Celebrity chef, Food Channel regular and former gal pal to New York State Governor Andrew Cuomo, Sandra Lee reacted to the harassment accusations against her ex-paramour by former female aides with the shocked words: “Oh my God.”
The Post reported that Lee, 54, made the remark but declined to comment further when asked last week in the aftermath of accusations by these aides and other young women against Cuomo for harassment.
According to a report on the cheatsheet.com web site, Sandra Lee and Andrew Cuomo ended their decade long relationship in September 2019, just a few months before Cuomo was thrust into the national spotlight. As governor of New York State, Cuomo was tasked with steering the state through the Coronavirus crisis, and people across the world watched his daily news conferences. He even had the time to pen a book about his experiences navigating the coronavirus as a leader and even won a daytime Emmy award for his daily presentations to the voting public.
Cuomo and Lee started their relationship in 2005, according to the cheastsheet.com web site, shortly after Cuomo’s divorce from Kerry Kennedy was finalized. Betrothed to the seventh child of Robert Kennedy, Jr and his wife Ethel, Cuomo was married to Kennedy for 15 years and they share three daughters together. According to a report in the New York Times, Cuomo and Lee first met at a cocktail party in the Hamptons. They were introduced by a mutual friend, and Lee was, reportedly, taken with Cuomo immediately. Their relationship began shortly after that, but it took more than a year for Lee to meet Cuomo’s three daughters.
Lindsey Boylan, who worked for the state’s economic development agency, was the first female aide to pipe up about the sexual harassment she sustained because of Cuomo’s totally inappropriate behavior towards her. Photo Credit: Twitter
Lindsey Boylan, who worked for the state’s economic development agency, was the first female aide to pipe up about the sexual harassment she sustained in 2018 because of Cuomo’s totally inappropriate behavior towards her. In a lengthy essay that she penned last week, Boylan directly accused the governor of sexual harassment and in so doing she outlined several unsettling episodes, including an unsolicited kiss in his Manhattan office, according to a New York Times report.
“As I got up to leave and walk toward an open door, he stepped in front of me and kissed me on the lips,” Boylan wrote. “I was in shock, but I kept walking.” Cuomo and Boylan met one-on-one at least four times in 2018, according to the governor’s public schedule database. Three of those meetings took place in the State Capitol; one, on the afternoon of July 19, happened in Cuomo’s office in Midtown, according to the NYT. The question remains: Where was Sandra Lee?
Charlotte Bennett, pictured at right in a CBS News video still, is accusing Gov. Andrew Cuomo of sexually harassing her while she worked in the New York governor’s office. Photo Credit: AP photo; CBS video still
Last weekend, another former female aid to Cuomo, Charlotte Bennett gave an interview to the NYT in which she also accused her boss of sexually harassing her while she served as an executive assistant and health policy adviser in the governor’s administration in 2020, according to a report in People Magazine.
Bennett, 25, sat down with CBS’ anchor Norah O’Donnell last week for her first television interview. Based on what Cuomo discussed with her, Bennett surmised that “the governor’s trying to sleep with me” during a one-on-one meeting with Cuomo back in June, as was reported by People magazine.
“Without explicitly saying it, he implied to me that I was old enough for him and he was lonely,” she said. The question remains: Where was Sandra Lee?
For his part, Cuomo says he “never inappropriately touched anybody” but apologized this week for what he insisted was inadvertent behavior. An independent investigation is ongoing.
Last week, it was reported that Anna Ruch, 33, said the governor touched her face and back and asked to kiss her moments after they met at a 2019 wedding reception, according to a WABC News report. Photo Credit: NYT
Last week, it was also reported that Anna Ruch, 33, said the governor touched her face and back and asked to kiss her moments after they met at a 2019 wedding reception, according to a WABC News report.
The New York Times reports that Ruch said Cuomo put his hands on her lower back, and when she removed them, she said he seemed “aggressive” and put his hands on her cheeks and asked if he could kiss her.
“I was so confused and shocked and embarrassed,” Ruch told the Times, which published a photo of the encounter showing the governor’s hands on her face. “I turned my head away and didn’t have words in that moment.” The question remains: Where was Sandra Lee?
Also last week, the Wall Street Journal reported that yet another former aide of Cuomo said he asked her if she had a boyfriend, called her sweetheart, touched her on her lower back at a reception and once kissed her hand when she rose from her desk.
Ana Liss, now 35 years old, served as a policy and operations aide to Cuomo between 2013 and 2015, according to the WSJ report. She said Cuomo’s actions were unsolicited and occurred in the first year while she sat at her desk, which was near his office in the Executive Chamber of the New York State Capitol in Albany. The question remains: Where was Sandra Lee?
Ana Liss, now 35 years old, served as a policy and operations aide to Mr. Cuomo between 2013 and 2015, according to the WSJ report. She said Cuomo’s actions were unsolicited and occurred in the first year while she sat at her desk, which was near his office in the Executive Chamber of the New York State Capitol in Albany. Photo Credit: File Photo
Speculation has arisen as to whether Cuomo was approaching young women for the purpose of sexually exploiting them while he was still in a relationship with Ms. Lee. The question remains as to whether Lee had any knowledge of Cuomo’s twisted actions and if so, did this lead to their break up? If she was not aware of Cuomo’s proclivities towards infidelity, then why did the pair terminate their relationship after being together for over a decade?
These questions and many more remain to be answered in their entirety. Only time will tell.
President Joe Biden will deliver a prime time address on Thursday the White House confirmed Monday, addressing the one-year anniversary of the coronavirus shutdowns.
White House press secretary Jen Psaki said the speech would “commemorate” the anniversary of shutdowns and advise Americans about continuing the fight.
“The president will look forward to highlighting the role that Americans will play in beating the virus and moving the country toward getting back to normal,” she said.
This will be Biden’s first prime time address to the American people since becoming president.
The speech will make the one-year anniversary of President Donald Trump’s March 11th speech to address the spread of the coronavirus, announcing new travel bans to protect Americans from the virus.
At the time, Trump also urged Americans to practice “good hygiene” in response to the virus.
“Wash your hands, clean often-used surfaces, cover your face and mouth if you sneeze or cough, and most of all if you are sick or not feeling well, stay home,” he said.
President Trump did not advise public lockdown guidelines to slow the spread until March 16 when he announced his “15 Days to Slow the Spread” campaign, which he extended to 30 days at the end of the month.
Masks have been a permanent staple of American life for the past year. Recommendations change like spring weather, from none to one to two or more, all based on flimsy evidence from the “follow the science” crowd.
Last March, the World Health Organization recommended no masks for individuals “unless they are sick with COVID or caring for someone who is sick.”
The esteemed Dr. Anthony Fauci agreed saying, “There’s no reason to be walking around with a mask… And, often, there are unintended consequences.” How right he was, in an unintended way.
Last month, Dr. Fauci made the case for two masks. After all, if one is good, two or more must be better. Try that with your prescription medications and see how that works out.
Gov. Newsom wants his California subjects to wear two masks, hoping to suffocate voters ahead of his recall election. He describes states that are now ditching their mask diktats as “absolutely reckless”. He did not apply that descriptor to himself after posting, “a video of himself inside a restaurant in an area of the state where indoor dining is still banned in response to the coronavirus pandemic.” Where he was wearing only one mask while he floated his own rules.
The unintended consequences Dr. Fauci referred to included face touching as people fiddle with their masks, contaminating their faces and fingers, defeating the purpose of a face covering. There is another consequence receiving no attention, mask pollution.
Masks act as air filters rather than barriers. A barrier would be one of those space suits with a self-contained breathing apparatus worn by researchers in the most secure biolabs like the one at Fort Detrick.
Masks filter the air, to a greater or lesser degree, depending on the type of mask and fit. As filters, masks capture virus in inhaled room air, or exhaled by the mask-wearing person if they carry the virus. Masks are like the filters in your furnace, capturing dust blowing through your ventilation system, turning the filters black.
If such a filter was in the ventilation system of a bioweapons lab, capturing lethal viruses, would it be tossed in the trash along with coffee cups and candy wrappers? It certainly would not, instead considered hazardous biowaste, decontaminated, and disposed of safely.
Why are not masks treated similarly? If masks are filtering out the deadly coronavirus, why are they not treated as medical waste rather than normal trash tossed on the ground or in the nearest rubbish bin?
COVID can persist on inanimate surfaces for up to nine days, yet infected masks are being discarded anywhere and everywhere like cigarette butts. Why are not masks considered medical waste? What if a hospital discarded bloody waste or used hypodermic needles in the regular trash?
Beyond the biohazard risk, what are masks doing to the environment?
The U.K. alone will generate yearly, mask waste equivalent to over five Eiffel Towers. Add in the rest of the world and it’s an Eiffel Tower of masks every day.
Another U.K. analysis calculated that single use masks, made from multiple layers of plastic, worn by every person in the U.K. for a single day, “Would create 66,000 tonnes of contaminated plastic waste and create ten times more climate change impact than using reusable masks.”
Cloth masks are often washed after a day of use, but surgical masks are not, disposed of at the end of the day, dropped in trash can, in parking lots or wherever.
Masks take 450 years to biodegrade. How many will end up in oceans and landfills, contaminating water and food chains with micro-plastics? Will sea animals become entangled in elastic mask straps as they are with plastic six-pack rings?
Surprisingly environmental groups are saying little about this new form of pollution. The BBC at least acknowledged the problem as did Oceans Asia, but the Green New Deal gang on this side of the pond does not seem concerned.
Microplastics in masks which contain toxic chemicals released during the degradation process. Masks don’t grow on trees, requiring energy and raw materials for production. Plastics are petroleum based, not magically grown from wind or solar energy. Ironically those on the left pushing universal masking are trying to ban the source of these masks.
There is also the disposal problem. The United Nations warns, “It can be expected that around 75 per cent of the used masks, as well as other pandemic-related waste, will end up in landfills, or floating in the seas.”
Sea birds and other aquatic life can become tangled in the elastic mask straps. Animals may ingest the masks or microplastics, harming the animals or contaminating the food chain.
Plastic gloves, also in common use these days, are derived from fossil fuel-based plastics and take hundreds of years to degrade, shedding microplastics into the environment.
Where are the climate warriors? As states end their mask mandates, climatistas should be cheering, Instead President Biden refers to this environmentally friendly move as “neanderthal thinking.” Greta Thunberg, the scowling environmental scold, should be wagging her finger at Dr. Fauci and state governors who want to keep everyone perpetually masked, creating tons of environmental waste.
The same “follow the science” crowd is also quite certain that man made global warming will destroy the planet, now in nine short years according to climate scientist John Kerry. Yet they are ignorantly or willfully paying no attention to the real environmental impact of the mountains of trash created over dubious COVID rules and mandates, such as masking up the entire population indefinitely.
Was it ever about the environment? Or the virus? Or simply a power grab by the left?
Two recent polls suggest wokism is beginning to recede on a variety of fronts, from less trust in Black Lives Matter and more confidence in the police, to suspicion that the Capitol “insurrection” account is being used to unfairly suppress political expression while Antifa, increasingly, is seen as a terrorist organization whose violence has been ignored improperly by authorities.
There are tens of millions of Americans who either have been stung, or turned off, by McCarthyite wokeness (and thus have anti-wokeness antibodies). More have been vaccinated from its latest virulent strains by their own values of judging people as individuals, not as racial or gender collectives. So lots of Americans have developed peremptory defenses against it. The result is that daily there are ever-fewer who are susceptible to the woke pandemic. And it will thus begin to fade out—even as the virus desperately seeks to mutate and go after more institutions.
Peak wokeness is nearing also because if it continued in its present incarnation, then the United States as we know would cease to exist—in the sense that 1692-93 Salem or 1793-94 Paris could not have continued apace without destroying society. Woke leftism exists to destroy and tear down, not to unite and build. It is not designed to play down and heal racial differences, but to accentuate and capitalize on them.
Scattershot Immunity
The methodology of cancel culture is utterly incoherent and unsustainable. The shark was jumped by the case of the Dr. Seuss books—banned by some local school districts, even as Dr. Seuss Enterprises, in terror, pulled some of the late Theodor Seuss Geisel’s publications of its own accord. If the author of TheCat in the Hat is now an enemy of the people, then anyone and all can be so designated.
That is, after 70 years and millions of books in the houses of millions of Americans, our generation’s new Soviet censors have now decided that Seuss’s books of the late 1940s and 1950s do not conform to our 2021 sensibilities and thus should be banned. The same kind of canceling of Disney films and cartoons, and of particular novelists and social critics is now a matter of record.
But what are to be the new standards of Trotskyization as we go forth? Can the Governor of New York be excused for months of policies that led to nearly 15,000 unnecessary deaths, but not for inappropriate kisses and touching of women? Or will he, as an Emmy-winning woke official, be exempt from punishment for both types of transgressions?
There are no logical standards that dictate who is and who is not canceled. For now, all we know about the rules of wokeness is that living leftists are mostly not canceled by the woke mob for the thought crimes that ruin both the non-Left or the generic dead.
The operating assumption is that the uncovered sins of the progressive are aberrations and not windows into their dark souls. Or perhaps woke leftism works on the same principle as carbon credits: the more you act progressively, the more pluses you have when minuses are summed up.
Most who have claims of being non-white are likely to find partial vaccination from the woke mob. Those who are independently wealthy or successfully self-employed likewise have some immunity. Then there are the defiant, the proverbial “Don’t Tread on Me” folks, who will fight, and thus encourage the zombie walkers to detour around them.
The only consistent pattern of woke punishment is the shared logic of the lions and water buffalos at the ford—devour the sacrificial, single, and vulnerable while avoiding the robust herd with retaliatory horns.
The Woke Tax
Wokeness eventually would put an unsustainable economic strain on the system. Wokeness is siphoning off billions of dollars from a productive economy through a sort of value-subtracted tax. We are spending a great deal of labor and capital for merit to be replaced in college admissions, in hiring, in grants, in publication, in the selections of awards, and in movies and videos, in everything—as racial, ethnic, and sexual identity considerations replace meritocratic, literary, artistic, and technological criteria, rather than just augment, them.
Americans also are investing lots of capital in preempting wokeness—writing/saying/acting in ways that are not productive, but simply defensive. Diversity oaths, and diversity applications, pledges, and statements take some time to read and digest. It will not be long before insurers will sell “woke insurance,” the premiums adjusted upward for those more conservative and of the wrong genealogy. It won’t be long before we all carry cards certifying that “At no time, did I say, hear, or think anything . . . .”
At a time of $1.7 trillion in student aggregate debt, and existential financial crises in universities during the zoom virtual campus, is higher education really so rich that it can add layers and layers of six-figure-income diversity and equity coordinators?
Most will not invent, create, teach, or produce. Instead, they are not merely monitoring but hindering those who do—either out of a need to justify their apparat or from self-importance. To believe otherwise is to suggest that on, say, May 1, 2020, the United States was an utterly racist society, without civil rights protections or any reparatory programs for those deemed unfairly victimized in the past.
The result is that billions of Americans’ hours are invested in woke reeducation and diversity training, in workshops and group confessionals, and in adjudicating and punishing those who do not comply. Ad hoc and personal cancel culture results in thousands of days of unproductive labor as functionaries scour the internet on the scent of a past misspoken word, or an ancient but now incorrect gesture that can return to ruin a rival or an enemy.
Our economy will soon mimic the totalitarian ones of old. Our commissars are like those of the old Red Army—ordering Soviet commanders’ counter-offensives during the Great Patriotic War to ensure that tank battalions were advancing ideologically correctly rather than just tactically or strategically soundly.
Melodramatic? Perhaps. But 280 former generals, admirals, and national security officials signed a letter warning that if Trump were to bring in any federal troops to keep the peace after the capital violence of late May and early June, riots that saw systematic attacks on police, vandalism, arson, injuries, and looting, and neared the White House grounds, he should be considered a dictatorial threat. “There is no role for the U.S. military in dealing with American citizens exercising their constitutional right to free speech, however uncomfortable that speech may be for some,” they insisted.
The same group remained mute when nearly 30,000 troops flooded the streets of the capital in the aftermath of the January 6 riot inside the Capitol building. They maintain their silence as barbed wire and fencing now cordon off the city, and thousands of troops remain without a terrorist or insurrectionist enemy in sight—a militarization of the capital not seen since the Civil War. Tolerable and intolerable violence is predicated on ideology, not its nature or magnitude.
Warring on the Past
No society can long exist if it believes that its own founding principles, its customs and traditions, its very origins are evil and must be erased. Tearing down statues of Abraham Lincoln, and redefining 1776 and 1787 as 1619, are many things, but one thing they are not is coherent. Trump was considered nutty when he warned that the statue topplers would go from Confederate monuments to Washington and Jefferson—and then when they did just that he was further ridiculed for being prescient.
Who were the long-dead men who devised a system whose natural and eventual fruition is what attracts indigenous people from Oaxaca, the destitute from Somalia, or the politically oppressed from Vietnam? If evil white people founded an evil system solely for their own evil purposes, why would anyone nonwhite dare risk his life to eat from the alluring fruit of the inherently long-ago poisoned tree?
If Americans are to accept that their Declaration of Independence and Constitution were frauds, abject falsifications of the real unspoken founding of 1619, then again what is to replace them? Whose statues are to rise, which books are we to be authorized to read, whose science are we to turn to?
Everyone has feet of some clay. For every cancellation, then must there be commensurate bowdlerizing? Is there no adultery, or unkind treatment of women or plagiarism in the past of Martin Luther King, Jr? No violence or criminality in the life of Malcolm X? Did Cesar Chavez never send his goons to the border to beat back illegal aliens? Was Margaret Sanger only a sometimes advocate of eugenic abortion? Are the written biographies of Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson to be freed of anti-Semitism and petty corruption? Is Louis Farrakhan an ecumenical leader in the way FDR was not? Was JFK really our first feminist?
Are we to look to those who erased our supposedly awful past for guidance?
Is it to be the architect of the 1619 Project? Long ago the ecumenical Nikole Hannah-Jones wrote that “the white race is the biggest murderer, rapist, pillager, and thief of the modern world . . . The descendants of these savage people pump drugs and guns into the Black community, pack Black people into the squalor of segregated urban ghettos and continue to be bloodsuckers in our community.”
Is going back into one’s student days to find such an embarrassing rant, in the fashion of the accusers’ of Brett Kavanaugh’s desperate but false allegations, unfair? If so, this past summer Hannah-Jones bragged that, yes, it would be “an honor” if the summer rioting—700 police officers injured, 40 deaths, and billions in property damages and hundreds—be called henceforth “the 1619 riots.”
At the height of tensions, she advised, “Destroying property, which can be replaced, is not violence.” And she added, “Any reasonable person would say we shouldn’t be destroying other people’s property, but these are not reasonable times.” Did the Times consider its essayist inflammatory?
Tribes
In our self-celebrated liberal society are we all to be reduced to identifying by race? But first, do we even have the ability to ascertain who is and is not white or black or brown?
Most illiberal societies in the past that tried such stigmatization of race, ethnicity, or religion did not end so well—from the Ottomans and the Third Reich to the former Yugoslavians, Rwandans, and Iraqis. One eighth, one fourth, or one half makes one a person of color—or not color? Shall we seek knowledge of one-drop of tell-tale bloodlines from the archived jurisprudence of the antebellum South?
If Peruvian George Zimmerman had only used his matronymic, and Latinized his first name, then would a Jorge Mesa have become a sympathetic character who lost a fair fight with Trayvon Martin rather than reduced by the New York Times to a strange category of “white Hispanic” hoodlum, with the additional odor of a Germanized patronymic.
Why does class bow to race, since the former seems to trump the latter. If we forget percentages for a moment, and also forget that we are individuals, not anonymous cogs of vast racial wheels, in absolute numbers, there are roughly (in some studies) more poor white people—both those earning incomes below the poverty level and those with no income at all—than all other commensurate poor minorities combined. Were these supposed to be the targets of Barack Obama’s “clingers” remarks, or Hillary Clinton’s “deplorables,” John McCain’s “crazies,” or Joe Biden’s “dregs,” “chumps,” and “Neanderthals”?
Apparently, the supposedly all-powerful, all-determining Oz-like role of racial supremacy and the unearned privilege that accompanies it, have aided those 26 million white impoverished very little. Or perhaps they did not get the message that they were recipients of unearned, all-determinative white privilege.
Or perhaps they were just people, like the poor of all other races, who suffer from lack of or access to education or vocational training, the stagnation of entry-level incomes, divorce, family dissolution, bad luck, poor health, substance abuse, economic ill-winds, cultural disadvantages, self-inflicted pathologies, or all the other criteria that can make every one of us of every race susceptible to ravages of poverty.
Given that, in absolute numbers alone, there are more minorities that are not poor than the number of white people who are, how is it that class considerations are forgotten? Or for that matter, does any child’s destiny rest on just race—or a two-parent household living in Menlo Park rather than Parlier, or growing up with college-educated parents or high-school dropouts? And does race really determine all the other criteria that foster wealth or poverty?
Note the artifact that those who are now classified as nonwhite are wisely not often seeking to rebrand themselves as “white” to share in intractable “white privilege ”—in the fashion of the past when white majority racism was undeniable. Why are Asian-Americans, on average, enjoying over $20,000 more in average household income than so-called whites?
Why more commonly would so-called white people create an entire industry of constructing pseudo-minority identities—from Elizabeth Warren to Rachel Dolezal to Ward Churchill to Alec Baldwin’s wife, Hilaria—if not for careerist or social advantage or wishing to be cool by claiming not to be “white”? Why has the new racist “passing for non-white” replaced the old racist “passing for white”?
These are admittedly absurd questions. But they are quite apt for an absurd society obsessed with race but without any mechanism to develop a logical category of victimization and reparation.
Predicating wokism on race is a tricky business, even if one could define and identify race, quantify its role in determining class status, and convince millions that it is moral to judge people by how they look.
Like the Salem witch trials and the McCarthyite hysteria, when wokism fades, we are likely to see its real catalysts revealed. And they will not be found to be misplaced idealism, nor heartfelt desire for a more ecumenical society, but mostly the age-old, narcissistic destructive road to career enhancement, fueled by customary ancient fears, envies, and hatreds.
New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo and his top lieutenants cited a report altered by his top aides to paint a false narrative of his handling of the COVID-19 outbreak in nursing homes in comparison to other states.
The New York State Department of Health knew that nearly 10,000 nursing home residents had died of COVID-19 by early July, according to reports from The Wall Street Journal and The New York Times. Despite this, top Cuomo aides convinced the health department to report just 6,432 nursing home deaths in a July 6 report that claimed the Cuomo administration’s infamous March 25 order did not lead to more fatalities.
The July 6 report used the reduced figure, which omitted nursing home residents who died of the virus at a hospital, to conclude that only 21% of New York COVID-19 deaths were in nursing homes. The figure was repeatedly cited by Cuomo all while he was claiming to be a servant only to the facts.
No other state that reports nursing homes COVID-19 deaths omits residents who died in hospitals from their reporting. But Cuomo and other New York officials still used the 21% figure to claim New York was handling the situation better than 45 other states.
“You look at the nursing home deaths in this state,” Cuomo told reporters in October. “Do you know what number we are by percentage before you made that statement? We’re No. 46 out of 50 states, and we had the worst problem, and we’re 46th in terms of percentage of deaths in nursing homes.”
New York State Department of Health Commissioner Howard Zucker also cited the 21% figure during a July 6 press conference announcing the findings of the report.
“We have had 21, 22 percent of our deaths are in the nursing homes, which is essentially the lowest in the nation,” Zucker said.
“New York state ranked 46 in the nation, meaning that 45 states had a greater percentage of fatalities,” Zucker said of the state’s nursing home deaths.
Zucker also accused some critics of Cuomo’s March 25 order, which required nursing homes to accept coronavirus-positive patients, of either lacking the ability to think critically or of operating with “malice.”
“Sometimes what happens is that a narrative gets perpetuated when it’s not based on facts,” he said. “And that narrative, that story, gets swept away as the truth simply by virtue of repetition whether because of lack of critical thinking or malice. Either way, it does not do us as a society any good.”
Sitting beside Zucker at the press conference was Northwell Health CEO Michael Dowling, a Cuomo donor and nursing home operator who reportedly lobbied Cuomo to sign legislation in April that shielded nursing home executives from coronavirus-related lawsuits.
“New York has done exceptionally well,” Dowling said during the press conference. “Percentage of deaths in nursing homes — percentage of total — in New York was 21%. Just look at other states.”
“Rhode Island it was 77%. Minnesota, 77%. Pennsylvania, 68%. Kentucky, 61%,” Dowling said. “So it’s interesting when you see all the narrative focusing on, oh, look what happened in New York … but when you look at it percentage-wise, New York was number 46 in the United States. That’s an important fact to keep in mind.”
A special counsel to Cuomo, Beth Garvey, issued a statement Friday saying that the decision to omit nursing home residents who died from COVID-19 in hospitals from the July 6 report “didn’t change the outcome” of the report and that Cuomo’s March 25 order requiring nursing homes to accept coronavirus-positive patients did not inflate the death toll.
But the oft-cited 21% figure cited by Cuomo and his top lieutenants jumps up to 33% when taking into account the over 4,000 previously unreported nursing home residents who died of COVID-19 in hospitals that Cuomo administration revealed in early February, according to the Empire Center.
“By this measure, the revised toll pushed New York from 21 percent to 33 percent, and its ranking among states from 48th to 33rd,” the Empire center reported.
Another false statistic cited by Cuomo that was derived from the undercounted nursing home death toll was his claim that New York’s COVID-19 morality rate in nursing homes ranked 35 among all states.
“Just on the top line, we are number 35 in the nation in percentage of deaths in nursing homes,” Cuomo said during a July 24 press conference. “Go talk to 34 other states first, go talk to the Republican states now. Florida, Texas, Arizona. Ask them what is happening in nursing homes. It’s all politics.”
When using accurate figures that include nursing home residents who died in hospitals, New York’s mortality rate in nursing homes bumps up from 35th to the 13th highest in the nation, according to the Empire Center.
Senior Cuomo advisor Rich Azzopardi criticized Empire Center in July for highlighting that the Cuomo administration report was based on misrepresented nursing home data.
“If they revise their death count and it goes up by as many as I think it will go up, it’s not going to be a good news story and it won’t be a flattering news story,” Empire Center Senior Fellow Bill Hammond said prophetically in late July.
Azzopardi responded to Hammond’s prediction in a statement to 6 News: “Trust shady right-wing think tanks with undisclosed funders at your own peril.”
Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [email protected].
(AP) — Fully vaccinated Americans can gather with other vaccinated people indoors without wearing a mask or social distancing, according to long-awaited guidance from federal health officials.
The recommendations also say that vaccinated people can come together in the same way — in a single household — with people considered at low-risk for severe disease, such as in the case of vaccinated grandparents visiting healthy children and grandchildren.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention announced the guidance Monday.
The guidance is designed to address a growing demand, as more adults have been getting vaccinated and wondering if it gives them greater freedom to visit family members, travel, or do other things like they did before the COVID-19 pandemic swept the world last year.
“With more and more people vaccinated each day, we are starting to turn a corner,” said CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky.
During a press briefing Monday, she called the guidance a “first step” toward restoring normalcy in how people come together. She said more activities would be ok’d for vaccinated individuals once caseloads and deaths decline, more Americans are vaccinated, and as more science emerges on the ability of those who have been vaccinated to get and spread the virus.
The CDC is continuing to recommend that fully vaccinated people still wear well-fitted masks, avoid large gatherings, and physically distance themselves from others when out in public. The CDC also advised vaccinated people to get tested if they develop symptoms that could be related to COVID-19.
Officials say a person is considered fully vaccinated two weeks after receiving the last required dose of vaccine. About 31 million Americans — or only about 9% of the U.S. population — have been fully vaccinated with a federally authorized COVID-19 vaccine so far, according to the CDC.
Authorized vaccine doses first became available in December, and they were products that required two doses spaced weeks apart. But since January, a small but growing number of Americans have been fully vaccinated, and have been asking questions like: Do I still have to wear a mask? Can I go to a bar now? Can I finally see my grandchildren?
The guidance was “welcome news to a nation that is understandably tired of the pandemic and longs to safely resume normal activities,” said Dr. Richard Besser, president and CEO of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and a former acting director of the CDC.
“I hope that this new guidance provides the momentum for everyone to get vaccinated when they can and gives states the patience to follow the public health roadmap needed to reopen their economies and communities safely,” said Besser, in a statement.
But Dr. Leana Wen called the guidance “far too cautious.”
The CDC did not change its recommendations on travel, which discourages unnecessary travel and calls for getting tested within a few days of the trip. That could seem confusing to vaccinated people hoping to visit family across the country or abroad.
The new guidance also says nothing about going to restaurants or other places, even though governors are lifting restrictions on businesses, said Wen, an emergency physician and public health professor at George Washington University who was formerly Baltimore’s health commissioner.
“The CDC is missing a major opportunity to tie vaccination status with reopening guidance. By coming out with such limited guidance, they are missing the window to influence state and national policy,” Wen said, in an email.
The CDC guidance did not speak to people who may have gained some level of immunity from being infected, and recovering from, the coronavirus.
___
Associated Press reporter Zeke Miller in Washington contributed to this report.
___
The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Department of Science Education. The AP is solely responsible for all content.
The Biden administrationhas told the Department of Homeland Security not to speak freely about the growing border crisis, according to Breitbart, which spoke with a “senior-level law enforcement source” within DHS who spoke on condition of anonymity.
“The situation with media relations now is night and day compared to the last administration,” said the official. “We have been advised not to speak on immigration issues at the border and to rely on DHS’s Office of Public Affairs and the White House Press Office to handle messaging.”
The verbal order applies to senior law enforcement leaders within DHS and has no formal expiration date. It comes as the administration is struggling to manage the growing crisis caused by changes in border security and immigration policies leading to a spike in illegal crossings at the border.
As local communities along the border continue to grapple with the release of migrants into their communities, the administration is facing criticism even amongst their own ranks, Breitbart reported.
The viral video tweeted on Sunday by Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) reveals: “The tip of the iceberg near Yuma, AZ as immigrants begin to flood into the US responding to @JoeBiden ’s open border, catch and release policy.”
The tip of the iceberg near Yuma, AZ as immigrants begin to flood into the US responding to @JoeBiden’s open border, catch and release policy. How many have COVID? pic.twitter.com/8Cu3k88etZ
— Senator Ron Johnson (@SenRonJohnson) March 7, 2021
The gap between black and white unemployment worsened in the first full month of Joe Biden’s presidency.
Unemployment dipped in the U.S. in February, the first full month of the Biden presidency, and the economy added far more jobs than expected.
But the recovery was uneven. While unemployment fell among Asians dipped slightly for whites and Hispanics, it rose for blacks, according to data released Friday.
The unemployment rate for black Americans rose from 9.2 percent in January to 9.9 percent in February. That contrasts with a tick down from 5.7 percent to 5.6 percent for whites, a dip from 8.6 to 8.5 among Hispanics, and a decline from 6.6 to 5.1 percent for Asians.
The widening gap is even starker when gender is included. The unemployment rate for black men jumped from 9.4 percent to 10.2 percent in February. For white men it fell from 5.5 percent to 5.3 percent.
Before the pandemic struck. the black-white employment gap had narrowed to its slimmest on record under President Trump.
The unemployment ratio had averaged around 2 to 1 or so for decades, meaning the black unemployment rate is typically twice the white unemployment rate. In good times, the unemployment rate of whites and blacks fell but the gap tended to remain. And in bad times, the unemployment rate for whites and black rose, but black unemployment typically remained around twice that of white employment.
That changed in the Trump presidency when the black unemployment rate fell to just 161 percent of the white unemployment rate. That was up to 177 percent in February, still low by historic standards but well above where it was the month before.
(AP) — In a wide-ranging interview aired Sunday, Harry and Meghan described painful palace discussions about the color of their son’s skin, losing royal protection and the intense pressures that led the Duchess of Sussex to contemplate suicide.
The interview with Oprah Winfrey was the couple’s first since they stepped down from royal duties and the two-hour special included numerous revelations likely to reverberate on both sides of the Atlantic.
Harry told Winfrey that he felt trapped by royal life and was surprised that he was cut off financially and lost his security last year. He also said he felt his family did not support Meghan, who acknowledged her naivete about royal life before marrying Harry, as she endured tabloid attacks and false stories.
Meghan, who is biracial, described that when she was first pregnant with son Archie, there were “concerns and conversations about how dark his skin might be when he’s born.” The statement led Winfrey to incredulously ask “What?”
While Winfrey sat in silence, Meghan said she struggled to understand why there were concerns within the royal family about her son’s skin color. She said it was hard for her to “compartmentalize” those conversations.
Meghan, the actor formerly known as Meghan Markle who starred in the TV drama “Suits,” said she grew concerned about her son not having a royal title because it meant he wouldn’t be provided security.
Meghan said processing everything during her pregnancy was “very hard.” More than the “prince” title, she felt the most troubled over her son’s safety and protection.
“He needs to be safe,” a teary-eyed Meghan recalled. “We’re not saying don’t make him a prince or princess, whatever it’s going to be. But if you’re saying the title is going to affect their protection, we haven’t created this monster machine around us in terms of click bait and tabloid fodder. You’ve allowed that to happen, which means our son needs to be safe.”
The interview was broadcast in the United States a full day before it will air in Britain. The revelations aren’t over: Winfrey teased unaired bits of the interview would be shown Monday morning on CBS.
In a rare positive moment in the interview, Harry and Meghan revealed their second would be a girl. The interview opened with Winfrey gushing over Meghan’s pregnancy and lamenting that COVID-19 protocols kept them from hugging.
Winfrey at various points in the interview ran through headlines about Meghan and at one point asked about the mental health impact. Meghan responded that she experienced suicidal thoughts and had sought help through the palace’s human resources department, but was told there was nothing they could do.
“I was really ashamed to say it at the time and a shame to have to admit it to Harry, especially because I know how much loss he suffered,” she said. “But I knew that if I didn’t say it that I would do it. And I just didn’t, I just didn’t want to be alive anymore.”
Harry, too, said there are lasting impacts about Meghan’s treatment and his relationship with his family.
“There is a lot to work through there,” Harry said about his relationship with his father. “I feel really let down. He’s been through something similar. He knows what pain feels like. And Archie is his grandson. I will always love him, but there is a lot of hurt that has happened.”
Harry said the royal family cut him off financially at the start of 2020 after announcing plans to step back from his roles. But he was able to afford security for his family because of the money his mother, Princess Diana, left behind.
In response to a question from Winfrey, Harry said he wouldn’t have left royal life if not for his wife. He said their relationship revealed the strictures of royal life.
“I wouldn’t have been able to, because I myself was trapped,” Harry said. “I didn’t see a way out.
“I was trapped, but I didn’t know I was trapped,” Harry said, before adding, “My father and my brother, they are trapped.”
Harry acknowledged that he does not have a close relationship presently with his brother William, who is heir to the throne after their father, Prince Charles.
Harry disputed rumors that he intentionally blindsided his grandmother, Queen Elizabeth II, with his decision to split. He suspects the rumors came from the institution.
“I’ve never blindsided my grandmother,” he said. “I have too much respect for her.”
Meghan, too, was complimentary toward the queen, despite saying at one point she realized some in the palace were willing to lie to “protect other members of the family.”
“The queen has always been wonderful to me,” Meghan said.
Sunday’s interview special opened with Meghan describing how naive she was about the ground rules of royal life before she married her husband, Harry, nearly three years ago. “I didn’t fully understand what the job was,” she said. She also noted that she did not know how to curtsy before meeting Queen Elizabeth II for the first time, and didn’t realize it would be necessary.
“I will say I went into it naively because I didn’t grow up knowing much about the royal family,” Meghan said. “It wasn’t something that was part of conversation at home. It wasn’t something that we followed.”
Meghan said she and Harry were aligned during their courtship because of their “cause-driven” work. But she did not fully comprehend the pressure of being linked to the prestigious royal family.
“There was no way to understand what the day-to-day was going to be like,” she said. “And it’s so different because I didn’t romanticize any element of it.”
The couple married at Windsor Castle in May 2018, and their son, Archie, was born a year later. Harry and Meghan’s departure from royal duties began in March 2020 over what they described as the intrusions and racist attitudes of the British media toward the duchess.
At the top of the interview, Winfrey said no topic was off limits and that Meghan and Harry were not being paid for the special.
It is unclear what public reaction, if any, the queen and other royal family members will have to Sunday’s interview. The U.K.’s Sunday Times newspaper, citing an anonymous source, reported that the queen would not watch it.
Regular physical activity is one of the most important things you can do for your health.
Everyone can experience the health benefits of physical activity – age, abilities, ethnicity, shape, or size do not matter.
If you’re not sure about becoming active or boosting your level of physical activity because you’re afraid of getting hurt, the good news is that moderate-intensity aerobic activity, such as brisk walking, is generally safe for most people.
Read about the benefits for improving your brain health, weight management, reducing disease, strengthening your bones and muscles, and improving your ability to do everyday activities.
If you have not been physically active in a while, you may be wondering how to get started again. Find more tips here to get started with physical activity for a healthy weight.
Learn more about what works and how physical activity can improve your health.
Immediate Benefits
Some benefits of physical activity on brain health happen right after a session of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity. Benefits include improved thinking or cognition for children 6 to 13 years of age and reduced short-term feelings of anxiety for adults. Regular physical activity can help keep your thinking, learning, and judgment skills sharp as you age. It can also reduce your risk of depression and anxiety and help you sleep better.
Learn more about the immediate benefits of physical activity.
Weight Management
Looking to get to or stay at a healthy weight? Both diet and physical activity play a critical role in maintaining a healthy body weight, losing excess body weight, or maintaining successful weight loss. You gain weight when you consume more calories through eating and drinking than the amount of calories you burn, including those burned during physical activity. It’s important to balance calories. When it comes to weight management, people vary greatly in how much physical activity they need. You may need to be more active than others to reach or maintain a healthy weight.
To maintain your weight: Work your way up to 150 minutes a week of moderate-intensity aerobic activity (for example, 30 minutes a day, 5 days a week). Strong scientific evidence shows that physical activity can help you maintain your weight over time. However, the exact amount of physical activity needed to do this is not clear since it varies greatly from person to person. It’s possible that you may need to do more than 150 minutes of moderate-intensity activity a week to maintain your weight.
To lose weight and keep it off: You will need a high amount of physical activity unless you also adjust your diet and reduce the amount of calories you’re eating and drinking. Getting to and staying at a healthy weight requires both regular physical activity and a healthy eating plan. For more information about nutrition, physical activity, and weight loss, visit Healthy Weight.
Reduce Your Health Risk
Cardiovascular Disease
Heart disease and stroke are two of the leading causes of death in the United States. Following the recommendations and getting at least 150 minutes a week of moderate-intensity aerobic activity can put you at a lower risk for these diseases. You can reduce your risk even further with more physical activity. Regular physical activity can also lower your blood pressure and improve your cholesterol levels.
Type 2 Diabetes and Metabolic Syndrome
Regular physical activity can reduce your risk of developing type 2 diabetes and metabolic syndrome. Metabolic syndrome is some combination of too much fat around the waist, high blood pressure, low High Density Lipoproteins (HDL) cholesterol, high triglycerides, or high blood sugar. People start to see benefits at levels of physical activity below the recommended 150 minutes a week. Additional amounts of physical activity seem to lower risk even more.
Already have type 2 diabetes? Regular physical activity can help you control your blood glucose levels. To find out more, visit Diabetes and Me.
Some Cancers
Being physically active lowers your risk for developing several commonly occurring cancers. Research shows that adults who participate in greater amounts of physical activity have reduced risks of developing cancers of the:
Bladder
Breast
Colon (proximal and distal)
Endometrium
Esophagus (adenocarcinoma)
Kidney
Lung
Stomach (cardia and non-cardia adenocarcinoma)
Improve your quality of life. If you are a cancer survivor, research shows that getting regular physical activity not only helps give you a better quality of life, but also improves your physical fitness.
Strengthen Your Bones and Muscles
As you age, it’s important to protect your bones, joints, and muscles – they support your body and help you move. Keeping bones, joints, and muscles healthy can help ensure that you’re able to do your daily activities and be physically active. Doing aerobic, muscle-strengthening, and bone-strengthening physical activity at a moderately-intense level can slow the loss of bone density that comes with age.
Hip fracture is a serious health condition that can have life-changing negative effects, especially if you’re an older adult. Physically active people have a lower risk of hip fracture than inactive people.
Among older adults, physical activity also reduces the risk of falling and injuries from falls. Physical activity programs that include more than one type of physical activity are most successful at reducing falls and fall-related injuries. Different types of physical activity include aerobic, muscle strengthening, and balance physical activities. Also, weight bearing activities such as running, brisk walking, jumping jacks and strength training produce a force on the bones. These activities that can help promote bone growth and bone strength and reduce the risk of fall-related injuries and fractures.
Regular physical activity helps with arthritis and other rheumatic conditions affecting the joints. Doing 150 minutes a week of moderate-intensity aerobic physical activity, if able, plus muscle-strengthening activity improves your ability to manage pain and do everyday tasks and improves quality of life.
Build strong, healthy muscles. Muscle-strengthening activities like lifting weights can help you increase or maintain your muscle mass and strength. This is important for older adults who experience reduced muscle mass and muscle strength with aging. Slowly increasing the amount of weight and number of repetitions you do as part of muscle strengthening activities will give you even more benefits, no matter your age.
Improve Your Ability to do Daily Activities and Prevent Falls
A functional limitation is a loss of the ability to do everyday activities such as climbing stairs, grocery shopping, or playing with your grandchildren.
How does this relate to physical activity? If you’re a physically active middle-aged or older adult, you have a lower risk of functional limitations than people who are inactive.
Improve physical function and decrease the risk of falls. For older adults, multicomponent physical activity is important to improve physical function and decrease the risk of falls or injury from a fall. Multicomponent physical activity is physical activity that includes more than one type of physical activity, such as aerobic, muscle strengthening, and balance training. Multicomponent physical activity can be done at home or in a community setting as part of a structured program.
Increase Your Chances of Living Longer
Science shows that physical activity can reduce your risk of dying early from leading causes of death, like heart disease and some cancers. This is remarkable in two ways:
Only a few lifestyle choices have as large an impact on your health as physical activity. People who are physically active for about 150 minutes a week have a 33% lower risk of all-cause mortality than those who are physically inactive.
You don’t have to do high amounts of activity or vigorous-intensity activity to reduce your risk of premature death. Benefits start to accumulate with any amount of moderate- or vigorous-intensity physical activity. (CDC.gov)
(TJVNEWS) Not only will 2020 be remembered as the year of coronavirus, but tragically, violent crime has skyrocketed in just about every part of the country.
According to NYPD data, thieves committed 204 home-invasion robberies in 2020, a 7 percent increase from the 190 reported in 2019, and that points to the pandemic as a factor in the uptick in the often-terrifying crimes, according to a New York Post report.
Just to offer an example, the Post reported that a home invasion in the East Village left two people shot and a third injured on December 22nd, according to the Post report. The 3 gunmen were wearing all black when they busted into the apartment.
During a botched home robbery in Staten Island in May, two people, a pregnant woman, and her boyfriend were fatally shot by home invaders.
In 2021, thus far, home invasions have significantly increased. There were 56 home invasions reported through February 28th, according to the NYP report. NYPD statistics show that the city was put on-page for more than 300 this year alone.
On January 27th, the NYP reported that armed crooks were caught on video forcing their way into a Bronx home — where they threw a 75-year-old woman on the ground and held her and two men at gunpoint before making off with $2,000.The Post reported that on January 31st, armed robbers bound an Upper East Side resident and his Madison Avenue doorman and made off with more than $10,000 in cash and rare coins.
The NYP reported that in the early hours of February 5th, two armed men broke into a Jamaica, Queens residence, tied up at least six people, and stole three copies of a safe key, police sources said.
Now that people are working at home due to coronavirus restrictions, robbers and home invaders have more easy targets, according to the NYP. Recently, a pair of robbers who were dressed as plumbers took two men hostage & tortured them in an apartment in the Bronx for hours. They ended up fleeing with a cell phone and $2000.
Joseph Giacalone, a retired NYPD sergeant who teaches at John Jay College of Criminal Justice told the post that, “these people, NYC residents, are sitting ducks. Suspects that do home invasions don’t care who is inside. Women, children. It’s part of their plan, to cause fear and terror in their victims.”
“The suspects in these cases steamroll into your home with guns and restraints and it’s happening more frequently due to the pandemic. Nobody thought the lockdowns would be going on this long,” he said. He explained that home invasions are more sinister than the far more common burglary, he explained. A “garden variety” burglar is usually unarmed and “waits for you to leave before entering and taking your stuff.
“Even a slight uptick in home invasions warrants a concern,” Giacalone added. “Many home invasions involve drug dealers robbing drug dealers and the chance of retaliation becomes high.” (Source: newyorkpost.com)
Yeshiva guard Ryan Turell (11) shoots over Worcester Polytechnic Institute forward Jake Wisniewski (4) during the second half of an NCAA DIII college basketball game, March 6, 2020. (AP/Terrance Williams
By Joseph Wolkin, World Israel News
The Division III Yeshiva University Maccabees are currently the winningest team in NCAA men’s basketball. The Maccabees are playing like the fate of the Jewish people was on the line, winning 35 straight matches.
The unbelievable winning streak for the New York City-based team started in November of 2019, and they want to stretch it to tie SUNY Potsdam’s record of 60 straight wins (1985-1987).
“We weren’t thinking about it for a while,” head coach Elliot Steinmetz told The Daily News. “If there was an NCAA tournament or a conference tournament this year, we probably still wouldn’t be. But this streak kind of gives the guys something to keep playing for.”
The Yeshiva University blue and white is coached by Steinmetz and former New York Knicks player Michael Sweetney.
“You walk in the gym and it’s pretty much no breathing room,” Sweetney told TheDaily News about the crowd before the pandemic. “Standing room only. People were standing the whole games. People from the Jewish community were coming to support, but also people from Washington Heights, which was cool to see.”
Yeshiva University, which plays in the Skyline Conference, is the only team in the conference with a win this season. Most of the schools in the conference have opted out of playing this year, with the ones that are participating in the season having a scaled-back schedule.
The pandemic, though, didn’t stop the Maccabees. Half of the team already had the virus and because of that, they currently practice in two groups, or pods — one of people who had Covid-19 and one which didn’t.
The pandemic has cut down their chances for some sort of title. The Maccabees (6-0) are ranked fourth in the country and would like some sort of title, The Daily News reports.
“It’s highly unlikely but possible, somebody puts together a four-team tournament,” forward Gabriel Leifer said. “We want to set ourselves up for any possible opportunity.”
The Maccabees were vying for a spot in the Division III NCAA Tournament this month, but the tournament was canceled due to the Covid-19 pandemic.
A copy of the book "And to Think That I Saw It on Mulberry Street," by Dr. Seuss, is one of the banned books. (AP/Steven Senne)
By Josh Plank, World Israel News
Online marketplace eBay barred the sale of certain Dr. Seuss books last week after Dr. Seuss Enterprises announced that it would no longer be publishing the children’s classics due to “hurtful and wrong” content.
Even while eBay was removing books like Dr. Seuss’ 1937 And to Think That I Saw It on Mulberry Street, anti-Semitic children’s books like Nazi propagandist Ernst Hiemer’s 1938 The Poisonous Mushroom (Der Giftpilz) was still available for sale.
According to users’ screenshots, eBay sent a notification to sellers of Seuss’ books saying, “We had to remove your listing because it didn’t follow our Offensive Material Policy. Listings that promote or glorify hatred, violence, or discrimination aren’t allowed.”
“Dr. Seuss Enterprises has stopped publication of this book due to its negative portrayal of some ethnicities. As a courtesy, we have ended your item and refunded your selling fees, and as long as you do not relist the item, there will be no negative impact to your account,” eBay said.
A search of eBay on Sunday revealed that several of the discontinued Seuss titles were still available. The company apparently experienced difficulty removing all of the listings for the books, the demand for which has skyrocketed since the public learned of their discontinuation.
“We’re currently sweeping our marketplace to remove these items. It can take some time to review all existing listings and provide education to impacted users. We’re also monitoring the newly published list to be reviewed,” an eBay spokesperson told the Washington Examiner on Thursday.
Some users complained that Seuss’ books were being removed while books like The Protocols of the Elders of Zion and Hitler’s Mein Kampf remained available.
“You can’t make this stuff up. @eBay is blocking my listing of @DrSeuss’s ‘The Cat’s Quizzer’ & citing it as offensive material. Yet anti-Semite Louis Farrakhan’s books are okay?” tweeted seller Clare Ath.
Dr. Seuss Enterprises released a statement last week saying that the company, working with a panel of experts, had decided to cease publication and licensing of the following titles: And to Think That I Saw It on Mulberry Street, If I Ran the Zoo, McElligot’s Pool, On Beyond Zebra!, Scrambled Eggs Super!, and The Cat’s Quizzer
Customers sit at a reopened cafe in Jerusalem on March 7, 2021. (Yonatan Sindel/Flash90)
By World Israel News Staff
On Saturday night, Israel’s corona cabinet approved Health Ministry regulations for the third phase for the nation’s exit plan, which began on Sunday.
The step marks a significant step in reopening Israel’s economy, affecting restaurants, school grades 7-10 in areas with low-to-medium infection rates, various attractions, and event halls, in addition to other facilities and institutions.
The new regulations also apply to Ben Gurion Airport, easing restrictions on entry to the country for citizens returning from abroad.
Most significantly, the new regulations eliminated rules requiring quarantine in state-run corona hotels and ended a period that began on January 25 during which the airport was closed to most flights and a government-run committee controlled entry to the country.
As of Sunday, 1,000 people per day can enter the country, with that number set to increase to 3,000 later in the week.
“Designated flights for new immigrants whose immigration cannot be delayed, essential foreign workers and professional athletes shall not count toward the entry quota,” said a statement from the government on the regulations.
Under the new regulations, restaurants can seat indoors up to 100 people who hold “green passports” proving that they are vaccinated or had the coronavirus. As many as 100 people can be seated outside, without green passports.
“Restrictions on passengers in private vehicles are cancelled,” said the government statement, adding that “the requirement to question or measure temperatures at the entrance to public or commercial places is cancelled.”
The statement continued, “Pupils in grades 7-10 will return to classes in those areas in which classes are held for other grades (green, yellow and borderline orange areas, whose ranking is no more than 7 and in which at least 70% of people over 50 have been vaccinated).”
The new regulations also eased restrictions on houses of worship and tourist attractions, but provide fines of up to NIS 5,000 for violating the regulations.
The new regulations are valid until Saturday, Mar. 20, 2021, except for the education regulations, which will be in effect until Saturday, April 3, 2021.
Meretz head Nitzan Horowitz gives his victory speech after being confirmed head of the party, June 27, 2019. (Flash90)
By Lauren Marcus, World Israel News
Chairman of the left-wing Meretz party, Nitzan Horowitz, is under fire from politicians from both ends of the political spectrum after he made comments on Saturday saying that the International Criminal Court’s probe into alleged Israeli war crimes is justified.
“I say this with great sadness, there were grounds for the decision. I don’t want Israel to face these situations… but Israel needs to ask itself what it needs to do to prevent that,” Horowitz said in an interview with Channel 13.
He then blamed Israel for bringing the ICC investigation upon itself.
By “continuing to build in the settlements as if there is no tomorrow” and refusing to enter negotiations with Palestinians, Israel should expect international backlash like the ICC probe, Horowitz said.
“Even in Operation Protective Edge [2014 Gaza conflict], there were things that should not have been done. There was massive damage done to the civilian population that the court wants to check.
“The solution for us is not to say that The Hague is anti-Semitic, but rather to advance negotiations with the Palestinians that bring about a solution. Then, there will be no reason for the Hague,” he said.
Horowitz doubled-down on his comments despite the criticism on Sunday in an interview with N12. “The one who are dragging Israel to the Hague court are Netanyahu, the Right and the settlers.”
“Meretz is an ideological party – we say things even when they are unpopular. Unlike other parties like Labor or Blue and White, I do not have to break Left or Right,” he said, speaking of other parties. Israel goes to the polls on March 23.
Horowitz’s comments come on the heels of an announcement last Wednesday by ICC Chief Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda that the court will open a probe into Israel’s military actions starting from June 2014.
The probe potentially could see IDF officials prosecuted.
The Likud party released a statement blasting Horowitz for “abandoning the IDF soldiers who are guarding him and all of us.”
The statement added that the ICC probe is “an anti-Semitic decision and Prime Minister Netanyahu will fight against it anywhere in the world to repeal it.”
Defense Minister Benny Gantz slammed Horowitz on Twitter, writing, “Nitzan, your remarks tonight made me very angry. As someone who served in the IDF for 38 years and served as Chief of Staff, I know very well how much the IDF and its soldiers make every effort to avoid harming innocent people.”
Referencing recent polls suggesting that Horowitz’s Meretz party is hovering just below the threshold of minimum votes needed to enter the Knesset, he added, “No political campaign will justify legitimizing the unfounded decision of the Hague Tribunal.”
MK Ayelet Shaked of the right-wing Yemina party said Horowitz “is an embarrassment to the Knesset” and that her party will refuse to join a coalition alongside Meretz.
Itamar Ben Gvir of the still further to the Right Otzma Yehudit party called upon Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit to investigate Horowitz “on suspicion of treason.”
In November 2020, MK Michal Cotler-Wunsch (Blue and White) took to Twitter with an explosive accusation that Horowitz was not alarmed by links between European financing for NGOs and terrorism.
The tweet came after a Knesset discussion on the issue.
“Imp[ortant] discussion on foreign govt $ NGOs, inc[luding] to terror tied orgs & need for transparency. Some MKs aren’t disturbed,” Cotler-Wunsch tweeted.
“I asked @NitzanHorowitz: ‘Does it bother you that the murderers of Rina Shnerb worked for Eur govt $ NGOs?’ His shocking response: ‘No.’”
As it turns out, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo has not completely alienated all of his female staff in the maelstrom of the sex harassment complaints against him.
According to a New York Post report, two high ranking female aides, who have covered for Cuomo while other female aides have accused the governor of inappropriate behavior and sexual harassment have “family ties to high-powered lobbyists whose firms rake in millions of dollars lobbying the governor and those in his orbit.”
Melissa DeRosa, Cuomo’s executive secretary, and the person in his administration who admitted on a video to state legislators that the numbers of those who died in New York nursing homes during the height of the pandemic were actually fudged and an inaccurate and much lower figure was offered. According to an investigation conducted by the New York Attorney General’s office, the report indicated that approximately 15,000 people perished rather than the original 8000 that was reported in the early part of 2020.
There is speculation that Cuomo may have been allegedly incentivized by monetary offers to send Covid patients to nursing home facilities in order to receive compensation. None of this has been proven or confirmed.
According to the NY Post report, Melissa DeRosa, is married to Matthew Wing, Cuomo’s former press secretary who now serves as a top communications exec for Uber. Her father, Giorgio DeRosa, is a partner and chief Albany lobbyist for the influential Bolton St. Johns firm. Brother Joseph and sister Jessica also work at the firm.
The Post also reported that yet another majoring lobbying giant is at play here. The president and co-founder of the Parkside Group, Harry Giannoulis, is the life partner of Cuomo chief of staff, Jill DeRosiers
John Kaehny of Reinvent Albany told The Post, “People are married to, and the children of, top lobbyists. So the potential for conflicts of interest abound. The sexual harassment accusations are really just a facet of an overall abuse of power. It’s just part of it.”
Uber spent more than $1.1 million in lobbying efforts in NY including talks with Cuomo, according to filings with the state Joint Commission on Public Ethics (JCOPE)
Other groups who are paying Cuomo for his favors are a sports betting company named Fanduel, according to the Post, that dropped at least $52,500 in 2020 for an exhaustive slate of lobbying services, which included “direct lobbying” of Cuomo’s office and his executive chamber.
Also paying for access to the governor is the energy investment firm LS Power Associates. According to the NY Post report, they gave Parkside $75,000 to directly lobby Cuomo’s executive council and his office. The NYP reported that Major League Baseball and the National Basketball Association paid $35,850 and $32,700 respectively for access to the governor’s inner circle.
