Do voters care about Trump taxes?

BBC

2020-09-29 10:14:56

• 'The system is rigged': Seun Kuti on reviving Fela's political party

  “For 60 years nothing has really been solved in this country,” Seun Kuti says. “Healthcare, education, electricity, transportation, welfare – nothing has been accomplished.”. Galvanised by the brutality meted out by Nigerian police against protesters in October last year, the 37-year-old Grammy-nominated musician and youngest son of the Afrobeat legend...Read Full StoryPolice BrutalityCelebritiesPolitical PartyCountry MusicHealthcareMOPNigeriansFela 's Old ClubOctober KutiNigerian PeopleNigerian AuthoritiesLagosElitesLekkiSarsSeun KutiFela KutiMuhammadu Buhari

• Goat Secures Strategic Investment From Groupe Artémis

  Goat, the sneaker and apparel trading app offering brands like Balenciaga as seen, secured investment from Groupe ArtémisGoat has secured more financing to start 2021, this time from Groupe Artémis, the Paris-based holding company founded by François-Henri Pinault.The sneaker and apparel trading app is currently valued at $1.75 billion following the close of its $100 million Series E investment round in September 2020 led by D1 Capital Partners. The investment from Artémis, the size of which was not disclosed, will be used to accelerate the company’s growth and further expansion in apparel, accessories and other categories.“Goat has established a rapidly growing, distinctive brand with tens of millions of young consumers,” said Pinault, chairman of Artémis in a statement. “Our investment reflects our belief in their business model and in the power of their technology and platform to tell the story of luxury brands.”The investment also further strengthens Goat’s connection with Kering, which owns brands Balenciaga, Alexander McQueen and McQ that have direct partnerships with Goat. McQ in September 2020 named Goat its 360 partner for the launch of its Genesis II collection designed by global creative collaborators.“This investment acts as another validation point for the strength of our brand,” said Goat Group cofounder and chief executive officer Eddy Lu. “The luxury brands that we work with appreciate a company that stands for fashion, culture and style and present their products well. Our direction is different than the transactional marketplace. We have that point of view in fashion, culture and style and we’re seeing more and more that our customers love sneakers and fashion.”Goat launched with sneakers in 2015, acquired Flight Club in 2018, further establishing its place in the sneaker resale and trading market, and received investment from Foot Locker and Index Ventures among others. The company added apparel in 2019, and devoted its first advertising campaign in 2020 to the new category.Goat offers apparel in both the primary and secondary markets, pitting it against resale companies like The RealReal and Grailed as well as retailers like Farfetch. The company offers brands including Raf Simons, Visvim, Off-White and Rhude on its app, as well as Supreme, Bape, Kith and Palace among others via resale. Versace and Chloé tapped Goat in 2018 and 2019, respectively, to launch sneakers on the app as well.“We are the true convergence of the primary and secondary market,” said Lu. “On the primary side, we’ve announced brands that we’ve worked directly with, and on resale, we’re consistently adding more.”But what about sneakers? Lu said that remains Goat’s bread and butter, and apparel is the best companion to that. It’s also a huge opportunity since apparel represents a trillion-dollar global market.“As brands started to work with us, we thought apparel is a great complement,” he said. “Our customer is a younger demographic looking for items that make them stand out. We’ve been very intentional in how we connect with our audience. There’s so much room to grow and enhance the experience for our audience.”According to Lu, 2020 was Goat’s best year, and the company hit many sales records in terms of gross merchandise volume during the holiday season. Three of the company’s biggest days were on Black Friday, Cyber Monday and the day the Air Jordan XI “Jubilee” sneakers were released, marking the 25th anniversary of the silhouette.Groupe ArtémisMisAdvertising CampaignInvestmentGlobal CompaniesTechnology CompanyGrowth CompaniesLuxury BrandsFrançois-Henri PinaultD1 Capital PartnersGoat GroupFlight ClubFoot LockerIndex VenturesRealRealAlexander McqueenRaf Simons

• Mandatory language classes are very stressful

  In college, there comes a time when you finally decide what you are going to do for a career. There are specific pathways to take before you can get an official degree. Specific majors have different requirements for students to fulfill. One of the types of conditions is that you have to take a foreign language class. Some of the pathways that have this requirement are ‘Philosophy, Politics, and Economics’ as well as ‘Political Science’.Read Full StoryForeign LanguageFirst LanguageSecond LanguageComes A TimeTextbookCollege StudentsGraduate StudentsBackward ClassesForeign StudentsEconomicsSpecific PathwaysSpecific MajorsDyslexiaPolitical SciencePeople

• Why Putin wants to keep Navalny locked up

  Michael Bociurkiw (@WorldAffairsPro) is a global affairs analyst and host of the podcast "Global Impact." He is a regular contributor to CNN Opinion. The opinions expressed in this commentary are his own. Read at CNN. (CNN) — With Alexei Navalny back in Russia five months after surviving a poisoning with the nerve agent Novichok, his courageous return presented Russian President Vladimir Putin -- who Navalny believes ordered his killing -- with two choices: allow the high-profile activist to continue to be a thorn in his side or lock him up in the hopes that he fades into obscurity.We learned Sunday that Putin chose the second option. And the question now is whether Navalny's anti-corruption movement can survive with its incredibly telegenic and social media savvy leader isolated from the frontlines -- especially with factors like pandemic restrictions limiting public gatherings stacked against them.We were also reminded, if we even needed it, of Putin's disdain for any form of dissent, his reflex to reach for the most barbaric tactics to silence voices of opposition. These certainly are not the hallmarks of a leader who seeks a place in history among the great statesmen of the world.Unfortunately for Navalny, his brave gamble in going back to take on someone as ruthless as Putin appears to have been a miscalculation. The Russian leader can remain in office for years, cares little about the international opprobrium for his treatment of Navalny and no doubt expects little retaliation from a United States pre-occupied with the turmoil of Donald Trump's departure. That makes it unlikely to mean -- at least in the short term -- that Navalny's supporters can make a heroic return to the protest barricades.Indeed, during a hastily arranged hearing on Monday at the Moscow police station where he is being held, Navalny was ordered to remain in custody for 30 days. In what can best be described as a sham trial, a judge was brought in, defense lawyers were not informed until the last minute and only pro-Kremlin journalists were allowed to attend.The prospects for the 44-year-old politician -- expected to be jailed for at least 3.5 years— do not look at all favorable. Shortly before his arrest, he told journalists at Moscow's airport he was not afraid because "I know that I will leave and go home because I'm right and all the criminal cases against me are fabricated." Navalny probably wanted to end his stay abroad in order to avoid the risk of becoming irrelevant or being seen as a foreign-backed agent. Likely he had an eye on two things: the situation of Belarus opposition leader Svetlana Tikhanovskaya, who was forced to go into exile in Lithuania last August and remains outside of her country, and the fact that Russians -- as I am told by many contacts in the country -- rarely have sympathy for politicians who flee abroad (even though his departure from Russia last year was forced by his needing medical treatment after the poisoning attempt, which almost killed him).Putin, who typically refuses to acknowledge Navalny by name and has said that if Russian special services had wanted to kill Navalny they would have "finished it," probably wanted nothing more than to see the anti-corruption activist absent at least until later this year, after elections for the lower house of Parliament are held and where the ruling, pro-Putin United Russia party is hoping to be handed a loyal majority in the next State Duma. "This is the main political event of the year and the main reason to ensure his (Navalny's) absence," Russian political scientist and Chatham House Associate Fellow Ekaterina Schulmann told me Sunday. At the time of his poisoning, Navalny, who refers to United Russia as the party "of crooks and thieves" was promoting a "Smart Voting" strategy that encourages voters to cast tactical ballots for any opposition candidates considered likely to unseat a ruling party member in regional and federal elections. The tactic was used effectively in Moscow last year. That, coupled with an ability to reach millions of supporters via social media and in a way which Putin and his cronies are unable to compete, presented a formidable challenge that the Kremlin could not ignore.Navalny's return home also comes at a time the Kremlin and its security services are likely still seething: Late last year, an investigation by CNN-Bellingcat revealed the complicity of Kremlin agents in the poisoning, with Navalny duping a Russian agent tailing him into discussing details of the poisoning. To further complicate matters for Navalny and his movement, harsh Covid-19 restrictions in Russia make it difficult for large protests to take place. That, coupled with an economic downturn, essentially silenced Russia's protest movement throughout 2020.The pandemic situation in Russia is one of Putin's top problems at the moment. According to the Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center, Russia, with more than 3.5 million cases, has the fifth highest caseload in the world. (Though Russia's official reporting figures, especially on deaths, is said to be wildly inaccurate).A series of other economic headaches are hitting hard: plummeting global oil prices, the disruption to the completion of Russia's $11 billion Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline project and punishing sanctions imposed after Russia illegally annexed Crimea in 2014 and invaded eastern Ukraine shortly afterward. An unpopular attempt in 2018 to raise the pension age infuriated many Russians and caused the ruling party's popularity to plummet.Putin may have wanted to sideline Navalny at a time when incoming US President Joe Biden is distracted by crises like Covid-19, domestic violence and the foreign policy fires lit by outgoing Secretary of State Mike Pompeo (Taiwan, Cuba, Sudan) in his final days in office.Russia is certainly on Biden's agenda, with his incoming National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan already signaling a more activist approach, calling the attacks on Navalny "not just a violation of human rights, but an affront to the Russian people who want their voices heard."But the new administration needs to play a more activist role. Biden needs to take this opportunity to forge a unified alliance among world leaders to confront Putin and renew pressure on him to lay off opposition leaders such as Navalny and Tikhanovskaya.And to do it before Putin takes any more outrageous steps against those who speak out in opposition to him.United Russia PartyPoliticsPolitical OppositionCrimeaRussiansParliamentChatham HouseCNN-BellingcatState DumaSideline NavalnyMoscowKremlin AgentsEastern UkraineOpposition LeadersPoliticiansAlexei NavalnyVladimir PutinDonald TrumpEkaterina SchulmannMike PompeoJoe BidenJake Sullivan

• Trump's legacy will take years to purge from the American psyche

  (CNN) — After four exhausting years of raging tweets, lies, "fire and fury" rants and orders for far-right extremists to "stand back and stand by," it's almost over.Donald Trump's presidency is ending in a riot of division, discord and disgrace that encapsulates the pandemonium of his single term that culminated in him inciting an insurrection against Congress and a legacy that will take years to purge from the American psyche.Trump is expected to unfurl a new list of pardons, including for white-collar criminals and celebrity rappers, in his last full day in office Tuesday that is likely to reflect the self-dealing contempt for justice that was a dominant theme of his tumultuous term. And there are sure to be more political traps for Joe Biden's incoming administration on his way out the door.The very experience of being alive in America will change at noon on Wednesday when the mandate expires of the loudest, most disruptive and erratic commander in chief in history -- who forced himself into every corner of life on his social media feed and constant craving for the spotlight.Millions of Americans who viewed the twice-impeached Trump's assaults on decency and the rule of law with shame and alarm will finally be able to breathe easily again, liberated from his strongman's shadow. Biden will be a President who seeks to unify an internally estranged nation in contrast to Trump's obsession with ripping at its social, racial and cultural fault lines to cement his power. Trump's cynical weaponizing of race reemerged on Monday when his White House chose the national holiday honoring Martin Luther King Jr. to issue a commission report that minimizes slavery and insults the modern civil rights movement.But this is only one view of Trump. The 74 million Americans who voted to reward him with a second term saw him as a leader who voiced their anger at political, business and media elites. Trump channeled their belief that an increasingly diverse and socially liberal nation threatened their values, religion, gun rights and cultural heritage. His exit could trigger volatile political forces among a community that will mourn his White House. The continued devotion of Trump's loyal base voters means that while Biden can wipe out many of the outgoing President's policy wins, removing his influence from politics may well be impossible.As he moves into retirement, Trump's presidency will personify the divides between two halves of a populace -- one largely conservative and rural and the other more liberal suburban and city dwelling. The two increasingly lack a common cultural language and definition of patriotism -- and thanks to Trump and the media propagandists who sustained his personality cult -- even a common version of truth.One long conspiracy theoryTrump's political career began with outrageous lies and a conspiracy theory over former President Barack Obama's birthplace. It is ending, at least for now, with another even more outrageous one: the false claim that he won an election he clearly lost. Trump's perpetuating of this alternative reality has caused catastrophic damage to faith in government that is the bedrock of any functioning nation. His shattering of the tradition of peaceful US transfers of power threatens to suffocate Biden's legitimacy and prolong the nation's agony at a time of dire crises.After his final White House departure on Wednesday, Trump's Marine One will fly over miles of iron fencing and troops protecting the US Capitol from a repeat of the mob insurrection he enlisted and inspired. There could not be a better metaphor for his assault on American democracy.Biden's inaugural celebrations will also be muted by the never worse pandemic that was fueled by presidential neglect. Nearly 400,000 Americans, many whose deaths could have been prevented, are dead on Trump's watch. Like his election sedition, Trump's denial over Covid-19 was rooted in an incessant focus on his own political needs rather his oath to faithfully execute the office of the presidency he swore in January 2017. The President's premature push to reopen the country in the service of his reelection campaign last summer helped spark a murderous second wave of the virus. Future generations will understand his contempt for science through his barely believable public pondering about whether ingesting disinfectant could cure Covid-19.A desire to promote his own interests was also reflected in the outgoing President's attempts to funnel cash and publicity toward his worldwide real estate and hotel empire. This was highlighted by his abortive effort to host the G7 summit at his struggling Doral golf resort in Florida. In many ways, Trump attitude to the presidency was the exact inverse of President John Kennedy's inaugural admonishment to his fellow citizens: "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country."A legacy that will outlast his termIn purely political terms, the President leaves office with some achievements that will long outlast his term. He fundamentally remodeled the Supreme Court and the judiciary on conservative lines. He presided over the first criminal justice reform in years. And he managed to avoid being drawn into foreign wars and beefed up US policy towards an increasingly hostile China while putting NATO nations on notice they must spend more in their own defense. At the same time, he trashed America's reputation among its friends abroad, treated another looming threat, climate change, with the same denial he brought to the coronavirus and fawned over autocratic US enemies such as Vladimir Putin and Kim Jong Un.But perhaps his term will be mostly remembered for his adoption of "forgotten Americans" in midwestern and southern cities hollowed out by globalized free trade policies. Trump powerfully identified a populace badly neglected by Washington politicians of both parties -- as well as an audience for his populist, nationalist politics. But the facts suggest the President's tax cuts and economic policies in practice did more for corporations and rich cronies that the heartland Americans he championed. His promise to furnish Americans with a "beautiful" health care plan never materialized. And his immigration policy and southern border wall that Mexico never paid for turned out to be more successful as a demagogic prop than in addressing the causes of undocumented immigration.Trump's post-election propagandizing has added a dangerous layer of radicalization to the grievances of his supporters, millions of whom now reject the structures of US government they believe unjustly ejected their leader. Partly because of this, he leaves behind a country that is now as divided as it has been since the Civil War, in which White nationalism is on the march and in which extreme groups like QAnon have infiltrated a shattered Republican Party. How Trump's voters react to his departure will not only shape the future of the GOP -- a party that has shown itself to live in fear of Trump's base -- but will have huge implications for American unity in time to come.A more quiet futureBiden's inheritance is the most challenging of any new President since Franklin Roosevelt, who took office in the teeth of the Great Depression in 1933, at a time when Nazism was building its totalitarian horror in Europe. Despite Biden's ambitious goals on issues such as climate, health care and foreign policy, the success of his presidency will likely be judged on his ability to lead America out of the worst public health crisis in 100 years and the economic nightmare it created. And every President faces crises that they could never have anticipated.But one thing is for sure -- his White House will be far more conventional, quiet and stable than Trump's. In fact, America may never see anything quite like the last four years again.Us CapitolCivil Rights MovementAmerican DemocracyPolitical HistoryTrump PoliticsPower PoliticsLegacyUS PoliticsCNNCongressAmericansWhite HouseMarine OneDoralSupreme CourtDonald TrumpJoe BidenMartin Luther King Jr.Barack ObamaVladimir PutinKim Jong Un

• Big businesses say they are responsible, but too often they fuel conspiracy theories

  U.S. corporations and their leaders are speaking out forcefully about the insurrection at the U.S. Capitol and the need to transition quickly to the Biden era. However, they face a serious problem — their political spending in many cases conflicts with their calls and, in fact, played a role in the crisis. Their problem is highlighted by the hundreds of thousands, even millions, of dollars that leading corporations and their trade associations contributed to some groups that funded the election of state attorneys general who tried to overturn the election, and to groups like the Rule of Law Defense Fund that encouraged the Jan. 6 election protest. Companies' words versus their actions Companies and their leaders have been speaking out to help reduce today’s deep political dysfunction and to improve the environment for business. This represents a major milestone in business thinking. However, they need to deal with incredible pressure from the powers that be to make risky political investments that could hurt their reputation and bottom line. Moving toward a positive, proactive role for business in politics will require companies’ taking another step — assessing carefully their traditional role in our political system today and rethinking the playbook that includes their political spending. And this rethinking may be beginning. At least 27 companies and trade groups have put a pause on all their political action committee donations in the wake of the Capitol siege, including BlackRock, JPMorgan Chase, Coca-Cola and Facebook. And at least 31 companies are withholding political action committee support for Republicans who voted against affirming the electoral victory of President-elect Joe Biden, including Amazon, AT&T, General Electric and Goldman Sachs Group. Wall Street on Jan. 12, 2021, in New York City. Angela Weiss/AFP via Getty Images Will companies go beyond window dressing and adopt changes to their political spending that build responsibly on the trauma of the moment? Will they support evidence-based policy positions and take steps to restore the reasoned policymaking in government that citizens and the country sorely need? It is too soon to tell. Companies’ traditional approach has eroded public support for business. When corporations and their leaders adopt a principled stance in public yet their political spending supports the opposite, then trust in business is seriously eroded. This approach is not only indefensible from an ethical standpoint, it's also bad for business. This scenario was common before the November elections. Numerous companies faced accusations of hypocrisy for making commitments to address climate change, while having contributed to climate deniers who opposed sound policy. Other companies advocated reducing racial inequality, but then helped elect state legislatures that engineered racial gerrymandering. And still other companies publicly supported improvements in U.S. health care, but then helped elect attorneys general who are trying to dismantle the Affordable Care Act. Conflicts between rhetoric and political spending have continued in the post-election period. When more than 160 top business leaders signed a November letter calling on the Trump administration to accept the election results and begin an official transition, it was a major step forward for business. Yet at least four of the CEO signers came from companies — Mastercard, Visa, The Travelers and Marsh & McLennan — that contributed more than $500,000 to the Republican Attorneys General Association over the past two election cycles. In this period, RAGA supported 17 state attorneys general who recently joined Texas in asking the U.S. Supreme Court to allow four state legislatures to reverse the 2020 presidential election results. Fortunately, the court quickly dismissed the case. Capitol riot: Trump's exit won't end the far-right violent terrorism threats he fueled In another example, more than 40 companies recently called for the United States, under Biden, to rejoin the Paris climate accord. Yet 10 of these companies donated more than $864,000 to RAGA for the 2018 election cycle. The group supported the election of seven state attorneys general who have sided in court with Trump’s weakening of clean car emission standards, undermining the aim of standards in the Paris accord. Corporate political spending In the case of the storming of the Capitol, 38 corporations and seven trade associations contributed $100,000 or more to RAGA in the 2020 election cycle. And the Rule of Law Defense Fund, a 501(c)(4) arm of RAGA, sent robocalls to individuals urging them to attend the March to Save America that culminated in the Capitol attack. These companies included Anthem ($336,025), Altria ($335,154), Comcast ($315,000), Walmart ($270,100) and AT&T ($215,000). The trade associations included the U.S. Chamber of Commerce ($750,375) and the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America ($136,025). Business today is the leading source of money in elections and lobbying in the United States. Unfortunately, corporate funding has contributed to degrading our democracy, failing to advance sound policy and backing partisanship rather than improving the environment for business. Modest reforms can help reverse this trend. By aligning company values with their areas of political influence and spending, companies can advocate policies that advance both business and public interests and also support their own stated values. The new 2020 Model Code of Conduct for Corporate Political Spending , by the Center for Political Accountability and the Wharton School’s Zicklin Center for Business Ethics Research, offers a set of new standards for political involvement by business. These include greater transparency and accountability for political spending and related reforms recommended in a recent Harvard Business Review article . Trump's lies: Trump's 5-year campaign of lies led to the Capitol attack. And we just let it happen. The United States is in the grip of multiple crises, from rioting mobs at the Capitol and the historic second impeachment of a president to a devastating pandemic, a sharp economic downturn and months of civil unrest over police violence and racial inequality. Each day, businesses are asked to take a stand. If companies could shift from supporting partisanship to pro-citizen legislation and political practices, business would begin to reclaim the trust and support of Americans. Moreover, a shifting role of business in politics would put our nation on a path to ending gridlock and enacting sound policies that address the many intractable issues of the day. This needs to start with their political spending. Michael E. Porter is the Bishop William Lawrence University Professor at Harvard Business School, and a leading authority on company strategy, economic and social development of states and nations around the world. Bruce F. Freed is president of the Center for Political Accountability, a nongovernmental organization that is bringing transparency and accountability to corporate political spending. You can read diverse opinions from our Board of Contributors and other writers on the Opinion front page , on Twitter @usatodayopinion and in our daily Opinion newsletter . To respond to a column, submit a comment to [email protected] This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Big businesses say they are responsible, but too often they fuel conspiracy theories State LegislaturesCivil UnrestBlackrockRacial GerrymanderingBusiness EthicsPoliticsConspiracy TheoriesGovernment PoliciesEconomic PoliciesPolitical StrategyPublic PoliciesBlackRockJPMorgan ChaseCoca-ColaFacebookJoe Biden

• Synchronous classes help students succeed

  Online school has been difficult, but through understanding our complex schedules, especially in this difficult time, our professors can help us get through this semester. Students and professors work best together in synchronous classes, where professors can ensure their students succeed. I began taking classes at NIU this past fall,...Read Full StoryOnline ClassesOnline StudentsVirtual SchoolLaw SchoolWork TimeNIUSynchronous ClassesVirtual ClassesFellow StudentsProfessorsOnline SchoolPolitical ScienceIntroductionDetailed ResponsesResearch

• China is hitting back at criticism of its vaccines with a dangerous disinformation campaign

  Hong Kong (CNN) — Speaking at the World Health Assembly last year, Chinese President Xi Jinping called for "solidarity and cooperation" in developing coronavirus vaccines, "our most powerful weapon" for tackling the pandemic. But with Chinese medical company Sinovac facing questions over the efficacy of its coronavirus shot, the country's propaganda apparatus has apparently forgotten Xi's comments. Instead, it is choosing to attack other vaccines -- a dangerous gambit that could risk undermining overall confidence in mass vaccinations just as the world desperately needs people to get inoculated. China has been widely praised for its decision to focus on providing vaccines to the developing world, with companies Sinovac and Sinopharm focusing on producing candidates that do not require expensive cold storage, unlike those released by American drug makers Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna which are being rolled out in the United States. Hope was particularly high when both Chinese companies said their vaccines were more than 78% effective, higher than the shot produced by the United Kingdom's Oxford University and AstraZeneca, and second only to the US-developed mRNA-based shots, which require cold storage and are more difficult to distribute. Then came the results from Brazil. Late-stage trials of the Sinovac candidate in the South American country reported an efficacy rate not of 78%, but 50.38% -- barely above the 50% efficacy threshold set by the World Health Organization for approval. The true efficacy rate of the vaccine is still unclear. As well as the initial 78% figure, Turkey, which approved the Sinovac shot for emergency use last week, reported an efficacy of 91.25%, while Indonesia reported 65.3%. Brazil's data also suggests a greater level of efficacy in some cases than others.Sinovac has stood by its vaccine, even as some countries have placed it under review and paused rollouts, but scientists have called on the company to release more data. The confusion has also shone a spotlight on the role Chinese authorities are playing in controlling information about the vaccines produced by domestic companies, though Sinovac -- unlike Sinopharm -- is a nominally private company. Chinese officials and state media have made the country's vaccine candidates a major point of national pride and a way to win global favor following a widespread backlash over the initial mishandling of the coronavirus outbreak in Wuhan, where officials have been accused of silencing whistleblowers and failing to act in time to contain infections.In this picture taken on April 29, 2020, engineers are seen working in a laboratory at the Sinovac Biotech facilities in Beijing, China.It was perhaps inevitable, then, that any questions raised about a Chinese vaccine would be seen as an attack on the state, particularly in a climate of intense hostility between Beijing and Washington over the two countries' respective responses to the pandemic. "If you look at the websites of major media in the US and the West, almost all the news you read about the Chinese-made vaccine is negative," Hu Xijin, the influential editor of the state-run tabloid Global Times, wrote on Saturday. "The press is out to destroy the reputation of the Chinese vaccine, hoping that the world will wait for Pfizer and other American and Western companies to produce surplus vaccines and finally get vaccinated." Hu's paper has led the way in defending Chinese-produced vaccines, not by establishing their effectiveness, but by seeking to tear down the reputation of other candidates -- particularly those produced by US company Pfizer. In an editorial last week, the Global Times accused English-language media of "downplaying" deaths in Norway it appeared to claim were linked to vaccines, "as if they had already reached a consensus." The report added that "those major Western media will immediately hype any unfavorable information about Chinese vaccines and try to amplify their impact on public psychology." While the deaths in question did occur after vaccination -- and were reported on by CNN, among numerous other US media outlets -- the Norwegian health authorities said that given the age and frailty of those inoculated, "it is expected that deaths close to the time (of) vaccination may occur."However, on Twitter, Liu Xin, an anchor with state broadcaster CGTN, has repeatedly -- and baselessly -- accused Western media of ignoring deaths and downplaying concerns about the Pfizer vaccine. In a tweet shared by senior Chinese diplomat Zhao Lijian, a top spokesman for China's foreign ministry, Liu said she could not "independently verify" the claims she was promoting, tagging a number of international media outlets and asking "What about following it up? Hello???"Zhao has spent much of his recent time on Twitter promoting positive coverage of China's vaccination program, as well as disinformation like that shared by Liu. His banner image on the site currently reads "this is the time for facts, not fear. This is the time for science, not rumors. This is the time for solidarity, not stigma." Journalists, whether based in China, the US, or anywhere in the world, have a very good reason for not rushing to report on deaths supposedly linked to vaccines. Indeed, some outlets have been criticized for overplaying allergic reactions to vaccines or reporting on the deaths of people recently inoculated without evidence of any link with the shot. Millions of people are being vaccinated against coronavirus around the world. Some will die in the wake of receiving the shot of unrelated causes, and a tiny few may die as a result of a severe allergic reaction to the vaccine. But neither means that the inoculation itself is unsafe. "One of the things we want to make sure people understand is that they should not be unnecessarily alarmed if there are reports, once we start vaccinating, of someone or multiple people dying within a day or two of their vaccination," Dr. Kelly Moore, associate director of the US Immunization Action Coalition, told CNN last month. This is particularly the case in the initial stages of the vaccine programs, when the majority of people being inoculated are elderly or immuno-compromized. Derek Lowe, an expert on the pharmaceutical industry, wrote recently that "if you take 10 million people and just wave your hand back and forth over their upper arms, in the next two months you would expect to see" about 14,000 deaths from heart attacks, strokes, cancer, and other usual causes of mortality. "But if you took those 10 million people and gave them a new vaccine instead, there's a real danger that those heart attacks, cancer diagnoses, and deaths will be attributed to the vaccine," he added. While articles about allergic reactions and deaths linked to vaccines may put the matter in proper context, it is often difficult for headlines to do so. This creates the risk that people see only that there have been fatalities and get the false impression coronavirus vaccines are dangerous. That is why the disinformation being put out by Chinese state media and officials -- all in the name of defending a Sinovac vaccine that everyone in the world deeply wants to succeed, and that critics of which are only asking for more information on -- is so dangerous. Vaccine hesitancy is already a major problem, thanks in large part to irresponsible media coverage of the MMR autism scare, which was pushed by a now-disgraced British doctor.China has among the least vaccine hesitant populations in the world, according to a recent Nature study, which may explain why the country's propaganda outlets feel freer to play fast and loose with reporting on Western vaccines. But to defeat the pandemic, we need about 80% of people to achieve immunity, and pushing disinformation risks undermining the work of companies like Sinovac to achieve this. BrazilIndonesiaThe VaccinesDisinformation CampaignPropagandaHeart AttacksThe New AttackChinaInfectionsCNNThe World Health AssemblySinovacPfizer-BioNTechOxford UniversityAstraZenecaXi JinpingHu XijinZhao LijianDerek LoweKelly Moore

• Biden’s hefty to-do list starts with a flurry of orders

  WASHINGTON (AP) — Joe Biden has given himself an imposing to-do list for his earliest days as president and many promises to keep over the longer haul.Overshadowing everything at the very start is Biden’s effort to win congressional approval of a $1.9 trillion plan to combat the coronavirus and the economic misery it has caused.But climate change, immigration, health care and more will be competing for attention — and dollars. Altogether Biden has laid out an ambitious if not always detailed set of plans and promises across the range of public policy.Drawn from a review of his campaign statements and a recent memo from Ron Klain, who’ll be his chief of staff, here’s a sampling of measures to expect right away, around the corner and beyond:WEDNESDAY, after the inauguration, mostly by executive action:— Declaration that the U.S. is rejoining Paris climate accord.— Declaration that the U.S. is rejoining World Health Organization.— Ethical standards for his administration and an order prohibiting interference in the operations of the Justice Department from other parts of government. — Start of a process to restore 100 public health and environmental rules that the Obama administration created and President Donald Trump eliminated or weakened.— Start of a process to rejoin the deal restraining Iran’s nuclear program in exchange for sanctions relief.— Executive action to end travel restrictions on people from a variety of Muslim-majority countries.— Executive action to protect from deportation people who came to the country illegally as children.— Executive action to make masks mandatory on federal property and when travelling out of state. Others will be asked to wear masks for 100 days.— Steps to extend pandemic-era restrictions on evictions and foreclosures.— Legislation to go to Congress proposing to repeal liability protections for gun manufacturers and tightening some other aspects of gun control.— Immigration legislation to go to Congress as part of an effort to offer a path to citizenship for 11 million people in the U.S. illegally and to codify protections for people who came illegally as children.— Education Department to be asked to extend the existing pause on student loan payments and interest for millions with student debt.___THURSDAY— Executive action laying out new steps to expand virus testing, protect workers and set new public health standards.___FRIDAY— Directive to agencies to take unspecified immediate action to deliver economic relief from the pandemic.___BY FEB. 1— Executive actions to strengthen “buy American” provisions.— Executive actions to address climate change.— First steps to expand access to health care, for low-income women, women of color and other segments of the population.— First steps to reunite families still separated at the Mexican border.___BEYOND (some may be tried sooner)— Ensure 100 million vaccines have been given before the end of his first 100 days.— Ensure 100 federally supported vaccination centers are up and running in his first month.— Expand use of the Defense Production Act to direct the manufacture of critical pandemic supplies. — Win passage of a $2 trillion climate package to get the U.S. to net-zero carbon emissions by 2050.— Seek passage of a “Medicare-like public option” to compete alongside private insurance markets for working-age Americans; increase existing premium subsidies.— Eliminate certain corporate tax cuts where possible, by executive action, while doubling the levies U.S. firms pay on foreign profits.— Make a plan within 100 days to end homelessness.— Expand legal immigration slots.— Freeze deportations for 100 days, then restore the Obama-era principle of deporting foreigners who are seen as posing a national security threat or who have committed crimes in addition to the crime of illegal entry, thereby pulling back the broad deportation policy of the Trump years.— Halt financing of further construction of the wall along the Mexican border.— Within 100 days, establish a police oversight commission to combat institutional racism by then. — Reinstate federal guidance, issued by Obama and revoked by Trump, to protect transgender students’ access to sports, bathrooms and locker rooms in accordance with their gender identity.— Ensure taxes are not raised on anyone making under $400,000.— Restore Obama-era rules on campus sexual misconduct and a policy that aimed to cut federal money to for-profit colleges that left students with heavy debt they can’t pay back.— Support legislation to make two years of community college free and to make public colleges free for families with incomes below $125,000, with no repayment of student loans required for people who make less than $25,000 a year and, for others, no repayment rate above 5% of discretionary income.— Support increasing the national minimum wage to $15.— Try to win passage of a plan to spend $700 billion boosting manufacturing and research and development.— Establish a commission to study expanding the Supreme Court.Immigration LegislationIranDeportationPoliticsPresidential ElectionCampaign MoneyTrump CampaignGovernmentAPWorld Health OrganizationThe Justice DepartmentMuslimEducation DepartmentMexicanMedicareJoe BidenRon KlainDonald Trump

• Robby Anderson’s depressing comments on experience of playing for the Jets

  Carolina Panthers wide receiver Robby Anderson previously spent the first four seasons of his NFL playing career as a member of the New York Jets. With his time in East Rutherford now officially behind him after signing a two-year, $20 million free agent contract with the Panthers ahead of the 2020 campaign, the Carolina newcomer has certainly not been shy about his less-than-stellar stint in New York.Read Full StoryNew York JetsThe JetsNFL FootballReal FootballEast RutherfordCarolina PanthersCharlotte ObserverHappyAlaina GetzenbergLoveThingsTimeReceptionCampaignFree AgentRobby Anderson

• Alveda King: “We Have To Stop Fighting Over Skin Color and Political Parties”

  On Fox Across America with Jimmy Failla, Alevda King, Fox News Contributor and niece of Martin Luther King, spoke to JImmy about what she feels is the message everyone can learn from her uncle. 'Martin Luther King Jr. said the law may not be able to make somebody love me,...Read Full StorySkin ColorRace RelationsHuman RacePolitical PartiesGodHuman SkinFox News ContributorFox Across AmericaAlevda KingUnityThingsPeopleLoveNieceMessageAlveda KingJimmy FaillaMartin Luther KingMartin Luther King Jr.