He really thinks he’s a god-emperor.

Also why is he bragging about doing something he should have done WEEKS ago?

How I wish he would just drop dead.

Trump is withholding assistance from governors who don’t kiss his ass.

In case you missed it, El Caudillo del Mar-a-Lago went on teevee with Sean Hannity on Thursday night and explained in rather precise detail how his pandemic shakedown is going to work. For example, he is not happy with Gretchen Whitmer, the Democratic governor of the state of Michigan, where Detroit has become a hot zone in which hospitals are overwhelmed and already preparing contingency plans to triage patients in order to ration things like ventilators. In several appearances addressing the crisis in her state, Whitmer has been critical of the federal response—or lack thereof—to the pandemic. The president* told Hannity:

“She is a new governor, and it’s not been pleasant … “We’ve had a big problem with the young — a woman governor. You know who I’m talking about — from Michigan. We don’t like to see the complaints…She doesn’t get it done, and we send her a lot. Now, she wants a declaration of emergency, and, you know, we’ll have to make a decision on that. But Michigan is a very important state. I love the people of Michigan.”

Whitmer, meanwhile, in an interview with WWJ Newsradio in Detroit, explained what being on the business end of the pandemic shakedown was like.

“What I’ve gotten back is that vendors with whom we’ve procured contracts — They’re being told not to send stuff to Michigan,” Whitmer said live on air. “It’s really concerning, I reached out to the White House last night and asked for a phone call with the president, ironically at the time this stuff was going on.”

So that’s fine. Trump is murdering people in Michigan for the sake of his own vanity, so that’s nothing to worry about.

On Wednesday, of course, talking to another Fox News meat puppet, Trump made the general outlines of the shakedown quite plain. From Business Insider:

“It’s a two-way street,” Trump said of his discussions with governors about providing their states with federal aid. “They have to treat us well also. They can’t say, ‘Oh gee, we should get this, we should get that.’ We’re doing a great job.” Trump used New York an example of how the federal government had put forward resources to support states. “We’re literally building hospitals and medical centers,” he said. “And then I hear that there’s a problem with ventilators — well, we sent them ventilators, and they could have had 15 or 16,000, all they had to do was order them two years ago. But they decided not to do it. They can’t blame us for that.”

They can’t say “we should get this”? Why not? They’re not saying it to Donald Trump the crooked hotel owner, they’re saying it to the federal government of a large rich country. Of course they can say “we should get [i.e. we need] this.” Presidents aren’t supposed to tell governors “we won’t give you what you need unless you kiss our ring.”

I wasn’t the only one confused by the Derbyshire police rebuke of walking in an empty landscape. The government had to clarify.

The government has said people should “stay local” and not travel unnecessarily for exercise.

New advice clarifies that people must use “open spaces” near to home, where possible.

It follows confusion over whether people could drive places to go walking, running, or cycling.

Exercise is one of the few defined reasons that people in the UK are allowed to leave their home during the coronavirus pandemic.

Derbyshire Police sparked a heated debate on Twitter this week when it shared drone footage of people walking in the Peak District, with a warning that daily exercise should not involve long trips or journeys in the car.

I would like to point out here that it’s not clear that the Derbyshire police knew the people walking had taken a long trip to do it. Some people actually live in Derbyshire, I believe.

The prime minister, who has tested positive for coronavirus, said on Monday that people can take “one form of exercise a day” – either on their own or with people they live with. The government’s official guidelines list running, walking and cycling as examples.

But the initial guidelines did not advise if, or how far, people could travel in order to exercise.

While the new advice does go further, it does not explicitly define what counts as “local”, and whether or not people can use cars.

And for some people the Peak District is local.

The RAC said before the release of the latest goverment advice that people shouldn’t drive places to exercise, recommending instead that they use their gardens – where possible – or leave home “on foot or by bike”.

Superintendent Steve Pont, of Derbyshire Police, echoed this advice in an interview with the BBC’s Today programme.

“Every time you’re out in public, away from your home, there’s a possibility you might catch or pass on the virus,” he said.

But not much of one if you keep your distance from people, don’t touch stuff, and don’t touch your face. It still looks to me like a kind of reversion to the war, when travel was restricted, for the very compelling reason that fuel was in limited supply and crucial for not letting Hitler win. This isn’t that. Maybe there’s some point to saying let’s keep the risk of traffic accidents as low as possible while medical people are in emergency mode, but it seems a bit stretched to me. It’s not personal; I don’t have a car; I just think it’s a bit too much like the cops visiting people to accuse them of transphobia.

Pandemic or no pandemic, Labour is still busy getting rid of all these pesky women who don’t agree that men become women by saying some words.

Earlier this week, the Labour party – you remember, the party of fairness and kindness and compassion and equality – decided that it has no place for a woman who has worked tirelessly to protect women from abuse and to remind the world about murdered women who are so often ignored.

Let’s start with murdered women. There are quite a lot of them: 241 women were killed in England and Wales last year. Most of them are killed by men – men they know. Often this is taken as mundane, just one of those unremarkable facts of life (and death) that doesn’t make much news. Man kills woman is dog bites man, if you will.

Some people do think this is worth making noise about. You might know that every year, the Labour MP Jess Phillips reads out a roll-call of the dead, naming the women killed by men in the past year. Whether or not you share Phillips’ politics or think this issue is deserving of parliamentary time, you must concede that this simple act has both emotional power and political impact. It has helped push the often-neglected issue of domestic violence a little further up the agenda.

Which means it damn well is deserving of parliamentary time, if you ask me.

What you might not know is the name of the woman who collects those names. She is Karen Ingala-Smith and she runs the Counting Dead Women project, which does exactly that.

When Ingala-Smith isn’t counting and naming dead women, she runs a charity that provides refuge for women who have suffered physical and sexual abuse. In that capacity, she has given evidence to parliamentary inquiries, briefed politicians and worked with major corporate sponsors on issues around the murder of women. She’s won prizes from such sources as the National Diversity Awards and is doing a PhD in sociology in her spare time.

She was a Labour member for a long time but left the party in 2018 because of Jeremy Corbyn. Now that Corbyn has moved on she applied to rejoin.

And guess what the Labour party said to Karen Ingala-Smith? No. There is no place in the party for you.

Why? Why would Labour reject the membership of a woman who has devoted more than 25 years to protecting women from abuse and violence, and fighting for officials to focus on the abuse and murder of women?

We know why. It’s because men who say they are women are far more important than mere women who campaign to end violence against women.

In a letter dated March 24th, the Governance and Legal Unit at Labour HQ informed Ingala-Smith that she was not welcome in the party:

‘The information brought to our attention is that you have engaged in conduct online that may reasonably be seen to demonstrate hostility based on gender identity.

Your application for membership of the Labour party has therefore been rejected.’

There you have it. It could hardly be any more stark. Men who claim to be women matter, and women who work to end violence against women do not matter. Pretend-women are everything and real women have to either bend the knee to them or be shunned.

It’s disgusting.

It’s maybe inappropriate to complain about public godbothering at this time, but there’s such a fundamental absurdity at the heart of the whole thing that I can’t not raise an objection. I’ll just leave names and handles out of it.

A guy on Twitter, a guy who writes for the Atlantic and wrote a book called Learning to Speak God From Scratch (so you can find his name obviously, I’m just not naming him here), tweeted:

I don’t often ask for prayer on here, but my friend Laura from NYC has COVID-19. She has double pneumonia and is in ICU on a ventilator fighting for her life right now. She is only 30. Please pray for her.

I hope she survives. Best of luck to her. But that tweet…he doesn’t often ask for prayer on Twitter but this time he will – because what? It will work but it should be used sparingly? Why? If it works why not use it non-stop? Why not get lists of critically ill people and request prayers for all of them? Or is it because he knows it doesn’t work, or suspects it doesn’t, or knows most of us know it doesn’t, and so he would feel silly requesting it often? Or because he doesn’t like to be a nuisance so he doesn’t request miraculous intervention except when it’s for a friend who’s only 30?

In other words it doesn’t make sense. If you believe in prayer and believe it works, then why would you ration your use of it? If you don’t believe it works, why would you request it at all?

But also…the perpetual issue with these things…if you believe in a god who rescues people from fatal illness if you ask nicely, why do you believe in a god like that? The god must have caused the epidemic, right? Or at least looked fixedly in the opposite direction rather than stopping it. Why ask god to spare one particular person instead of everyone?

I know people have rationalizations to make it all seem coherent, I just don’t think they make much sense.

He got lots of replies that have the same problems. “Please, daddy god, fix this one person, no hard feelings about creating the pandemic in the first place.”

Praying for Laura and all the other victims of this horrible virus. Praying for the doctors, nurses and first responders. In addition praying for all the workers who are working in essential business today. I’m just on my knees praying.

To the monster who made it all happen. Why would that work, exactly?

Praying for Laura…knowing that God hears, cares, and is able!

Oh yes? Then why did God make her so ill in the first place?

Spirit of Life, be as you were at Laura’s first breath, life-giving, then again and again until her lungs are strong and clear. Sustain and protect all medical helpers, both at her bedside and everywhere across this planet. Have mercy on us all, O God, amen

It’s as if parents never fed their children unless they got down on their knees and begged.

Praying probably makes people feel better, and things that make people feel better are nothing to sneer at. But. But. It’s a very Stockholm syndrome kind of feeling better, this crawling at the feet of a monster who unleashed a novel virus on defenseless humans.

A CNBC reporter:

You have got to be kidding.

Why do the cruise companies have offshore registration? Not for a hobby, not to be whimsical, not to give Offhshorelandia a boost. No, they have it for the purposes of not paying taxes and not obeying labor laws.

Given that, why on earth is a Senate group working to ensure they can have our money anyway?

None of this should ever have been allowed. Responsible adults should have blocked him from running, or failing that blocked him from getting nominated. Failing that they should have invoked the 25th amendment the minute he was inaugurated. Now we’re stuck with a mass murderer.

President Donald Trump faced new and troubling questions Thursday about his response to the coronavirus pandemic, as it became clear that there is a nationwide shortage of ventilators, masks and other crucial medical equipment. During a White House news conference, Trump was asked about the shortages and responded by falsely suggesting lying that the problem was unforeseen. He also shrugged off responsibility for the crisis and encouraged states to find their own resources.

That’s why. That’s why he should never have been allowed. He lies and he treats it as not his responsibility.

Since the beginning of the crisis earlier this year, Trump and his team have responded with dozens of dishonest and misleading claims. And the President’s comments about the ventilator shortages fit into his pattern of trying to avoid responsibility by falsely claiming that nobody ever predicted a pandemic like this, which he has said many times, even after it’s been widely debunked.

And it has always been obvious that that’s what he is. The fact that no one stopped him is a horrifying indictment of the US as a country.

The US intelligence community warned in 2018 and again in 2019 that the US was vulnerable to a large-scale flu or coronavirus pandemic, which would “strain governmental and international resources,” though it did not mention shortages of specific medical equipment. These reports were released by then-Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats, a Trump appointee.

But Trump pays no attention to such things. Trump tweets and shouts and smirks, and that’s all he does. He’s evil and he’s lethal – but we can’t get rid of him.

That terrible missing theory of mind again.

“This was something that nobody has ever thought could happen…”

No. It isn’t. It is not. That is not what it is. What it is is not that. People who know about this subject absolutely thought this could happen, and that it would. Epidemiologists, virologists, journalists who read and talk to epidemiologists and virologists – they most definitely thought it could happen, and they said so. Trump never thought it could happen. Trump is a narrow, stupid, incurious, ignorant huckster. What he never thought would fill a cosmos, and is of no interest.

I’m confused by this.

The clip shows a couple walking their dog in an empty landscape, and captions it “Not Essential.” It shows several more like that – people very social distanced indeed, getting fresh air and exercise.

What, exactly, is the problem? The Derbyshire cops seem to be confusing the pandemic with the war. Fuel isn’t rationed, nobody has to invade Europe right now, we can still find oranges.

But what if daily exercise taken locally to your home is more crowded than the Peaks? What if it’s harder to maintain social distance in your nabe than it is in the Peaks?

I just don’t understand what they’re talking about. Strolling around on the High Street just for the hell of it is a terrible idea, and clustering in popular national park spots is also a terrible idea, but surely finding an empty place and walking in that is a good idea.

What am I missing?

Utterly disgusting.

Any hope of G7 foreign ministers releasing a joint statement on the fight against COVID-19 was killed today after the U.S. insisted the document refer to it as the “Wuhan virus.”

As originally reported by Der Spiegel, and according to sources with knowledge of the situation, when U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo insisted the novel coronavirus be referred to by the name of the Chinese city where the outbreak first appeared, ministers from other countries refused to agree.

They were doing a video conference, having scrapped an in-person one planned for Pittsburgh because of the pandemic. One of the ministers suggested a joint statement on said pandemic.

Sources say that’s when Pompeo said the U.S. wanted to refer to COVID-19 as the “Wuhan virus.”

That was a red line for several ministers, and no joint statement was agreed upon or released.

One official from a country involved said Pompeo would not agree to a communique that didn’t refer specifically to the “Wuhan virus.”

…

Asked why including the term was so important in the global context of the pandemic, Pompeo blamed China for not spreading the word globally fast enough about just how dangerous the virus is.

This from a man who works for Donald Trump. This from a man who works for the “president” who has been lying about the virus from the beginning and continues to do so.

The Trump administration’s insistence on naming it the “Chinese virus,” or the “Wuhan” virus, contravenes international guidelines. The World Health Organization says viruses shouldn’t be named after cities and countries.

That advice is meant to avoid international finger-pointing in a crisis, and avoid repeats of taxonomic debates as occurred a century ago with the so-called Spanish flu…

But Trump and his pigs of course embrace international and racist finger-pointing.

H/t YNnB

I have to wonder what the hell basis the Trump campaign thinks it has to tell tv stations to pull this ad. Trump did say all those things we hear him saying, after all, and the numbers have rocketed up the way the graph illustrates, after all, so…???

So yeah, share share share.

I asked Kate Smurthwaite a few questions about life under COVID-19 for the people who make life worth living.

Tell us how the pandemic is affecting comedians and others who perform to live audiences.

The live entertainment industry no longer exists… Every comedian, musician, actor, magician, burlesque dancer I know as well as all the people I know who are sound engineers, front of house staff, dressers, bartenders, venue managers, promoters, publicists, poster-designers and stage hands are now all unemployed people and likely to stay that way for months and months to come.

There’s a widespread sense of panic and desperation. Few will qualify for government assistance, despite Boris’s big claims. For most of us turning professional is the result of years of hard work and sacrifice. Going back to jobs you tolerated on the way to building your dream grates and isn’t always possible, especially in a suddenly crowded market. I’ve been doing bits of online maths tutoring.

And there’s also a lot of activity in online communities. Comedians are making jokes, musicians are writing songs, people are talking politics, sharing survival tips and rapidly fluctuating feelings.

On top of this lots of performers appear to have the virus. Unsurprising considering how much we travel and how many people we meet. It’s literally our job! Well it used to be…

How is it affecting you personally?

First up – I’ve had it. Well extremely likely I’ve had it. After performing at the Perth Fringe in Australia I flew back via Hong Kong at very much the wrong time and subsequently had symptoms including swollen glands, fever and muscles aches. Of course I wasn’t offered testing, just sent back to the sofa. But that is over now, my health is back.

Emotionally it’s been tough. I’m not a stay-at-home kind of person. All my joy in life is on the road. Professionally of course but also personally. I like to travel and be wildly promiscuous. Both cancelled until further notice. The next person on Facebook who tells me to practice self-care by meditating is not going to come out of the situation well. Not my jam, never has been.

Financially I lost £14,000 of work out of my diary in a matter of days. Basically all of it. And in many cases I’d booked travel and accommodation and paid registration fees or for advertising which I am unlikely to get back.

My Patreon account, News At Kate, where generous people have sponsored me to make online political comedy videos has by necessity become my focus where once it was my sideline. And people are amazing. I’ve not lost a single sponsor, which would be totally understandable, and actually gained several.

Is it hard to write comedy in such a fast-changing situation? Remarks that seem edgy but ok one day can make us cringe the next – do you find it inhibiting or a welcome challenge to take that on?

I’ve been writing comedy for fifteen years, including for other people and TV shows, so that includes on topics I knew very little about and felt no particular connection to. So writing the comedy is not the issue. Its longevity, yes, is highly variable, but that is always in the nature of talking about political and topical issues.

There is a new and unexpected issue though. The nation is utterly split into those who are coping and those who aren’t. There are people ready and keen to discuss the long term implications of the crisis and there are people who really can’t cope with any more focus on it and just want some silly distraction. For the first time ever this week my News At Kate video offering will have two videos so my audience can choose which they want to hear.

Tell us about your show.

By genuine coincidence just as the crisis kicked in my solo show from last year, Clit Stirrer, finally came out of editing and was ready for release on download and streaming. I was already excited to be able to bring the show to fans living in places I can’t tour to. But now I’m also ridiculously grateful for the income boost.

Clit Stirrer is the most ambitious show I’ve ever written. It says something that I’ve had boiling up in my head for a long time, about what is and isn’t considered controversial, and it says it in a way that breaks a lot of the conventions of one-person comedy hours. It’s a multimedia mix of stand-up comedy, dramatic story-telling and sketches that draws heavily on my experiences of participating in TV debate and discussion shows from Question Time to This Morning.

When I opened the show at the Edinburgh Fringe I was mightily relieved to discover that it “worked”. My audience “got it”, they were as excited about it as I was. By the end of the first week the venue had a sign outside letting people know where and when they should start queuing if they wanted to get in to see it. We were full until the end of the run.

Two reviewers came, they both gave it five stars. After the Fringe I toured the show around the UK in small and independent venues (I’m far too “controversial” for the mainstream places of course…hahaha). There were several London shows, including one that had to be moved after the pub decided I was (you guessed it) “too controversial”.

The final date of the tour was in the beautiful Tara Arts Centre in Earlsfield in West London. It’s a really intimate venue, audience on three sides of the stage and that’s where we filmed it. It was edited by Flavio Buonerba, who also wrote the music we use in the show. He’s done a great job of keeping the “live” atmosphere. It really feels like being in the audience for an intimate event, not a staged TV special.

Do you think live performance will change radically after this nightmare?

I think live performance won’t exist at all for a long time yet. I expect the lockdown may be eased and then tightened again as the progress of the virus fluctuates but I don’t imagine live shows will be allowed for a long time. Perhaps at some point small venues will be allowed to open, with capacity limits and rules on spacing and sanitiser on every surface.

The big shift will come in a few years when there is a vaccine. Only then will people genuinely feel unafraid. I think it will bring with it a new era of decadence. A post-millennial roaring twenties. A new generation will grow up feeling, as we once did, as young people always should, that they are invincible. The rest of us will have been changed by the experience, shaken and unsettled, but also bloody grateful for the chance to sit in a pub and have a laugh together.

I hope to see you there xxx

http://www.katesmurthwaite.co.uk
http://www.patreon.com/newsatkate
https://gumroad.com/l/ksclit

More on the Federalist’s “let’s let the young people get C19 in hopes of herd immunity”:

Twitter temporarily locked the account of The Federalist Wednesday after the conservative opinion site published a piece, written by a dermatologist based in Oregon, that proposed the deliberate spread of the coronavirus in order to boost immunity to the disease.

The op-ed, penned by Dr. Douglas Perednia, proposed an “outside the box” solution to the current pandemic that flies in the face of advice from experts, including Dr. Anthony Fauci, who are urging social distancing.

…

“It is time to think outside the box and seriously consider a somewhat unconventional approach to COVID-19: controlled voluntary infection,” The Federalist wrote in a now-removed tweet linking to the op-ed.

That’s a pull-quote from the article. That’s not a thought experiment, it’s a “let’s consider this” suggestion. Saying let’s consider is a step removed from “let’s do” but it’s not as far removed as a thought experiment. Thought experiments are just that, they’re not suggestions to consider doing a thing.

Twitter initially added a warning to the link stating that the post might be “unsafe.”

Then, according to a Twitter spokesperson, “the account was temporarily locked for violating the Twitter Rules regarding COVID-19.”

It’s great that Twitter could find a few seconds to spare from locking the accounts of women who say that men are not women, in order to lock the account of someone saying we should consider deliberately spreading COVID-19.

The tweet was deleted, and the Federalist Twitter page appears to be back up and running. Twitter has taken aggressive measures to crack down on misinformation surrounding the coronavirus.

Federalist co-founders Sean Davis and Ben Domenech did not respond to Mediaite’s request for comment.

Probably too busy talking to Sean Hannity.

The monster has stirred.

Superb.

The Federalist did what now?

Erm…have they forgotten that there is no effective treatment yet? Which means there is no such thing as “safe infection”?

Also…a dermatologist? Really?

What’s the thinking here? That taking C19 seriously is a libbrul thing, the way taking climate change seriously is a libbrul thing? That treating it with frivolity or reckless endangerment or both is a Trump-Republican thing? (If it is that means Princess Ivanka will have to come out in favor of it, because she announced she’s a “proud Trump-Republican” the other day.) The hitch in the plan here is that viruses don’t give a fuck about your politics, any more than climate change does.

No one ever does.

First thing this morning.

The trolley problem revisited.