Mediaboss Marketing

Jason Sattler, Opinion columnist Published 4:44 p.m. ET April 27, 2021 | Updated 5:39 p.m. ET April 27, 2021

This liberal's plea to 'pro-life' party leaders: Promote the COVID-19 vaccination as an act of patriotism, not partisanship. Help end this pandemic.

There has never ever been a better time for the "pro-life" movement of America to act urgently to, well, save some lives.

America's supply of COVID-19 vaccines will soon surpass demand.Meanwhile Israel, with the most aggressive (yet imperfect) vaccine rollout in the world, has recorded multiple days with zero pandemic-related deathsfor the first time in 10months suggesting that a comprehensive national vaccination program could contain the killer virus that has already killed nearly 575,000 Americans.

Still, some Americans seem to be eager to stand in the way of any hope of what scientists call "herd immunity. Who are those Americans? Mostly Republican menand white evangelicals aka the people whove spent the past 40years or so telling us they are much moreconcerned about life than everyone else.

Nearly all Americans have a chance step up to take a shot that might not only save us but also our families, our neighbors and our countryfrom prolonging the deadliest pandemic in a century. Yet at this Dunkirk moment,elected Republicans have largely done the opposite of joining our armada of "little ships."

Sens. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin and Rand Paulof Kentucky have spread garbage about the effort to vaccinate as many Americans as possible.Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis acts far more concerned about efforts to make sure people are vaccinatedthan he does about the effects of COVID-19, which has already killed 35,000 Floridians morethan the 32,463-vote marginthat put him in office in 2018.

Donald Trump urged his followers at the Conservative Political Action Conferenceto get their shotsand has made a fewsupportive comments.But when he was still president, in January,he and first lady Melania Trump were vaccinated secretly at the White House. Their off-camera shots, revealed last month, deniedthe country the single most obvious image that might be used to persuade reluctant Trump supportersto join the war on COVID-19.

Former Vice President Mike Pence was among the first Americans to get his shot lastDecember. Since then, he hasbeen busy avoiding nooses brandished by fans of his two-time running mate and getting a pacemaker. Nonetheless, he has found time to try to scaremonger about unaccompanied minors at the border.

COVID-19 vaccine on Feb. 12, 2021, in Connecticut.(Photo: Joseph Prezioso/AFP via Getty Images)

And Pence isnt alone. The entire Republican Party seems to want the nation to fixate on the tragic number of 18,500 kids arriving alone at the border in March. But the Republicanscant find the same energy to finish off a pandemic still infecting more than50,000 Americans eachday, still orphaning thousands of Americans eachweek.

And whos paying the cost of the GOPs insistence on Joe Biden and his administration almost solely responsible for the biggest public health mobilization in American history? In Michigan, the state withthe worst spike of cases in the nation, we'relearning that the answer increasingly isthe kids.

Just say yes: Are we about to hit a vaccine wall? If you have doubts about getting the shot, reconsider.

Ive spent a lot of my adult life trying to shame pro-lifers into caring about actual children as much as they do about fertilized eggs. While this effort may get you some retweets, it doesnt change the rights behavior in the least. Its like trying to translate Republicans professed affection for Israel into an appreciation of Israels national universal health care.

Im sure President Biden, who has led an awesome nationalized rollout of vaccinations that has exceeded most reasonable expectations, will humbly call for all Americans to join the fight when he addresses Congress on Wednesday. Unfortunately, this clarion call from a man 70% of Republicans think stole the electionwith his tricky strategy of getting over 7 million more votes than Trump mightonly increase Republican hesitancy to get injected.

The rights inherent suspicion of government power, which suddenly reappears when Republicans arent in power, is being compounded by the way COVID-19 was turned into a culture war with the bombastic leadership of the last president. Republican leaders recognize there are few rewards that come with breaking with their partys base. And who wants to help a Democratic president in the task that will largely define the success of his presidency? So were stuck.

Even talking about vaccine hesitancy helps normalize it, especially when its me, a lib, doing it. Would Republicans risk their own voters' lives just to own me? Ask the millions of Americans who have been denied Medicaid insurance because their Republican governors refuse to expand it under the Affordable Care Act even though the federal government is footing almost the entire bill.

We have never been more desperate for Republican heroes who want to save their own constituents' lives, and theyve never been harder to find. Im begging GOP leaders to care as much about their fellow Republicans health and survival as much as this lib does.

Former CDC chief: Think diners, dentists and dollar stores. Make COVID vaccines easy to get.

We may disagree about when life begins, but we can all agree that every American who is 16 and over and now eligible for free vaccines has met that standard. Go out and brag about taking Mr. Trumps shots that were basically invented by Mr. Trump himself (even though the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines were already in clinical trials before Operation Warp Speed was even announced).

Do whatever you have to do to make vaccination an issue of patriotism and not partisanship.

Since the sanctity of life is obviously not encouragement enough, think of the next election, the one you are busy trying to rig in state legislatures across the country.If you dont act to defeat this plague when it's possible, your next president could spend his entire term dealing with this pandemic. And if it is who I know you hope it is, we already know how much he hates doing that.

Jason Sattler, a writer based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, is a member of USA TODAYs Board of Contributors and host of "The GOTMFV Show" podcast. Follow him on Twitter:@LOLGOP

Autoplay

Show Thumbnails

Show Captions

Read or Share this story: https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2021/04/27/covid-19-vaccine-trump-republicans-help-us-save-lives-column/7390749002/

See more here:
Where are the Republican COVID-19 heroes willing to risk their careers to save lives? - USA TODAY

When President Joe Biden speaks to a joint session of Congress on Wednesday, it will look different than presidential addresses in years past with the event taking place amid the ongoing coronavirus pandemic and heightened security concerns in the wake of the January 6 Capitol attack.

The joint session will be designated a National Special Security Event and there will be a limit on the number of lawmakers in the chamber due to Covid-19 protocols, a Capitol official involved in planning told CNN. Lawmakers will be seated in the upstairs gallery in addition to the House floor and guests will not be permitted. A total of about 200 people are expected to be allowed in the House chamber.

Even the date and timing of the address was affected by the pandemic. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi sent a letter earlier this month inviting Biden to speak to Congress after previously saying that she was waiting to make a decision on extending an invitation due to concerns over the coronavirus pandemic.

Biden wont be required to wear a mask while speaking on Wednesday, however. House rules require anyone speaking in the chamber to be wearing a mask, but that doesnt apply to Biden because the rules only pertain to lawmakers, according to a senior Democratic aide.

The rule, which took effect on January 4, similarly didnt apply to then-Vice President Mike Pence when he presided over the congressional certification of Bidens victory on January 6.

The House Sergeant at Arms sent a letter on Friday to members offices, which noted that due to Covid and safety protocols, the joint address is invite-only with invitations extended to a limited number of lawmakers. Sources familiar told CNN that Capitol Police initially asked for fencing to remain in place until the address to a joint session of Congress.

Its unclear how many lawmakers per party will attend. House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell both are expected to attend.

Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin, the No. 2 Senate Democrat, told reporters Monday, I understand its going to be selective seating, so I hope Im there. Asked if hes going, he replied, I dont know. I dont know if I made the cut.

Sen. John Thune, the Republican whip, told reporters that he thinks each Senate caucus will receive 30 invitations to the joint address, and each House caucus will receive 40.

I think right now my understanding at least the way theyre limiting it its like 40-40. 40 Rs, 40 Ds. And then the Senates like 30 and 30, or something like that, Thune said.

The South Dakota senator said he doesnt think that number of invites will be a problem for Republicans, and anyone who wants to attend he thinks should be able to. Thune added, Im sure there are a lot of members who prefer to watch it from their offices or somewhere else.

The letter from the House Sergeant at Arms stated that if a lawmaker does not receive an invitation from congressional leadership, he or she will not be allowed inside the Capitol after 5 p.m. ET on the day of the address.

Many, though not all, congressional lawmakers have been vaccinated. CNN confirmed last month that 189 Democrats out of 219 in the House have been vaccinated, and 53 House Republicans out of 211 have been vaccinated.

In another sign of how the setup will be different this year, first lady Jill Biden wont have a traditional viewing box at Bidens joint session address as coronavirus restrictions limit capacity in the chamber for the speech, White House press secretary Jen Psaki said Friday.

Jill Biden will attend the address to Congress, but due to increased Covid protocols and decreased attendance she will not be bringing guests to sit with her, Jill Bidens press secretary Michael LaRosa told CNN.

View post:
Covid and security precautions will make this year's joint address to Congress different - KNBR

Trumps Legal Farce is Having Tragic Results, N.Y. Times, Nov. 23, 2020

Trump Needs Three Consecutive Hail Mary Passes, The Atlantic, Nov. 11, 2020

What Happens If Trump Wont Concede?, Slate, Nov. 8, 2020

New Lawsuit to Halt Ballot Cures in Pennsylvania Could Preview Trumps Postelection Strategy, Slate, Nov. 3, 2020

Trump Cant Just Declare Victory, Slate, Nov. 1, 2020

Our Biggest Election Day Concern, CNN Opinion, Nov. 1, 2020 (with Richard H. Pildes)

Kavanaugh has wild ideas about voting. They likely wont matter on Election Day, Washington Post, Oct. 27, 2020

In a 4-4 Split, the Supreme Court Lets Pennsylvania Make Voting EasierFor Now, Slate, Oct. 19, 2020

Were Living in the Shadows of Bush v. Gore 2.0, Slate, Oct. 19, 2020 (with Dahlia Lithwick)

What If Theres No Winner on November 4?, CNN Opinion, Oct. 19, 2020

A Key Fix for an Unthinkable Election Disaster, CNN Opinion, Oct. 5, 2020

This Will Be a Crucial Week for Pandemic Voting Cases at the Supreme Court, Slate, Oct. 5, 2020

Trumps New Supreme Court Is Coming for the Next Dozen Elections, N.Y. Mag, Oct. 5, 2020

Electoral Chaos Might Ensue if Biden or Trump Were Forced Out of the Race, Slate, Oct. 2, 2020

Dont fall for claims of voter fraud, L.A. Times, Sept. 25, 2020

Ive Never Been More Worried About American Democracy Than I Am Right Now, Slate, Sept. 23, 2020

Can Congress Salvage RBGs Legacy?, Slate, Sept. 21, 2020

Barrs Undermining of the Election is Downright Dangerous, CNN Opinion, Sept. 17, 2020

Democrats May Not Trust the Election Results if Trump Wins, Wash. Post, Sept. 10, 2020

Donald Trumps Encouragement to Vote Twice Could Cause Election Day Chaos, Slate, Sept. 3, 2020

Trumps Relentless Attacks on Mail-In Voting Are Part of a Larger Strategy, N.Y. Times, Aug. 19, 2020

California's Ballot Harvesting Law: A Crop of Trouble?, L.A. Lawyer, July/Aug. 2020

Bring on the 28th Amendment, N.Y. Times Sunday Review, June 29, 2020

Texas Voters Face Malicious Prosecutions After COVID-19 Absentee Ballot Ruling, Slate, May 27, 2020

The Right-Wing Legal Network is Now Openly Pushing Conspiracy Theories, Slate, May 27, 2020 (with Dahlia Lithwick)

Trumps bogus attacks on mail-in voting could hurt his supporters, too; The president is undermining democracy. He could also be undermining his own campaign, Wash. Post, May 20, 2020

GOP War on Mail-in Ballots May Backfire, NY Daily News, Apr. 20, 2020

We Cannot Hold an Election Without a Functional Post Office, Slate, Apr. 14, 2020

Trump is Wrong About the Dangers of Absentee Ballots, Wash. Post, Apr. 9, 2020

How Republicans are Using the Pandemic to Suppress the Vote, LA Times, Apr. 4, 2020

What Happens in November if One Side Doesnt Accept the Election Results? How coronavirus could contribute to a 2020 election meltdown, Slate, Mar. 30, 2020

How to Protect the 2020 Election from Coronavirus, Slate, Mar. 13, 2020

Why Trump and the RNC are spending $10 million to fight Democrats voting rights lawsuits, Slate, Mar. 5, 2020

Can't Call the Super Tuesday Vote? Be Patient, LA Times, Mar. 3, 2020

If Democrats Fight Right-Wing 'Fake News' Fire with Fire, We All Lose, Salon, Feb. 24, 2020

How to Prevent the Next Election Meltdown, Wall St. Journal, Feb. 7, 2020 (Saturday Essay)

What the Impeachment Ordeal Can Tell Us About the 2020 Election, CNN Opinion, Feb. 5, 2020

Trump's Jokes About Defying Election Results Could Create Chaos, Slate, Feb. 4, 2020

The Alarming Prospect of the Supreme Court Deciding the 2020 Election, The Atlantic, Feb. 3, 2020

The loser of Novembers election may not concede. Their voters wont, either, Wash. Post, Jan. 24, 2020 (Sunday Outlook)

Read more opeds from 2006-2009, these from 2010-2011, these from 2012-2013, these from 2014, these from 2015 and 2016, these from 2017, these from 2018. and these from 2019.

Here is the original post:
electionlawblog.org

The events of Jan. 6 are fresh in our minds, as is the refusal of the Senate to hold the chief insurrectionist accountable for the armed attack on our Capitol. The anti-democracy faction, as always, is in Big Lie mode, as if middle school code messaging can claim the battlefield.

The People are to swallow the poison elixir to wit, the rejected presidents inflammatory speech was not at all meant to incite the violence that immediately followed, but was mere metaphoric poetry designed to evoke peaceful participation in the mechanics of democratic government. But the People are not drinking the elixir. Those of us with at least half a wit and a dose of our parents old-fashioned common sense, who watched, listened and now recall the context of this historical episode of a defeated candidates attempt to overthrow an election and remain in power, had no problem navigating the thicket of lies to arrive at the sobering truth America came perilously close to totalitarianism.

And we are still far from being out of the woods.

Let me put the evidence in the record for the readers. First, a little background. I was a federal prosecutor for 21 years of my 45 years of government service in the criminal justice system. During that part of my career, half of which was spent in the very busy Southern District of California, I tried hundreds of jury cases, many of which involved complex fraud crimes where the intent of the defendant was a critical element of the offense e.g., intent to deceive as well as cases involving violent crimes, likewise involving proof of specific intent e.g., premeditated intent to kill.

Intent is rarely susceptible to direct proof without a confession from the defendant. Lacking such proof, the evidence must be supplied through indirect, or circumstantial, proof such as similar acts showing a pattern of deceit or violence. Keep these concepts in mind as I endeavor to articulate just some of the actions and statements of Donald Trump which put the activity and speech of Jan. 6 in context.

I begin with his first campaign for president. In August 2016, he gave a speech at a rally of his supporters in which he told them that if Hillary Clinton won she would abolish the Second Amendment and there was nothing you can do folks although the Second Amendment people maybe there is, I dont know The term Second Amendment solutions is a euphemism associated with political assassination, and has been regularly employed by right-wing militias to legitimize the supposed right to engage in armed insurrection against the government. Of course, Trump would later deny any such connotation.

Forwarding to March 2019, when talk of impeachment was in the air, Trump boasted in an interview with Breitbart that if he were to be removed from office (through impeachment), I have the support of the police, the support of the military, the support of the Bikers for Trump I have the tough people it would be very bad.

On Sept. 30, 2019, Trump tweeted that if the Democrats are successful in removing the President from office it will cause a Civil War fracture in the Nation from which our Country will never heal.

In September 2020, during the first presidential debate, Trump was asked by the moderator whether he condemned the violence of white supremacy extremists, and he not only failed to do so, he exhorted the Proud Boys (a violent and extremist white supremacy gang) to stand by a slogan that the Proud Boys subsequently stitched to their clothing.

On April 17, 2020, Trump tweeted Liberate Michigan in a series of tweets critical of Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer for her COVID-19 shutdown measures in the state. Then in early October 2020, the FBI and Michigan State Police foiled an imminent plot by 13 members of a paramilitary group, the Michigan Watchmen, to kidnap and murder Whitmer and other state officials. After being fully briefed by federal law enforcement about the plot, Trump tweeted, I do not tolerate ANY extreme violence and added, Governor Whitmer open up your state

Months before the November 2020 election, Trump began broadcasting that he could only lose the election if it was rigged and there was fraud. To put these remarks in context, the readers need to keep in mind that Trumps advisers had long been informing him that the Democratic candidate most likely to beat him was Joe Biden, which had fueled his pressuring the Ukraine president to announce a criminal investigation of Biden (to no avail).

What followed was the foreseen catalyst to the Jan. 6 insurrection Trump lost the election by a large margin and initiated his claim of fraud, filing and losing some 60 lawsuits because his lawyers could not prove fraud despite the numerous opportunities to do so. That spurred his attempt to pressure election officials to change the vote tally to appear as if he had been the winner (e.g. the notorious recorded call to the Georgia secretary of state in which he demanded that 11,000 votes be switched from Biden to him).

Trump engaged in serial attacks on election officials in swing states, who endured death threats from his supporters for validating the election results as accurate after numerous recounts. Finally, Trump was left with one desperate move preventing the ceremonial opening of the Electoral College ballots officially confirming Biden as the 46th president of the U.S. by the vice president before Congress on Jan. 6.

That was the setting for the summoning of his tough people for a rally that very day of the very certification of the votes of the People which would terminate his term and install Biden in the White House. The attendees, not coincidentally, included Proud Boys, militia members, police, military officers and other such supporters he previously bragged would make it very bad.

This is some of the totality of context in which to judge the intent of the main orator at the Jan. 6 rally, moments before the crowd attempted to overthrow our government. The crowd got the message many of them have since affirmed they believed they were following the then-presidents orders. In the aftermath of the sedition, America is hardly out of danger in the threat against our Constitution and Democracy.

Had Trump succeeded in overturning the election results, we would soon be like all totalitarian governments with pretext elections that count only for show and must always favor the dictator to be considered legitimate. Our Senate has now encouraged armed conflict and sedition in election cycles by passing on any meaningful response to the Jan. 6 events, the attack on the very seat of our government, and thus feeding the evolving narrative that such may become the new normal of politics in America.

Look around America the so-called fraud at the heart of the Trump stolen election narrative is at its core the African American vote. The Trump Party has embraced fully the white supremacy/nationalist agenda, which has never acknowledged the legitimacy of the African American vote.

Research our nations history for decades after the Reconstruction Era following the Civil War, white supremacists employed voting suppression tactics and violence to prevent and deny the Constitutional right to vote to African Americans. A recent USA Today article on challenges to Black voting references the concerted efforts of that era to suppress the African American vote. I am afraid MAGA is a call to return to that terribly unjust and discriminatory period of Jim Crow laws.

The John Lewis Voting Rights Act must be enacted. Voting must be facilitated, not impeded. Gerrymandering must be prohibited, not allowed through specious pretexts which disavow its true purpose and motive racial discrimination.

A former federal prosecutor, Judge Thomas Coffin was a U.S. magistrate for the District of Oregon until his retirement in 2017.

Original post:
Democracy on the Ropes Eugene Weekly - Eugene Weekly

The Capitol Siege was a sobering reminder of democracys fragility, damaging the United States already faltering standing as a global beacon of democracy. Nonetheless, the Biden administration is right to continue its plans to host the Summit for Democracy despite opposition from some policymakers and commentators. The summit can improve the resilience of US democratic institutions by forming a new bloc of democratic actors guided by the Democratic 10 (D10) group, developing multilateral strategies to tackle dark money and other authoritarian-sponsored forms of corruption, and demonstrating the Biden administrations commitment to bolstering democracy abroad.

The summit must bring together an international bloc of democracies and civil society groups as a bulwark against the global decline of democracy and pluralism. This decline has been partially caused by authoritarian regimes increasing interference in democracies, as well as transnational repression worldwide. A bloc of democracies would correspondingly strengthen US national security and anti-corruption measures, as well as reaffirm the United States return to a consistent multilateral foreign policy based on democratic values.

Furthermore, the summit would be a good platform to encourage the formation of the D10 to replace the Group of Seven (G7) as a steering group for this bloc. The D10 would consist of the current G7 members along with South Korea, India, and Australia. Unlike the G20, which is a larger and more inclusive group without a shared set of values, the D10 can replace the outmoded G7 as a large multilateral group that affirms democratic principles. Given how the G7 is increasingly criticized for being too small, Biden should publicly support the D10 to further prove his administrations commitment to promoting democracy globally.

While skeptics have argued the D10 is solely designed to exclude China and Russia from global governance, it is not necessarily supposed to be an anti-China and anti-Russia coalition. Promoters of the D10 have noted it could work with China and Russia on climate change, nuclear non-proliferation, and international development. In addition, the D10 group can address a variety of other issues, including the coordination of international sanctions and data governance standards.

After the Trump administrations consistent rejection of multilateralism in the economic and security spheres, Biden has set his administration apart by stressing his support for multilateralism. This is both to reassert US integrity to its allies and complement domestic democratic reform, as well as to foster international anti-corruption measures that would reduce authoritarian-sponsored corruption in the United States itself. Now that the United States has experienced its own close call with authoritarian turmoil, the need for reform is even clearer, as it can no longer claim to be above democratic backsliding.

Importantly, authoritarian-sponsored corruption is increasingly agreed to be a serious security threat in democratic states. For example, authoritarian states like Russia have dark money networks supporting election interference throughout the United States and its allies. Coordinating anti-corruption strategies between the United States and its allies would create a more comprehensive sanctions regime, and further strengthen their own democratic institutions defenses too.

The United States can likewise support its democratic allies as it works to reform its own institutions after the Capitol Siege. Notably, the United States has just established a beneficial ownership registry to reduce anonymous (and potentially foreign) corporate ownership of domestic assets. As the United States lags behind other states in establishing this registry, the Biden administration should cooperate with allies in sharing registry information on potentially suspicious actors to address this oversight. The summit is a good place to foster agreement on how to share this information.

Although authoritarian states have publicly relished how the United States has lost its privileged standing, the Biden administration understands the threat of rising authoritarianism in other democracies even better now after experiencing it firsthand. Consequently, any reforms the Biden administration promotes at the Summit for Democracy are significantly more credible as it is working to prevent the same turmoil from happening again at the domestic level.

Nonetheless, issues remain on the summits bar of admission. A significant number of US state allies are not liberal democracies and may view a lack of invitation to the summit as a diplomatic snub. Conversely, if there are too few members, the summit will have too small of an impact. Biden has also been urged to extend invitations to opposition parties, some of which may be under threat from repressive regimes. Such invitations would likely complicate diplomacy with such governments in the future. Even the proposed D10 group may face issues with Indias inclusion as its protections for civil liberties have precipitously declined since 2014. Therefore, the success of the Summit for Democracy will hinge on what democratic reforms Biden can formulate before it is held and what the summits admission criteria will be.

In any case, the Capitol Siege should not dissuade Biden from hosting the Summit for Democracy. In fact, the Biden administration would stand to benefit considering how the United States relatability has improved following the Capitol Siege. Thus, the Summit for Democracy would be a strong opportunity to make use of this change.

The views expressed in this article are those of the authors alone and do not necessarily reflect those of Geopoliticalmonitor.com

Original post:
Biden is Right Not to Abandon Plans for the Summit for Democracy after the Capitol Siege - Geopoliticalmonitor.com