COVID-19 (f/k/a "the Coronavirus")

[🏀]

Yup, trolly troll is successful in tying up 8 or 9 people with his intentional disinformation and bad faith arguing. Its one thing to have an honest back-and-forth with someone like Lenny vs. engaging with a chicosesque liar.

Yeah but it’s Chicos here

[Jockey]

Woodward’s old running mate from Watergate - Carl Bernstein - called what trump said, “homicidal negligence”.

Right in line with what I have maintained since March.

[SoCalwarrior]

Ignore button is your friend. 

No ignore button for moderators:(

[GooooMarquette]

Just a question for those criticizing Woodward for withholding his comments until publication of his book: Is your criticism based on the notion that his disclosure will dramatically change how Trump handles the virus? If not, what difference would it have made in terms of pandemic mitigation to disclose the comments earlier?

IMHO, the revelation - whether it was made in May or today - will not change what Trump or the administration does...or how the True Believers behave. As a result, the delay will not impact the number of lives lost. Instead, it may simply only have an impact on who votes for whom in the November election.

I guess we will see. If Trump takes a dramatically more aggressive stance toward the pandemic beginning immediately, it will be evidence my hunch is wrong. But if he continues his ‘hands-off/masks optional’ approach toward the crisis, it will suggest my hunch is correct.

[GB Warrior]

Just a question for those criticizing Woodward for withholding his comments until publication of his book: Is your criticism based on the notion that his disclosure will dramatically change how Trump handles the virus? If not, what difference would it have made in terms of pandemic mitigation to disclose the comments earlier?

IMHO, the revelation - whether it was made in May or today - will not change what Trump or the administration does...or how the True Believers behave. As a result, the delay will not impact the number of lives lost. Instead, it may simply only have an impact on who votes for whom in the November election.

I guess we will see. If Trump takes a dramatically more aggressive stance toward the pandemic beginning immediately, it will be evidence my hunch is wrong. But if he continues his ‘hands-off/masks optional’ approach toward the crisis, it will suggest my hunch is correct.

Wolves don't concern themselves with the opinions of sheep. It's not for Woodward to judge how it will be received by the American public; it's his job to determine whether they should receive it. He chose that they did not.

I buy and understand that he did not have full context and sourcing on information for several months. But he knew immediately that Trump was saying one thing in private and another in public. The contradiction is the story.

The idea that he should be the "2nd draft of history" is garbage when he was positioned to be the first. Woodward and Bernstein had about 200 Watergate articles when all was said and done. Who goes a fck if we didn't have the whole picture of the coronavirus - we still don't! That story would have evolved regardless, but the peek into the President's consciousness wasn't newsworthy because he couldn't validate the claim of how serious it was? Give me a fcking break.

[GooooMarquette]

Wolves don't concern themselves with the opinions of sheep. It's not for Woodward to judge how it will be received by the American public; it's his job to determine whether they should receive it. He chose that they did not.

I buy and understand that he did not have full context and sourcing on information for several months. But he knew immediately that Trump was saying one thing in private and another in public. The contradiction is the story.

The idea that he should be the "2nd draft of history" is garbage when he was positioned to be the first. Woodward and Bernstein had about 200 Watergate articles when all was said and done. Who goes a fck if we didn't have the whole picture of the coronavirus - we still don't! That story would have evolved regardless, but the peek into the President's consciousness wasn't newsworthy because he couldn't validate the claim of how serious it was? Give me a fcking break.

‘The contradiction is the story‘…but we have long known that Trump contradicts himself all the time. Nothing terribly urgent about that. Simply a confirmation (for about the 50th time) of the same old thing.

And what might the consequences of this revelation/confirmation be? The only answer seems to be accountability.

So who is going to hold him accountable? Congress? Nope; the House already tried, but the Senate didn’t go along with it. The answer is We The People. And since we have the information before November, we have it in plenty of time to hold him accountable.

[Jockey]

Wolves don't concern themselves with the opinions of sheep. It's not for Woodward to judge how it will be received by the American public; it's his job to determine whether they should receive it. He chose that they did not.

I buy and understand that he did not have full context and sourcing on information for several months. But he knew immediately that Trump was saying one thing in private and another in public. The contradiction is the story.

The idea that he should be the "2nd draft of history" is garbage when he was positioned to be the first. Woodward and Bernstein had about 200 Watergate articles when all was said and done. Who goes a fck if we didn't have the whole picture of the coronavirus - we still don't! That story would have evolved regardless, but the peek into the President's consciousness wasn't newsworthy because he couldn't validate the claim of how serious it was? Give me a fcking break.

I think you are wrong and I agree with Goo. What Woodward revealed was mostly not news. Almost all was just a confirmation of what most of us knew 6 months ago. He mainly just filled in the blanks.

Holding Woodward responsible is simply an attempt to deflect blame from where we all know it belongs. Our leader lied is responsible for tens of thousands of deaths. No different than Johnson and Nixon lies in the 60s caused tens of thousands of young men to die.

The #1 job of the president is to protect Americans. Instead, trump is the biggest failure of any president in history.

[Mutaman]

Fauci, Cuomo, Newsome, Murphy, etc said the federal govt was there for them when they needed it.

Governor Cuomo: "There was a headline in the Daily News once: 'Ford to City: Drop Dead'...What Ford did pales in comparison to what Trump is doing; not only did he tell New York City to "drop dead," Trump is actively trying to kill New York City. It is personal. I think it's psychological. He is trying to kill New York City."

Cuomo: "Donald Trump caused the COVID outbreak in New York. That is a fact. It's a fact that he admitted and the CDC admitted and Fauci admitted this nation loses more people per day to COVID than any nation on the globe. Do you hear that point? We lose more people per day to COVID than any nation on the globe. You know who did that? Donald Trump's incompetence. And now they won't provide federal funding to help repair the damage from the ambush they created."
Cuomo 9/8/20
https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/video-audio-rush-transcript-cuomo-trump-actively-trying-kill-new-york-city

[Hards Alumni]

Just a question for those criticizing Woodward for withholding his comments until publication of his book: Is your criticism based on the notion that his disclosure will dramatically change how Trump handles the virus? If not, what difference would it have made in terms of pandemic mitigation to disclose the comments earlier?

IMHO, the revelation - whether it was made in May or today - will not change what Trump or the administration does...or how the True Believers behave. As a result, the delay will not impact the number of lives lost. Instead, it may simply only have an impact on who votes for whom in the November election.

I guess we will see. If Trump takes a dramatically more aggressive stance toward the pandemic beginning immediately, it will be evidence my hunch is wrong. But if he continues his ‘hands-off/masks optional’ approach toward the crisis, it will suggest my hunch is correct.

To me, you get the information out there once you can confirm it.  Sitting on it until it is financially or politically expedient is a large part of why we are where we are as a country.

[GB Warrior]

I think you are wrong and I agree with Goo. What Woodward revealed was mostly not news. Almost all was just a confirmation of what most of us knew 6 months ago. He mainly just filled in the blanks.

Holding Woodward responsible is simply an attempt to deflect blame from where we all know it belongs. Our leader lied is responsible for tens of thousands of deaths. No different than Johnson and Nixon lies in the 60s caused tens of thousands of young men to die.

The #1 job of the president is to protect Americans. Instead, trump is the biggest failure of any president in history.

That's fine, we can disagree on this one. I don't disagree with either of you where the blame falls. And I don't disagree that most reasonably minded people were anticipating that this would be a Big Deal by the end of Feb (noting the story in dispute happened in early Feb). By that time, I had already canceled two business trips and begun bolstering my home office. So clearly this had begun to sink in for normal, moderately well-read people like me.

My point is that while our national consciousness was still grappling with this virus, there was on the ground reporting that the president had admitted it was worse than he was projecting publicly. While some in his administration had begun tepidly ringing alarm bells in early Feb, you don't think it'd have forced some hands if the words of the president suggested a bit more urgency? I'm not really concerned with the 1/3 of the country that are lemmings for him; I think this could have been a meaningful conversation to have in February that, even around the edges, would have had meaningful impact.

There's a time and a place for long-form or exposè journalism. I think this - in this moment - is bad optics for a profession that has been unfairly maligned as it is.

[Pakuni]

I understand the criticism of Woodward, and while I won't tell people they're wrong to be critical, it seems that inherent in the criticism is a misunderstanding of Woodward's role and process these days.
He's not a daily or even weekly news reporter any more. He's a book author. And as such, his reporting takes place over weeks and weeks of interviews - in this case, 18 separate interviews - and is conditioned by an understanding between him and his sources that he's not going to publish immediately. Without that condition, the interviews likely don't take place and, even if they do, you're not likely to see the kind of candor we saw here.
So while people may understandably dislike or criticize the process, the process is the only reason we've got this information in the first place. Trump very likely isn't going to sit down for 18 recorded interviews with Woodward and open up like this if he knows it's being published the next day every time.
If you believe it was unethical for Woodward to sit on this info, that's fine. But it would also have been unethical for him to publish this information immediately when the condition of the interview was that he would not publish immediately.

Again, I'm not telling anyone not to be critical. But do realize that it's a lot more complicated than just "Woodward buried this to sell books!"

[Jockey]

To me, you get the information out there once you can confirm it.  Sitting on it until it is financially or politically expedient is a large part of why we are where we are as a country.

In an ideal world, maybe yes. But, trump supporters - even with the president lying on tape - deny that he lied. Those who don't support him already knew what Woodward reported. He just confirmed the details.

There is not a single word in his book that would have changed minds. There was no reason to put this "news" out there.

[Jockey]

No chico. and,...

Suddenly we can have a great discussion. Different viewpoints presented with respect.

[Hards Alumni]

In an ideal world, maybe yes. But, trump supporters - even with the president lying on tape - deny that he lied. Those who don't support him already knew what Woodward reported. He just confirmed the details.

There is not a single word in his book that would have changed minds. There was no reason to put this "news" out there.

Well obviously minds wouldn't be changed... for his base.  I'm going to say I'm not super outraged.  Anyone with a modicum of intelligence has known that a pathological liar is going to lie nonstop.   And the Venn diagram of people who don't think that Trump lies constantly, and whose mind won't be changed by this story is a circle.   So whoopity- do, add it to the god damned pile.

[Frenns Liquor Depot]

It's not about voters.  It is whether or not it would have made those in power to take action sooner or act in a different manner (governors, Fed Bureaucracy) and those who are governed to accept public health measures.

Instead Bob W chose to protect the info to get more interviews (they would have been cutoff the min he released it).  So we are left with someone making a decision to have a more impactful book (more interviews than if he leaked) or more book sales....or both.   

[GB Warrior]

In an ideal world, maybe yes. But, trump supporters - even with the president lying on tape - deny that he lied. Those who don't support him already knew what Woodward reported. He just confirmed the details.

There is not a single word in his book that would have changed minds. There was no reason to put this "news" out there.

I do think there's a thread to pull on, though. His supporters listen to him, and these are his words. He would have continued to lie and cheat and steal because that's who he is as a person. Even marginally, it would have put his press conferences on the defensive.

I don't think anyone is suggesting this would have solved everything. I'm fully confident this administration would have unnatural carnal knowledge'd up their response just as they did. But if even a single Trump supporter heard him describe the severity in his own words and maybe altered their practices, it would have made a difference in an exponentially expanding virus.

Now, I think Pakuni's comment is fair that Woodward isn't a member of the WH press Corp anything of the sort. All true, and different journalists have different roles to play. But Woodward said there were no NDAs or agreements to delay reporting, so it seems to have been his choice to withhold.

[GooooMarquette]

It's not about voters.  It is whether or not it would have made those in power to take action sooner or act in a different manner (governors, Fed Bureaucracy) and those who are governed to accept public health measures.

Instead Bob W chose to protect the info to get more interviews (they would have been cutoff the min he released it).  So we are left with someone making a decision to have a more impactful book (more interviews than if he leaked) or more book sales....or both.

If it's about changing leaders' behavior, we should still see changes with this revelation today. Will Kim Reynolds, Kristi Noem or Doug Burgum issue stay-at-home orders now that they have heard POTUS' words? Will they make masks mandatory in public, and enforce violations?

Personally, I kinda doubt it....

[Frenns Liquor Depot]

If it's about changing leaders' behavior, we should still see changes with this revelation today. Will Kim Reynolds, Kristi Noem or Doug Burgum issue stay-at-home orders now that they have heard POTUS' words? Will they make masks mandatory in public, and enforce violations?

Personally, I kinda doubt it....

It's too late for that...we are where we are.  I think it's more about a guy like Doug Ducey not being so cavalier back in Apr...he and the people of AZ by the way is a great example of acting differently once the gravity was understood.

[MU Fan in Connecticut]

Ummm...epidemiologists have been warning about this for years. So pretty much everyone who believes in science.

A friend of mine works in Emergency Planning division of HHS and he's been telling me for years, "a pandemic WILL happen, count on it."

[Jockey]

Wolves don't concern themselves with the opinions of sheep. It's not for Woodward to judge how it will be received by the American public; it's his job to determine whether they should receive it. He chose that they did not.

I buy and understand that he did not have full context and sourcing on information for several months. But he knew immediately that Trump was saying one thing in private and another in public. The contradiction is the story.

The idea that he should be the "2nd draft of history" is garbage when he was positioned to be the first. Woodward and Bernstein had about 200 Watergate articles when all was said and done. Who goes a fck if we didn't have the whole picture of the coronavirus - we still don't! That story would have evolved regardless, but the peek into the President's consciousness wasn't newsworthy because he couldn't validate the claim of how serious it was? Give me a fcking break.

Trump is making the exact same argument today.

[Warriors4ever]

Whether Woodward should have released the info earlier is a valid question question but irrelevant to the questions about the actions and mindset of the President, and should not be used to cloud that issue.

[GB Warrior]

Trump is making the exact same argument today.

Well it rings hollow coming from the man wit blood on his hands. It's wrong and he's wrong, but Woodward created a window of opportunity for him. Its an indictment of our time that we need our democratic infrastructure outside of Agent Orange to be above reproach, but we do, because Trump has shown he will lean on whataboutisms to no end.

So, bottom line is this, because you and I agree with who is to blame and that Trump's core base would be unmoved: I'm not outraged at Woodward as if he could have solved this, and I don't hold him up as some would-be savior. I'm (extreme dad voice) disappointed. It was a missed opportunity for journalism writ large and invited some valid critiques of media practices at a time where we need them at their best. And Woodward, in my opinion, fell short.

[Pakuni]

Whether Woodward should have released the info earlier is a valid question question but irrelevant to the questions about the actions and mindset of the President, and should not be used to cloud that issue.

Bingo.
This is like the serial killer blaming the cops for not catching him sooner.

[TSmith34, Inc.]

Instead Bob W chose to protect the info to get more interviews (they would have been cutoff the min he released it).  So we are left with someone making a decision to have a more impactful book (more interviews than if he leaked) or more book sales....or both.

This is sort of a side discussion, but it baffles me why Trump was talking to Woodward in the first place. His last book in 2018 was highly critical of Trump, and usually that sort thing prompts  undying antagonism from the POTUS. But here he is have multiple extensive conversations with Woodward...I don't get it.

[naginiF]

This is sort of a side discussion, but it baffles me why Trump was talking to Woodward in the first place. His last book in 2018 was highly critical of Trump, and usually that sort thing prompts  undying antagonism from the POTUS. But here he is have multiple extensive conversations with Woodward...I don't get it.

Hubris - he thought he could control the narrative, paint a positive picture, and hold the book up as a monument to his greatness. It's the only thing that makes any sense.

As far as accountability goes, I see Woodward as a distant 6th. POTUS, his administration, elected officials in both house and senate (those that were silent and who profited by timely stock sales), FOX news, and conservative hangers on (evangelicals, OAN, etc.) all are more culpable IMO.