Feinstein, Inhofe Bring Number Of Senators Who Dumped Stock To Four

After the news broke last night that Senators Kelly Loeffler (R-Ga.) and Richard Burr (R-N.C.) sold large amounts of stock after receiving an intelligence briefing on the growing Coronavirus outbreak last January, armchair investigators and journalists have been poring over congressional disclosures to see who else may have benefitted financially from their inside knowledge. Now, Senators James Inhofe (R-Okla.) and Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) have also been found to have engaged in trading after the briefing.

A Twitter user, NYCSouthpaw, posted Inhofe’s disclosures online. The forms show that the Oklahoma Republican sold as much as $500,000 in stocks in the period. Many of the six transactions were within days of the January 24 briefing.

southpaw@nycsouthpaw

So uhhh... that all-senators Senate Health Committee briefing was on 1/24, right?

8,375

9:23 PM - Mar 19, 2020

Twitter Ads info and privacy

4,355 people are talking about this

Sen. Feinstein and her husband sold between $1.5 and $6 million in shares of a California biotech company between January 31 and February 18 per reports from MSN. The company, Allogene Therapeutics, which makes cancer treatments, has weathered the stock market crash better than many stocks. At present, it is trading at $20.18 per share, only $1.81 below its one-year high.

The reports come on the heels of reports that Kelly Loeffler and Richard Burr engaged in multiple stock sales worth millions of dollars. Loeffler and her husband made 29 transactions, per the Daily Beast. Only two of the trades were purchases, including buying between $100,000 and $250,000 in Citrix stock. Citrix makes teleworking software.

Sen. Burr engaged in 33 trades valued between $628,000 and $1.72 million per Pro Publica. Burr’s biggest sales included shares of hotel chains Wyndham Hotels and Extended Stay America.

A fifth senator, Ron Johnson (R-Wisc.), also sold a large share of stock, but this transaction appears unrelated to the outbreak. Raw Story notes that Johnson’s sale on March 2 was comprised of interest in a family business. Pacur LLC is a privately traded plastics manufacturing company in Wisconsin.

Another Georgia senator, David Perdue, also reported a large number of stock trades. Many of Perdue’s trades occurred before the briefing, however. Perdue also continued buying into February, purchasing companies that have been damaged by the stock market crash such as Delta Air Lines and Urban Outfitters.

Lachlan Markay

✔@lachlan

 · 5h

Replying to @lachlan

Inhofe was also selling stock in the days *before* that coronavirus briefing. And though all the ones he purchased in its wake did indeed fall, there was reason to believe that, say, PYPL would do well in an economy where people fear cash and are making lots of online purchases

Lachlan Markay

✔@lachlan

Then there's David Perdue. Yes, he sold a bunch of stock in Jan/Feb (57 transactions), but he also purchased a bunch (50 transactions). And many of those occurred before that Jan 24 briefing and after the market tanked. So it's tough to see anything suspect there.

923

9:24 AM - Mar 20, 2020

Twitter Ads info and privacy

241 people are talking about this

Loeffler, Feinstein, and Inhofe all claim that their trades were made by portfolio managers without their knowledge. Burr released a statement that said that he “relied solely on public news reports” regarding his financial transactions. Burr denied wrongdoing and requested a Senate ethics investigation of his trades.

While there may be a reasonable explanation for the timing of the transactions, the trades smell very fishy. This is especially true since some of the senators who benefitted from trades that seem tailormade to plan for the current pandemic were among those who publicly called concerns about preparations for Coronavirus to be “dangerously and intentionally” misleading.

Kelly Loeffler

✔@KLoeffler

Democrats have dangerously and intentionally misled the American people on #Coronavirus readiness.

Here’s the truth: @realDonaldTrump & his administration are doing a great job working to keep Americans healthy & safe. https://apnews.com/d36d6c4de29f4d04beda3db00cb46104 …

AP FACT CHECK: Democrats distort coronavirus readiness

WASHINGTON (AP) — Democratic presidential contenders are describing the federal infectious-disease bureaucracy as rudderless and ill-prepared for the coronavirus threat because of budget cuts and...

apnews.com

419

3:20 PM - Feb 28, 2020

Twitter Ads info and privacy

4,740 people are talking about this

Loeffler and Burr’s trades seem the most suspicious. This is due to the timing, the number, and the specific stocks involved in the trades.

An ethics investigation seems like a really good idea.

Originally published on The Resurgent

Mythbusting COVID-19

ve been seeing so much bad information about Coronavirus on my timeline that I felt I needed to set some things straight. This isn’t a matter of politics. The virus doesn’t care if you’re a Democrat or a Trump supporter. The facts are the facts.

Isn’t the flu more dangerous than COVID-19?

The virus is much more dangerous than the flu. The flu has killed more people so far, but that’s because the flu has been more widespread. The final numbers are not in on the Coronavirus but COVID-19 has higher rates of both mortality and infection than the flu.

The flu has a death rate of about 0.1 percent and each person with the flu infects about 1.3 other people on average. For Coronavirus, the death rate is estimated to be about two percent, possibly slightly lower and possibly higher. A Coronavirus victim also infects about 2.2 other people on average.

If you aren’t familiar with what death rates mean, the 0.1 percent rate for the flu means that there is about one fatality for every 1,000 cases. In contrast, the estimated two percent death rate for Coronavirus means that about 20 people would die for every 1,000 cases. In other words, the Coronavirus is about 20 times more lethal than the flu.

The fact that more people have died from the flu is because the flu has been more widespread so far. That is changing fast.

Aren’t we overreacting since the flu kills more people?

The current precautions are about prevention, not reaction. The Coronavirus is more dangerous so the objective is to limit its spread.

The goal is to slow the number of cases and the demand for hospital beds. If the virus surges through the population quickly, the number of patients will be more than the number of available hospital beds, intensive care units, and ventilators. That will mean that the death rate is much higher than it had to be.

Death rates are highest where hospitals are overwhelmed by patients. If half of the US population is infected, as health experts say is possible, the death toll could reach the millions, even with a death rate of “only” two percent.

There is no treatment or vaccine for COVID-19 and humans have no natural immunity to this new virus.

To this point, testing for COVID-19 has been a problem in the US. Many people have been infected with Coronavirus and don’t know it.

Doesn’t a two percent death rate mean a 98 percent chance of living?

Yes, but it might also mean spending a long time in an ICU and permanent lung damage.

Even if you survive COVID-19 you might infect other people who are higher-risk. You might be responsible for infecting elderly friends or relatives.

What are the symptoms of Coronavirus?

The main symptoms are a fever and a cough, although various other symptoms have been reported as well. If you have a fever and have trouble breathing, you should seek medical help.

The symptoms of Coronavirus are similar to the flu. An increase in influenza-like-illnesses, in which patients have symptoms of the flu but test negative for it may mask many cases of Coronavirus.

Do masks prevent the spread of the virus?

The CDC says that masks do not protect unsick people from contracting the virus. Masks should be used by sick people to keep from spreading the virus in aerosol droplets when they cough or sneeze.

How long has Coronavirus been in the US?

Coronavirus is new to the US. The first known case was in China in mid-November 2019. The first known case in the US dates back to January 19, 2020, in Washington State. The man had been on a trip to Wuhan, China and had apparently contracted the virus there.

President Trump ordered a ban on travel from China on January 31, but the virus could have been carried into the US by other passengers prior to the ban taking effect. The ban did not prohibit Americans from entering the country. Five airports had screenings were set up for Coronavirus at the time, but the focus was on visitors from China.

Does the Coronavirus only affect the elderly?

Eighty percent of Coronavirus deaths are people older than 60 according to the CDC. This group also accounts for 45 percent of hospitalizations.

The flip side is that more than half of cases requiring hospitalization are people younger than 60. Some of these cases are so serious that they require treatment in intensive care.

The very young can be infected with the virus but usually on have mild or moderate cases. They can still infect other high-risk people, though.

Even though the virus is most dangerous to seniors with pre-existing health problems, the virus is more dangerous than the flu for most age groups.

Coronavirus has been around for a long time. Why are we panicking about it now?

There is more than one type of Coronavirus. COVID-19 is a new strain that was discovered in 2019. That’s what the “19” means.

Are there multiple strains of Coronavirus?

There are two different types of COVID-19, but they are almost identical. WHO considers the virus to be a single strain. The differences could simply be the mutations caused in the virus as it adapted to its new host, humans.

Can you catch Coronavirus more than once?

Scientists believe that once a person survives the virus, they become immune to it. That could change if the virus mutates.

Should you avoid ibuprofen if you suspect you have COVID-19?

The latest evidence says that there is little evidence of risk with ibuprofen but experts say to be cautious.

Is Coronavirus a bioweapon?

The evidence points to a natural origin for Coronavirus. Analysis of virus genomes showed no evidence that the virus was the product of a laboratory.

The theory that China released a bioweapon on themselves doesn’t really make sense anyway. The Chinese economy is being heavily damaged by the virus, something that they would not do on purpose. If the release was accidental, the Chinese government would have responded much more quickly to contain the outbreak than they did.

Further, Coronavirus has a lower mortality rate than a virus used as a weapon would likely have. Why weaponize Coronavirus with a two percent mortality rate when you could use Ebola, which has a 90 percent death rate?

Isn’t this a hoax to hurt Trump?

Would entire nations lock down their populations and destroy their economies to try to keep Trump from being re-elected? If it is a hoax, then Trump is in on it at this point. Coronavirus is also not a plot to delay the election and keep Trump in power, to implement martial law, to poison Americans with a mandatory vaccine, or to implant microchips in unsuspecting people.

Remember that the most basic advice to avoid contracting or spreading the Coronavirus is simple:

• Wash your hands carefully
• Stay six feet away from other people
• Cover your mouth with a tissue if you cough or sneeze and then throw the tissue in the trash
• Wash your hands some more

Don’t panic and don’t fall for the fake news and conspiracy theories about COVID-19. As a nation, we will get through this if we keep our heads, wash our hands, and trust God to see us through.  

Originally published on The Resurgent

The World Turns On A Dime

One of the most important lessons of the Coronavirus pandemic is the reminder of just how fragile life and human constructions really are. A month ago, almost no one was seriously considering the possibility that almost the entire world would be shut down as millions are threatened with premature deaths, yet here we are.

It is times like this that we must acknowledge just how insignificant and out-of-control of our fates that human beings really are. In the space of a few weeks, we have gone from globe-trotting masters of our domain to cowering in our homes to avoid being infected by a pathogen so small that it is only visible through a microscope.

In science fiction, the idea of a butterfly effect has been the basis of many stories, particularly about time travel. The theory suggests that a small change, such as killing a butterfly in the past, can cause enormous changes further down the timeline. In our own reality, a virus that likely jumped to humans from a dead bat is panicking the world and may eventually kill millions. How’s that for a butterfly effect?

The world has turned on a dime before in my lifetime. On September 11, 2001, we pivoted from celebrating the end of the Cold War to an entirely new Long War against Islamic terrorists. As with COVID-19, the change was ushered in by a shockingly swift collapse of economic markets that upended the hopes, dreams, and lives of many around the world.

Turns on a dime don’t have to occur on a worldwide or national level. Almost two years ago I wrote about my sudden diagnosis with melanoma. While I was blessed that my cancer was found at stage one and was easily treatable, others were not so lucky. I have known too many people near my own age or younger whose lives were disrupted by untreatable cancers or suddenly ended by heart attacks.

We aren’t assured that our lives will last beyond our next breath or that our nations will endure another day. No matter what our intentions or plans, our ability to carry them out is wholly at the mercy of the will of something greater than ourselves.

Whether you acknowledge the existence and supremacy of God or whether you ascribe your impotence and powerlessness to an unfeeling and uncaring universe, you are not in control of your life or your future.

I am convinced that if we dwell too much on the futility of life and the certainty of death that it would drive almost anyone crazy. “Life’s a bitch and then you die” is a bleak outlook, but, if we depend solely on ourselves, it is ultimately all that we have.

The one way that we do have hope is by putting our faith in Jesus Christ and the God of the Bible, who ultimately exercise control over both our lives and the universe. When we trust in God and commit ourselves to his care, we can be assured that “in this world, we will have trouble” but that “all things work together for good to those who love God.”

The Coronavirus epidemic will run its course. The stock market will rebound. Life will go on.

But the world will turn on a dime for another reason one day and we are still going to die of something, whether it’s Coronavirus or old age decades from now or a car crash tomorrow. Life is always fatal.

I choose to believe that a God who could conquer death for his son, can also conquer death for me.

Originally published on The Resurgent

Should The Olympics Be Canceled?

y kids introduced me to a game application called “Plague Inc.” a few years ago. That game has been on my mind a lot in recent weeks as the Coronavirus spread around the world.

Aside from a world map that looks a lot like what you see on the news shows showing the spread of the virus, the game also features a crawl of news stories. Some of these stories are about your fictional illness while others are unrelated. As your plague spreads, one story that comes up in almost every game deals with the cancellation of the Olympics. Now reality is mirroring entertainment as there are calls to cancel or postpone the 2020 Olympic games.

On the surface, the Olympic games would seem to be a nightmare for public health officials in the midst of fighting a pandemic. People from all around the world will be congregating in one place and then returning to four corners of the world, likely carrying the virus with them.

This year’s Olympics, to be held in Tokyo, are not slated to begin until July 24. The rub is that the runup to the Olympics begins next week with the torch run leaving Fukushima. Jules Boykoff of the New York Times notes that, in addition to Coronavirus concerns, there are apparent radiation hot spots near the site of the 2011 nuclear disaster as well.

No one knows for sure how long it will take for the Coronavirus outbreak to run its course, but there is a good possibility that it won’t be fully under control by July. Even if case numbers are leveling off by that point, there is a risk that the large numbers of travelers could spark a second wave. Boykoff cites a Swiss study that forecasts that the pandemic won’t be under control until the winter of 2020-21.

The responsible and safe thing to do would be to postpone the games, but there are significant costs associated with that course of action. Boykoff notes that Japan has spent a staggering $26 billion to prepare for the Olympics, but the costs of cancellation go beyond sunk costs of preparations. Lost revenue, particularly from the lack of television coverage, would also be massive.

If the International Olympic Committee doesn’t want to pull the trigger on canceling the Olympics four months out, they should at least scale back events that lead up to the games. In the midst of a worldwide pandemic where governments are urging people to stay home, it is irresponsible and unsafe to encourage thousands of sports fans to travel to the other side of the world.

Originally published on The Resurgent

Trump Administration Readies Airline Bailout

The four largest US airlines collectively earned a net profit of more than $10 billion in 2018. Three months into 2020 and mere weeks after the onset of America’s Coronavirus scare they are looking for a bailout.

Airlines have been forced to cancel thousands of planned flights both as part of containment measures and because few people want to be in close proximity to travelers from who-knows-where as they pass through airport terminals and airline cabins. Revenue forecasts have not been updated but they must be plummeting. Delta alone has announced plans to cut flights by 40 percent and park 300 airplanes.

But airlines have high fixed costs. Even when passengers are not buying tickets, the companies still must make lease payments on airplanes that are not generating revenue. Employees must still be paid unless the crisis extends long enough to justify furloughs. Even furloughs entail costs for retraining crews. For the moment, Delta and its pilot union have agreed to a plan to allow some pilots to voluntarily take time off with partial pay as a stopgap measure.

Even with cost-cutting, the airlines will be burning through their cash reserves at an alarming rate. Industry groups say that most of the world’s airlines will be bankrupt by May.

The situation is similar to what occurred after the September 11 attacks when airlines were shut down for several days and then the public avoided flying. Despite a $15 billion federal bailout, a wave of airline bankruptcies occurred in the years following the terrorist attacks. This year, the leaner airlines will benefit from the reorganizations that resulted from those bankruptcies.

This year, the airlines are also asking for much more than the $15 billion they received 19 years ago. Airlines are currently seeking a $50 billion package that includes grant money, loan guarantees, and tax relief.

The Trump Administration appears ready to sign onto the plan.

“As far as the airlines are concerned, the airlines, we’re going to back the airlines 100 percent,” President Trump said yesterday. “It’s not their fault. We’ve told the airlines we’re going to help them. We’re going to be helping them very much. It’s very important.”

The question is how far the Administration is prepared to go. The effects of the Coronavirus downturn will extend far beyond the travel industry. Movie theaters are shut down, restaurants and bars are closed or are urged to provide carryout and delivery only, and untold numbers of other businesses are being affected as consumers take a wait-and-see attitude to spending on everything except food and toilet paper. Where should the line for federal aid be drawn?

It would be easy – and if we are honest likely – for Congress to choose political considerations over effectiveness in the virus relief bill. In the past, crony capitalism has often ruled the day and we should expect no different in a contentious election year.

In 1887, President Grover Cleveland issued a veto of a bill to provide federal funds for drought-stricken Texas farmers. In his veto message, Cleveland argued that charity for individuals was not the role of the federal government even though the cause was good.

“I can find no warrant for such an appropriation in the Constitution, and I do not believe that the power and duty of the General Government ought to be extended to the relief of individual suffering which is in no manner properly related to the public service or benefit,” Cleveland said, adding, “The friendliness and charity of our countrymen can always be relied upon to relieve their fellow-citizens in misfortune.”

For better or worse, both parties abandoned Cleveland’s conservatism and reliance on individual charity long ago. And possibly with good reason. A localized drought in Texas is one thing, but a nationwide pandemic is another. It’s impossible for individuals to bail out the airlines or help one another when they are confined to their homes and not earning a paycheck themselves.

“Unlike in 2008, unlike 2001 – there is not one or two particular industries we are talking about, and the economic pain that we as a society are going to face is widespread,” said Matt Dallek, a political history professor at George Washington University. “Because if you bail out the travel industries — well, what about the restaurants and bars that are going to go under? What about the taxi drivers and Uber and Lyft drivers? What about other people who are being laid off in other industries that are threatened.”

A much bigger question is how much a nation that is $23 trillion in debt and that was running a $1 trillion annual deficit before the current crisis can do to bail out its entire economy. Thanks to generations of profligate spending, we may find ourselves moving from a public health crisis to a debt crisis.

Originally published on The Resurgent