Trump's tripe on coronavirus makes scientists sound like civic rebels
Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, testifies via teleconference during a Senate hearing Tuesday. Credit: Pool / EPA / Win McNamee
In another administration, this hearing would have fanned no controversy. But when leading officials testified Tuesday on Capitol Hill about the coronavirus pandemic, their words countered President Donald Trump's messages from the Oval Office.
Dr. Anthony Fauci, the nation’s top infectious diseases expert, warned of increased suffering, death and deeper economic damage if state and local officials ditch stay-at-home rules and other precautions too quickly.
“There is no doubt, even under the best of circumstances, when you pull back on mitigation, you will see some cases appear,” Fauci told the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions. If reopening is rushed and guidelines ignored, “my concern is we will start to see little spikes that might turn into outbreaks,” he testified via teleconference during his self-quarantine. “The consequences could be really serious."
Anyone who'd been paying attention probably knows all this by now. Timing, planning and other details are still subject to debate. But Trump blurs the issue when he prods states to "reopen the economy." His vague blurts about "liberating" states and about having somehow "prevailed" over the virus make serious scientific analysis sound like bold dissent.
The gulf between Trump's public assertions on one hand and sworn testimony from his professional experts on the other keeps reappearing.
Last year, testimony from then-Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats clashed with Trump's dismissive statements about foreign election meddling. "The Kremlin," Coats told a Senate committee in January 2019, "is stepping up its campaign to divide Western political and security institutions and undermine the post-WWII international order. We expect Russia will continue to wage its information war against democracies and to use social media to attempt to divide our societies."
Three months ago, FBI Director Christopher Wray delivered factual testimony about a lethal trend of hate crimes that didn't quite fit the political agenda of the president, who has declined to make an issue of right-wing extremism. Wray called 2019 the deadliest year for domestic terrorism since the Oklahoma City truck bombing in 1995. Wray said he had raised combating racially motivated violence to a national priority for the FBI.
“The spate of attacks we saw in 2019 underscores the continued threat posed by domestic violent extremists and perpetrators of hate crimes,” Wray told the House Judiciary Committee. “Such crimes are not limited to the United States, and with the aid of internet, like-minded hate groups can reach across borders.” One prime example was the murder last August of 22 people at the Cielo Vista Walmart in El Paso, Texas. The gunman targeted Hispanics.
During the impeachment hearings, testimony by several federal officials drew worldwide attention. Before the microphones, seasoned diplomatic and security officials told matter-of-factly of how Trump's White House pressured Ukraine's president to announce an investigation aimed at U.S. Democrats including former Vice President Joe Biden. The witnesses who blandly shattered Trump's conspiracy theories about Ukraine were never known to break from the official line. But in Trump's Washington, the most careful analysis of the facts becomes a bold act of rebellion.
Dan Janison is a member of the Newsday editorial board.
