction based solely on the color of your skin," she said.

MORE: What do terms like systemic racism, microaggression and white fragility mean?

National parks and the conservation movement were created as a way for people to escape cities during the industrial revolution, which Pannell said is one example of systemic racism in the outdoors that hasn't been confronted.

"In many ways, they are created by removing indigenous people from those lands and creating refuges for more affluent white people to get away from the city, which were becoming black and brown. So we have to -- we have to deal with that history and that legacy," he told ABC News.

Carolyn Finney, a storyteller and cultural geographer whose book "Black Faces, White Spaces" focuses on African Americans' relationship to the outdoors said the dominant narrative around national parks doesn't include that they were considered primarily with white visitors in mind.

She said that despite the value of the ideas that conceptualized the National Park Service and laid the groundwork for the modern environmental movement in the early 1900s, figures like John Muir and Theodore Roosevelt did not consider how those spaces would include people of color because they were actively segregated at the time. And some figures close to the conservation movement like Madison Grant, who founded organizations like the Bronx Zoo, espoused actively racist ideologies.

"You're looking at time during Jim Crow segregation, it didn't stop because we were talking about a conservation trail, or because we're talking about the environment. It did not stop," she said in a phone interview.

"And so for me, you know, we jumped ahead to a Christian Cooper experience or my own personal experience, or anybody of color's personal experience out in nature, walking that trail in the park. You know, they're not anomalies. Now it's all part of a -- is a long experience of things that have never been thoroughly addressed here and that it is really hard when something becomes normalized."

Many people of color say that history of the parks is another psychological barrier white Americans don't have to face.

"Historically, in the South, in particular, many atrocious things that happened to Black people were in the woods," said Frank Peterman, an outdoors enthusiast who began visiting the national parks with his wife Audrey 25 years ago.

Vela said he recognizes that history and fear it instills and is developing strategies to combat it.

"We have to be responsive to those needs and -- and deal with those needs because they're going to be different. And it's going to require a different approach. And so, we have to own that," he told ABC News.

Part of the solution, Vela and advocates agree, is to openly confront the racism associated with the parks and highlight the important stories of black, Hispanic, Native American and LGBTQ people in American history.

"I think that as a person of color, I think that our national parks and what I've found, is opportunities to really reflect on the most difficult and challenging times in our nation's history," Vela said.

MORE: In the South, Confederate monuments aren't simply a black-and-white issue

And even on the current debate around the future of Confederate monuments in national parks, Vela said he won't remove any statue or memorial from national park land, saying it risks removing the story of why they were put there in the first place.

"If we do that on park land we then remove the stories that they contain. And if those stories are further sanitized in the history text, we can -- we may completely lose that narrative. We can't," he said.

Vela said he wants the National Park Service to provide information and facilitate conversations about that history so visitors are inspired to learn more and can decide what it means for themselves.

"Hopefully you're going to want to learn more. And do further research. And if that's the case, we did our job. But we're not going to make that decision for you," he added.
The future of national parks

Americans of all races in the new Park Service study said they value the nation's iconic parks and landmarks as important to America's national identity and think they should be protected. And advocates say they hope the current moment leads to future change and more attention to combating systemic racism in national parks and the outdoors industry and culture.

"(The parks) tell the story of the evolution of America. So if you want to know that story -- and now there's so much confusion about the 'real' American story -- you will find them in the national parks," said Audrey Peterman, who has visited 185 parks in 47 states with her husband.

"There's been a tremendous improvement and it's largely coming from inside our communities," she said.

And that future is a part of why Vela said further integrating national parks is a priority.

"If we don't make ourselves relevant to current and future generations, who is going to be the advocates for the protection and preservation of our nation's public lands at every level, whether it's at the local level, the state level and the federal level? And, who's going to wear these uniforms?" Vela told ABC News.

"We've got a lot of work to do. And you know we keep talking internally, about we're in a second century of service. We can learn from that first century our values aren't going to change. But how we do business has to," he said.

Q WHY DON'T FIRST NATIONS PEOPLE VISIT NATIONAL PARKS?

A  BECAUSE IT'S THEIR LAND

DEFENDING TEA PARTY HEROES OF THE  CONFEDERACY

DHS launches rapid deployment teams to federal monuments over the July 4th weekend

AND AN A COUPLE OF INDIAN KILLERS

The President has been tweeting about jailing protesters for up to 10 years.  

WITH ONLY BREAD AND WATER

By Luke Barr 1 July 2020, ABC NEWS

As President Donald Trump ramps up his hard-line rhetoric against protesters, The Department of Homeland Security said Wednesday it is launching rapid deployment teams to federal monuments over the Fourth of July weekend.

The effort comes amid nationwide protests over the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis police custody in May -- many of which have targeted Confederate and other statues and monuments.

"As we approach the July 4th holiday, I have directed the deployment and pre-positioning of Rapid Deployment Teams (RDT) across the country to respond to potential threats to facilities and property," said DHS Acting Secretary Chad Wolf. "While the Department respects every American’s right to protest peacefully, violence and civil unrest will not be tolerated."

The Department says the task force will work with the Department of the Interior and Department of Justice to establish information sharing but would not provide specifics as to what the teams would do and how many personnel would be deployed. It is also unclear whether DHS is responding to any specific threat or planned protest.

The Federal Protective Service, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Customs and Border Protection and the Coast Guard will be the primary agencies assisting in the deployment, according to a senior DHS official.

A locked gate surrounds the Emancipation Memorial debate in Lincoln Park, June 26, 2020, in Washington, D.C., to protect it as controversy and protests erupted around monuments that many find offensive.Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images

Trump has been focusing on protecting statues and monuments, last week signing an executive order to do so.

“I just had the privilege of signing a very strong Executive Order protecting American Monuments, Memorials, and Statues - and combatting recent Criminal Violence,” Trump tweeted. “Long prison terms for these lawless acts against our Great Country!”

The Department says Trump's executive order "directs DHS, within its statutory authority, to provide personnel to assist with the protection of federal monuments, memorials, statues, or property."

MORE: Trump vows jail for 'anarchists' toppling monuments, warns protesters trying to establish 'Black House Autonomous Zone'

Trump has tweeted numerous times about protecting statues, even tweeting the FBI wanted poster for some of the alleged suspects who tried to take down the Andrew Jackson statue outside the White House.

MORE: Robert E. Lee’s descendant says taking down Confederate symbols a ‘no-brainer’

"We are tracking down the two Anarchists who threw paint on the magnificent George Washington Statue in Manhattan. We have them on tape. They will be prosecuted and face 10 years in Prison based on the Monuments and Statues Act. Turn yourselves in now," the president tweeted.

Over the weekend, DOJ charged four people with allegedly trying to take down the statue.

On Fox News' "Fox and Friends" Wednesday morning, Wolf said that because of the "lawlessness" of the past few weeks "the president, the administration, we are taking some really strong action."


Acting secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Chad Wolf prepares for a television interview outside the White House, June 23, 2020.Stefani Reynolds/EPA via ShutterstockBut the American Civil Liberties Union said the government, specifically DHS, should be focused on other critical issues.

"DHS should not be prioritizing the protection of property over the wellbeing of Black and Brown communities. DHS has proven time and time again that it cannot be trusted to protect human life. The fact that they are now being deputized to protect property shows exactly where this administration's priorities are," Andrea Flores, deputy director of immigration policy for the ACLU said in a statement to ABC News.

 "Our government should be focusing resources on keeping communities of color safe and investing resources in investigating threats to the wellbeing of these communities not turning additional law enforcement resources against them and further militarizing our streets."

Trump calls Russia bounty reports 'hoax' even as White House briefs intel on it

A top adviser said the U.S. had shared the information with other countries.
By Ben Gittleson and Jordyn Phelps 1 July 2020,


Pressure builds on Trump to address Russian bounty scandal

The White House is still refusing to say if President Donald Trump received information on the suspected Russian bounty plot in his intelligence briefing months ago.Even as the White House provided briefings this week to members of Congress on the intelligence behind reports Russia offered bounties to Taliban militants to kill U.S. troops, President Donald Trump on Wednesday tried to discredit them as "made up" and a "hoax" designed to "slander" him.

"The Russia Bounty story is just another made up by Fake News tale that is told only to damage me and the Republican Party," Trump tweeted Wednesday, going after The New York Times, which first reported on the intelligence on Friday and also reported that Trump had been briefed on it. "The secret source probably does not even exist, just like the story itself. If the discredited @nytimes has a source, reveal it. Just another HOAX!"

The Russia Bounty story is just another made up by Fake News tale that is told only to damage me and the Republican Party. The secret source probably does not even exist, just like the story itself. If the discredited @nytimes has a source, reveal it. Just another HOAX!— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 1, 2020

But just as Trump repeated the message in a second tweet -- saying it was "all a made up Fake News Media Hoax started to slander me & the Republican Party" -- top White House aides tried to argue that the president wasn’t actually calling the underlying intelligence “fake” but was instead taking issue with media reporting.


National Security Advisor Robert O'Brien speaks to reporters outside of the West Wing of the White House in Washington, May 21, 2020.National Security Advisor Robert O'Brien speaks to reporters outside of the West Wing of the White House in Washington, May 21, 2020.Mandel Ngan/AFP via Getty Images, FILE"I think what is a hoax is the initial reporting,” National Security Adviser Robert O'Brien told reporters at the White House Wednesday. "And I believe this was The New York Times -- that the president had been briefed about this unverified, uncorroborated intelligence, and chose not to take action on it. That was a hoax, and there's no question about it."
MORE: Trump White House under growing pressure for intel, answers on reported Russian bounties in Afghanistan

Trump first used the word "hoax" in connection to the new reporting on Sunday night, writing in a tweet it was "possibly another fabricated Russia Hoax."

White House counselor Kellyanne Conway said Wednesday she thought the “hoax” the president was referring to was the idea that “he was somehow briefed on it and didn't take action on it and looked the other way.”

Even as the White House sticks to its narrative that the intelligence never rose to the level to warrant a formal briefing of the president, O'Brien noted the U.S. had previously shared the information with other countries fighting in Afghanistan.

Military personnel carry a transfer case for a service member killed in Afghanistan during a dignified transfer at Dover Air Force Base on Feb. 10, 2020, in Dover, Del.Military personnel carry a transfer case for a service member killed in Afghanistan during a dignified transfer at Dover Air Force Base on Feb. 10, 2020, in Dover, Del.Mark Makela/Getty Images

The White House has repeatedly said Trump was not briefed on the intelligence before The New York Times first reported on it, although top officials have been more vague about whether it had been included in the president's written briefing materials months ago. Multiple news outlets, citing unnamed sources, have reported that the intelligence had been included in the written materials, known as the President's Daily Brief.

MORE: Marine commandant says families of fallen service members are 'entitled' to answers on alleged Russian plot

The White House this week provided separate briefings for groups of select Republican and Democratic members of Congress but has so far not acceded to Democratic congressional leaders' request that all members of both the Senate and House of Representatives get briefed.

The first bipartisan briefing for the "Gang of Eight" -- a group of senior lawmakers from both parties that is regularly informed of sensitive intelligence -- is expected to take place on Thursday on Capitol Hill, according to a White House official and a senior aide to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. The meeting had previously been expected for Wednesday.



President Donald Trump walks on the South Lawn after arriving on Marine One at the White House in Washington, June 25, 2020.President Donald Trump walks on the South Lawn after arriving on Marine One at the White House in Washington, June 25, 2020.Alex Brandon/AP

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on Wednesday attacked lawmakers expressing outrage now, saying they had previously seen the same intelligence, although he did not clarify about exactly whom or when he was referring.

"They saw the same intelligence that we saw, so it would be interesting to ask them what they did when they saw whatever intelligence it is they're referring to," Pompeo told reporters. "They would have had access to this information as well -- not just the intelligence committees, by the way, even more broadly than that."

Pompeo and other Trump administration officials have forcefully defended the president's approach to Russia, as a bipartisan chorus of members of Congress have expressed concern that Russia's actions may have potentially cost U.S. lives.

"The president has been consistently aware of the challenges that Russia presents to us, and he is aware of the risk in Afghanistan," Pompeo said.



Civil engineers from the 405th Expeditionary Support Squadron, 455th Air Expeditionary Wing, begin recovery operations before the "all clear" is given after an attack near Bagram Airfield, Afghanistan, Dec. 11, 2019.Civil engineers from the 405th Expeditionary Support Squadron, 455th Air Expeditionary Wing, begin recovery operations before the "all clear" is given after an attack near Bagram Airfield, Afghanistan, Dec. 11, 2019.Brigitte N. Brantley/U.S. Air Force

The criticism has forced the White House to rush to contain the political fallout of the revelations. Democrats, sometimes joined by those on the other side of the aisle, have long alleged Trump has not responded forcefully enough to Russia's provocative behavior.
MORE: Dems say Russia bounty intel is 'red flag' that Trump-Putin relationship could be compromised

In the four days since the first report on the intelligence, Trump avoided questions and did not appear publicly. He did not have any public appearances on his schedule on Wednesday either, although he planned to be interviewed by the Fox Business network.

The White House has faced mounting questions Tuesday about how much and how long Trump has known about the alleged Russian bounties. Lawmakers called on the administration to share more information and potentially take action.

ABC News' Conor Finnegan contributed reporting.

Busted: Taliban commanders admit Russia is paying to murder US soldiers as Trump calls cash-for-killings a ‘hoax’

July 1, 2020 David Badash, The New Civil Rights Movement

President Donald Trump, the Director of National Intelligence, the former acting Director of National Intelligence, the National Security Advisor, the Secretary of State, the Secretary of Defense, the White House press secretary, and other Trump-appointed administration officials all have offered varying denials that Russia is paying terrorists in the Taliban to kill American soldiers, and that President Trump was briefed on the bounty program as far back as March of 2019.

Those who are not denying that Russia is paying he Taliban to kill American troops?
The Taliban.Two current Taliban commanders and one former Taliban commander have confirmed to Business Insider “that Russia pays extremists in Afghanistan to attack US soldiers.”

“The Taliban sources were clear that this took place, and said Iran and Pakistan do it too,” Business Insider, a right-leaning news site, adds in its report.

Russia is not only paying cash – via wire transfers as The New York Times reports – to the Taliban to kill Americans, but “Taliban commanders have confirmed” Russia has also offered “material support to its members in exchange for attacking US forces in Afghanistan.”

The former Taliban commander, now a refugee in Greece, explains that the Russians “did not spend the money because we are friends. They spent it to kill their American enemies.”

Trump, as recently as Wednesday morning, has denied that the Russian cash-for-killings bounty program exists, and that he was ever briefed on it. As with many things that are true, Trump labeled it a “hoax.”

The Russia Bounty story is just another made up by Fake News tale that is told only to damage me and the Republican Party. The secret source probably does not even exist, just like the story itself. If the discredited @nytimes has a source, reveal it. Just another HOAX!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 1, 2020

ROGUE NATION VIOLATES HUMAN RIGHTS

Immigration judges challenge DOJ limits on public speaking

The judge's union said the Justice Department is effectively issuing gag orders.

By Quinn Owen1 July 2020, 

Administrative judges who decide asylum and deportation cases are challenging a Department of Justice policy dictating who is allowed to speak publicly about immigration.

MORE: Judge urges release of children from ICE detention centers

The National Association of Immigration Judges, which represents over 400 of the immigration adjudicators across the country, joined a lawsuit filed Wednesday that accuses the Justice Department’s Executive Office of Immigration Review of using a recently implemented pre-approval process to infringe on free speech.

The Justice Department this year expanded a 2017 policy which requires additional layers of approval for public speaking engagements, according to policy documents revealed by lawyers with Columbia University’s Knight First Amendment Institute, which brought the lawsuit.

"Part of the job of an immigration judge is to educate the public about the immigration courts and the role they play in society," said Judge A. Ashley Tabaddor, president of NAIJ. "This policy prevents us from doing this critical work, undermining public understanding of and trust in the immigration courts in the process."

MORE: Judge blocks removal of Honduran teen being deported under CDC coronavirus rule

One example cited in Wednesday's legal complaint describes an immigration judge who was barred from speaking to a group of students studying immigration law at his alma mater even after he had been previously approved.

Another judge filed a request in February 2019 to speak with a seventh-grade class about immigration and asylum law and was informed by his supervisor months later that the request would be denied despite a lack of formal notice, according to the court filing.

The Trump administration has made a flurry of policy changes dictating who is granted asylum in the U.S. Those changes can impact how judges decide cases and have often left immigration lawyers scrambling to decipher the new rules.

A federal court on Tuesday struck down one policy that prevented migrants traveling through multiple countries before reaching the U.S. from obtaining asylum. The rule was previously upheld by the Supreme Court after back and forth among lower courts that repeatedly implemented and reversed the policy.

"The judges are on the front line of what’s happening to the court system," Tabaddor said, adding that complex legal changes require guidance only administrative judges can provide.

At U.S. immigration courts -- where the cases are civil, not criminal and legal representation is not guaranteed -- judges routinely explain court procedure to immigrants who appear without a lawyer.

"There’s a much greater efficiency and benefit to the court as well as to the community if you have the ability to educate a large group of people," Tabaddor said.

NEXT

Fox News fires Ed Henry after sexual misconduct allegation

Fox News has fired news anchor Ed Henry after it received a complaint about workplace sexual misconduct by him

BY DAVID BAUDER AP Media Writer
1 July 2020


NEW YORK -- Fox News on Wednesday fired daytime news anchor Ed Henry after an investigation of sexual misconduct in the workplace.

The network said it had received a complaint last Thursday from an attorney about the misconduct. An outside investigator was hired and, based on the results of that probe, Fox fired Henry.

Henry, who co-anchored “America's Newsroom” between the hours of 9 a.m. and noon on weekdays, had slowly rehabilitated his career on Fox following a four-month leave of absence that ended in 2016. That followed published reports of Henry's extramarital affair with a Las Vegas cocktail waitress.

Fox offered no details of the complaint that resulted in Henry's firing, only to say that it happened “years ago.” Henry did not immediately return messages seeking comment.

Meanwhile, HarperCollins said Wednesday that it would no longer publish a book by Henry that had been scheduled for September. Titled “Saving Colleen: A Memoir of the Unbreakable Bond Between a Brother and Sister," it was about Henry donating part of his liver to his sister.

The alleged victim is represented by noted sexual harassment attorney Douglas Wigdor. He also would not provide any details of the case.

Henry's former co-anchor, Sandra Smith, announced the firing on the air. Fox said she'll continue in her role with rotating co-anchors until a full-time replacement is hired.

Henry, a former White House correspondent for Fox, was only recently elevated to the role on “America's Newsroom.” He got the job after Bill Hemmer moved to Shepard Smith's afternoon time slot.

In a memo to staff, Fox News Media CEO Suzanne Scott and President Jay Wallace reminded employees of Fox's 2017 overhaul of its human resources operation and the avenues they can follow with a sexual harassment complaint.

Fox's late former chairman, Roger Ailes, was fired in 2016 following harassment allegations made by former anchor Gretchen Carlson. Prime-time anchor Bill O'Reilly lost his job a year later following the revelations of settlements reached with women who had complaints about his behavior.

Hiker captures stunning cloud on hilltop
A hiker captured the cloud rolling across a hill in England.

A LITTLE BIT O' HEAVEN SEAMUS O' MOCHERY 

Big pharma trade group blasted as ‘morally bankrupt’ for suing to block Minnesota insulin affordability law
 July 1, 2020 By Common Dreams


The law is named for Alec Smith, an uninsured 26-year-old who died in 2017 after rationing his insulin.

A Big Pharma trade group is under fire for filing a federal lawsuit late Tuesday against Minnesota’s Alec Smith Insulin Affordability Act mere hours before it took effect.

State Sen. Matt Little, a member of the Minnesota Democratic–Farmer–Labor Party (DFL), decried the move as “morally bankrupt” and “devoid of humanity.” In a Tuesday night tweet, Little also vowed: “I will spend my entire life fighting these soulless companies. No one should get sick or die from an inability to afford life-sustaining insulin.”

The law in question is named for an uninsured 26-year-old diabetic who died in 2017 of complications from rationing his insulin because he couldn’t afford the medicine and related supplies after aging off his mother’s health insurance. After state lawmakers overwhelmingly approved the measure, DFL Gov. Tim Walz signed it into law this April.
Defend democracy. Click to invest in courageous progressive journalism today.



As MPR News explains:

Under the law, people with diabetes who can’t afford the essential medicine will be able to get 30-day supplies with no more than a $35 copay. A separate income-based program is established for those with needs that extend beyond that.

Drug makers are required to participate. If they don’t, they would face a series of escalating fines

The suit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota by Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA). The drug industry group claims the measure is unconstitutional, arguing in the complaint (pdf) that “a state cannot simply commandeer private property to achieve its public policy goals.”

An PhRMA spokesperson told Brian Bakst of MPR News that “we are not seeking an emergency ruling to block the law from going into effect, but we think the law is unconstitutional and that the court should strike it down after it hears our challenge.”

The advocacy group Public Citizen noted the tragic death of the law’s namesake and denounced PhRMA’s suit as “beyond unconscionable.”

what stage of capitalism is this? https://t.co/1P5csxGVet
— David Sirota (@davidsirota) July 1, 2020

Nicole Smith-Holt, Alec Smith’s mother, also took to Twitter to condemn PhRMA’s lawsuit and accuse drug companies of violating human rights.

Do you know what I think is unconstitutional? @PhRMA determining the value of my life, of your life of my sons life!! @PhRMA determining who lives and dies, I think that is unconstitutional. These companies are violating our human rights, that is unconstitutional. #insulin4all https://t.co/5SZeqNL9a8
— Nicole Smith-Holt #insulin4all (@NSmithholt12) July 1, 2020

Smith-Holt was not the only outraged parent of a diabetic. Saint Paul-based healthcare advocate Lija Greenseid wrote in a series of tweets that she felt “so deflated” and “duped by lawmakers,” calling out GOP state senators who she said “assured advocates that they had worked with the manufacturers to develop their plan.”


Phrma’s lawsuit against Alec’s Law really hurts. As the mom of a kid with Type 1 diabetes, I spent so much of my time for 2 years advocating for affordable insulin. I feel so deflated. We were duped by lawmakers. And people will continue to suffer and die.

— Lija Greenseid, PhD

(

@Lija27) July 1, 2020

GOP senators assured advocates that they had worked with the manufacturers to develop their plan. Advocates wanted a fee on the manufacturers and were told by GOP lawmakers that it would get hung up in court and not help anyone. Well, here we are anyway with their plan.

— Lija Greenseid, PhD

 

(@Lija27) July 1, 2020


GOP state Senate Majority Leader Paul Gazelka expressed disappointment with the suit in a written statement reported by MPR News. “Senate Republicans remain committed to providing emergency insulin for those in crisis no matter what happens with this poorly timed lawsuit,” Gazelka said.

State Attorney General Keith Ellison (DFL) tweeted Wednesday morning in response to PhRMA’s “attack” on the law that “we look forward to defending the people of Minnesota in court against this morally repugnant behavior.

‘Without urgent government intervention,’ koalas face extinction in New South Wales by 2050
July 1, 2020 By Common Dreams


“If urgent action isn’t taken now, NSW is taking a chainsaw to the last koala tree in the bush.”

Koalas in the Australian state of New South Wales will be extinct before 2050 “without urgent government intervention,” a new report warns.

The report, released Tuesday, is the result of a year-long parliamentary inquiry examining the state of the animal and their habitat. The multi-party committee tasked with the effort was led by Greens Member of the Legislative Council Cate Faehrmann.

Among the key findings was that “following the 2019-2020 bushfires and the general trend of population decline, the current estimated number of 36,000 koalas in New South Wales is outdated and unreliable.” At least 5,000 koalas died in the fires.

And, as a result of the scale of koala population losses due to those fires, and “without urgent government intervention to protect habitat and address all other threats, the koala will become extinct in New South Wales before 2050,” the inquiry found.

The most serious threat to the koalas is “the fragmentation and loss of habitat.” Some parts of koala habitat on public land in NSW witnessed “a devastating loss of up to 81 percent” because of the fires.

The climate crisis is also dealing a blow to the koala population “by affecting the quality of their food and habitat.” That crisis is also “compounding the severity and impact of other threats, such as drought and bushfires, on koala populations,” the report noted.

oalas are on track to be extinct in NSW by 2050 unless the NSW Government takes urgent action.@Matt_KeanMP and @GladysB we call on you to follow expert advice and urgently implement the inquiry report’s 42 recommendations. We need to protect #koala habitat now! pic.twitter.com/C5SD1S2roE— Nature NSW (@naturensw) July 1, 2020

The report also laid out 42 recommendations, starting off with a call for state authorities to accurately determine koala population numbers. Rounding out the top three are for the NSW government to “urgently prioritize the protection of koala habitat and corridors in the planning and implementation stages of urban growth areas” and to “fund and support local councils to conserve koala habitat, including by identifying pockets of urban bushland to include in the state’s protected area network.”

“The only way our children’s grandchildren will see a koala in the wild in NSW will be if the government acts upon the committee’s recommendations,” Faehrmann wrote in the foreword to the report.

7 News Australia reported on the inquiry’s recommendations, including the establishment of a national park for koalas:

A NSW parliamentary report into the state’s koala population has warned they could be extinct by 2050. Among its recommendations is a ‘koala national park’ that would limit expansion of Sydney’s booming southwest. https://t.co/yC5PX0u0E0 @sarina_andaloro #7NEWS pic.twitter.com/UrnPMrcO3I— 7NEWS Australia (@7NewsAustralia) June 30, 2020

According to BBC News, “The state government welcomed the report but did not immediately confirm which recommendations it would adopt.”

Deputy chair of the committee Mark Pearson of the Animal Justice Party put the implications of inaction in stark terms.

“If urgent action isn’t taken now, NSW is taking a chainsaw to the last koala tree in the bush,” Pearson said in a statement.

“This isn’t speculation,” he said. “This is fact, the experts have told us the decline in koala numbers in NSW is a result of habitat destruction due to logging, agriculture, and coastal development.”

The new publication was welcomed by the World Wide Fund for Nature-Australia, which said it should spur government action.

“The bushfires burned a quarter of koala habitat, killing more than an estimated 6,300 koalas,” said Stuart Blanch, senior manager with WWF-Australia’s Land Clearing and Restoration project.

“Deforestation is soaring, killing koala homes and food,” he added.

Blanch said NSW has taken some good steps, like better koala habitat mapping. “But,” he stressed, “koalas are fast heading towards extinction across vast areas of the state and relying on National Parks alone as a conservation intervention simply will not be enough.”

He called on Premier Gladys Berejiklian to take steps including “a transition out of logging koala forests and into plantation.”

Efforts need to happen at the federal level too, Blach said, as he called the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act (EPBC) inadequate to protect koalas from extinction.

The upcoming report based on the law’s 10-year statutory review—and its potential “revisioning” and impacts on koalas—was noted by Australia-based legal center Environmental Defenders Office (EDO).

Rachel Walmsley, the Sydney-based director of Law Reform and Policy for EDO, warned that the law could become victim to the federal government’s “deregulation agenda” that “pre-dates both the horrific bushfire season and the Covid-19 pandemic. Part of this agenda is delegating environmental responsibility to the states. Yes, the states with the laws that cannot even protect koalas,” she said.

“Rebuilding and restoring ecosystems burnt by bushfires and sustainably managing landscapes scarred by climate change, extreme weather, and drought will require laws to deliver a long-term vision for human and environmental health and resilience,” said Walmsley, as she warned against “[s]hort-term responses to the Covid-19 pandemic that focus solely on immediate economic stimulus measures—by reducing environmental protections or public involvement through fast-tracking infrastructure projects.”

She suggested the fate of the iconic animals in the wild is at stake, asking, “Are Australians really content for koalas to become relics in zoos?”

Desperate to distract from the coronavirus catastrophe, Trump and his media allies are going full-on rabid racism

July 1, 2020 By Amanda Marcotte, Salon- Commentary


Racism is all he’s got.
Everything else Donald Trump was going to run on this summer and fall has evaporated. The “booming” economy? (Which he inherited from Barack Obama in the first place.) The U.S. has the worst unemployment rate since the Great Depression and the situation is about to get exponentially worse as unemployment benefits expire. And no, “reopening” is not a solution, since the data makes clear that consumers have little interest in shopping or eating out during a pandemic.

And then there was Trump’s plan to hold big rallies to make himself look like he’s got momentum, while Joe Biden campaigns in responsible ways that don’t spread the coronavirus. Not only was that plan sociopathic, it’s also not working. Trump’s big comeback rally in Tulsa was a hilarious failure, with only a third of the arena filled. Now Trump has canceled a rally in Alabama, citing coronavirus fears. It’s just as likely that the campaign was scared of more empty seats — even some of his most ardent followers would rather root for him at home rather than risk getting sick.

Trump’s efforts to paint Biden as too old and out of it to do a job as difficult as being president? Well, in the face of reports that Trump did nothing to push back against Russia paying Afghan fighters to kill American soldiers, the only “defense” of Trump is that he’s either too lazy or too illiterate to pay attention to his intelligence briefings. For a 74-year-old man trying to argue he’s sharper than his slightly older opponent, having his press secretary argue that Trump does too know how to read is arguably not a great look.

As for the coronavirus itself, Trump is so hostile to any efforts to meaningfully fight the disease that people have started to wonder, only half-facetiously, whether he’s campaigning on a pro-coronavirus agenda.

So now Trump, aided as usual by the massive propaganda apparatus at Fox News, is pushing all his chips on the bet that just enough voters in swing states will disregard all these failures, so long as he keeps escalating the racism. There’s no real evidence this will work — his efforts to whip up racist hysterics about a “caravan” that was “invading” the U.S. in the fall of 2018 (it was really a small group of Central American refugees fleeing from violence) did nothing to prevent the Democrats’ big midterm win — but Trump is a dull-witted man with few real ideas. Racism is all he has.

And if racism isn’t working yet, Trump clearly thinks that piling on more and more of it will finally turn the tide.

On Tuesday night alone, Trump — who clearly isn’t sleeping much, based on his Twitter patterns — went buck-wild with the overt racism.

Around 9 p.m., Trump tweeted that at “the request of many great Americans who live in the Suburbs” he is “studying” (ha) “the AFFH housing regulation that is having a devastating impact on these once thriving Suburban areas.”

The reference may be a little obscure, but the intent definitely isn’t. Trump is referring to an Obama-era rule to enforce the 1968 Fair Housing Act, aimed at ending racial discrimination in housing. Or, to put it more bluntly, Trump is suggesting that it ruins suburban life if Black people move in, and he’s eager to do whatever he can to stop it. (Trump himself was sued by the Department of Justice for refusing to rent to Black tenants in the 1970s.)

Trump’s administration has already put a pause on enforcing some Obama-era rules to desegregate housing, even though evidence shows that there continue to be dramatic levels of discrimination against Black people seeking homes to rent or buy. The administration has made some noises to make these moves somehow sound not-racist, but Trump’s unsubtle tweeting suggests he sees the racism as a selling point. His theory, one supposes, is that white voters will thrill to hear he’s working to keep Black people from moving into their neighborhoods.

Later that night, Trump threatened to defund the entire U.S. military if the Senate tries to rename military bases that currently sport the names of Confederate military leaders. Again, not exactly subtle. These bases should never have been named for traitors who took up arms against the U.S. government and killed hundreds of thousands of patriotic American soldiers in the name of white supremacy. With this threat, Trump is pretty clearly saying that racism matters more than patriotism, which is turning out to be a pattern with him.

There are reports that some members of Trump’s staff think that going full-on white supremacist is a bad look — anonymous White House staffers recently told reporters that they spent three hours trying to get Trump to take down a tweet featuring that infamous video clip of golf-cart-riding supporters shouting “white power” — but the biggest hosts at Fox News think this ramped-up racism is a winning strategy for their orange reality-TV president.

Basically, the message coming from Fox News in recent days has been to threaten the network’s older white viewers with the prospect that a failure to vote Republican might mean, heaven forbid, that the forces of anti-racism will triumph. Apparently, Fox News hosts believe nothing could be more terrifying to their viewers than the possibility that they might have to live near Black people, or treat them with respect.

“If Biden wins,” Laura Ingraham announced on Fox News Tuesday night, “you’ll be sending money to Washington so Pelosi and the squad can commission statues of their new heroes of the left. Like, I don’t know, Colin Kaepernick and Stacey Abrams.”

The context of this snark, of course, is the ongoing Trump-fueled controversy over Black Lives Matter activists demanding the removal of statues celebrating historical figures, mostly Confederate military leaders, who are viewed as white supremacists, as well as the fight over renaming military bases, maybe to honor people who didn’t commit treason. In Ingraham’s world, statues honoring Black people who have fought against racism, often at great personal cost, would be preposterous, but statues honoring white supremacists are “what makes this country so great.”

Similarly, Fox News host Tucker Carlson dug into an apocalyptic racist fantasy Tuesday night, proclaiming that “Americans who want to live as they did just 15 years ago, quietly, productively, without being harassed and harangued by self-righteous lunatics” are going to “need a protector,” and that “protector must be the Republican Party.”

There are, of course, no reports of “self-righteous lunatics” going into the homes of quiet, productive people to harangue them. That’s just a fantasy Carlson is spinning to justify conservatives’ pangs of guilt when they turn on the news and see people who are angry about racism or sexism or other social ills that sofa-bound right-wingers would rather not interrogate. The option to turn the TV off and live in ignorance is always there, but Carlson wants his audience to feel aggrieved and play the victims.

The scary thing here is that of course there’s a well-known Fox News-to-Trump feedback loop. The president gets himself all worked up by imbibing Fox News’ racial grievance politics, and then turns around and pours his racist vitriol out on Twitter and into speeches. Then the Fox News crew takes their cues from Trump and turns up the racism even more.

Given the Trump campaign’s desperate need to distract from the economic collapse, the pandemic and the fact that Trump’s Russian buddies reportedly paid bounties for the lives of American soldiers, this feedback loop is only going to get worse. Their bag of tricks is running out, and racism is all Trump and his media allies have left. It’s four months and two days until the election and in that time, we can expect the white supremacist demagoguery to escalate day by day. Considering what a powder keg this country already is, it’s a downright terrifying situation.