San Diego Zoo has vaccinated 9 great apes
Troop of gorillas became infected
SAN DIEGO – The San Diego Zoo has vaccinated nine great apes for the coronavirus after a troop of gorillas in its Safari Park became infected, officials said Thursday.
Four orangutans and five bonobos received COVID-19 injections in January and February. Three bonobos and a gorilla also were expected to receive the vaccine, which is experimental.
It was developed by Zoetis Inc., a U.S. firm that produces medicine for animals.
The vaccinations followed a January outbreak of COVID-19 at the zoo’s Safari Park. Eight western lowland gorillas got the virus, probably by exposure to a zookeeper who tested positive for COVID-19, officials said, even though employees work masks at all times around the gorillas.
“That made us realize that our other apes were at risk,” Nadine Lamberski, chief conservation and wildlife health officer for the San Diego Zoo Wildlife Alliance, told the San Diego Union-tribune. “We wanted to do our best to protect them from this virus because we don’t really know how it’s going to impact them.”
The gorillas had symptoms ranging from runny noses to coughing and lethargy. But they are recovering.
Wildlife experts have expressed concern about the coronavirus infecting gorillas and other endangered apes that share much of their DNA with humans.
Other kinds of wildlife in other locations also have gotten the virus.
WASHINGTON – Rep. Eric Swalwell, who served as a House manager in Donald Trump’s last impeachment trial, filed a lawsuit Friday against the former president, his son, lawyer and a Republican congressman whose actions he charges led to January’s insurrection.
The California Democrat’s suit, filed in federal court in Washington, alleges a conspiracy to violate civil rights, along with negligence, inciting a riot and inflicting emotional distress. It follows a similar suit filed by Rep. Bennie Thompson last month in an attempt to hold the former president accountable in some way for his actions Jan. 6, following his Senate acquittal.
Swalwell charges that Trump, his son Donald Jr., former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani and Republican Rep. Mo Brooks of Alabama, had made “false and incendiary allegations of fraud and theft, and in direct response to the Defendant’s express calls for violence at the rally, a violent mob attacked the U.S. Capitol.”
The lawsuit spells out in detail how the Trumps, Giuliani and Brooks spread baseless claims of election fraud, both before and after the 2020 presidential election was declared, and charges that they helped to spin up the thousands of rioters before they stormed the Capitol. Five people died as a result of the violence on Jan. 6, including a U.S. Capitol Police officer.
Trump spokesman Jason Miller called Swalwell a “low-life” with “no credibility.”
“Now, after failing miserably with two impeachment hoaxes,” Swalwell is attacking “our greatest President with
yet another witch hunt,” Miller said in a statement. “It’s a disgrace that a compromised Member of Congress like Swalwell still sits on the House Intelligence Committee.”
Brooks said the lawsuit was frivolous and “a meritless ploy.”
“I make no apologies whatsoever for fighting for accurate and honest elections,” he said, adding he wore the lawsuit “like a badge of courage.”
The lawsuit, through Trump’s own words, accuses the former president of inciting the riot, using much of the same playbook used by Swalwell and others during Trump’s impeachment trial – that his lies over the election results stirred supporters into the false belief the 2020 election had been stolen, that he egged on the angry mob through his
rally speech and that he did nothing when faced with the images of throngs of his supporters smashing windows at the U.S. Capitol and sending lawmakers fleeing.
Unlike Thompson’s lawsuit – filed against Trump, Giuliani and some farright extremist groups whose members are alleged to have participated in the insurrection – Swalwell’s did not specify whether he was filing in his personal or official capacity, which would require additional approvals from the House and involve House attorneys.
Both lawsuits cite a federal civil rights law that was enacted to counter the Ku Klux Klan’s intimidation of officials. Swalwell’s attorney Philip Andonian praised Thompson’s lawsuit, filed under a Reconstruction-era law called the Ku Klux Klan Act, and said they were behind it 100%, but saw the need for this one, too.
“We see ourselves as having a different angle to this, holding Trump accountable for the incitement, the disinformation,” he said.
Presidents historically are afforded broad immunity from lawsuits for actions they take in their role as commander in chief. But the lawsuit, like the one by Thompson, was brought against Trump in his personal, not official, capacity.
Swalwell also describes in detail being trapped in the House chamber with many other members of Congress as plainclothes Capitol Police officers barricaded the doors and tried to fend off the mob with guns drawn.
“Fearing for their lives, the Plaintiff and others masked their identities as members of Congress, texted loved ones in case the worst happened, and took shelter throughout the Capitol complex,” the lawsuit reads.
The lawsuit alleges that Brooks “conspired with the other Defendants to undermine the election results by alleging, without evidence, that the election had been rigged and by pressuring elected officials, courts, and ultimately Congress to reject the results.” It notes that he spoke at a rally supporting Trump at the Ellipse, near the White House, shortly before thousands of pro-trump rioters made their way to the Capitol and overwhelmed police officers to shove their way inside the building.
The suit seeks unspecified damages, and Swalwell also wants a court to order the defendants to provide him with written notice a week before they have any rally in Washington that would draw more than 50 people.
“Unable to accept defeat, Donald Trump waged an all out war on a peaceful transition of power,” Swalwell said in a statement.
WASHINGTON – The Senate seemingly killed progressives’ last-ditch effort to include a minimum wage hike in the Democrats’ $1.9 trillion COVID-19 relief bill Friday, as the chamber began climactic votes on the huge package embodying President Joe Biden’s top legislative priority.
Senators voted 58-42 against the increase, though the vote had not been formally gaveled to a close by 3 p.m. Eight Democrats voted against the proposal, suggesting that Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-VT., and other progressives vowing to continue the fight in coming months face a difficult fight.
Though the number of Democrats opposing the proposal was a surprise, its defeat was not. Solid Republican opposition had guaranteed in advance that proponents would fall well short of the 60 votes needed to win. The proposal would boost the federal minimum wage to $15 hourly by 2025, up from its current $7.25.
The overall bill, aimed at battling the killer virus and nursing the staggered economy back to health, would provide direct payments of up to $1,400 to most Americans. There’s also money for COVID-19 vaccines and testing, aid to state and local governments, help for schools and the airline industry, tax breaks for lower-earners and families with children, and subsidies for health insurance. The Senate had voted 51-50 Thursday to begin debating the legislation, with Vice President Kamala Harris casting the pivotal tie-breaking vote. That nail-biter and the eleventh-hour deals Democratic leaders were cutting with rank-and-file lawmakers reflected the delicate task they faced of moving the measure through the precariously divided 50-50 chamber. The package faces a solid wall of GOP opposition.
Senate approval, considered likely over the weekend, would give the House time to approve the legislation and whisk it to Biden for his signature.
First, the Senate was preparing to vote on a mountain of amendments, mostly by GOP opponents and virtually all destined to fail but designed to force Democrats to take politically awkward votes. But among those amendments was a Democratic proposal expected to pass that would trim the House bill’s $400 weekly emergency unemployment benefits.
Under the compromise, those payments – payable on top of regular state benefits – would be reduced to $300, but run an extra month through September. The amendment, sponsored by Sen. Tom Carper, D-del., would also reduce taxes on unemployment benefits.
White House press secretary Jen Psaki signaled Biden’s support for the new minimum wage language, tweeting that it would “provide more relief to the unemployed” than the bill’s original provision.
Biden and Senate leaders had agreed earlier to retain the House bill’s higher $400 version. The reduction to $300 seemed to reflect a need to secure support for the overall bill, particularly from moderate Democrats.
Republicans are attacking the overall bill as a liberal spend-fest that ignores that growing numbers of vaccinations and signs of a stirring economy suggest that the twin crises are easing.
“Our country is already set for a roaring recovery,” said Senate Minority Leader Mitch Mcconnell, R-KY., in part citing an unexpectedly strong report on job creation. “Democrats inherited a tide that was already turning.”
Democrats reject that, citing the millions of jobs still unrecovered from the pandemic and numerous people still struggling to buy food and pay rent.
“If you just look at a big number you say, ‘Oh, everything’s getting a little better,’ ” said Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. “It’s not for the lower half of America. It’s not.”
In an encouraging sign for Biden, a poll by The Associated PRESS-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research found that 70% of Americans support his handling of the pandemic, including a noteworthy 44% of Republicans.
Work on the bill mired down Thursday when Sen. Ron Johnson, R-wis., forced the chamber’s clerks to read aloud the entire 628-page measure. The exhausting task took the staffers 10 hours and 44 minutes and ended shortly after 2 a.m. ET, with Johnson alternately sitting at his desk and pacing around the mostly empty chamber.
Democrats made a host of other late changes to the bill, designed to win over all manner of Democrats.
Progressives got money boosting feeding programs, federal subsidies for health care for workers who lose jobs, tax-free student loans, and money for public broadcasting and consumer protection investigations.
Moderates won funds for rural health care, language assuring minimum amounts of money for smaller states and a prohibition on states receiving aid using the windfalls to cut taxes. And for everyone, there was money for infrastructure, cultural venues, start-up companies and afterschool programs.
In another late bargain that satisfied moderates, Biden and Senate Democrats agreed Wednesday to tighten eligibility for the direct checks to individuals. The new provision completely phases out the $1,400 payments for individuals earning at least $80,000 and couples making $160,000, well lower than the original ceilings.
The alterations left House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-calif., the task of keeping her chamber’s numerous progressives on board. Liberals already suffered a blow when their No. 1 priority – a federal minimum wage increase to $15 hourly that was included in the House package – was booted from the bill in the Senate for violating the chamber’s rules and for lack of moderates’ support.
Johnson told reporters he was forcing the bill’s reading to “shine the light on this abusive and obscene amount of money.” Schumer on Friday morning praised the staffers who worked late as “the unsung heroes of this place” and said of Johnson, “I hope he enjoyed his Thursday evening.”
The economic recovery began to stall late last year as the virus surged, causing a shortfall in hiring in recent months. The Labor Department said Friday that the economy added 379,000 jobs last month, indicating unexpected strength as virus cases fall and consumers boost spending, but still leaving a long way until the country’s job market fully recovers.
The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates economic growth would exceed 4% this year without Biden’s rescue package. Republicans cite that as evidence the economy is pointed upward, but Democrats say a strong economic stimulus is still needed to prevent a relapse.
Two firefighters loaned to Washington on Jan. 6 were the only medics on the Capitol steps, trying to triage injured officers as they watched the angry mob swell and attack police.
Law enforcement agents were “being pulled into the crowd and trampled, assaulted with scaffolding materials, and/ or bear maced by protesters,” wrote Arlington County firefighter Taylor Blunt in an after-action memo. Some could not walk and had to be dragged to safety.
Even some of the attackers sought medical help, and Blunt and his colleague Nathan Waterfall treated those who were passing out or had been hit. But some “feigned illness to remain behind police lines,” Blunt wrote.
The memo is one of hundreds of emails, texts, photos and documents obtained by The Associated Press through 35 Freedom of Information requests to Capitol area law enforcement agencies. Taken together, the materials shed new light on the sprawling patchwork of law enforcement agencies that tried to stop the riot and the lack of coordination and adequate planning that stymied their efforts.
“We were among the first mutual aid teams to arrive and were critical to begin the process of driving protestors off the Capitol,” wrote Blunt.
Five people died in the insurrection, including a police officer. Two other officers killed themselves after the attack. There were hundreds of injuries and more than 300 people, including members of extremist groups Proud Boys and Oathkeepers, have been charged with federal crimes. Federal agents are still investigating and hundreds more suspects are at large.
The Arlington firefighters ended up at the Capitol because, two days earlier, Washington Metro Police Chief Robert J. Contee had formally asked the Arlington County Police Department to lend them some officers trained for protests and riots, according to the documents.
Arlington’s acting police chief, Andy Penn, said they’d send help for the “planned and unplanned first amendment activities,” according to emails.
At the time, the Capitol Police department had issued a security assessment warning that militia members, white supremacists and other extremists were heading to Washington to target Congress in what they saw as a “last stand” to support President Donald Trump.
Members of Congress, who were locked down or rushed to safety Jan. 6 as the attackers approached the House and Senate chambers, have held hearings this week to explore what went wrong with the law enforcement response that allowed the crowd to ransack the Capitol building.
One question they hoped to answer is why the Capitol Police didn’t have more help on hand that day.
The emails obtained by the AP – hastily written and including misspellings and incomplete sentences – show that nearby police agencies were alerted two days earlier that there might be trouble and were prepared to help.
The night before the breach, after hours of rallies and speeches across the city, Federal Protective Service officers, who protect federal property, had noticed
protesters trying to camp out on federal property, and added they were “being vigilant for any suspicious activity,” according to an agency email.
The agents were particularly interested in the right wing extremist group, Proud Boys. They noted how many were in Washington, that they were staying at a downtown hotel, and what they planned.
In a briefing at noon on that day, just as Trump was encouraging supporters to “fight like hell,” a Federal Protective Service email said about 300 Proud Boys were at the Capitol.
It warned, “The Proud Boys are threatening to shut down the water system in the downtown area which includes government facilities.”
The email noted there was a man in a tree with what appeared to be a rifle near the Ellipse, and about 25,000 people were around the White House, some hiding bags in bushes outside the building.
“Together we stand!” the signed off.
As the White House rally was wrapping up, a protective service officer whose name was redacted sent an email to his peers: “POTUS is encouraging the protesters to march to capitol grounds officer and continue protesting there.” POTUS referred to Trump as “President of the United States.”
Intelligence agents used Facebook to monitor dozens of protests planned for Jan. 6 and beyond, according to emails. Some events were permitted, others were not.
Fairfax County, Virginia, officials were also closely monitoring the events of Jan. 6, and realized their Washington counterparts needed help.
At 3:10 p.m., Fairfax County’s Deputy County Executive Dave Rohrer emailed more than 25 county officials: “It is obvious to me based on my experience and knowledge that an emergency exists.” He said he had authorized the Fairfax County Police Department to send Civil Disturbance Unit officers and commanders “to assist gaining control for safety reasons.”
But he added that they were monitoring the deployment. The redacted email refers to the early June episode when police from several jurisdictions used tear gas to violently break up a peaceful and legal protest in Lafayette Square, across the street from the White House.
On Jan. 6, Rohrer said he reminded commanders on the scene “that they are to cease operations if at any point they determine they are being used in an inappropriate, unethical, illegal manner, or are not under a competent authority… Maintaining life safety, regaining and establishing a safe perimeter, etc., should be the initial focus.”
At 8:31 p.m., a Federal Protective Service memo alerted “there is a report of an armed militia group headed to dc from west Virginia. Query ongoing.”
As midnight approached, Rohrer emailed again. Although the Capitol was quiet, “Intel will be monitored throughout the night and, unfortunately, PD and US Capitol Police are investigating several threats targeting residences of Capitol VIPS or family members received late tonight.”
By Jan. 7, Fairfax County Executive Bryan Hill was thanking his staff.
“Our Police Department’s Civil Disturbance Unit answered the call yesterday,” he wrote, “and as much as I hated to activate you, it was an activation to preserve our republic.”