quinta-feira, 30 de abril de 2020
Trump erupts over poll slump and threatens to sue campaign manager / Chaos rocks Trump White House on virus' most tragic day
Trump erupts over poll slump and threatens to sue
campaign manager
President blows his top in Friday argument and
reportedly tells Brad Parscale ‘I’m not fucking losing to Joe Biden’ in November
Kenya
Evelyn in Washington
@LiveFromKenya
Thu 30 Apr
2020 17.10 BSTLast modified on Thu 30 Apr 2020 23.50 BST
Donald Trump at the White House on Tuesday. According
to multiple sources, the president cursed at Parscale repeatedly.
A row
between Donald Trump and his election campaign manager, Brad Parscale, over a
recent drop in the president’s poll numbers resulted in Trump threatening
Parscale with a lawsuit.
The
argument reportedly happened last Friday, as the US death toll from the
coronavirus pandemic reached 50,000 in three months and the fallout continued
from Trump’s suggestion at the White House the night before that taking
disinfectant internally could be examined as a possible treatment for
coronavirus, even though it is potentially lethal.
But the
blow-up was just the latest in a series of tense moments between Trump and his
2020 re-election team, according to reports from multiple outlets including the
Washington Post, the Associated Press and CNN.
“I’m not
fucking losing to Joe Biden,” Trump reportedly said on a call with Parscale
during a meeting with aides. According to multiple sources who spoke to the AP,
the president cursed at Parscale repeatedly.
Trump
deflected much of the blame for the disappointing polls, ignoring criticism of
his performances at the podium during daily White House coronavirus press
briefings, where he has repeatedly attacked the media for questioning delays in
the government’s response, pushed misinformation and shown little empathy for
victims.
In a
meeting two days before the call, political advisers briefed Trump on data
sourced internally and from the Republican National Committee. The figures
showed the president losing ground against Biden in key battleground states.
Advisers
had warned Trump to change his tone at daily coronavirus briefings, citing data
that showed the negative coverage was fueling a decline in approval ratings.
The
president allegedly balked at the guidance, insisting viewers “love” them and
think he’s “fighting for them”. Trump instead pointed to restricted travel and
an inability to host campaign rallies as the source of the slump.
After
initially refusing to comply with recommendations he step back from the
briefings, Trump later relented – after making headlines over the disinfectant
row, which prompted cleaning product companies to issue public warnings against
ingesting or injecting disinfectant for any reason.
Last
Friday, the president took no questions and abruptly left the short briefing,
which had been stretching over two hours in evening prime time, and cancelled
his weekend press briefings altogether.
“He’s
pissed because he knows he messed up in those briefings,” a Republican close to
the White House reportedly told CNN.
He also
reportedly ranted about a New York Times story on him watching hours of cable
news a day and then fuming about his coverage, before spending the weekend
attacking reporters and media organizations on Twitter for their coronavirus
journalism.
One
official told the Washington Post the president was “in a terrible mood with
everyone late last week”.
Trump shot
back at reports of his growing frustration on Wednesday, telling Reuters he
doesn’t “believe the polls”.
“I believe
the people of this country are smart. And I don’t think that they will put a
man in who’s incompetent,” he said of Biden. Trump said he thought the election
did not represent a referendum on his administration’s handling of the
pandemic.
While
neither the sincerity nor the grounds of the president’s lawsuit threat against
Parscale isn’t clear, sources told CNN the two patched things up by that same
night. On Thursday, Trump tweeted that Parscale “is doing a great job”.
“I never
shouted at him (been with me for years, including the 2016 win), and have no
intention to do so,” he wrote.
The
president then lashed out at media outlets for reporting on the alleged
tensions, taking particular aim at MSNBC and its lead anchor, Brian Williams,
in a flood of tweets.
The new
White House press secretary, Kayleigh McEnany, last week signaled that the
president’s White House coronavirus briefings would be less frequent and would
take a different slant, pivoting to preparations for reopening the US economy.
This week, Trump has been meeting with some state governors in the Oval Office.
Stephen
Collinson Profile
Analysis by
Stephen Collinson, CNN
Updated
1523 GMT (2323 HKT) April 8, 2020
(CNN)The
chaos and confusion rocking President Donald Trump's administration on the most
tragic day yet of the coronavirus pandemic was exceptional even by his own
standards.
Trump set
out Tuesday to cement his image of a wartime leader facing down an
"invisible enemy" at a dark moment as the country waits for the virus
to peak and with the economy languishing in suspended animation.
"What
we have is a plague, and we're seeing light at the end of the tunnel," the
President said, on a day when a record number of Americans succumbed to the
wicked respiratory disease.
But instead
of putting minds at rest, Trump's wild performance instead put on a display
many of the personal and political habits that have defined his tumultuous
presidency. It was a troubling spectacle coming at such a wrenching chapter of
national life, the kind of moment when Presidents are called to provide
consistent, level leadership.
To begin
with, Trump sparked concern that he will prevent oversight of the disbursement
of economic rescue funds by removing a watchdog official responsible for
overseeing the $2 trillion package. The move, coming after Trump ousted an
intelligence community inspector general last week, was yet another sign that
an already impeached President is using the cover of the worst domestic crisis
since World War II to further erode constraints on his power.
Trump's
acting Navy secretary quit after an episode in which he called an aircraft
carrier captain dismissed for raising the alarm about virus infections among
his crew "stupid."
Then Trump
insisted he hadn't seen January memos by a top White House official warning
about the pandemic at the same time the President was dismissing it as a
threat.
He also
announced he was placing a "very powerful hold" on funding for the
World Health Organization, even though it correctly identified the scale of the
virus and he didn't. Then moments later, he insisted he did no such thing.
Adding to
the sense of farce, White House Press Secretary Stephanie Grisham was moved
out, without ever having given a briefing, on yet another day of staff turmoil.
CNN's KFile reported Tuesday that her replacement, Kayleigh McEnany, recently
said that thanks to the President, "we will not see diseases like the
coronavirus come here."
Trump's top
economic adviser Larry Kudlow admitted that a small business rescue program was
off to "a bad start" after recipients struggled to register funds,
only for the President to celebrate the program's roaring success -- and to
credit his daughter Ivanka with personally creating 15 million jobs.
To top off
a disorientating day in the West Wing, the President presided over an unchained
news conference in which among other topics, he lashed out at mail-in voting,
making claims about fraud that don't square with the facts, even though he
recently cast such a ballot himself. The comment followed extraordinary scenes in
Wisconsin, after Republicans blocked the Badger State's Democratic governor
from delaying the state's primary over concern that voters could infect one
another with the novel coronavirus.
Trump's
daily jousts with the media recreate the adversarial dynamic of his 2016
campaign and much of his earlier presidency and invite his supporters to adopt
his narrative of events rather than fact-based critiques of his conduct. This
has been a successful device in the past to cement the anti-establishment
President with his followers.
But a new
CNN/SSRS poll Wednesday finds increasing overall concern about Trump's handling
of the coronavirus crisis following an initial spike in his ratings in recent
weeks.
A majority
of Americans -- 55% -- now say the federal government has done a poor job
preventing the spread of the disease in the United States, up eight points in
about a week. And 52% say they disapprove of the way Trump is handling the
outbreak. As usual, assessments of Trump break on partisan lines. Some 80% of Republicans
say the federal government has done a good job, and Trump's approval rating is
steady at 44%.
Also
Wednesday morning, a prominent model that tracks the coronavirus pandemic in
the United States has updated its projections to predict that the nation will
reach its peak number of daily Covid-19 deaths in four days and its peak use of
resources -- such as hospital beds and ventilators -- in three days.
The model
also predicts that far fewer people -- 60,415 -- than have been previously
projected will die due to Covid-19 by August.
That model,
from the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of
Washington in Seattle, previously projected on Tuesday that about 82,000 people
would die by August and that the country wouldn't reach peak resource use until
next week.
A dark
day in the fight against Covid-19
In many
ways, it was just another inexplicable day of the Trump presidency.
Trump did
mention Americans grieving the loss of loved ones in his scripted remarks, but
the intensity of Trump's clashes with reporters and litany of outrageous claims
seemed incongruous with a backdrop of such human tragedy with more than 1,800
deaths reported in a single day.
There are,
after all, more confirmed cases in the United States than anywhere else in the
world -- even if there are some hopeful and preliminary signs that the wave of
infections may be beginning to slow in the New York epicenter.
The chaos
and contradictions coming from the administration do not just raise questions
about the White House's current management of the pandemic. They will cause
concern because the second stage of the national effort -- reopening the
economy and keeping a second wave of infections at bay -- will require focused
and subtle leadership that can win the confidence of the nation.
No White
House has ever faced the task of ensuring such an expansive economic package is
properly implemented and does not fall prey to corruption. There is little in
the history of the Trump administration that suggests this will go smoothly.
The
President sparked fresh fears about his capacity to properly oversee previous
rescue packages and those to come when it emerged he had removed Defense
Department Inspector General Glenn Fine from a post monitoring the stimulus
funds.
The move
prompted Democrats to warn that Trump is seeking to oversee the package
himself. Trump had already warned he will ignore a provision in the bill
requiring the special inspector general to report to Congress on the handling
of the funds.
His
dismissal of Fine was the latest swipe against the structures of government
meant to hold him accountable -- that peaked with his defiance of the
impeachment inquiry.
On Monday,
Trump personally attacked a Health and Human Services inspector general who
uncovered massive shortages of vital protective equipment at hospitals battling
Covid-19.
On Friday
night, the President fired the intelligence community inspector general who
alerted lawmakers to a report about his pressure on Ukraine to dig up dirt on
his Democratic foe Joe Biden.
Trump
dismisses Navarro memos
With the
pandemic taking a tighter grip on the United States, Trump has taken vigorous
steps to cover up for his multiple statements earlier this year downplaying the
virus.
The
question of his responsibility for a lack of preparation for the crisis
intensified on Tuesday when The New York Times revealed that a top economic
official, Peter Navarro, had written a memo to the President in January warning
coronavirus could become a "full blown pandemic" causing trillions of
dollars in economic damage and risking the health of millions of Americans.
How Peter
Navarro went from an anti-China 'gadfly' to trusted Trump
coronavirus adviser
How Peter
Navarro went from an anti-China 'gadfly' to trusted Trump coronavirus adviser
The
revelation undercut the President's repeated declarations that nobody could
have foreseen the consequences of the virus. It also left him in a tricky spot.
Either he had to admit that he had seen the warning, or if he said it didn't
reach him, he would paint a picture of dysfunction at the White House.
He did
neither, seeking to foster misinformation and confusion around the document
designed to disguise his own culpability.
The
President maintained that he did not see the memo or memos until several days
ago.
"I
didn't see them. I didn't look for them either," the President said, then
argued falsely he had reached the same conclusion as Navarro, citing his
decision to stop flights from China. In fact, Trump was downplaying the impact
of the virus as recently as early last month.
When asked
why he did not level with Americans about the potential impact of the crisis if
his unexpressed thoughts aligned with Navarro, Trump said: "I'm not going
to go out and start screaming, this could happen."
"I'm a
cheerleader for this country. I don't want to create havoc and shock."
Trump
nominates a new foil -- the WHO
Unlike the
President, the World Health Organization has warned for weeks about the gravity
of coronavirus.
The WHO
declared a Public Health Emergency of International concern on January 30 after
sending a team to Wuhan and to meet Chinese leaders in Beijing.
On the same
day, at a rally in Michigan, the President said of the virus, "We think we
have it very well under control."
But on
Tuesday, the President lashed out at the global health body, claiming it had
underplayed the threat of the virus and that he had got it right.
"We're
going to put a hold on money spent to the WHO. We're going to put a very
powerful hold on it," the President said in his briefing.
"They
called it wrong. They missed the call. They could have called it months
earlier," Trump said.
"It's
a great thing if it works but when they call every shot wrong that's no
good," he said, accusing the WHO of being biased towards China, which
Republicans have accused of trying to cover up the virus.
Given the President's
long timeline of false statements and predictions, that must go down as one of
the most audacious comments of his presidency. It was also reflective of his
own tendency to nominate an enemy and accuse it of the very transgression that
he is accused of perpetrating.
He added to
the confusion by denying that he had said that he would halt funding to the WHO
-- a move that would be counterproductive in a pandemic and would undermine
already compromised perceptions of US leadership on the crisis.
"I'm
not saying I'm going to do it, but we are going to look at it," the
President said.
The
President was also unable to provide much clarity on the chaos afflicting the
Navy, following the resignation of Thomas Modly. The acting Navy secretary quit
a day after leaked audio revealed he called the ousted commander of the USS
Theodore Roosevelt "stupid" in an address to the ship's crew.
This came a
little more than a week after Capt. Brett Crozier sent a memo warning of
coronavirus spreading among the sailors. The memo leaked and Modly subsequently
removed Crozier from command.
"I had
no role in it. I don't know him but I've heard he was a very good man,"
the commander in chief said.
But Trump
also rebuked Crozier.
"He
didn't have to be Ernest Hemingway. He made a mistake but he had a bad day. And
I hate seeing bad things happen."
Top US intel agency rules out ‘manmade’ theory of coronavirus origins
Top US intel agency rules out ‘manmade’ theory of
coronavirus origins
But the intelligence community is still investigating
whether the virus may have accidentally leaked from a Chinese laboratory.
By NATASHA
BERTRAND 4/30/20, 8:16 PM CET
https://www.politico.eu/article/top-us-intel-agency-rules-out-manmade-theory-of-coronavirus-origins/
The agency
that oversees the entire U.S. intelligence community has released an unusual
public statement on Thursday outlining its ongoing investigation of the origins
of the novel coronavirus outbreak, amid reports suggesting the White House has
been pressuring analysts to conclude that the outbreak spread from a lab in
Wuhan, China.
“The entire
Intelligence Community has been consistently providing critical support to U.S.
policymakers and those responding to the COVID-19 virus, which originated in
China,” reads the statement released from the Office of the Director of
National Intelligence. “The Intelligence Community also
concurs with the wide scientific consensus that the COVID-19 virus was not
manmade or genetically modified."
ODNI does
not typically comment on intelligence-gathering matters, let alone publicly
confirm a particular finding. The last press release that came close to
commenting on intelligence was in early March, when ODNI signed onto a joint
statement warning voters that “foreign actors continue to try to influence
public sentiment and shape voter perceptions.”
The agency
went on to confirm in its statement on Thursday that it is still investigating
the origins of the outbreak, including the theory, pushed by some in the White
House, that it was the result of a lab accident in Wuhan.
“As we do
in all crises, the Community’s experts respond by surging resources and
producing critical intelligence on issues vital to U.S. national security,” the
statement reads. “The IC will continue to rigorously examine emerging
information and intelligence to determine whether the outbreak began through
contact with infected animals or if it was the result of an accident at a
laboratory in Wuhan.”
Current and former national security officials said
they were surprised by the release, and suggested it could be a sign that the
intelligence community feels it is being pulled into a political battle. The
administration has been pressuring analysts, particularly at the CIA, to search
for evidence that the virus came from a lab and that the World Health
Organization helped China cover it up, according to a person briefed on the
discussions.
“I thought
it was a terrific statement,” former acting CIA director Michael Morell said
during an event hosted by George Mason University on Thursday. “A lot of people
have been concerned about politicization [of the intel community], and you have
senior administration officials all over the map about the origins of the
virus...it was perfectly appropriate and a very good idea for ODNI to put this
out.”
ODNI’s
statement does not rule out the possibility that the virus spread after a lab
accident, but it emphasizes the fundamental role of the spy agencies: to
collect and analyze information, not to search for a particular conclusion.
There is currently no evidence to support the theory that it came from a lab,
said people briefed on the intelligence, but there is also no intelligence that
would allow the agencies to explicitly rule out the possibility.
“If you
think about it, uncovering the actual truth -- whether it passed from animal to
human, or came from a lab -- is probably something we’ll never know,” Glenn
Gerstell, who served as the National Security Agency’s general counsel from
2015-2020, said during the same GMU event on Thursday. “We’d have to find some
kind of smoking gun...I wouldn’t be surprised if we never end up with the
actual definitive answer.”
In an op-ed published on Tuesday, three intelligence
veterans who either rarely criticize the administration or rarely comment on it
at all — Morell, former White House deputy national security adviser Avril
Haines, and former deputy CIA director David S. Cohen — warned of what they say
are Trump’s ongoing efforts to politicize the intelligence community, most
recently by firing the IC inspector general who informed Congress of the
whistleblower complaint against him.
“This pattern of politicization is particularly
concerning now,” they wrote, “as the country confronts the coronavirus
pandemic.
“The
answers to key intelligence questions—Did the coronavirus emerge from nature or
escape from a Chinese lab? To what extent did the Chinese government
misrepresent the scope and scale of the epidemic?—will have profound
implications for the future of U.S. national security policy, especially
concerning China. We know Trump’s preferred answers to those questions. What we
don’t know is whether the career analysts in U.S. intelligence agencies will be
allowed to speak the truth when they uncover it."
Morell
noted separately on Thursday that if the virus leaked from a Wuhan lab, the
U.S. would shoulder some of the blame since it funded research at that lab
through government grants from 2014-2019.
“If it did
escape from the lab, not only bad on China but also bad on the U.S. for giving
funding to a lab with safety concerns,” Morell said, referring to State
Department cables from early 2018 that warned of the lab’s risky coronavirus
experiments and shortage of trained technicians.
“So if it
did escape,” he added, “we’re all in this together."
El-Erian: We will have the worst recession since the Great Depression
Allianz
Chief Economic Advisor, Mohamed A. El-Erian discusses the impact the
coronavirus has has on the economy, the government's fiscal and monetary
response and why the worst is not over.
Recession Vs. Depression: What’s The Difference? / Another 3.8 million Americans lose jobs as US unemployment continues to grow 30-4-2020
Another 3.8 million Americans lose jobs as US unemployment continues to grow
Pace of job losses appears to be slowing but figures
increase and many people yet to receive benefits as backlog hits US system
Dominic
Rushe in New York
@dominicru
Thu 30 Apr
2020 13.31 BSTLast modified on Thu 30 Apr 2020 16.20 BST
Another 3.8
million people lost their jobs in the US last week as the coronavirus pandemic
continued to batter the economy. The pace of layoffs appears to be slowing, but
in just six weeks an unprecedented 30 million Americans have now sought
unemployment benefits and the numbers are still growing.
The latest
figures from the labor department released on Thursday showed a fourth
consecutive week of declining claims. While the trend is encouraging, the rate
of losses means US unemployment is still on course to reach levels unseen since
the Great Depression of the 1930s.
The figures
are also still undercounting the number of people out of work. Some states are
still dealing with backlogs of claims after their systems were overwhelmed by
the massive volume of applications.
Florida has
become a notable black spot. As of Tuesday the state had received more than 1.9
million claims and processed just over 664,000, one of the slowest rates in the
nation.
Kia
Washington, 22, lost her job at Scarlett’s, a club in Fort Myers, on 16 March.
She has yet to receive unemployment benefits or the $1,200 stimulus cheque she
is entitled to from the federal bailout.
Washington
said every time she has tried to file her claim online she has been kicked out
of the system, and that she had been trying at 4am or later in the hope of
getting through but to no avail. She sent in a paper application three weeks
ago but has yet to have a reply.
She is
currently living with her grandparents. “If I didn’t have them, I would be out
on the streets,” she said.
The pace of
layoffs may slow further as states begin to open up for business once more. But
some have warned that relaxing quarantine rules could trigger another wave of
infections and shutdowns and the virus has already done significant damage to
the economy.
Many large
US companies have announced cuts to staff or are planning layoffs. Boeing
announced this week that the coronavirus had delivered “a body blow” to its
business and is weighing laying off 16,000 people, a 10% cut to its 161,000
workforce. Hertz, the car rental company, recently laid off about 10,000
employees in North America and is reportedly considering bankruptcy.
On Tuesday
the commerce department announced the US economy shrank 4.8% in the first three
months of the year, its steepest decline since the last recession and ending a
decade of near constant economic growth.
Kevin
Hassett, senior economic adviser to Donald Trump has warned that the jobless
rate in the US could spike to between 16% and 20% by June.
According
to the latest Department of Labor figures, the insured unemployment rate – the
number of people currently receiving unemployment insurance as a percentage of
the labor force, was 12.4% for the week ending 18 April , the highest
percentage recorded since the department started releasing those figures.
Next Friday
the bureau of labor statistics releases its official jobs report for themonth
of April. The monthly report is regarded as a more accurate snapshot of the
jobs market but often lags the weekly report.
In March
the jobless rate rose 0.9%, the largest single-month change since January 1975,
to 4.4%. The pandemic shutdowns started in late March, so April will give a
more accurate picture of their impact on the jobs market. JP Morgan is
predicting unemployment could reach 20%.
Capitals criticize key plank of Brussels’ recovery plan
Capitals criticize key plank of Brussels’
recovery plan
Proposal for loans raised on financial markets faces
pushback from Northern Europeans.
By HANS VON
DER BURCHARD AND LILI BAYER 4/29/20, 8:53 PM CET Updated 4/30/20, 7:30 PM CET
A powerful
array of EU countries including Germany is lining up against a key element of
the post-coronavirus economic recovery plan floated by European Commission
President Ursula von der Leyen.
Von der
Leyen has proposed that the Commission raise money on financial markets, using
guarantees that would be provided by EU members raising the ceiling on how much
they could contribute to the EU budget. A large chunk of those funds would
likely go to Southern European countries such as Italy and Spain, which have
been hit hard by the pandemic and have limited fiscal room for maneuver.
But,
although the Commission has yet to present a formal proposal, that central
element of the plan is already facing deep skepticism from Berlin, Vienna,
Stockholm, Helsinki and The Hague — highlighting once again a North-South
divide when it comes to questions of EU financial solidarity.
Von der
Leyen has said recovery funds, which she has suggested would generate at least
€1 trillion of investment, will be a mix of grants and loans. But that raises
the question of how money borrowed from the markets would be repaid if it is
given to countries as grants.
“There is
the idea that a big chunk of the money should simply be handed out as a grant.
In other words, debt would be incurred,” a diplomat from a Northern EU country
said, raising the question of who would be liable for this debt.
"We're
willing to look at everything, but debt financing grants at this stage seems a
bridge too far" — A Dutch official
The idea of
using borrowed funds for grants has also sparked legal concerns. Under the EU's
treaties, the long-term EU budget's expenditures cannot exceed its resources.
While some
officials have raised the prospect of taking out very long-term loans that
would not have to be repaid for decades, the diplomat said that this "is
not possible, that would be against the EU treaties," and added:
"There can’t be debt mutualization until there is a treaty change that
would lead to a deeply integrated fiscal union with democratic oversight."
After
commissioners held a debate on recovery financing on Wednesday, Commission Vice
President Věra Jourová affirmed the plan would include "temporarily
boosting the financial firepower of the budget by increasing the headroom [the
ceiling on maximum contributions] and tapping financial market financing to
channel extra funding to the member states."
"The
College [of Commissioners] recalled the need to find an appropriate balance
between loans, grants and financial guarantees," she added.
On
Thursday, the Commission appeared to attempt to lower expectations about the
new elements of the plan while indicating the semantics are likely to be
sensitive, with Chief Spokesperson Eric Mamer telling reporters the plans would
no longer be referred to as a recovery fund.
Northern
headwind
The big
problem for the Commission is that multiple countries contend that cash
borrowed from the markets should be used for loans, not grants. Southern
European countries, meanwhile, argue that loans will add to their debt pile and
thus harm their long-term economic prospects.
An Austrian
official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said a compromise would have to
be found that works for all EU members but Vienna "supports strongly the
borrow-to-lend approach."
Angelika
Winzig, who leads the delegation of Austria's governing People's Party in the
European Parliament, said her party supports "full solidarity" in the
crisis but borrowed money has to be repaid.
"Raising
money on the financial markets is one thinkable option to acquire the necessary
means to help member states that are especially hard hit by the crisis. But we
have to insist, that the countries who receive the recovery help will pay it
back at some point in time when the recovery has succeeded. Solidarity is not a
one-way street," she said.
Stockholm
takes a similar line. "The Swedish position on a Recovery Fund is that it
should provide loans, not grants," a Swedish official said last week.
A Dutch official said The Hague is skeptical about
using loans to fund grants. "We're willing to look at everything, but debt
financing grants at this stage seems a bridge too far," said the official.
"Before
the EU resorts to ever new methods of financial alchemy, levers and bond
constructions, we finally need clarity for what all the money is to be used
for." — Eckhardt Rehberg, CDU spokesperson for budgetary affairs
Helsinki
shares this view — but sounds more open to a compromise.
“We prefer
loans, but are open to look at combination of loans and grants," said a
Finnish official. "The problem with loans is that it adds up to the debt
of the most indebted countries but the problem with grants is that it would
leave the EU budget permanently in deficit or require actual money
contributions down the line."
Commission
officials insist they will find a creative compromise that is in line with EU
law and that they are working hard to craft a plan that takes account of the
concerns of all member countries.
German
reservations
Ultimately,
Germany's attitude to the Commission's plans will be crucial. And in Berlin,
members of Chancellor Angela Merkel's Christian Democratic Union (CDU)
highlighted strong reservations.
Gunther
Krichbaum, the head of the Bundestag's European affairs committee, said the
Commission's legal service had a "somewhat more generous" view about
the use of grants whereas lawyers at the Council of the EU, which represents
member countries, are "already more skeptical."
The CDU
lawmaker also noted that Germany's constitutional court will next Tuesday issue
a long-expected ruling on the legality of the European Central Bank buying the
bonds of EU member countries, which would likely feed into the broader
political debate.
Eckhardt
Rehberg, the CDU's spokesperson for budgetary affairs, suggested the Commission
was putting the cart before the horse.
"Before the EU resorts to ever new methods of
financial alchemy, levers and bond constructions, we finally need clarity for
what all the money is to be used for," said Rehberg. "It appears that
some are only interested in putting large sums of money on display."
Merkel
herself has suggested a more orthodox way of raising funds, making clear in
recent days that Germany — the biggest contributor to the EU's coffers — is now
ready to pay more into the long-term EU budget, the Multiannual Financial
Framework (MFF).
But it is
unclear if larger budget contributions — even if backed by all member countries
— would raise anything like the amount of up to €1.5 trillion that Southern
European countries say is required.
German MEP
Niclas Herbst, a CDU member and vice-chair of the European Parliament's Budgets
Committee, said Europe needs "a far more ambitious classic MFF." He
backed the idea of cash that "comes from EU Budget and goes into special
programs for member states."
Herbst said
in an email that the budget should also include "some new financing
instruments (such as money raised from financial markets)" but added that
"we have to be realistic that some member states won't be in the condition
to pay back loans in the near future. Therefore grants and loans under special
conditions might be an adequate option."
Markus
Töns, a German MP from the Social Democrats, the junior partner in Merkel's
ruling coalition, said he had heard the German government has legal concerns about
the Commission's plans.
But he
criticized the government’s attitude, saying that it was in Berlin’s best
interest to show more solidarity when it comes to pooling debt risk and thereby
support European partners. “If foreign trade — which is set to collapse
worldwide — now also collapses at European level, then things will also become
very, very bitter for German exporters. And this would affect many thousands of
jobs," he said.
How anti-5G anger sparked a wave of arson attacks
How anti-5G anger sparked a wave of arson attacks
Conspiracy theory-fueled opposition to the technology
bubbled online for years. Then the coronavirus outbreak hit.
By LAURENS
CERULUS 4/29/20, 6:40 PM CET Updated 5/1/20, 4:50 AM CET
Hanna
Linderstål wanted to see how deep the rabbit hole of anti-5G theories would go.
The
Stockholm-based researcher had been studying online groups opposed to the new
technology for years. Then she watched as the movement reached a tipping point
earlier this year amid the coronavirus outbreak — spilling into criminality
with a spate of arson attacks against telecom masts.
In the
space of just a couple of weeks, more than 60 masts have been hit by arson
attacks in the U.K. It prompted Boris Johnson's office to condemn the attacks
as caused by a “crazed conspiracy theory” and "putting lives at
risk."
On the
Continent, the Netherlands is the hardest-hit country with 22 arson attacks and
three attempted attacks linked to 5G concerns. Ireland has seen three such
attacks, Cyprus has seen two and Belgium, Italy, Sweden and Finland have all
seen at least one, recent figures from industry associations ETNO and GSMA
showed.
The outrage
behind these attacks — fear that 5G radiation causes health problems — has been
bubbling away on the internet ever since the technology became viable.
"Everybody is really scared. Everybody is an easy
target" — Hanna Linderstål, Stockholm-based researcher
But it was
only this year, when anti-5G groups started spreading rumors that the
technology had caused the coronavirus outbreak, that things turned ugly.
Online
ravings escalated into physical harassment of telecom engineers and torchings
of "base station" sites of antennas — masts and internet connections
worth hundreds of thousands of euros.
"People
see these clips and they get angry," Linderstål said in a video call.
"Everybody is really scared. Everybody is an easy target."
For
Linderstål, the disinformation and conspiracies surrounding 5G have been around
for years. She co-founded a boutique intelligence firm called Earhart that's
been tracking misinformation on 5G since 2018 on social media platforms like
Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and, more recently, the booming video-sharing app
TikTok.
Her firm
tracks groups ranging from environmentalists concerned about the ecological
impact of 5G to online channels devoted purely to misinformation and nonsense.
"Half
of the clips feature people that claim to be doctors and scientists, and half
of the clips are people filming cell towers next to dead birds and so on,"
Linderstål said.
The
creators "are really good at presenting the information. They make a
compelling narrative. It's like a good movie clip," she added.
Anti-5G
warriors switch gears
Opposition
to 5G started with environmental and other groups raising concerns about
health. It echoed earlier movements going back to the rollout of 3G and 4G
networks warning of long-term effects of radiation on the human body.
Little
evidence exists linking cell phone radiation to health problems, the World
Health Organization underlines in its evaluation: "To date, and after much
research performed, no adverse health effect has been causally linked with
exposure to wireless technologies," it said, adding that "so far,
only a few studies have been carried out at the frequencies to be used by
5G."
The absence
of long-term studies has fueled community opposition to mobile phone system
infrastructure such as antenna towers.
The
opposition has largely coalesced around Stop 5G groups on social media, which
successfully pushed some authorities to start investigating health effects from
the technology. In France, the health authority launched an inquiry in January.
In Brussels, home of the EU's main institutions, the local government imposed
environmental limits making it effectively impossible for operators to roll out
5G.
While those
groups started a debate, they also laid the groundwork for 5G coronavirus
conspiracy theories, which ultimately led to people torching masts.
"There's
been a discussion and very extensive research on this. There have been
unfounded concerns being expressed by segments of society for some time ...
What you saw with corona is an increase of misinformation [including] the idea
that coronavirus exists because of 5G, that it is a direct effect of 5G,"
said Joakim Reiter, external affairs director for Vodafone Group.
"It
became so ludicrous and yet it traveled so quickly," Reiter said.
Tech giants
have taken action in past weeks to slow down the sharing of conspiracy
theories. WhatsApp, owned by Facebook, limited how users can forward messages
to large groups of people. YouTube, owned by Google, this week expanded its
fact-checking program, citing concerns of coronavirus misinformation as a key
reason. Facebook expanded its work with fact-checking organizations in April.
The World Health Organization now lists 5G at the top
of its coronavirus mythbusters page to help fight misinformation during the
pandemic.
Still,
telecoms executives warned anti-5G groups continued to thrive during the
pandemic.
In
Bulgaria, the Stop 5G groups used the pandemic to mobilize people against the
new technology, according to Janet Zaharieva, chief regulatory adviser for
local operator Vivacom.
"They
misused what happened with the coronavirus and used the coronavirus as an
accelerator for them, to attract new followers," she said.
In Sweden,
where there has been one arson incident, small local protest groups have also
seized the momentum.
"Now
they try to tag [the pushback] onto the international discussion on
corona," said Tommy Ljunggren of Sweden's main IT and telecoms industry
association IT&Telekomföretagen.
Beyond the
older anti-5G online groups, researchers warned that others are misusing
widespread public fear of coronavirus to boost the spread of 5G conspiracies.
Facebook
has become a popular platform for spreading misinformation about 5G and the
coronavirus
"Some of [the activity] is typical behavior of
trolls trying to make money out of clicks. They choose a topic that is very
popular," said Linderstål.
Case in
point: In late January, an invite-only Facebook group called “Coronavirus the
real truth” was set up and quickly descended into spreading falsehoods and
rumors about the global pandemic. Yet by late April, when almost 600 people had
signed up, the group abruptly changed its name to “5G the real truth,” and
began spreading the theories linking COVID-19 to 5G, according to a review of
these social media posts by POLITICO.
Authorities
try to push back
As the
attacks gathered pace, telecoms industry groups took an interest in the work of
Linderstål's Earhart, and other people who have been researching 5G-related
conspiracy theories. Industry association GSMA has used the findings to alert
authorities and global health officials to the danger of more attacks.
The World
Health Organization now lists 5G at the top of its coronavirus mythbusters page
to help fight misinformation during the pandemic, and the European Commission
says on its website that "there is no connection between 5G and
COVID-19," and cites "no evidence that 5G is harmful to people’s
health."
But the
official dismissal of the claims has so far failed to stop the spread of the
disinformation, telecom industry officials warned.
“We must
stop disinformation linking 5G to COVID-19 from harming our critical
communications networks and frontline engineers when we need them most,” GSMA
and its local European association ETNO said in a joint emailed statement.
The Stop 5G groups have bombarded local mayoral
offices with letters warning of alleged health risks, including linking the
technology to outbreaks of coronavirus.
Zaharieva,
of Bulgaria's Vivacom, said her company is concerned with local political
resistance against the next-generation networks. The Stop 5G groups have
bombarded local mayoral offices with letters warning of alleged health risks,
including linking the technology to outbreaks of coronavirus in Wuhan, China
and in the north of Italy.
"Local
authorities provide the permits for base stations," she said, adding that
operators fear local politicians could halt the rollout of new networks due to
fears that it would harm them politically.
Linderstål,
the disinformation researcher, said governments should get down to the level of
the local protest groups on social media in order to counter the falsehoods.
"You
have to publish information in the channels where these conversations are
happening," she said. "You can't publish your response in the papers,
you have to engage in the channel where kids are reading it."
Mark Scott contributed reporting.
Air France must make way for the train: 'Short flights cancelled'
Air France must make way for the train: 'Short flights
cancelled'
The French airline Air France must make way for the train
in its own country. Short domestic flights should be cancelled. Passengers can
switch to the train.
Frank Renout 29
april 2020, 21:52
"If there is
an opportunity within France to travel by train in less than 2.5 hours, that should
be the rule," said Economy Minister Bruno Le Maire.
Only if a short
flight still serves and then makes an international switch, for example in
Paris to a destination elsewhere in the world, that is allowed, Le Maire
announced on Twitter. Air France needs to reduce its CO2 emissions on domestic
flights by 50% over the next five years.
"Air France
must become the most environmentally conscious airline on earth. That's a
hard-hitting demand I set." Le Maire
calls it a prerequisite for the loans that are ready for Air France.
‘Geen blanco
check’
Earlier this week
it was announced that Air France can count on 7 billion euros in loans to
overcome the corona crisis. The Netherlands pledged 2 to 4 billion in loans to
KLM. About 90 to 95 percent of Air France KLM's fleet is under the run by the
crisis these days.
Of the money for
Air France comes 4 billion from banks. The French state guarantees 90% of that
amount. The remaining 3 billion is directly lent to Air France by the French
State. "We don't give a blank check. It's about a lot of taxpayers'
money," says Minister Le Maire.
The minister adds
that Air France must also fly 'cleaner' on international flights. The company
needs to make more use of biofuel and when purchasing new aircraft it should
pay attention to the ecological footprint of the aircraft, according to Le
Maire.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Set for Record Decline Due to Coronavirus Lockdowns
AIR
POLLUTION
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Set for Record Decline
Due to Coronavirus Lockdowns
Olivia RosaneApr. 30, 2020 07:33AM
The decline
in energy demand driven by coronavirus lockdowns will trigger a record fall in
greenhouse gas emissions, the International Energy Agency (IEA) said Thursday.
The
Paris-based agency predicted a drop of eight percent, almost six times the last
record, set in 2009 and triggered by the global financial crisis. It is also
twice as steep as all emissions declines since World War II combined. However,
the agency cautioned that this decline on its own is not a solution to the
climate crisis.
"Resulting
from premature deaths and economic trauma around the world, the historic
decline in global emissions is absolutely nothing to cheer," IEA Executive
Director Dr Fatih Birol said in a press release. "And if the aftermath of
the 2008 financial crisis is anything to go by, we are likely to soon see a
sharp rebound in emissions as economic conditions improve."
Birol did
note, however, that a rebound in emissions is not inevitable, as he added his
voice to the growing global call for a green recovery process.
"[G]overnments
can learn from [the post-2008] experience by putting clean energy technologies
– renewables, efficiency, batteries, hydrogen and carbon capture – at the heart
of their plans for economic recovery," he said. "Investing in those
areas can create jobs, make economies more competitive and steer the world
towards a more resilient and cleaner energy future."
The IEA's
Global Energy Review is based on more than 100 days of data so far this year.
It predicts that global energy demand will fall by six percent in 2020, the
equivalent of losing the entire energy demand of India and seven times the 2008
decline.
All major
fossil fuels have taken a beating so far and are expected to decline further.
Coal demand
fell by almost eight percent in the first quarter of 2020 and could fall eight
percent for the whole year.
Oil
declined by almost five percent in the first quarter and could fall by nine
percent for the year.
Natural gas
declined by two percent so far and is expected to fall by five percent for the
year, The Guardian reported. While gas has been less impacted than oil and
coal, that would still be its steepest decline since it became a widely-used
energy source in the mid-20th century.
Only
renewable energy sources saw growth, and are expected to continue to grow
throughout the year. This is because wind turbines and solar panels cost little
to operate, so when electricity demand declines, they get priority on the grid,
The New York Times explained.
This means
low carbon energy sources are expected to continue moving in the direction that
began in 2019, when they overtook coal as the world's leading source of
electricity for the first time in 50 years. By the end of 2020, they should
account for 40 percent of the world's electricity.
"This
is a historic shock to the entire energy world. Amid today's unparalleled
health and economic crises, the plunge in demand for nearly all major fuels is
staggering, especially for coal, oil and gas. Only renewables are holding up
during the previously unheard-of slump in electricity use," Birol said.
"It is still too early to determine the longer-term impacts, but the
energy industry that emerges from this crisis will be significantly different
from the one that came before."
The IEA
estimates are based on certain assumptions, namely that lockdown measures are
loosened in the coming months and the economy begins to recover.
"Some
countries may delay the lifting of the lockdown, or a second wave of
coronavirus could render our current expectations on the optimistic side,"
Birol told Reuters.
The
question for climate advocates is whether the decline in emissions can be
sustained. This is a tall order. The United Nations has estimated that
emissions need to decline by around eight percent per year through 2030 in
order to keep temperatures "well below" two degrees Celsius above pre
industrial levels, The New York Times reported.
However,
the declines in air pollution that have accompanied the lockdowns may provide
an effective argument for cleaner energy.
"I
hope the striking improvements in air quality we've seen remind us what things
could be like if we shifted to green power and electric vehicles,"
Stanford University earth scientist Rob Jackson told The New York Times.
Covid-19 crisis will wipe out demand for fossil fuels, says IEA / Climate experts call for 'dangerous' Michael Moore film to be taken down Planet of the Humans, which takes aim at the green movement, is ‘full of misinformation’ says one distributor
Covid-19 crisis will wipe out demand for fossil
fuels, says IEA
Renewable electricity may be only source to withstand
biggest shock in 70 years
Thu 30 Apr
2020 05.00 BSTLast modified on Thu 30 Apr 2020 05.04 BST
Renewable
electricity will be the only source resilient to the biggest global energy
shock in 70 years triggered by the coronavirus pandemic, according to the
world’s energy watchdog.
The
International Energy Agency said the outbreak of Covid-19 would wipe out demand
for fossil fuels by prompting a collapse in energy demand seven times greater
than the slump caused by the global financial crisis.
In a
report, the IEA said the most severe plunge in energy demand since the second
world war would trigger multi-decade lows for the world’s consumption of oil,
gas and coal while renewable energy continued to grow.
The steady
rise of renewable energy combined with the collapse in demand for fossil fuels
means clean electricity will play its largest ever role in the global energy
system this year, and help erase a decade’s growth of global carbon emissions.
Fatih
Birol, the IEA’s executive director, said: “The plunge in demand for nearly all
major fuels is staggering, especially for coal, oil and gas. Only renewables
are holding up during the previously unheard of slump in electricity use.”
Renewable
energy is expected to grow by 5% this year, to make up almost 30% of the
world’s shrinking demand for electricity. The growth of renewables despite a
global crisis could spur fossil fuel companies towards their goals to generate
more clean energy, according to Birol, but governments should also include
clean energy at the heart of economic stimulus packages to ensure a green
recovery.
“It is
still too early to determine the longer-term impacts,” said Birol. “But the
energy industry that emerges from this crisis will be significantly different
from the one that came before.”
The impact
of the coronavirus has triggered a crisis for fossil fuel commodities,
including the collapse of oil market prices, which turned negative for the
first time in the US earlier this month.
Global
efforts to curb the spread of Covid-19 have led to severe restrictions on
travel and the global economy that will cause the biggest drop in global oil
demand in 25 years.
Demand for
gas is expected to fall by 5%, after a decade of uninterrupted growth. It is
the steepest drop since gas became widely used as an energy source in the
second half of the previous century.
Coal demand
is forecast to fall by 8% compared with 2019, its largest decline since the end
of the second world war.
CLICK to ENLARGE
Climate experts call for 'dangerous' Michael
Moore film to be taken down
Planet of the Humans, which takes aim at the green
movement, is ‘full of misinformation’ says one distributor / GUARDIAN
Michael Moore turns on climate left with film
skewering green energy
'Planet of
the Humans' released on Moore's YouTube channel for Earth Day
By Valerie
Richardson - The Washington Times - Friday, April 24, 2020
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2020/apr/24/michael-moore-turns-climate-left-film-skewering-gr/
Left-wing filmmaker Michael Moore is under attack from
his putative climate allies with a newly released documentary taking on one of
the sacred cows of the environmental movement: green energy.
“Planet of
the Humans,” released this week free of charge on YouTube to coincide with
Earth Day, argues that replacing fossil fuels with renewable energy is not only
a pipe dream, but that solar arrays, wind farms and biomass are doing enormous
damage of their own to the environment.
The
blowback from the left was immediate. Josh Fox, director of the anti-fracking
films “Gasland” and “Gasland Part II,” called on activists, scientists and
others to sign a letter “demanding an apology and an immediate retraction by
the [film’s] producers, director and other advocates.”
“It was very difficult to write this letter, because
Michael Moore has always been a hero of mine,” Mr. Fox said, but argued that
the latest documentary was “a blatant affront to science, renewable energy,
environmental activism and truth itself.”
Written,
directed and narrated by veteran environmentalist Jeff Gibbs, the film also
accuses the green movement of selling out to corporate America, taking shots at
leading figures such as former Vice President Al Gore, 350.org’s Bill McKibben,
former Obama green-jobs adviser Van Jones, the Sierra Club, Virgin’s Richard
Branson, and Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
“The only
reason we’ve been force-fed the story ‘climate change plus renewables equals
we’re saved’ is because billionaires, bankers and corporations profit from it,”
Mr. Gibbs said in the 100-minute film.
Mr. Moore,
the film’s executive producer, has admitted in interviews that he “thought
solar panels lasted forever” and “didn’t know what went into the making of
them,” referring to rare-earth minerals like quartz and the fossil fuels used
in production.
He told
Reuters that he used to support electric vehicles, but “I didn’t really think
about, where is the electricity coming from?” More than 62% of the U.S.
utility-scale power grid is run on natural gas and coal.
“[W]e are
not going to be able to solar-panel and windmill our way out of this,” Mr.
Moore said on CBS’s “Late Night with Stephen Colbert.” “We need a serious new
direction.”
Free-marketers
are unlikely to endorse the film’s proposed solutions — population control and
drastic reductions in consumption — but that doesn’t mean they haven’t enjoyed
seeing Mr. Moore reiterate their talking points on green energy’s drawbacks.
Quipped the
Competitive Enterprise Institute’s Myron Ebell: “‘Planet of the Humans’ should
really be titled, ‘The Luddite Left Eats the Climate Industrial Complex.’”
“If global warming is really a problem, the solution
can’t possibly be windmills, solar panels, burning biomass, and battery
storage,” said Mr. Ebell, director of the CEI Center for Energy and
Environment. “Climate and energy realists like CEI have been making these
points for years, but now that leaders of the extreme anti-human,
anti-industrial environmental fringe have reached the same conclusions, perhaps
more people will start to pay attention.”
Heartland
Institute senior fellow Anthony Watts, who runs the skeptical Watts Up With
That website, hailed the film as an “epic take-down of the left’s love-affair
with renewables by one of the left’s most known public figures.”
Meanwhile,
there was plenty of outrage on the left over Mr. Moore’s betrayal.
Penn State
climatologist Michael E. Mann, creator of the much-debated “hockey stick” graph
of global warming, called it “another polemic from Moore, but this time
attacking climate action rather than the misdeeds of the right.”
“Michael Moore’s prescription (shunning renewable
energy) will insure a far LESS healthy planet,” tweeted Mr. Mann, who holds a
Ph.D. in geology and geophysics. “It’s a travesty for people to be viewing his
error-riddled polemic at a time when we need to focus on REAL climate
solutions.”
Others on social media blasted Mr. Moore as a
“blowhard,” “rich white guy,” “misinformed” and “dishonest.”
“Michael
Moore bringing together the white male small-population racists and the white
male ecomodernist ultra-growth bros to attack solar and wind on Earth Day is
just such a pure 2020 story,” tweeted science writer Ketan Joshi.
Bowling for
biomass
No Michael
Moore film would be complete without gotcha moments, and “Planet of the Humans”
has its share, including details on Mr. Gore’s financial ties to green energy,
Mr. McKibben waffling on 350.org’s funding sources, and Mr. Jones, Mr. Kennedy
and Mr. McKibben skirting questions on biomass.
Mr.
McKibben issued a statement Thursday emphasizing that he changed his mind years
ago about “large-scale biomass,” a renewable-energy source that involves
logging and burning vast swaths of trees at power plants to produce
electricity.
“I am used
to ceaseless harassment and attack from the fossil fuel industry, and I’ve done
my best to ignore a lifetime of death threats from right-wing extremists,” said
Mr. McKibben. “It does hurt more to be attacked by others who think of
themselves as environmentalists.”
The film
slams the Koch brothers, who are invested in renewables, but most of the
criticism is devoted to bursting the left’s green-energy bubble. A concert
billed as running on renewables is actually plugged into the grid. Acres of desert
brush and trees are leveled for gigantic solar projects.
In a scene
at the Ivanpah Solar Power Facility in the Mojave Desert, co-producer Ozzie
Zehner says that while solar energy is renewable, the array itself was built
using fossil-fuel infrastructure.
“You use
more fossil fuels to do this than you’re getting benefit from,” said Mr.
Zehner, a visiting scholar at Northwestern and author of 2012’s “Green
Illusions.” “You would have been better off burning the fossil fuels in the
first place instead of playing pretend.”
In his
letter, Mr. Fox called the assertion “patently untrue and ridiculous,” accusing
the film of using outdated information and making unfair, misleading attacks on
“movement leaders” and “important local campaigners.”
The
Oscar-winning producer of films such as “Bowling for Columbine,” “Fahrenheit
9/11,” and “Roger and Me,” Mr. Moore said he decided to release the film online
because of the uncertainty about when theaters would reopen following the
coronavirus closures.
“[W]e are not
going to be able to solar-panel and windmill our way out of this,” Mr. Moore
said on CBS’s “Late Night with Stephen Colbert.” “We need a serious new
direction.”
Whether Mr.
Moore’s conversion changes any minds on the left remains to be seen, but Power
the Future Western states director Larry Behrens said he doubted it.
“The fact
that the problems of the green agenda are so plain that even Michael Moore can
figure it out is little comfort to those who support our workers and a strong
economy,” Mr. Behrens said. “Sadly, even if Moore can plead temporary sanity,
advocates of the socialist green agenda are still moving forward trying to
destroy energy jobs across our country.”
Subscrever:
Mensagens (Atom)
