The White House on Tuesday acknowledged it will not meet its goal of having 70 percent of all American adults receive at least one dose of a coronavirus vaccine by July 4, a rare setback for a president who has put the nation’s recovery from the pandemic at the center of his agenda.

It will be the second time the administration will miss a goal related to the pandemic — in part because it has repeatedly set objectives that are deliverable. Officials also indicated Monday that President BidenJoe BidenBaltimore police chief calls for more ‘boots on the ground’ to handle crime wave Biden to deliver remarks at Sen. John Warner’s funeral Garland dismisses broad review of politicization of DOJ under Trump MORE is likely to miss his target of shipping 80 million vaccines overseas by the end of the month, blaming it on logistical challenges.

The acknowledgement of a setback on Tuesday comes as the pace of U.S. vaccinations has dramatically fallen off, a worry to public health experts who say the nation must be wary of COVID-19 variants that could take hold in parts of the country.

ADVERTISEMENT

Officials on Tuesday warned the delta variant is extremely transmissible, can be much more severe and poses a threat to unvaccinated young people.

“The delta variant is currently the greatest threat in the U.S. to our attempt to eliminate COVID-19,” Anthony FauciAnthony FauciWhite House admits July 4 vaccine marker will be missed Overnight Health Care: White House acknowledges it will fall short of July 4 vaccine goal | Fauci warns of ‘localized surges’ in areas with low vaccination rates | Senate Finance leader releases principles for lowering prescription drug prices Poll: 58 percent say Fauci should not resign MORE, the nation’s leading infectious diseases expert, said Tuesday. “Good news: All vaccines are effective against the delta variant. Conclusion: We have the tools, so let’s use them and crush the outbreak.”

Yet while Tuesday was clearly a disappointment, it also comes as life in the United States rapidly returns to normal, with people going to summer blockbusters and baseball stadiums announcing they will fill to capacity this summer.

The White House cast the missed objective in positive terms, with White House coronavirus response coordinator Jeff ZientsJeff ZientsWhite House admits July 4 vaccine marker will be missed Overnight Health Care: White House acknowledges it will fall short of July 4 vaccine goal | Fauci warns of ‘localized surges’ in areas with low vaccination rates | Senate Finance leader releases principles for lowering prescription drug prices 70 percent of Californians over 12 have received one shot of coronavirus vaccine MORE telling reporters it would take “a few extra weeks” to reach Biden’s original marker.

“This is amazing progress and has our country returning to normal much sooner than anyone could have predicted,” Zients said Tuesday. “Where the country has more work to do is particularly with 18- to 26-year-olds. The reality is more younger Americans have felt that COVID-19 is not something that impacts them and they’ve been less eager to get the shot.”  

Zients acknowledged the U.S. would also fall short of having 160 million Americans fully vaccinated by Independence Day. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, about 150 million Americans are fully vaccinated.

ADVERTISEMENT

“We will hit 160 million Americans fully vaccinated no later than mid-July,” he vowed.  

White House officials described Biden’s July 4 goal as aspirational and a way to provide incentives for people to get vaccinated so they can gather with family and friends.

They also announced a new goal: making sure adults over the age of 27 receive at least one shot by Independence Day.

Zients said that the U.S. has partially vaccinated 70 percent of adults aged 30 and older and is on track to reach people aged 27 and older after data from the July 4 weekend is counted.

The White House has not yet outlined new strategies it plans to deploy to reach younger adults who haven’t gotten vaccinated, but White House press secretary Jen PsakiJen PsakiBaltimore police chief calls for more ‘boots on the ground’ to handle crime wave White House draws ire of progressives amid voting rights defeat White House admits July 4 vaccine marker will be missed MORE said that officials would build on efforts already underway to reach this age group. She pointed to an ongoing college vaccine challenge and business incentive programs, like Microsoft giving away free Xbox consoles through the Boys and Girls Clubs of America.

“Our focus from the beginning has been continuing to redouble our efforts among demographics and groups where we need extra assistance,” Psaki said, before acknowledging there are limits to what the administration can do. “Ultimately, it is going to be up to individuals to decide if they want to get vaccinated.”  

Click Here: Liverpool soccer tracksuit

Jen Kates, a senior vice president at the Kaiser Family Foundation, said she thinks younger people will be easier to convince than other holdouts. Still, she said that effort will fall largely on state and local officials rather than federal.

“What that requires is a ground game effort that is very intense. It’s not usually something that a federal government does. It’s certainly something our federal government can support by helping communities do that work, but it really is down to the almost old fashioned door-to-door kind of campaign,” Kates said.

Anand Parekh, chief medical adviser at the Bipartisan Policy Center, said that the most important data points of the vaccination program are the steep declines in daily cases to about 10,000 and daily deaths to about 300.  

Indeed, the White House is planning to celebrate that progress by hosting some 1,000 first responders, essential workers and military members on the South Lawn for an Independence Day celebration on July 4.

Parekh said the message to younger American adults should be threefold: reminding them of the threat from new variants, communicating that vaccinations are the key to getting back to normal life and stressing that vaccines protect others who are vulnerable around them but unable to get vaccinated.  

“We cannot stop; we need to do more particularly given the delta variant with its high transmissibility increasing across the country,” he said.  

Biden and other officials are crisscrossing the country to convince hesitant or unwilling Americans to get vaccinated as part of a “month of action” in June.

Despite promotions like lotteries, sports tickets and college scholarships, vaccination rates have lagged considerably, especially in the South and the Midwest.  

According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, 13 percent of all U.S. adults currently say they have no intention of ever getting vaccinated.

Only 16 states and Washington, D.C., have vaccinated 70 percent or more adults with at least one shot. Four states — Mississippi, Wyoming, Alabama and Louisiana — have vaccinated less than 50 percent of their populations with at least one dose.

First lady Jill BidenJill BidenBiden to deliver remarks at Sen. John Warner’s funeral Brad Paisley, Jill Biden urge people in Tennessee to get vaccinated White House admits July 4 vaccine marker will be missed MORE was in two Southern states, Mississippi and Tennessee, to tour vaccination sites on Tuesday. President Biden is scheduled to travel to North Carolina as part of the vaccination push later this week.  

Fauci on Tuesday warned about the threat of “localized surges” in areas with low vaccination rates.  

ADVERTISEMENT

“There is a danger, a real danger, that if there is a persistence of a recalcitrance to getting vaccinated that you could see localized surges,” Fauci said during a White House briefing.

However, he emphasized: “All of that is totally and completely avoidable by getting vaccinated.”

Officials said that the Biden administration will continue to take steps to make vaccines more accessible, incentivize vaccinations and answer questions from wary Americans in the coming months.  

“We’re not going to let up. I know July 4 is an important deadline, but this continues long after July 4,” said U.S. Surgeon General Vivek MurthyVivek MurthyWhite House admits July 4 vaccine marker will be missed The Hill’s Morning Report – After high-stakes Biden-Putin summit, what now? A full pandemic recovery demands mental health support MORE. “We’re not going anywhere.”

 

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthyKevin McCarthySunday shows – Fauci in the spotlight Kinzinger urges Republican leaders to call out ‘garbage politicians’ who play on vaccine fears Investigating the Jan. 6 insurrection will resurrect democracy MORE (R-Calif.) faces a daunting task as he weighs his options for appointing Republicans to a special committee to investigate the Capitol attack of Jan. 6.

Formally, his picks need approval from Democratic leaders, who wrote the rules for the panel. Informally, McCarthy’s choices can’t upset former President TrumpDonald TrumpYoungkin releases new ad seeking to tie McAuliffe to Trump in Virginia’s governors race Trump says being impeached twice didn’t change him: ‘I became worse’ Lobbyists, moderate Democrats rely on debunked arguments against tax hikes MORE, who remains the party’s kingmaker. And internally, they can’t alienate one faction of McCarthy’s conference or another, which could threaten his chances of becoming Speaker if the House flips in next year’s midterm elections.

Yet there’s a fourth complication, as well: A number of lawmakers say they’re simply not interested in being on the committee.

ADVERTISEMENT

“It’s not on Rep. Upton’s bucket list to serve on the select committee,” said Billy Fuerst, a spokesman for Fred UptonFrederick (Fred) Stephen UptonCheney, Kinzinger are sole GOP votes for Jan. 6 select committee Fauci: Emails highlight confusion about Trump administration’s mixed messages early in pandemic Why Republican politicians are sticking with Trump MORE, the veteran Michigan Republican.

Upton is hardly alone. The Hill last week contacted the offices of 30 Republicans who had supported an independent commission to investigate the Jan. 6 attack. Only two would comment for this story — Upton and Rep. Andrew Garbarino (N.Y.) — and neither indicated the slightest desire to serve on the panel.

“The Select Committee is not about getting answers, it’s just another platform for Democrats to bash Republicans,” Garbarino said in a statement lamenting that Speaker Nancy PelosiNancy PelosiPhotos of the Week: Therapy dog, Surfside memorial and Chinese dancers Investigating the Jan. 6 insurrection will resurrect democracy Hillicon Valley: Warren asks SEC to take closer look at cryptocurrency exchanges | Maryland town knocked offline as part of massive ransomware attack | Huawei hires three new lobbying firms MORE (D-Calif.) had not applied the rules of the independent commission to the select committee.

“The best any Republican participants can hope for,” he added, “is to push back on whatever partisan divisive claims Democratic members make throughout this process.”

Despite the criticism, there are political advantages to the select committee for GOP lawmakers, who will have an easier time bashing Pelosi’s creation than they would the independent commission, which was negotiated and endorsed by Rep. John KatkoJohn Michael KatkoMore than 75 Capitol Police officers have quit amid low morale since Jan. 6: report Five big questions about the Jan. 6 select committee Cheney, Kinzinger are sole GOP votes for Jan. 6 select committee MORE (N.Y.), the top Republican on the House Homeland Security Committee.

ADVERTISEMENT

“The select committee allows Republicans to attack it a little more than they would with an independent commission,” a GOP aide told The Hill.

But the reluctance of lawmakers to participate on the panel — or even to talk about it with the press — also hints at some of the potential pitfalls facing McCarthy and Republicans as the process evolves.

The Capitol attack was conducted by Trump supporters hoping to reverse his election defeat, injuring almost 140 police officers in the process. And Republicans on the panel will be put in a challenging spot, wary not to appear too critical of the officers now condemning Trump’s actions — or too sympathetic to the violent pro-Trump mob — all while defending a former president who had encouraged the crowd to march on the Capitol to block the peaceful transfer of power.

The GOP conference is stacked with Trump allies, including a handful of conservative rabble-rousers who have downplayed the violence of Jan. 6 and are more than eager to defend the former president on such a prominent stage. Reps. Matt GaetzMatthew (Matt) GaetzCalifornia event center drops plans to host Gaetz, Greene’s ‘America First’ tour Trump says ‘no reason’ for officer to shoot rioter, pushing conspiracy theory Gaetz associate seeks sentencing delay, still cooperating with prosecutors MORE (R-Fla.), Louie GohmertLouis (Louie) Buller GohmertThe Hill’s Morning Report – Cheney ‘honored’ to serve on select committee Ethics panel dismisses GOP lawmaker’s ,000 metal detector fine House Ethics panel upholds ,000 metal detector fine against GOP lawmaker MORE (R-Texas), Marjorie Taylor GreeneMarjorie Taylor GreeneGOP efforts to downplay danger of Capitol riot increase The Memo: What now for anti-Trump Republicans? Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene says she’s meeting with Trump ‘soon’ in Florida MORE (R-Ga.) and Lauren BoebertLauren BoebertKinzinger urges Republican leaders to call out ‘garbage politicians’ who play on vaccine fears GOP women’s group dismisses Greene and Boebert as ‘carnival barkers’ Kinzinger says he suspects some lawmakers knew what was going to happen on Jan. 6 MORE (R-Colo.), for instance, have all expressed an avidness to serve on the committee.

But Pelosi has veto power over McCarthy’s picks, and sources say she’s expected, if need be, to keep the conservative fringe off of the panel in the name of promoting a “responsible” probe.

A second pool of potential GOP picks — less controversial than the first — features a group of Trump defenders with deeper experience in the rough sport of partisan combat.

Reps. Jim JordanJames (Jim) Daniel JordanHillicon Valley: Trump files lawsuit against Facebook, Twitter, and Google | New cyberattacks ramp up tensions with Russia | 36 states, DC sue Google alleging antitrust violations in app store Rep. Jordan releases Big Tech agenda Trump hits Biden, Democrats in post-presidential return to rally stage MORE (R-Ohio), Elise StefanikElise Marie StefanikBiden jabs at McConnell for highlighting bill he voted against Trump, GOP seize on NY election board problems Pelosi may include Republican on Jan. 6 select committee MORE (R-N.Y.) and Mike JohnsonJames (Mike) Michael JohnsonFew companies stick with pledge to shut off funding for GOP objectors GOP divided on anti-Biden midterm message ‘I want to cry’: House Republicans take emotional trip to the border MORE (R-La.) were all effective advocates for the former president during his first impeachment. Rep. Jim Banks (R-Ind.), head of the Republican Study Committee and a former Trump critic, has emerged as a prominent champion of the 45th president, joining him on recent trips to New Jersey and the southern border. And Rep. Rodney DavisRodney Lee DavisThe Hill’s 12:30 Report – Presented by Goldman Sachs – Trump Org CFO’s expected indictment The Hill’s Morning Report – Presented by Facebook – Senate path uncertain after House approves Jan. 6 panel Capitol Police Board signals resistance to reform MORE (Ill.), the senior Republican on the House Administration Committee, has already told news outlets that he’d accept a seat on the select committee.

Pelosi is sure to face some internal pressure to reject any of the 139 Republicans who had voted in January to reverse the presidential election results in Arizona, Pennsylvania or both. And all but Davis fit that category.

“I hope that Kevin will appoint responsible people to the committee,” Pelosi said cryptically before the July 4 recess, when asked about her criteria for membership.

McCarthy’s office declined to comment on the deliberations surrounding the select committee. But his long-term goals are no mystery: The minority leader is fighting to flip control of the House in next year’s elections, then rise to Speaker in the weeks following. And the clearest path to achieving both, he’s calculated, is to remain in the good graces of Trump, who retains enormous support among conservatives and is vowing to use his powers of influence to sway races in the midterms and beyond. GOP leadership races are likely not exempt.

McCarthy could opt to appoint no additional Republicans to the select committee, leaving empty the five remaining seats. But that would lend Democrats — with help from Rep. Liz CheneyElizabeth (Liz) Lynn CheneyInvestigating the Jan. 6 insurrection will resurrect democracy Sore losers: Trump and Netanyahu have a lot in common Over 535 charged six months after Jan. 6 riot: DOJ MORE (Wyo.), the Trump-bashing Republican who accepted a seat on the panel — the entire stage to attack the former president uncontested.

Pelosi faced a similar decision in 2014, when Republicans created a select committee to investigate the deadly 2012 attack on a U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya. Despite some calls to boycott the panel, for fear of legitimizing it, she chose to participate, tapping the late Rep. Elijah CummingsElijah Eugene CummingsFive big questions about the Jan. 6 select committee Democrats plot next move after GOP sinks Jan. 6 probe Lawmakers press AbbVie CEO on increased US prices of two drugs MORE (D-Md.) to lead the defense of the committee’s target: former Secretary of State Hillary ClintonHillary Diane Rodham ClintonMade for Vegas: Trump’s rallies now a ‘nostalgia act’ Matt Damon: Research for Trump supporter role ‘eye-opening’ Sanders reaffirms support for Turner in Ohio amid Democratic rift MORE.

The vote to create the Jan. 6 committee underscores the similarly partisan nature of the current debate: Only two Republicans — Cheney and Rep. Adam KinzingerAdam Daniel KinzingerKinzinger: Afghanistan exit ‘a crushing defeat’ Sunday shows – Fauci in the spotlight Kinzinger urges Republican leaders to call out ‘garbage politicians’ who play on vaccine fears MORE (Ill.) — supported the bill. And even some of Trump’s harshest Republican critics say that’s a major problem, and one that will undermine the panel’s ultimate findings.

Rep. Jaime Herrera BeutlerJaime Lynn Herrera BeutlerBiden jabs at McConnell for highlighting bill he voted against Five big questions about the Jan. 6 select committee Cheney, Kinzinger are sole GOP votes for Jan. 6 select committee MORE (R-Wash.) — who voted to impeach Trump and supported the formation of the 9/11-style independent commission — says the select committee is inherently partisan, as Pelosi designed it, and therefore won’t be taken seriously by much of the public.

“If we move forward in a partisan manner, the truth about Jan. 6 will never be fully known — or respected,” she told The Hill just before the recess.

ADVERTISEMENT

Herrera Beutler also objected to the composition of the select panel, arguing that it’s a mistake to place sitting House members — who serve two-year terms and face intense political pressures to win reelection — in charge of such a crucial investigation. Republicans “made a mistake” in forming the partisan Benghazi panel in 2014, she said, and Democrats should take a lesson from that partisan indiscretion.

“The amount of political pressure on this thing is insane … and everybody in D.C. right now seems to be afraid of their own political shadow,” she said. “So why would we put those people in charge of unearthing what will be probably sensitive, important, intense information about the truth?”

Rebecca Beitsch contributed.

Click Here: Scotland Rugby Shirt

An attorney representing Breonna Taylor’s family is suing the Louisville Metro Police Department over allegations that authorities lied when claiming there was no body camera footage from the night police raided the 26-year-old’s apartment and fatally shot her. 

In the suit, filed Wednesday in Jefferson County court, attorney Sam Aguiar argued that Taylor’s family believes “misinformation has been presented to the general public regarding the usage of body cameras” on March 13, 2020, when police executed a no-knock warrant on Taylor’s apartment as part of a drug investigation. 

Taylor’s boyfriend, Kenneth Walker, opened fire on police, later saying he believed the officers were intruders. Police fired back, hitting Taylor multiple times. 

ADVERTISEMENT

The three officers involved in the incident have not been charged in connection with Taylor’s death, though Brett Hankison was fired by the department in June 2020 and was charged with three counts of wanton endangerment for bullets that went into a nearby apartment. 

Police have previously said that body camera footage from the incident does not exist, explaining that some officers within the department that executed the warrant do not wear body cameras and that any cameras that were worn may have not been activated at the time. 

However, Aguiar argued in this week’s lawsuit that one of the officers, Myles Cosgrove, was photographed wearing a body camera harness the evening the shooting took place, though he has said it contained no camera at the time. 

Additionally, the attorney argued that the cameras used by department officers, known as Axon Flex 2 cameras, are designed to activate when the lightbars of a police vehicle illuminate. 

Aguiar said in the court filing that several police cars at Taylor’s apartment that evening had their lightbars on at the time of the raid. 

“Simply put, it would have been difficult for most of the LMPD members with body cameras and who were associated with … events at Breonna’s … to not have had their Axon body cameras activated at one point or another,” he argued. 

ADVERTISEMENT

Aguiar explained that the police department has not fulfilled requests for information on body camera footage. 

“The plaintiffs, and the public, have an uncompromised right to know whether undisclosed body camera footage exists, or otherwise previously existed, from LMPD Axon Cameras which relates to the events surrounding the death of Breonna Taylor,” he wrote, calling on a judge to demand that Louisville police respond to his inquiry. 

The Louisville police department declined to comment to The Hill, explaining it does not discuss pending litigation.

In September, the city of Louisville reached a $12 million settlement with Taylor’s family, the largest the city has ever paid in a police misconduct case. 

The settlement also included specific promises for police reforms, including guidance on carrying out no-knock warrants. 

Click Here: Belgium soccer tracksuit

Justice Stephen BreyerStephen BreyerSupreme Court backs Alaska Natives in clash over COVID-19 relief funds Justice Alito bristles at conservative Supreme Court’s incremental course Supreme Court’s Cedar Point property rights decision protects both sides MORE’s future is the biggest question as the Supreme Court winds down its term in the next week.

Close observers of the court are scrutinizing any tea leaves they can find for possible clues on the 82-year-old liberal justice, questioning whether several major majority and dissenting opinions in recent weeks offer any evidence on his plans.

Breyer is under intense pressure from liberal activist groups and some progressive lawmakers to step down from the court while a Democrats is in the White House, giving President BidenJoe BidenTrump calls Barr ‘a disappointment in every sense of the word’ Last foreign scientist to work at Wuhan lab: ‘What people are saying is just not how it is’ Toyota defends donations to lawmakers who objected to certifying election MORE a chance to nominate a younger liberal to the court at a time when the party also holds a slim majority in the Senate.

ADVERTISEMENT

After former President TrumpDonald TrumpTrump calls Barr ‘a disappointment in every sense of the word’ Last foreign scientist to work at Wuhan lab: ‘What people are saying is just not how it is’ NY prosecutors give Trump Org lawyers Monday deadline: report MORE nominated three justices to the court in four years — including the successor to liberal Justice Ruth Bader GinsburgRuth Bader GinsburgOcasio-Cortez says Breyer should retire from Supreme Court Progressives want to tighten screws beyond Manchin and Sinema Juan Williams: Time for Justice Breyer to go MORE after her death last September — progressives are having waking nightmares that another liberal justice will hang on at the court for too long, and the window will again close on appointing a liberal successor.

Earlier this year, underscoring the unprecedented pressure Breyer is coming under, the progressive group Demand Justice paid for a billboard mounted on a truck to circle the Supreme Court with a message urging him to retire.

Those looking for signals from Breyer have little to look through.

The Justice has given few if any signs on his plans.

Breyer’s most prominent opinion was writing for the 7-2 majority that rejected a Republican-led challenge against the Affordable Care Act (ACA).

ADVERTISEMENT

Click Here: ireland gaa shop

The moment was notable in part because Chief Justice John Roberts was also in the majority but assigned the opinion to Breyer, raising speculation among legal pundits over whether the chief wanted to honor his colleague at the end of his long career — or was enticing him to stick around.

“The question we will ask is he doing this as a gesture to let him have a big swan song in his last year?” CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin asked during a segment on Thursday. “Or is he assigning those opinions because he wants to show Justice Breyer, ‘Look, you’re still a valued member of this court, stay with us a few years longer.’ Both of these are possibilities. I don’t know which one is right.”

Christine Kexel Chabot, a law professor at Loyola University Chicago who has studied how judges time their retirements over the years, said the move is open to interpretation.

“I think there’s a question as to whether is this one of the great achievements of his career that he was able to forge this coalition in the challenge to the Affordable Care Act, or does he feel like he should keep going, and maybe he will also be able to continue playing that role in some of the hot-button cases that are going to be decided by the court next term,” Chabot said.

Some court watchers believe that the effort to pressure Breyer to resign could backfire on the left.

ADVERTISEMENT

“If you’re calling for him to retire, and then he retires, it looks like he caved to political pressure,” said David Lat, a legal blogger who writes about the court on his newsletter Original Jurisdiction and founded the blog Above The Law.

“The people who are asking him to retire are generally people on the left, who want him to be replaced by a younger, liberal justice, but in some ways, they’re making it less likely that he’ll retire by putting this pressure on him because he doesn’t want to be seen as somebody who is caving to partisan concerns,” he said.

Lat says that he sees signs that Breyer intends to stay at the court, noting that he’s hired a full set of clerks for the full year. He also believes that Breyer may be encouraged by the coalitions that have emerged in recent weeks.

“The court has, I guess you could say, been on its best behavior,” he said. “So if there’s a case for replacing Justice Breyer, with a younger, more liberal justice, the case is weakened a little bit, because the past few weeks of Supreme Court rulings have shown us that the Supreme Court is not this out of control, crazy conservative court. It’s actually right now at least an appropriately moderate court.”

Progressives see a court that has been dominated by conservative priorities for decades, and that categorically favors the wealthy and business interests at the expense of labor unions, environmental regulations and consumer protections.

Some of those concerned about the Supreme Court’s rightward tilt have called for structural reforms like court-packing to counteract what they see as an ideological capture that is at odds with public opinion and the public interest. Pushing for Breyer’s retirement has become a part of that larger effort.

Samuel Moyn, a Yale Law professor who was among a group of academics who called on Breyer to step down this month, has called for structural reforms to the court, specifically limiting its power to strike down laws passed by Congress. Moyn said that the public debate over whether Breyer should retire has rested on an illusion that the court is independent of politics.

“It’s sort of like trying to do the impossible,” he said. “Keeping the court apolitical, which it’s not, or keeping up the appearance that it’s apolitical, which if it ever made sense, it’s too late because the cat is out of the bag with both parties trying to achieve control over the Supreme Court.”

Moyn said he finds the “kremlinology” around trying to predict Breyer’s plans a disturbing reminder of how much hinges on a single official’s career plans. 

“Of course, it makes sense to try to figure it out,” he said. “But if we leave the discussion there, we never ask, should they enjoy this power? And why are we playing guessing games about these inscrutable rulers, instead of restoring our own self rule?”

Thousands of Cubans took to the street Sunday in one of the largest anti-government demonstrations in memory.

The Associated Press reported that the march, which took place on Havana’s Malecon promenade and other areas on the island, was to protest food shortages and high prices sparked by the coronavirus pandemic.

Authorities at first followed protesters as they chanted “Freedom,” “Enough” and “Unite,” according to the AP. One person on a motorcycle reportedly displayed a U.S. flag, but it was taken from him by others.

ADVERTISEMENT

One middle-aged protester told the wire service “We are fed up with the queues, the shortages. That’s why I’m here.”

The protest, in which a number of young people participated, disturbed traffic Sunday afternoon, the AP reported.

Police became involved hours later and attempted to break up the demonstration after protesters threw rocks.

Cuba is experiencing its most difficult economic crisis in decades, in addition to a resurgence in COVID-19 infections, as the country grapples with the U.S. sanctions that were imposed by the Trump administration.

People tried to record the protests on their cellphones and broadcast the demonstrations live, but Cuban authorities reportedly disabled internet service in the afternoon, the AP reported.

Approximately 300 people close to the government reportedly arrived at the demonstration with a Cuban flag and yelled slogans in support of the late President Fidel Castro and the Cuban revolution, the wire service reported.

ADVERTISEMENT

Some members of that group reportedly attacked a cameraman with the AP, while an AP photographer was reportedly injured by police.

Demonstrations also broke out in Miami Sunday, thousands of people in the Little Havana neighborhood gathering in solidarity with the Cubans.

Julie Chung, the acting assistant secretary of the State Department’s Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs, expressed support for the “peaceful protests” in Cuba, writing “We commend the numerous efforts of the Cuban people mobilizing donations to help neighbors in need.”

Carlos F. de Cossio, Cuba’s director general for U.S. affairs, however, slammed the State Department and its officials for “promoting social and political instability in #Cuba.”

He said they should “avoid expressing hypocritical concern for a situation they have been betting on.”

“Cuba is and will continue to be a peaceful country, contrary to the US,” he added.

Sen. Bob MenendezRobert (Bob) MenendezThe Innovation and Competition Act is progressive policy Schumer says Senate will vote on repealing 2002 war authorization The Hill’s Morning Report – Biden-Putin meeting to dominate the week MORE (D-N.J.), chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, expressed support for the demonstrations in Cuba, writing in a statement “Let us hear their voices. Listen to their cries of desperation. Support their demands by ensuring we do not perpetuate the regime’s decades of repression.”

He called the day of protests “historic,” and said Cubans were “bravely joining to demand nothing more than the ability to live safely and speak their minds, freely, openly, and without fear.”

Sen. Marco RubioMarco Antonio RubioThousands march in Cuba to protest food shortages, high prices Rubio, Demings rake in cash as Florida Senate race heats up US lawmakers express shock at Haitian president’s assassination MORE (R-Fla.) also voiced support for the Cubans protesting, saying in a video statement posted on Twitter that the U.S. should help spread the images and words coming out of Cuba, ensure that their message isn’t lost and “that the true nature of this barbaric regime is exposed, especially for those who still hold out fantasies and illusions about what the true nature of this regime is.”

“And to the people who are out there protesting I want them to know your voice has already been heard, that those of us who live here in freedom, we have tried to take your messages on social media across the worldwide web and make sure that everyone hears your voice, sees your suffering, and understands what’s happening,” Rubio continued.

“We’re with you in spirit, and we hope to be with you in action. We’re going to do everything we can,” he concluded.

Click Here: vodacom bulls rugby jersey

Anthony FauciAnthony FauciIsrael offering third Pfizer dose to adults with weak immune systems Fauci: ‘Horrifying’ to hear CPAC crowd cheering anti-vaccination remarks Ocasio-Cortez knocks Boebert for call to end extra jobless benefits MORE said on Sunday that he believes there should be more mandates at the local level requiring people to get the COVID-19 vaccine.

“I know you’ve been very clear that the government isn’t mandating vaccines, but do you think it’s generally a good idea for businesses or schools to require vaccinations?” CNN host Jake TapperJacob (Jake) Paul TapperEric Adams to meet with Biden on curbing gun violence: reports Israel offering third Pfizer dose to adults with weak immune systems Fauci: ‘Horrifying’ to hear CPAC crowd cheering anti-vaccination remarks MORE asked Fauci on “State of the Union.”

“I have been of this opinion and I remain of that opinion that I do believe at the local level, Jake, there should be more mandates, there really should be. We’re talking about life and death situation. We’ve lost 600,000 Americans already, and we’re still losing more people. There’ve been 4 million deaths worldwide. This is serious business,” Fauci said.

ADVERTISEMENT

The nation’s leading infectious disease expert also said that he believes there’s more hesitancy at the local level to get the vaccines because they are under an emergency use authorization and have not been officially approved, but he predicted more mandates would be issued once they haves been fully approved.

“I think the hesitancy at the local level of doing mandates is because the vaccines have not been officially fully approved, but people need to understand that the amount of data right now that shows a high degree of effectiveness and a high degree of safety is more than we’ve ever seen with emergency use authorization,” he said.

“So people should really understand that, but they’re waiting now until you get an official approval before and I think when you do see the official approval, Jake, you’re going to see a lot more mandates,” he added.

Tapper also asked Fauci why the U.S. could not stop the pandemic, given that the U.S. has enough vaccines. 

“What is the problem with getting as many people as possible vaccinated to stop this pandemic in the United States?” the CNN host asked.

Fauci said in response that he believes that it is likely due to “inexplicable pushing back on the part of some people.”

“Jake, I don’t know, I mean I really don’t have a good explanation, Jake about why this is happening. I mean it’s ideological rigidity, I think, there’s no reason not to get vaccinated. Why are we having red states and places in the south that are very highly ideological in one way, not wanting to get vaccinations? Vaccinations have nothing to do with politics,” he said. “It’s a public health issue.”

Click Here: cork gaa jerseys