Below is my column in The Hill newspaper on potential liability of China for its negligence in the early stages (and possible release) of the Coronavirus.
Shortly after this column ran, two members announced that they would be introducing the amendment to the federal law discussed below.
There are now at least seven lawsuits filed against China which is pushing a public relations campaign to deflect blame.
Here is the column:
Joseph Stalin once said “a single death is a tragedy” and “a million deaths is a statistic.” The observation was chilling because it has a grain of truth about how we process tragedies. The same is sometimes true legally. If a government kills one person, it is a murder. If it kills thousands of people, it is a policy. That cold fact soon may be evident in a growing number of class action lawsuits now brought against China over its failure to notify the world promptly of the coronavirus, along with renewed allegations that the outbreak may have started in a laboratory in Wuhan.
The question of Chinese responsibility, and of potential liability, became more acute this week. Many in the media have dismissed allegations of a release from the lab as a politically motivated conspiracy theory. It is the same narrative aggressively pushed by China. For some of us, however, the dismissal of the lab as the possible source always seemed willfully blind. It might not prove to be true, but it hardly seems a baseless idea since the lab was working on coronavirus research. We also know that China arrested and silenced people who tried to raise alarms.
The true origin of the coronavirus may be incredibly difficult to prove. The media reported on an account by scientists that the genome sequence of the coronavirus does not show any signs of being artificially manipulated or engineered. The coverage suggested that it is now established that it was a purely natural outbreak rather than the fault of China. That would not seem to definitively answer the question, however, of whether a lab employee had been infected by a bat carrying the coronavirus.
Two years ago, the State Department raised concerns over coronavirus research on bats at the lab and its allegedly lax practices. Both American and British intelligence officials recently found a credible possibility that the lab was the source and that the outbreak then spread at first through the Huanan Seafood Market. There is no proof of this, but dismissal of the theory occurred as some in the media condemned President Trump for his use of the terms “Wuhan virus” and “Chinese virus.” That narrative seemed to demand universal rejection of the theory that the outbreak might have been the result of negligence at the lab. There remains no evidence that supports the theory of an intentional release of the coronavirus.
While legitimate questions surround the origin, there is little debate that the Chinese government cost the world crucial weeks of preparation and containment by hiding the outbreak and by silencing those brave doctors who tried to warn of a new highly contagious respiratory illness. There are even reports that the coronavirus may not have really emerged in Wuhan. Needless to say, had China fulfilled its responsibility to alert global experts and be transparent on early testing and data, many countries might have restricted international travel, ramped up production of medical supplies, or imposed social distancing rules much sooner than they did.
Many continue to advance the narrative that the outbreak is not the fault of China. Democratic Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut said “we are in the crisis that we are today” not “because of anything that China did” but “because of what this president did.” Some critics now call it the “Trump virus” and attack those who focus on the responsibility of China as Trump supporters peddling conspiracy theories. Such narratives are music to the ears of Chinese officials, and they undermine any hope of an investigation by Congress that examines the issue with no bias or agendas.
The single advantage to private litigation is that it comes with evidentiary discovery if that is even allowed. Such lawsuits are exceptionally difficult, and China is known for blocking depositions and document disclosures. At least four class action lawsuits have recently been filed in the United States. One lawsuit claims the coronavirus was designed as a biological weapon, an allegation that both experts and intelligence officials have rejected. All of the lawsuits allege intentional or negligent acts.
The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976 extends blanket immunity to countries from most lawsuits in the United States. The exceptions are rather narrow and rarely accepted by American courts, which read this statute as clearly conveying the intent to discourage such lawsuits. The United States can be sued just as easily in foreign courts and thus favors immunity as the general rule. The most common exception under this law concerns commercial activities by foreign nations. For that reason, some lawsuits have stretched the facts to suggest that the wet market or lab in Wuhan were commercial enterprises effectively run or directed by China. That argument is likely to be far too attenuated for the courts.
One legal question could turn on Congress. In 2008, a lawsuit with some interesting analogies was filed against Saudi Arabia over the financing of the terrorists who attacked us on 9/11. The kingdom had been accused of effectively releasing terrorists, rather than a virus, but the courts rejected those claims under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act. Congress then amended it to allow for such lawsuits with the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act. President Obama vetoed it, but Congress overrode his veto. It is possible that Congress could do so again for this virus, which has now cost tens of thousands of lives and trillions of dollars in losses.
Even with a legislative fix, China is unlikely to make people or information freely available and, even if it was found to be liable, we are back to what Stalin said. There is corollary in tort law for personal injuries in causation theory. Courts tend to cut off liability when causation gets too attenuated. In cases such as James Ryan versus New York Central Railroad, courts cut off liability for spreading fires by limiting it to natural direct damage rather than the ultimate damage. Courts ruled that spreading fires is caused by many reasons. Courts could also balk at liability for millions of cases, tens of thousands of deaths, and trillions of dollars in losses. They could rule that the outbreak was due to negligent decisions by countries.
Some of us would welcome an evidentiary discovery into the origin of the coronavirus. But Democrats and Republicans appear wedded to political narratives for their advantage. With questions about financial support for the lab by the Obama administration and allegations over a slow response by the Trump administration, we may have another farcical commission or investigation in which each party appoints loyalists to protect its interests. The 9/11 commission skillfully avoided holding anyone responsible despite negligent acts by government officials. However, litigation means building a provable case rather than maintaining a narrative. The brutal fact is that, in politics as in war, tens of thousands of deaths can just be a statistic. For some politicians, the real tragedy is who ends up with the blame.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. You can find his updates online @JonathanTurley.
Don’t buy Chinese
Don’t the Chinese hold a lot of our debt? Well screwem just call it even
China is responsible for two global pandemics.
China is responsible for the “Wuhan Flu” of 2020.
China is responsible for the “Spanish Flu” of 1918.
China must allow forensic investigation of records, facilities and the remains of victims.
____________________________________________________________________
“Historian Mark Humphries of Canada’s Memorial University of Newfoundland says that newly unearthed records confirm that one of the side stories of the war—the mobilization of 96,000 Chinese laborers to work behind the British and French lines on World War I’s Western Front—may have been the source of the pandemic.
“Even as the pandemic’s origins have remained a mystery, the Chinese laborers have previously been suggested as a source of the disease.
“Historian Christopher Langford has shown that China suffered a lower mortality rate from the Spanish flu than other nations did, suggesting some immunity was at large in the population because of earlier exposure to the virus.
“In the new report, Humphries finds archival evidence that a respiratory illness that struck northern China in November 1917 was identified a year later by Chinese health officials as identical to the Spanish flu.
“He also found medical records indicating that more than 3,000 of the 25,000 Chinese Labor Corps workers who were transported across Canada en route to Europe starting in 1917 ended up in medical quarantine, many with flu-like symptoms.”
– National Geographic
China has exceeded the law by its act.
Adjudication of the “Wuhan Flu” case against China must, similarly, exceed the law.
China has no respect or regard for law of any level, type or venue; China is engaged in deception as a totalitarian communist regime.
China has committed an act of war or criminal act emerging from its psychopathology, Anti-Social Personality Disorder (ASPD).
China’s release of the “Wuhan Flu” constitutes an egregious and heinous act.
China’s release of the “Wuhan Flu” is a crime against humanity literally, ethically, morally, legally and judicially.
China has no defense and no defense is possible.
All global debt payments to China must be halted.
All global Chinese assets must be frozen.
An ad hoc or provisional process of adjudication must created and established for future use.
_________________________________________________________________________
China has always been at war with America, a war of deception. From its economy to its cultural exchanges, every act of China has been an act of war.
“tendency to view the entire strategic landscape as part of a single whole” to Sun Tzu’s recognition that, “everything is relevant and connected.”
“He comments on counterintelligence, on psychological warfare, on deception, on security, on fabricators, in short, on the whole craft of intelligence.”
“Allen Dulles, Director of the Central Intelligence Agency from 1953-1961, compared the pragmatism of Sun Tzu’s emphasis on what Sun Tzu calls “foreknowledge” and intelligence gathering to early attempts at gaining advance warning from oracles and astrologers in the first chapter of his book, The Craft of Intelligence. “But in the craft of intelligence the East was ahead of the West in 400 B.C. Rejecting the oracles and the seers, who may well have played an important role in still epochs of Chinese history, Sun Tzu takes a more practical view,” wrote Dulles. [38] He continues, “To Sun Tzu belongs the credit not only for this remarkable analysis of the ways of espionage but also for the first written recommendations regarding an organized intelligence service… He comments on counterintelligence, on psychological warfare, on deception, on security, on fabricators, in short, on the whole craft of intelligence.”[39] Dulles’ regard for Sun Tzu, whose analytical approach to war and treatment of covert action, is reflected in the guiding principles of what has now become the U.S. intelligence community.”
– Classics of Strategy and Deception
I see nothing has changed much. It’s very easy to identify all of the tragic problems and of course to politicize the cause(s). But when the dust settles on this, there will be only one root cause and everything flows out from there…a virus that originated in China was not contained and it went international. What appears evident is that no nation had war-gamed this, certainly not ours. This kind of problem exposes all of our weaknesses. The biggest weakness we have right now is how this pandemic is being used as a political weapon. Never let a crisis go to waste.
On another note: For those whackjobs applauding the benefits “towards” the Left’s agenda: just remember our country has now gotten a heavy dose of what life would need to be like to achieve those extreme policies.
CNN= The Chinese News Network.
They are losing it
😜
Gretchen Whitmer Lambasts Protesters Again: People Weren’t ‘Lining Up at the Capitol’ During WWII
Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D) on Monday took another jab at American citizens who have taken their frustration with the economic shutdowns to the streets.
“President Trump called this a war, and it is exactly that. Let’s act like it,” Whitmer said on Monday, criticizing concerned residents who flocked to the State Capitol to protest the shutdowns that continue to bar millions of Americans from work.
“In World War II, there weren’t people lining up at the Capitol to protest the fact that they had to drop everything they were doing and build planes or tanks, or to ration food,” she said, taking a dig at the demonstrators.
“They rolled up their sleeves, and they got to work. We were all in this together, and it wasn’t indefinite. It was until we had beaten the enemy,” she continued.
“No state shined more in those days than the state of Michigan. We are called to act again. It is our time to shine, to put aside our political differences, to come together and defeat our common enemy,” Whitmer added:
The Hill
✔
@thehill
Gov. Gretchen Whitmer: “In World War II, there weren’t people lining up at the capitol to protest the fact that they had to drop everything they were doing and build planes or tanks, or to ration food.”
Embedded video
4,358
9:01 PM – Apr 20, 2020
Twitter Ads info and privacy
3,647 people are talking about this
This is far from the first time Whitmer has criticized concerned Michiganders, some of whom flocked to the Capitol in Lansing last week to demonstrate their disapproval of the governor’s executive orders closing businesses, schools, and forcing residents to stay home — even banning visits between neighbors.
“We know that when people gather that way without masks, they were in close proximity, they were touching one another, that that’s how COVID-19 spreads,” Whitmer said last week, blaming the protesters for what could be further restrictions.
“So the sad irony here is that the protest was that they don’t like being in this stay home order,” she said, adding, “and they may have just created the need to lengthen it.”
The governor also appeared on MSNBC’s The Rachel Maddow Show last week and suggested the protesters were engaging in “irresponsible action.”
Michigan’s stay-at-home order is expected to expire April 30, but Whitmer said the state’s next steps are largely contingent on “how these next ten days go.”
“To those of you who are hopeful we’ll be able to start loosening some restrictions, stay home now to better make the odds that we’re able to do that in ten days,” she said Monday.
“To those of you who want to get back to work as soon as possible, stay home. For those of you who made plans for June, July, and August and want to see them through, stay home,” she warned.
Radio host Steve Gruber, who attended Wednesday’s protest in Lansing, encompassed the sentiments of many protesters and warned that Whitmer has essentially “put Michigan back in Donald Trump’s column.”
“Look at this,” he said of the protest. “You think these people aren’t going to vote? These people are all going to vote. Every one of these people. Every direction you look here. They’re all going to vote. Every one of them.”
Julie are you a puppet?
China scr-wed the world knowingly permitting their citizens to travel outside of China but not inside or outside of Wuhan. A large number of Democrats are scr-wing America and its people by blaming Trump instead of China. While people like Murphy blame Trump for a slow response Trump responded before any other major political figure while people like Murphy decried his response. Those Democrat’s and Murphy’s attitudes if followed would have killed hundreds or thousands or millions of Americans (based on the reported models the CDC was using). Even Fauci advised against Trump restricting Chinese Traveller entry and we all recognize how much these stupid Democrats believe Trump should follow Fauci to the letter.
Save America and don’t vote Democrat.
And then reality steps in…
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/senator-says-white-house-turned-down-emergency-coronavirus-funding-in-early-february/ar-BB11OvE1
The question arises as to what he was actually asking money for. That really isn’t answered and we already know all the phony, non-specific and erroneous reports that are proven false a number of days later.
Let us hear exactly what went on at that hearing because nothing stopped the governor from purchasing so what was it that he needed assistance for at that time? Few if any recognized the full danger of what happened in China and those that did were called conspiracy theorists and the like. Fauci didn’t see it coming nor did other major players at the CDC. What I believe the Senator may have been asking for was being covered by the CDC and other money’s already appropriated.
So much fluff and bluster–at the end of the day, Turley and the Republicans aren’t really serious about suing China for the simple reason that Trump would be star witness No. 1 to disprove proximate cause as to America, because this infection was well-known at the time there were only a handful of cases. Trump’s lying, incompetence and downplaying no doubt was the proximate cause for most of the spread.. Discovery would open up what he knew when he called COVID-19 a “hoax”, when he said that 15 cases would soon be 0 cases, when he promised a vaccine “very quickly” and all of the other downplaying and lying. The playbook would have to be produced. Key questions that he can’t refuse to answer or pivot to insult the questioner, like he does with journalists who ask him questions he doesn’t like would include: 1. “why did you wait until March 16 to recommend social distancing?; 2. “what does the playbook left by your predecessor say about how to prevent the spread of a pandemic?” 3. why didn’t you beef up the national stockpile, when you had 3 years to do so?”; 4. Do you have any statistical models that show what would have happened if you had implemented the playbook and/or social distancing measures sooner”?; 5. “If you are blaming China now, why did you praise China’s response and transparency repeatedly after being aware of the pandemic?’ 6. “why did your ‘travel ban’ still allow 40,000 people to travel from China, and can you prove that these people aren’t more responsible for the spread than China?”
Nope, this is just a classic Kellyanne pivot maneuver, and we all see through it. Even Turley admits there is no evidence that this virus was lab-engineered, which means it is naturally-occurring and the source is animals. Regardless of the specific source, China’s delays, its downplaying and muzzling of doctors, America still had plenty of lead time to stop or seriously limit the spread, if we only had someone in charge who isn’t a liar and narcissist and who cares more about bragging about his economic success than the health of the American people. Bear in mind that Ebola, which is also very highly contagious and which has an even higher mortality rate than COVID-19, was contained while Barak Obama was in office. What would have happened if he lied about it, downplayed it, and disavowed any responsibility for it, like Trump is doing? Trumpster media would have called him a murderer.
lol. no, you don’t prove proximate cause with political witnesses. you prove them with experts.
I can’t even parse the rest of it because as i see too many of her noxious baubles interspersed in the rest of the vomit-pile like “kellyanne pivot”
folks, try and read the whole article before you start poking holes in it– or trying to.
Kurtz, the column reads like a lawyer’s attempt to deflect blame from Trump. Why should it be perceived as anything but that?
because you mis-perceived it entirely if you saw it that way
but i doubt that you did. if you read it you probably understood and were just nitpicking the lesser elements to make your usual grandstanding points
It just gets worse for Trump the more up the ‘expert’ witness chain you go.
You prove proximate cause with evidence. There is no evidence that COVID-19 was engineered, so it comes from a zoonotic source. The fact that the first cases were reported in China does not make China automatically liable. The issue is how the U.S. handled the information after it was obtained. We knew this was a novel virus to which there is no herd immunity and no vaccine when there were only a few cases. It could have been stopped here, just like Obama stopped Ebola. Here, Trump defenders are trying to blame US deaths and illnesses on China, instead of on Trump’s incompetence, which places squarely into issue how the virus was allowed to spread, what Trump knew, when he knew it, and what resources for dealing with a pandemic the Obama Administration developed and left for him to use. The source isn’t the issue. In fact, it got here from China somehow, so a visitor or US citizen visiting China probably brought it here.
“It could have been stopped here, just like Obama stopped Ebola.”
LOL, wow. you are really off today Natch.
These are totally different pathogens. Ebola kills its hosts very quickly compared to coronavirus. if you are also supposedly a nurse or even moderately well versed in biology the differences should be obvious. it’s party due to the weakness of the results of the sars-cov-2 infection in most carriers that it spreads so far
COVID-19 was coming here once it spread as far as it did in China, one way or another. Neither Xi nor Trump realistically could have “contained” it given the complex connections between China and the rest of the world including Europe, due to the nature of the virus itself, and the size of the initial outbreak in China, which was massive.
The only way it could have been contained is if China jumped on it fast enough, to contain the infected inside of China, which it did not,. Because denial, perhaps?
That may not have even been Xi’s fault either., just layers of PRC incompetent bureaucrats and corrupt officials. But the buck stops somewhere I guess.
The genesis matters but it is still not clear. It’s not clear when the thing emerged. And “patient zero” for China is not known, nor the US it seems, from a quick search.
Now this all relates to that proximate cause point Turley made, which apparently went over your heads.
Thing is, pandemic response steps are the same when it comes to viral transmission. Then treatment.
Yes they are similar but not the same. They vary according to the pathogen, both in public health containment response, and treatments.
Ebola and COVID-19 are vastly different. There are many different kinds of diseases to consider in this context. Here’s a helpful video I just watched today which discusses and elaborates the math of spread and compares some of the different diseases
Cool. Thanks, Kurtz. Viruses are viruses though even though they all have a unique signature and mutations. The initial strategy is the same in the same way that, say, a football team is either going to run or pass to try to score. Endless variations which which to take up either the run or pass. Even combinations of both on the same play. But the strategies are simple.
In other words, Seth, you are using wayyyyy too much crystal meth….time for an intervention … or maybe not
Patient Zero tells us the first documented case, not the first case per se. Important information? Certainly. But what it tells us in effect is that the virus began somewhere else, hit an area with no local immunity, and exploded. Patient Zero is the detonation point.
Any suits against the Chinese would get tossed for the same reason a tiger escaping a zoo in the States and killing or injuring people would be tied to a tiger escaping a zoo in China.
the tiger analogy is related to Turley’s point about proximate cause
the main big point they get dismissed is that 1976 statute he mentioned
You might want to look up the legal concept of intervening causation, described as follows: when an intervening cause (Trump’s negligence/lying) breaks the connection between a defendant’s negligent act (China) and a plaintiff’s injury (spread of COVID-19 in the U.S.) a defendant’s negligent act is no longer a ‘responsible cause’ of that plaintiff’s injury. The key to determining whether an intervening agency has broken the original chain of causation is whether, under the circumstances, it was reasonably foreseeable that the agency would intervene in such a way as to cause the resulting injury.
When Trump finally stopped lying and downplaying COVID-19, and social distancing was recommended, most states complied, and the spread was limited. Most medical experts agree this was necessary to prevent further death and illness. That proves the reasonable foreseeability prong: it was reasonably foreseeable that failing to advise the public about the danger of a highly contagious virus to which there is no herd immunity or vaccine, and to recommend social distancing would result in spread of the disease that would not have otherwise occurred. The longer the delay in disclosing this information and recommending social distancing, coupled with the lack of testing capacity, the greater the extent of spread. So, no matter how negligent China was, Trump’s mishandling and lying broke the chain of causation between China’s conduct and the spread of COVID-19 in the U.S.. This is simple tort law.
Then, there is the duty to mitigate damages: a plaintiff may not recover for any item of damages that they could have avoided through the use of reasonable care. Reasonable care is the conduct expected of a reasonably-prudent and careful person with knowledge of the facts under the circumstances. That places Trump’s knowledge plus the playbook information he was given squarely at issue for discovery. It appears clear from news reports that Trump had more than sufficient information about the risk of this disease and how it could rapidly spread when there were only a handful of cases that could have been quarantined, and contacts isolated. Instead, to prevent the market from crashing, he called it a “hoax”, said 15 cases would soon be 0 cases, he downplayed it and lied about a vaccine being available “very quickly”. That is not the conduct of a reasonably-prudent person under the circumstances. He has blood on those tiny hands of his.
The point regarding Ebola is that even though it is more virulent than COVID-19, actions by the Obama Administration stopped it from spreading here. The same could have been true if Trump wasn’t a narcissist and had any real leadership ability.
Natacha – do you think if you parrot yourself that it actually works? It only works if CNN is your source for news.
Just seize their assets in the US, all of them.
I say let’s seize Trump’s assets, all of them, US and elsewhere.
Natacha – you are supposedly an attorney, what would be your cause of action for seizing Trump’s assets?
I’m hoping it would entail a taze stick to the package.
Make him do the ambling buffalo dance.
Sautéed mushroom, anyone?
YNOT wants to sauté Seth’s mushroom?
You people are really strange
Turley Makes Vague Media Claims
Below is a passage from Turley’s column:
“Both American and British intelligence officials recently found a credible possibility that the lab was the source and that the outbreak then spread at first through the Huanan Seafood Market. There is no proof of this, but dismissal of the theory occurred as some in the media condemned President Trump for his use of the terms “Wuhan virus” and “Chinese virus.” That narrative seemed to demand universal rejection of the theory that the outbreak might have been the result of negligence at the lab”.
……………………………………………………………….
Here Turley implies, without evidence, that mainstream media is dismissing the lab theory. I’m not seeing that. My sources have given credible weight to the lab theory. What’s more, the entire world knows this virus came from China. It was documented in real time by international media.
I dont believe there’s any ‘danger’ the world will forget where this virus came from. Only those in the rightwing media bubble fear we missed an ‘opportunity’ by not calling it the Wuhan Virus. That stupid argument should have ended weeks ago. But here Professor Turley wants to rekindle it.
SETH PRESUMES TO EDIT PROFESSOR’S WEBSITE
the article is a legitimate and timely comment on private lawsuits and the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976.
it’s useful information well shared by the professor at this time. Why do you often criticize professor for making helpful information available to the public?
why do you presume to edit him like that?
i’ll play editor of your comment. “Turley Bad” adds nothing to the debate. the diversionary assertion in your last paragraph that this was about the virus naming is inaccurate. you either did not read the article, or you didn’t like it and want to dismiss it in favor of your usual themes.
i suggest you humble yourself a little and go back and actually read it before you presume to edit
Kurtz, this column isnt about only the lawsuits. China deserves whatever litigation comes it’s way. But mainstream media has NOT played down China’s responsibility. Nor do we need to call it the ‘Wuhan Virus’ in order to keep responsibility focused on China.
MSM has not downplayed China as the source, but only Fox News, Breitbart, Sinclair and Limbaugh keep trying to make the case that the morbidity and mortality we are experiencing here in the US is all China’s fault. The reason is, of course, to shift blame away from Trump for his utter incompetence. The reason the pro-Trump media keep bitching about MSM (and I include Turley in this group) is that MSM also report on what Trump has failed to do that contributes to the spread of this virus–something they won’t do. So, MSM gets called, “biased”, “unfair” and “fake”. Whenever a journalist asks a question Trump doesn’t like, he pivots to try to pretend that the journalist is really attacking the military, the CDC, first-responders, doctors, nurses or some other group dealing with this crisis, but not him. He calls them “fake” to their faces and won’t answer. The truly “fake media” are the pro-Trumpsters. Today’s piece is nothing but more red meat for the Trumpsters–a convenient distraction away from the fact that the U.S. still hasn’t reached the peak yet, even though we are well into April, and to pivot away from Trump’s lack of leadership, his arrogance and the pathetic way he takes over briefing on COVID-19 and turns it into a campaign rally. Yesterday, in response to a journalist’s question he didn’t like, so instead of answering, he predicted he’ll win by a “landslide”. He is truly repulsive.
Natch i realize you are in the same pro-mass-media navel gazing habits as Seth Peter but at least he has the excuse that he used to be a reporter. how could you totally miss the point. oh wait. you are essentially a bitterly hateful anti-Trump partisan and there is no pretense of a serious debate here from you least of all.
the article was not about what the stinking nattering nabobs of negativity said or said not. it is about these fanciful civil suits against china which will not succeed. which was turley’s actual core point for those who have reading comprehension
Then why bring it up at all? Because, if you look at the totality of what Turley published today, you’ll see an extensive recitation of theories, suppositions, vague assertions and veiled accusation all about China’s allegedly bad behavior, but tempered with a downplayed admission that a lawsuit isn’t really feasible. Red meat. Red meat.
Ah you just show up and say the same stuff every day against him no matter what. it’s sad
the entirety of your effort is nothing more than spinning and propaganda, except in a few unguarded moments when you forget the primary mission and let something genuine slip
Recently the mass media explored some of the stories about possible lab release
that was about two months after twitter was banning accounts for suggesting it.
the mass media is pathetic and you show up every day to spit shine their boots.
you also again skipped over the key point turley made which is the sovereign immunity makes these suits somewhat of a diversion since they can’t succeed at stated goals. and the matter is one of international relations not civil proceedings.
and you finish by reasserting your straw man claim about nomenclature
seth, it’s too bad you’re wasting your writing skills on the daily errand of denouncing turley and shoeshining the press. think and speak for yourself and we will all be uplifted
I’m sure many books are forthcoming about how best to deal with Communist China. I’m fairly certain most or all will start with the simple assertion that America has given up a dangerous amount of its political and economic free-will by overdependence on trade with China. Without US citizens knowing it, elites placed portions of our food and medicine supply in the hands of Communist bureaucrats whose Han Superiority and Communist self-righteous expansionism see America as their enemy. America’s weakness, in the CCP/PLA mindset, is a deeply ingrained consumerist impulse to buy cheap, while tuning out the long-term blowback of shopping decisions. The Communists only real threat is the slim possibility that Americans become highly disciplined, patriotic buyers willing to pay more than the cheapest price for something.
I can also assure you that suing China will be brushed aside as just so much pointless posturing and escapism from our strategic challenge.
Pbinca,
The elites want to kick the can down the road, as they have been since the mid-1990s when Clinton and Gingrich (etc) championed the absurdity that allowing China into the WTO would cause the Chinese citizenry to suddenly want freedom once their standard of living increased.
Our consumerist culture can be traced to Edward Bernays and his work with propaganda.
I sadly agree that there is likely a slim chance that people will suddenly start voting with their pocketbook and buy American or at least anywhere but China. People are ill-informed and, worse, incurious. China has a huge hold on Amazon. Etsy is selling V for Vendetta cloth masks to cover mouth and nose that are from Chinese companies. Ah, the irony.
Rose, Walmart, the nation’s largest retailer, was selling mostly ‘Made In China’ goods as far back as 20 years ago.
I remember one of my deceased kinsman who was an industrialist and used to rant back in the 80s about how it was a pity that they had to move manufacturing to Japan and then the ROC ie Taiwan in order to compete. He could have been feeding Trump talking points from the grave but at the time the ire was focused mostly on Taiwan.
he died before the PRC really opened up. when he was around they were stuck making fireworks. but, he predicted they would come along too, eventually.
it was a long time before Republicans cared at all about this issue, only Pat Buchanan kept the issue alive at all. Republicans were almost wholly free-traders until Trump.
Remember Ross perot>? He called it; but he had to run in the “Reform party” as there was no space for the issue inside the Republican ranks who were on the take of global capitalist interests intent on moving it all to China to make their fortunes. and oh they did, along with the paid off Democrats too, like bill Clinton who signed the NAFTA and sung its praises.
For this reason alone, Trump will always have a place in history. He utterly crushed the “free trade” dogma that had befuddled the Republicans for two decades or more.
Perhaps, too little, too late? We will see
Rear guards battle with the future are always too little too late Kurtz. You can’t put a cork in the future or pump up a shrunk globe. Smart leadership will deal with it and make the best of many opportunities. Remember Yang? You liked him. Was he selling a return to factory floors and sweat shops for Americans? There will not be enough work because of machines, not because of Chinese workers who will also become obsolete except as consumers. The problems of the future are not the ones from the Industrial Revolution.
True. That’s a huge lesson of the downsizing from the 2008 crash. More machines. Less people on salary on the other, total free agent markets created.
Not only that, entire industries met their end effectively in the last month. Well, the industry will remain, but the means have been forever changed.
Hard to picture the entertainment industry, which had been shifting more and more digital and streaming every year, doesn’t make the quantum leap and become mostly so after this. Theaters had awful occupancy rates when compared with other industries before the virus, hard to see the one to infinity theaters not peacing out after this.
yes a lot of things are going away a lot faster now which were just kind of dwindling before. and to some extent that is impossible to reverse
that’s part of why all these bailout schemes need to be fair and even handed and not just a matter of failing industries bailing themselves out
and yet fair and even handed parts of it have been underfunded like the small business PPP, sad, lame!
you do realize Seth is jamming the blog with gobbledeegook for its own sake…
that poster is not seth
if I had to guess i would say that Anonymous it is “elvis” who also had a second name, forget, the guy who says that he used to work in a lab.
at first i thought maybe those were book sockpuppets but i have thought that this elvis is a different person than book
it’s a vain exercise to waste too much time accusing people of being socks or worrying about it. just relax and see what greater insights we can conjure through our socratic dialogue!
Yang was right right about a lot of things, the loss of jobs to automation and what is coming in respect of AI in the future. this whole mess may just throw that dynamic into overdrive— a lot of easy service jobs like “secretary” now will that have gone away under quarantine, may never get rehired, as remote communications tech and increased automation and distance handling of documents like over cloud and all that, are brought online faster in service industries, like my own, law.
Yang will be remembered as a prophet for bringing this issue out in the primary, God bless him!
but that epochal insight was not about globalism or trade wars per se. related topics but not closely correlated. Yang kind of moved his point that way to try and sound a note of contrast to Trump so as to get some traction in the primary. This actually diluted the potency of that message because it made it sound like a talking point instead of a major social trend that transcends any sort of political contest.
the trade wars issues do relate to automation sometimes. automation has made and kept Japan competitive today in terms of productivity, not all the other sneaky tools in the older book of trade competition.
but going back to that playbook of sneaky practices, the PRC is full on using them at all times past and present.
I zero in on two things which make trade against the PRC not free and not fair.
a) not fair workers in the PRC are basically slaves who get paid whenever bosses feel like it, or not, cant sue in courts or they end up in jail (this was not true in postwar japan, by contrast, nor Taiwan, although probably Taiwan was closer to the PRC on this than was japan)
b) not fair workers in the PRC are not allowed to form unions (this was also true to some extent in Japan and Taiwan, but not even close to as bad as the PRC today)
genuine trade unionism seems to have had a stronger presence in republic of Korea than either Taiwan or Japan but that’s kind of an interesting backwater story that we don’t need to flush out here
i would add book that there are some things which need to be made onshore. like maybe stuff like n95 respirators? somehow?
I dont know what those things are but we should figure it out and not just go whole hog into the notion that everything can be made overseas and we will get it “just in time” when we need it. obviously that can work under perfect circumstances but sometimes problems erupt and need production closer to home
Kurtz, while we agree that trade should be negotiated to be fair, and that includes recognizing that some parties need tight guidelines, that is different from nationalism and breaking up global alliances. I think Yang’s point was larger – not smaller – than the election though I’m not sure he had a coherent strategy to face it.
If n95 masks are essential to our security, there will be thousands of things like that, an the bureaucracy necessary to regulate them would be much more odious than the simple principle of stockpiling which we supposedly are already doing. Someone – or many – should be held to account for our shortages, but we trying to mandate they be home made would be counter productive.
PS I don;t know if you ever listened to that discussion between 2 of the biggest thinkers on the planet right now about the future I linked. I’m sure you would find it interesting even if you hated everything said.
Pinker and Harari
https://youtu.be/qHSzeijQ95I
Yeah, right when China was allowed into the WTO by Clinton and Gingrich, etc.
Call it “Red China” and call the people “pink chinks”.
China telegraphed to everybody they were lying when they shut down Wuhan and other cities, costing trillions of dollars, on January 23. Things needed to happen far faster after that point than they did I think..
Tweeted last night by Rep Gov of Maryland::
Governor Larry Hogan
@GovLarryHogan
· 13h
I’m grateful to President Trump for sending us a list of federal labs and generously offering Maryland use of them for #COVID19 testing. Accessing these federal labs will be critical for utilizing the 500,000 tests we have acquired from South Korea.
I get the job.
But more importantly, there is a big problem with securing reagents which are critical components of effective tests. Because why? Made in China that’s why
It’s great that the ROK has developed them. The ROK are true friends of the United States and showing tremendous public healthy leadership to the world.
This blame placing exercise will have as much success as going after flu vaccine manufacturers for being responsible for the conditions in which CV-19 would thrive.
And the Trump administration definitely doesn’t want any prying into negligence issues around the virus.
Turley may be correct on the current law. But any judge who dismisses one of these law suits is going to have to go into the witness protection program.
JTs on the scapegoat train, as if CHina holds the key to getting out of this crisis.
Our leadership holds that key and they are still f…..g up every day on national TV.
btb = Total Schmuck
For those of you in flyover country, that means:
NOUN
NORTH AMERICAN
informal
a foolish or contemptible person.
“you’ve really got to be some schmuck to fall for that one”
synonyms:
idiot · ass · halfwit · nincompoop · blockhead · buffoon · dunce · dolt · ignoramus · cretin · imbecile · dullard · moron · simpleton · clod · dope · ninny · chump · dimwit · nitwit · goon · dumbo · dummy · dum-dum · dumbbell · loon · jackass · bonehead
Mofo you’re a puppet
Bythebook,
Our leadership has been f…ing up on China since the mid-1990s at least.
he’s actually not if you read the whole article it would be clear. the thrust of it, if you encompass the whole thing, is that these suits are going nowhere
i don’t mind saying that Turley is confirming and elaborating what I said a week ago when these diversions surfaced, ie, a) they are prevented by law due to sovereign immunity and b) they are policy level international relations issues not court case type issues.
Now I am not genius, that could have been said by any mature lawyer thinking and talking
it’s Turley who has said it fully and more wisely than myself.
that was for book, not on the “scapegoat train” I meant
Mao Tee Tung still alive.
Is ruthless Culture lives on.
65 million dead on his merciless
Pursuit of power.
The gift that keeps on giving: mutations.
Genetic diversity and evolution of SARS-CoV-2
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1567134820300915
• A novel coronavirus is officially known as SARS-CoV-2.
• Eighty-six complete or near-complete genomes of SARS-CoV-2 were analyzed.
• Many mutations and deletions on coding and non-coding regions of SARS-CoV-2 were found.
good luck on the vaccine with all these strains. this is going to be a problem for quite some time
The negligence on 9/11 was to be found at Logan Airport. Anyone know the name of the director of the Massachusetts Port Authority?
As for China, they will not be held responsible because they are big, cold, mean, and ruthless and no one can force them to do a blessed thing. Saving face means more to them than anyone’s welfare.
China is not responsible, says those Americans who have a vested interest in China’s pharmaceutical industry supplying 90% of America’s generics.
supplying 90% of America’s generics.
Fake news.
the statement is overbroad. here reason magazine unpacks it
nonetheless China makes much of the critical chemical components of medicines and lab tests iie “reagents”
https://reason.com/2020/04/06/why-you-shouldnt-trust-anyone-who-claims-80-percent-of-americas-drugs-come-from-china/
the level of production there is a national security issue and the global supply chain for important things need to be stabilized for not only this problem but other ones to come
Of course China is responsible for their actions. So are our leaders. Guess who is more responsible for our situation and who we have leverage over?