Connect with us

Politics

Fact-Checking Trump’s Claims About the U.S. Death Rate in That Viral Axios Interview

Published

on

  • In a now-viral interview that was recorded last week, President Donald Trump said the coronavirus pandemic in the United States is “under control, as much as you can control it.”
  • Despite that, Axios national political correspondent Jonathan Swan pressed Trump on the country’s increasing death rate, a fact which Trump denied.
  • At one point, Trump also seemed to insinuate that South Korea’s death count is much higher than the 301 deaths it has reported, but he provided no basis for that.
  • Below is a list of coronavirus-related claims stated by Trump in the interview and a breakdown of how true or false those claims are.

Trump’s Axios Interview Goes Viral

In a clip that has now been viewed more than 30 million times alone on Twitter, President Donald Trump denied the United States’ climbing coronavirus death rate and made a number of other false statements. 

That clip is part of a 38-minute Axios on HBO interview, which was recorded on July 28 and aired Monday evening. In that interview, Axios national political correspondent Jonathan Swan pressed Trump on a variety of topics including the arrest of Ghislaine Maxwell and the recent death of Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.).

However, Trump’s comments regarding the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic have undoubtedly captured the most attention.

The Rising U.S. Death Rate in States 

In his interview with Swan, Trump said his administration has done an “incredible” job handling the coronavirus pandemic. 

Immediately, Swan pushed back by pointing to last week’s death rate, which saw daily death totals climbing above 1,000. Nonetheless, Trump rejected those figures and asserted that the death toll was falling. 

“It’s going down in Arizona,” Trump said. “It’s going down in Florida. It’s going down in Texas.”

“It’s going down in Florida?’ Swan asked, bewildered, after pointing out that, nationally, daily deaths tolls were rising at the time of the interview. 

Regarding Florida, it’s possible that Trump was referring to a four-day dip in coronavirus deaths, but even so, four days is not a long enough period of time to accurately gauge whether or not deaths are beginning to decrease. That’s why many states have implemented reopening plans that only allow them to move into new phases after seeing a two week decline in cases.  

Source: The New York Times

On top of that, the day this interview was recorded, Florida experienced its highest death toll up to that point. That record was later topped each day for the next three days in a row. 

Over the last few days, Florida’s daily death toll has significantly dropped; however, it remains to be seen if this is the beginning of a genuine decrease in daily deaths or if the numbers, on average, will continue to rise.

By comparison, Trump’s claim that cases in Arizona are decreasing does seem to be somewhat accurate, and it’s a point Swan even backs up in the interview. Still, that much does not seem to be the case for Texas yet. 

Source: The New York Times
Source: The New York Times

The Death Rate Nationally

Trump accused media outlets of incorrectly reporting coronavirus-related statistics, but he declined to offer an explanation as to how. Instead, he asserted that his administration should receive credit for testing more vigorously than other countries.

“Because we do more tests, we have more cases,” Trump said. “In other words, we test more, we have more.”

For Swan, however, that was not the point. 

“If hospital rates were going down and death rates were going down, I’d say, ‘Terrific. You deserved to be praised for testing,’ Swan responded. “But they’re all going up. 60,000 Americans are in hospital. A thousand dying a day.” 

“If you watch the news or read the papers, they usually talk about new cases, new cases, new cases,” Trump said.

“I’m talking about death,” Swan said. 

“Well, you look,” Trump said. “Death is way down from where it was.”

While Trump is technically correct here, his statement—as Swan noted—is misleading. Beginning in April and continuing through the beginning of May, daily death totals in the U.S. spiked. At one point, the country was recording daily death tolls reaching 2,700 people. 

As May continued, the death toll began to fall, so much so that the country was reporting less than 1,000 deaths a day by mid-June; however, that number started climbing again early last month, eventually climbing back over that 1,000 mark.

Source: The New York Times

“We’re Lower Than the World.”

“And if you look at death, here,” Trump said while pointing to a graph. “United States is lowest in numerous categories. We’re lower than the world.”

“Lower than the world?” Swan asked, bewildered.

“We’re lower than Europe.” Trump continued. 

“In what? In what?” Swan asked. 

“Take a look,” Trump said, still pointing to the graph. “Right here. Here’s case death.”

“Oh, you’re doing death as a proportion of cases. I’m talking about death as a proportion of population,” Swan said in what has now become the most viral moment of the interview. “That’s where the U.S. is really bad. Much worse than South Korea, Germany, etc.”

“You can’t do that,” Trump said.

Trump and Swan are citing two different stats here. Trump is referring to the percentage of people who die in the U.S. after having contracted the virus, known as the fatality rate. Swan is referring to the percentage of Americans who have died compared to the whole population, known as the mortality rate.

Both are relevant figures, but it is Trump’s denial of the second statistic’s importance that is concerning. According to Johns Hopkins University, the U.S. is the 10th-worst nation in terms of per capita coronavirus deaths: 47.50 per 100,000 people.

Among more information, mortality rate can be used to see what percentage of a country’s population has died compared to another country. Such a number is more accurate than simply following raw numbers, as most countries vary significantly in population from the U.S. It’s also less subject to variables than the fatality rate.

“It’s surely a relevant statistic to say if the U.S. has X population and X percentage of death of that population versus South Korea—” Swan said.

“No, you have to go by cases,” Trump responded.

“Well, look at South Korea, for example,” Swan said. “Fifty-one million population, 300 deaths. It’s like— it’s crazy.”

“You don’t know that,”  Trump said. You don’t know that.”

“I do, it’s on their—You think they’re faking their statistics, South Korea?” Swan asked. “An advanced country?”

“I won’t get into that because I have a very good relationship with the country, but you don’t know that,” Trump said.

Since the coronavirus pandemic began, South Korea has only officially recorded 301 deaths. It is possible that Trump said, “You don’t know that,” because there may be some variation in that statistic. Still, even if more or fewer people died than what is officially recorded, that figure is likely not substantially different from the recorded value.

Trump provided no additional context into the meaning of this claim, and there is no basis to suggest that South Korea has fabricated its death toll. 

The Outbreak Is “Under Control”

Near the beginning of the interview, Trump says that the outbreak in the U.S. is “under control, as much as you can control it.”

As of Tuesday, the U.S. undoubtedly leads the world in cases: 4.7 million out of 18.3 million. Similarly, it leads the world in deaths: nearly 156,000 of nearly 695,000.

Notably, it is true that despite massive raw numbers, the U.S. does not have the highest percentage of cases or deaths compared to every country; however, the situation in the U.S. is significantly worse than almost every other country in the world. Even regardless of comparisons, the situation on its own is more than concerning. 

Because of that, Swan immediately pushed back against the president, asking him if his administration has truly done everything in its power to fight the virus. From there, the president shifted blame to governors, though he did praise some.

As Swan also noted, Trump’s position as president carries weight, and despite being highly controversial throughout his term, many listen to his words and trust them.

“I’ve covered you for a long time,” Swan said. “I’ve gone to your rallies. I’ve talked to your people. They love you. They listen to you. They hang on your every word. They don’t listen to me or the media or Fauci. They think we’re fake news. They want to get their advice from you. And so when they hear you say, ‘Everything’s under control, don’t worry about wearing mask,’ I mean, decent people. Many of them are older people, Mr. President. It’s giving them a false sense of security.”

“Under the circumstances right now, I think it’s under control,” Trump said. 

“How?” Swan asked. A thousand Americans are dying everyday.”

“They are dying, that’s true,” Trump said. “And it is what it is. But that doesn’t mean we aren’t doing everything we can.” 

See what others are saying: (Business Insider) (MarketWatch) (The Washington Post)

Politics

Supreme Court Rules High School Football Coach Can Pray on Field

Published

on

All of our rights are “hanging in the balance,” wrote Justice Sonia Sotomayor in a dissenting opinion.


Court’s Conservatives Break With 60 Years of History

The Supreme Court on Monday ruled in favor of a former high school football coach who lost his job after he refused to stop praying on the field at the end of games.

Joseph Kennedy, who was hired at Bremerton High School in Washington State in 2008, kneeled at the 50-yard line after games for years and prayed. He was often joined by some of his players, as well as others from the opposing team.

In 2015, the school asked him not to pray if it interfered with his duties or involved students.

Shortly after, Kennedy was placed on paid administrative leave, and after a school official recommended that his contract not be renewed for the 2016 season he did not reapply for the position.

Kennedy sued the school, eventually appealing the case to the Supreme Court.

The justices voted 6 to 3, with the liberal justices dissenting.

“Respect for religious expressions is indispensable to life in a free and diverse republic — whether those expressions take place in a sanctuary or on a field, and whether they manifest through the spoken word or a bowed head,” Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote in the majority opinion.

“Here, a government entity sought to punish an individual for engaging in a brief, quiet, personal religious observance,” he added.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote a dissenting opinion.

“Today’s decision is particularly misguided because it elevates the religious rights of a school official, who voluntarily accepted public employment and the limits that public employment entails, over those of his students, who are required to attend school and who this court has long recognized are particularly vulnerable and deserving of protection,” she said.

“In doing so, the court sets us further down a perilous path in forcing states to entangle themselves with religion, with all of our rights hanging in the balance.”

The defense in the case argued that the public nature of Kennedy’s prayers put pressure on students to join him, and that he was acting in his capacity as a public employee, not a private citizen.

Kennedy’s lawyers contended that such an all-encompassing definition of his job duties denied him his right to self-expression on school grounds.

“This is just so awesome,” Kennedy said in a statement following the decision. “All I’ve ever wanted was to be back on the field with my guys … I thank God for answering our prayers and sustaining my family through this long battle.”

Religious Liberty or Separation of Church and State?

Sixty years ago, the Supreme Court decided that the government cannot organize or promote prayer in public schools, and it has since generally abided by that jurisprudence.

But the court led by Chief Justice John Roberts has been increasingly protective of religious expression, especially after the confirmation of three conservative Trump-appointed judges.

Reactions to the ruling were mostly split between liberals who saw the separation of church and state being dissolved and conservatives who hailed it as a victory for religious liberty.

Americans United for the Separation of Church and State, which represented the Bremerton school district, said in a statement that the ruling “gutted decades of established law that protected students’ religious freedom.”

“If Coach Kennedy were named Coach Akbar and he had brought a prayer blanket to the 50 yard line to pray after a game,” one Twitter user said, “I’ve got a 401(k) that says this illegitimate, Christofascist SCOTUS rules 6-3 against him.”

“The people defending former Coach Kennedy’s right to kneel on the field after the game to pray – are the ones condemning Colin Kaepernick’s right to kneel on the field to protest police brutality against Black Americans,” another user wrote.

Others, like Republican Congressmember Ronny Jackson and former Secretary of State for the Trump administration Mike Pompeo, celebrated the ruling for protecting religious freedom and upholding what they called the right to pray.

“I am excited to build on this victory and continue securing our inalienable right to religious freedom,” Pompeo wrote.

See what others are saying: (The Washington Post) (The New York Times) (Fox News)

Continue Reading

Politics

Rep. Schiff Urges DOJ to Investigate Trump for Election Crimes: “There’s Enough Evidence”

Published

on

“When the Justice Department finds evidence of criminal potential criminal wrongdoing, they need to investigate,” the congressman said.


Schiff Says DOJ Should Launch Inquiry

Rep. Adam Schiff (R-Ca.) told Rogue Rocket that he believes there is “certainly […] enough evidence for the Justice Department to open an investigation” into possible election crimes committed by former President Donald Trump.

Schiff, who took the lead in questioning witnesses testifying before the House committee investigating the Jan. 6 insurrection on Tuesday, said that it will be up to the DOJ to determine whether “they have proof beyond a reasonable doubt” of criminal activity, but added that an investigation must first be launched.

“Donald Trump should be treated like any other citizen,” the congressman said, noting that a federal judge in California has already ruled that Trump and his allies “likely” engaged in multiple federal criminal acts. “When the Justice Department finds evidence of criminal potential criminal wrongdoing, they need to investigate.”

“One of the concerns I have is it’s a year and a half since these events. And while […] there’s an investigation going on in Fulton County by the district attorney, I don’t see a federal grand jury convened in Atlanta looking into this, and I think it’s fair to ask why,” Schiff continued, referencing the ongoing inquiry into Trump’s attempts to overturn the election in Georgia.

“Normally, the Justice Department doesn’t wait for Congress to go first. They pursue evidence and they have the subpoena power. They’re often much more agile than the Congress. And I think it’s important that it not just be the lower-level people who broke into the Capitol that day and committed those acts of violence who are under the microscope,” he continued. “I think anyone who engaged in criminal activity trying to overturn the election where there’s evidence that they may have engaged in criminal acts should be investigated.”

Schiff Takes Aim at DOJ’s Handling of Committee Subpoenas

Schiff also expressed frustration with how the DOJ has handled referrals the committee has made for former Trump officials who have refused to comply with subpoenas to testify before the panel.

“We have referred four people for criminal prosecution who have obstructed our investigation. The Justice Department has only moved forward with two of them,” he stated. “That’s not as powerful an incentive as we would like. The law requires the Justice Department to present these cases to the grand jury when we refer them, and by only referring half of them, it sends a very mixed message about whether congressional subpoenas need to be complied with.”

As far as why the congressman thought the DOJ has chosen to operate in this manner in regards to the Jan. 6 panel’s investigation, he said he believes “the leadership of the department is being very cautious.” 

“I think that they want to make sure that the department avoids controversy if possible, doesn’t do anything that could even be perceived as being political,” Schiff continued. “And while I appreciate that sentiment […] at the same time, the rule of law has to be applied equally to everyone. If you’re so averse, […] it means that you’re giving effectively a pass or immunity to people who may have broken the law. That, too, is a political decision, and I think it’s the wrong decision.”

On the Note of Democracy

Schiff emphasized the importance of the American people working together to protect democracy in the fallout of the insurrection.

“I really think it’s going to require a national movement of people to step up to preserve our democracy. This is not something that I think Congress can do alone. We’re going to try to protect those institutions, but Republicans are fighting this tooth and nail,” he asserted. “It’s difficult to get through a Senate where Mitch McConnell can filibuster things.”

“We don’t have the luxury of despair when it comes to what we’re seeing around us. We have the obligation to do what generations did before us, and that is defend our democracy,” the congressman continued. “We had to go to war in World War II to defend our democracy from the threat of fascism. You know, we’re not called upon to make those kinds of sacrifices. We see the bravery of people in Ukraine putting their lives on the line to defend their country, their sovereignty, their democracy. Thank God we’re not asked to do that.”

“So what we have to do is, by comparison, so much easier. But it does require us to step up, to be involved, to rally around local elections officials who are doing their jobs, who are facing death threats, and to protect them and to push back against efforts around the country to pass laws to make it easier for big liars to overturn future elections.” 

“We are not passengers in all of this, unable to affect the course of our country. We can, you know, grab the rudder and steer this country in the direction that we want.”

See what others are saying: (The New York Times) (The Washington Post) (CNN)

Continue Reading

Politics

Senate Passes Bill to Help Veterans Suffering From Burn Pit Exposure

Published

on

For Biden, who believes his son Beau may have died from brain cancer caused by burn pits, the issue is personal.


Veterans to Get Better Healthcare

The Senate voted 84-14 Thursday to pass a bill that would widely expand healthcare resources and benefits to veterans who were exposed to burn pits while deployed overseas.

Until about 2010, the Defense Department used burn pits to dispose of trash from military bases in Iraq, Afghanistan, and other locations, dumping things like plastics, rubber, chemical mixtures, and medical waste into pits and burning them with jet fuel.

Numerous studies and reports have demonstrated a link between exposure to the toxic fumes emitted by the pits and health problems such as respiratory ailments and rare cancers. The DoD has estimated that nearly 3.5 million veterans may have inhaled enough smoke to suffer from related health problems.

For years, the Department of Veterans Affairs resisted calls to recognize the link between exposure and illness, arguing it had not been scientifically proven and depriving many veterans of disability benefits and medical reimbursements.

Over the past year, however, the VA relented, awarding presumptive benefit status to veterans exposed to burn pits, but it only applied to those who were diagnosed with asthma, rhinitis, and sinusitis within 10 years of their service.

The latest bill would add 23 conditions to the list of what the VA covers, including hypertension. It also calls for investments in VA health care facilities, claims processing, and the VA workforce, while strengthening federal research on toxic exposure.

The bill will travel to the House of Representatives next, where Speaker Nancy Pelosi has pledged to push it through quickly. Then it will arrive at the White House for final approval.

An Emotional Cause for Many

Ahead of a House vote on an earlier version of the bill in March, comedian John Stewart publically slammed Congress for taking so long to act.

“They’re all going to say the same thing. ‘We want to do it. We want to support the veterans. But we want to do it the right way. We want to be responsible,’” he said. “You know what would have been nice? If they had been responsible 20 years ago and hadn’t spent trillions of dollars on overseas adventures.”

“They could have been responsible in the seventies when they banned this kind of thing in the United States,” he continued. “You want to do it here? Let’s dig a giant fucking pit, 10 acres long, and burn everything in Washington with jet fuel. And then let me know how long they want to wait before they think it’s going to cause some health problems.”

For President Biden, the issue is personal. He has said he believes burn pits may have caused the brain cancer that killed his son Beau in 2015.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer applauded the fact the long-awaited benefits could soon arrive for those impacted.

“The callousness of forcing veterans who got sick as they were fighting for us because of exposure to these toxins to have to fight for years in the VA to get the benefits they deserved — Well, that will soon be over. Praise God,” he said during a speech on Thursday.

A 2020 member survey by Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America found that 86% of respondents were exposed to burn pits or other toxins.

Although burn pits have largely been scaled down, the DoD has not officially banned them, and at least nine were still in operation in April 2019.

See what others are saying: (CNN) (Military Times) (Politico)

Continue Reading