- During Tuesday’s Senate hearing, Dr. Anthony Fauci warned against opening the country back up too soon.
- At the hearing, Fauci said states that reopen too early without heeding federal guidelines could risk uncontrollable outbreaks that lead to “suffering and death that could be avoided,” and undermine economic recovery.
- This is a direct contrast to what President Trump has been saying, which implies that America is starting to come out on the other side of the virus, despite the U.S. hitting 80,000 deaths.
Dr. Fauci Testifies
Dr. Anthony Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and a key member of the coronavirus task force, testified in a highly anticipated Senate hearing on Tuesday.
The hearing, dubbed “Covid-19: Safely Getting Back to Work and Back to School,” was held by the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee. It marked the first time the leading expert was publicly questioned by Congress since President Donald Trump declared a national emergency two months ago.
In addition to Dr. Fauci, senators also heard testimony from Dr. Robert Redfield, the director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Dr. Stephen Hahn, the Food and Drug Administration commissioner, and Admiral Brett Giroir, the assistant secretary for health at the Department of Health and Human Services.
Much of the focus of the hearing, especially the questions directed to Dr. Fauci, were centered around the widespread reopening efforts states have started to undertake.
In an email to the New York Times the night before the hearing, Dr. Fauci said that the message he wished to convey to the committee “is the danger of trying to open the country prematurely.”
“If we skip over the checkpoints in the guidelines to ‘Open America Again,’ then we risk the danger of multiple outbreaks throughout the country,” he wrote. “This will not only result in needless suffering and death, but would actually set us back on our quest to return to normal.”
Dr. Fauci Doubles Down
Dr. Fauci hit on that point during the hearing when asked what he thinks will happen if states start to open up too soon.
“My concern is that if states or cities or regions their attempt, understandable, to get back to some form of normality, disregard to a greater sense of degree the checkpoints that we put in our guidelines about when it is safe to proceed in pulling back on mitigation,” he said.
“Because I feel if that occurs, there is a real risk that you will trigger an outbreak that you may not be able to control,” he continued. “Which in fact, paradoxically will set you back, not only leading to some suffering and death that could be avoided, but could even set you back on the road to trying to get economic recovery. So you would almost turn the clock back rather than going forward.”
“When you are in the process of opening up and pulling back on mitigation, you really must have in place the capability of responding when you do that the inevitable uptick of cases. That will absolutely occur,” Dr. Fauci reiterated later in the hearing.
“It’s how we deal with it, and how successful we are in how we put the clamps on it, that will prevent us from getting the kind of rebound that not only from the standpoint of illness and death would be something that’s unacceptable. But it will set us back in our progress towards reopening the country.”
Dr. Fauci also pushed back against a number of claims President Trump has made in recent weeks. When asked if he thought the U.S. had the virus under control, as Trump has indicated, he responded, “If you think that we have it completely under control, we don’t.“
“If you look at the dynamics of the outbreak, we are seeing a diminution of hospitalizations and infections in some places—such as in New York City, which has plateaued and is starting to come down, New Orleans—but in other parts of the country, we are seeing spikes.”
“We run the risk of having a resurgence,” he added. “I would hope by that point in time in the fall that we have more than enough to respond adequately, but if we don’t, there will be problems.”
The doctor additionally addressed Trump’s claims that the coronavirus will go away without a vaccine.
“That is just not going to happen,” he said. “It’s a highly transmissible virus. It is likely there will be virus somewhere on this planet that will likely get back to us.”
The points made by Dr.Fauci were also echoed and supported by the other experts, like CDC director Dr. Redfield, who told the Senators “we’re not out of the woods yet.”
Contradicting Trump’s Remarks
Many of the remarks made by Dr. Fauci and the other health experts appeared to directly contract remarks made by President Trump over the last few weeks.
Two weeks ago when the federal social distancing guidelines expired, Trump announced he would not extend them.
“We think we really have crossed a big boundary, and much better days are ahead,” he said. “And I often say I see the light at the end of the tunnel, very strongly.”
Since then, the president has generally spoken about the virus as though it has largely been handled, even as the U.S. has now hit 80,000 recorded deaths. But that has not stopped Trump from claiming victory.
“We have met the moment and we have prevailed,” he boldly declared while speaking from the Rose Garden Monday.
When asked later, Trump said that he meant the country had prevailed on increasing access to testing, but even that is a questionable claim.
It is true that the U.S. has nearly doubled daily testing from 150,000 tests per day from a month ago to 300,000 per day recently, but that number is still far under the five million daily target Trump himself set last month.
Despite falling short of this self-proclaimed goal, Trump has repeatedly bragged about U.S. testing capabilities.
“We have a great testing capacity now,” he said Monday. “If somebody wants to be tested right now, they’ll be able to be tested.”
However, it is simply not true that everyone has access to testing. The U.S. only has the capacity to test everyone who is symptomatic or has been in contact with someone that tested positive.
Trump also mischaracterized the number of new cases in the U.S., claiming that they are “way down from what they were two weeks ago. The numbers are really coming down very substantially. This weekend was one of the lowest we’ve had.”
While the number of new cases reported across the country this weekend was 40,000, which is less than the 60,000 reported two weeks ago, that is still not good.
It is also not a “universal” trend, as Trump said. According to reports, new cases are actually increasing in nine states and basically unchanged in more than two dozen others.
Those facts and the remarks made by Dr. Fauci are highly relevant as more and more states begin to reopen.
The majority of states have started to implement at least a partial reopening, but according to reports, more than half of those states do not meet the Trump administration’s guidelines for doing so, which rely on increased testing capabilities and a downward trajectory of positive cases.
Many of those states have not increased their testing capabilities, and according to the Times: “In more than half of states easing restrictions last week, case counts were trending upward, the proportion of positive test results was rising, or both.”
See what others are saying: (The New York Times) (The Washington Post) (CNN)
Jan. 6 Rally Organizers Say They Met With Members of Congress and White House Officials Ahead of Insurrection
Two sources told Rolling Stone that they participated in “dozens” of meetings with “multiple members of Congress” and top White House aides to plan the rallies that proceeded the Jan. 6 insurrection.
Rolling Stone Report
Members of Congress and White House Staffers under former President Donald Trump allegedly helped plan the Jan. 6 protests that took place outside the U.S. Capitol ahead of the insurrection, according to two sources who spoke to Rolling Stone.
According to a report the outlet published Sunday, the two people, identified only as “a rally organizer” and “a planner,” have both “begun communicating with congressional investigators.”
The two told Rolling Stone that they participated in “dozens” of planning briefings ahead of the protests and said that “multiple members of Congress were intimately involved in planning both Trump’s efforts to overturn his election loss and the Jan. 6 events that turned violent.”
“I remember Marjorie Taylor Greene specifically,” the person identified as a rally organizer said. “I remember talking to probably close to a dozen other members at one point or another or their staffs.”
The two also told Rolling Stone that a number of other Congress members were either personally involved in the conversations or had staffers join, including Representatives Paul Gosar (R-Az.), Lauren Boebert (R-Co.), Mo Brooks (R-Al.), Madison Cawthorn (R-N.C.), Andy Biggs (R-Az.), and Louie Gohmert (R-Tx.).
The outlet added that it “separately obtained documentary evidence that both sources were in contact with Gosar and Boebert on Jan. 6,” though it did not go into further detail.
A spokesperson for Greene has denied involvement with planning the protests, but so far, no other members have responded to the report.
Previous Allegations Against Congressmembers Named
This is not the first time allegations have surfaced concerning the involvement of some of the aforementioned congress members regarding rallies that took place ahead of the riot.
As Rolling Stone noted, Gosar, Greene, and Boebert were all listed as speakers at the “Wild Protest” at the Capitol on Jan. 6, which was arranged by “Stop the Steal” organizer Ali Alexander.
Additionally, Alexander said during a now-deleted live stream in January that he personally planned the rally with the help of Gosar, Biggs, and Brooks.
Biggs and Brooks previously denied any involvement in planning the event, though Brooks did speak at a pro-Trump protest on Jan. 6.
Gosar, for his part, has remained quiet for months but tagged Alexander in numerous tweets involving Stop the Steal events leading up to Jan. 6, including one post that appears to be taken at a rally at the Capitol hours before the insurrection.
Notably, the organizer and the planner also told Rolling Stone that Gosar “dangled the possibility of a ‘blanket pardon’ in an unrelated ongoing investigation to encourage them to plan the protests.”
Alleged White House Involvement
Beyond members of Congress, the outlet reported that the sources “also claim they interacted with members of Trump’s team, including former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, who they describe as having had an opportunity to prevent the violence.”
Both reportedly described Meadows “as someone who played a major role in the conversations surrounding the protests.”
The two additionally said Katrina Pierson, who worked for the Trump campaign in both 2016 and 2020, was a key liaison between the organizers of the demonstrations and the White House.
“Katrina was like our go-to girl,” the organizer told the outlet. “She was like our primary advocate.”
According to Rolling Stone, the sources have so far only had informal talks with the House committee investigating the insurrection but are expecting to testify publicly. Both reportedly said they would share “new details about the members’ specific roles” in planning the rallies with congressional investigators.
See what others are saying: (Rolling Stone) (Business Insider) (Forbes)
Jan. 6 Committee Prepares Criminal Charges Against Steve Bannon for Ignoring Subpoena
The move comes after former President Trump told several of his previous aides not to cooperate with the committee’s investigation into the insurrection.
Bannon Refuses to Comply With Subpoena
The House committee investigating the Jan. 6 insurrection announced Thursday that it is seeking to hold former White House advisor Steve Bannon in criminal contempt for refusing to comply with a subpoena.
The decision marks a significant escalation in the panel’s efforts to force officials under former President Donald Trump’s administration to comply with its probe amid Trump’s growing efforts to obstruct the inquiry.
In recent weeks, the former president has launched a number of attempts to block the panel from getting key documents, testimonies, and other evidence requested by the committee that he claims are protected by executive privilege.
Notably, some of those assertions have been shut down. On Friday, President Joe Biden rejected Trump’s effort to withhold documents relating to the insurrection.
Still, Trump has also directed former officials in his administration not to comply with subpoenas or cooperate with the committee.
That demand came after the panel issued subpoenas ordering depositions from Bannon and three other former officials: Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, Deputy Chief of Staff Dan Scavino, and Pentagon Chief of Staff Kash Patel.
After Trump issued his demand, Bannon’s lawyer announced that he would not obey the subpoena until the panel reached an agreement with Trump or a court ruled on the executive privilege matter.
Many legal experts have questioned whether Bannon, who left the White House in 2017, can claim executive privilege for something that happened when he was not working for the executive.
Panel Intensifies Compliance Efforts
The Thursday decision from the committee is significant because it will likely set up a legal battle and test how much authority the committee can and will exercise in requiring compliance.
It also sets an important precedent for those who have been subpoenaed. While Bannon is the first former official to openly defy the committee, there have been reports that others plan to do the same.
The panel previously said Patel and Meadows were “engaging” with investigators, but on Thursday, several outlets reported that the two — who were supposed to appear before the body on Thursday and Friday respectively — are now expected to be given an extension or continuance.
Sources told reporters that Scavino, who was also asked to testify Friday, has had his deposition postponed because service of his subpoena was delayed.
As far as what happens next for Bannon, the committee will vote to adopt the contempt report next week. Once that is complete, the matter will go before the House for a full vote.
Assuming the Democratic-held House approves the contempt charge, it will then get referred to the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia to bring the matter before a grand jury.
See what others are saying: (CNN) (The Washington Post) (Bloomberg)
Senate Votes To Extend Debt Ceiling Until December
The move adds another deadline to Dec. 3, which is also when the federal government is set to shut down unless Congress approves new spending.
Debt Ceiling Raised Temporarily
The Senate voted on Thursday to extend the debt ceiling until December, temporarily averting a fiscal catastrophe.
The move, which followed weeks of stalemate due to Republican objections, came after Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) partially backed down from his blockade and offered a short-term proposal.
After much whipping of votes, 11 Republicans joined Democrats to break the legislative filibuster and move to final approval of the measure. The bill ultimately passed in a vote of 50-48 without any Republican support.
The legislation will now head to the House, where Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) said members would be called back from their current recess for a vote on Tuesday.
The White House said President Joe Biden would sign the measure, but urged Congress to pass a longer extension.
“We cannot allow partisan politics to hold our economy hostage, and we can’t allow the routine process of paying our bills to turn into a confidence-shaking political showdown every two years or every two months,’’ White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki said in a statement.
Under the current bill, the nation’s borrowing limit will be increased by $480 billion, which the Treasury Department said will cover federal borrowing until around Dec. 3.
The agency had previously warned that it would run out of money by Oct. 18 if Congress failed to act. Such a move would have a chilling impact on the economy, forcing the U.S. to default on its debts and potentially plunging the country into a recession.
Major Hurdles Remain
While the legislation extending the ceiling will certainly offer temporary relief, it sets up another perilous deadline for the first Friday in December, when government funding is also set to expire if Congress does not approve another spending bill.
Regardless of the new deadline, many of the same hurdles lawmakers faced the first time around remain.
Democrats are still struggling to hammer out the final details of Biden’s $3.5 trillion spending agenda, which Republicans have strongly opposed.
Notably, Democratic leaders previously said they could pass the bill through budget reconciliation, which would allow them to approve the measure with 50 votes and no Republican support.
Such a move would require all 50 Senators, but intraparty disputes remain over objections brought by Joe Manchin (D-W.V.) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-Az.), who have been stalling the process for months.
Although disagreements over reconciliation are ongoing among Democrats, McConnell has insisted the party use the obscure procedural process to raise the debt limit. Democrats, however, have balked at the idea, arguing that tying the debt ceiling to reconciliation would set a dangerous precedent.
Despite Republican efforts to connect the limit to Biden’s economic agenda, raising the ceiling is not the same as adopting new spending. Rather, the limit is increased to pay off spending that has already been authorized by previous sessions of Congress and past administrations.
In fact, much of the current debt stems from policies passed by Republicans during the Trump administration, including the 2017 tax overhaul.
As a result, while Democrats have signaled they may make concessions to Manchin and Sinema, they strongly believe that Republicans must join them to increase the debt ceiling to fund projects their party supported.
It is currently unclear when or how the ongoing stalemate will be resolved, or how either party will overcome their fervent objections.