coronavirus fears TRANSCRIPT: 3/13/20, All In w/ Chris Hayes

Jay Inslee, Elissa Slotkin, W. Ian Lipkin, Helen Branswell, Randi Weingarten, Dr. Joseph Fair, Dan Diamond




CHRIS HAYES, MSNBC HOST: Good evening from New York. I`m Chris Hayes. Today 

we saw two different styles of leadership from America`s leaders in dealing 

with the coronavirus crisis. President Trump staged a pageant in the Rose 

Garden in an apparently successful attempt to pump up the stock market 

while he also lied about where things stand. 


Nancy Pelosi, the House Speaker, hammered out a deal with Treasury 

Secretary Steve Mnuchin on a coronavirus aid package that includes among 

other things, free testing and paid emergency leave. This afternoon, the 

president paraded out to inform Americans he “takes no responsibility for 

the manifest documented repeated failures in the federal government slow 

response to deal with and prepare for The worst global pandemic in probably 

100 years.”




UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Dr. Fauci said earlier this week that the lag in 

testing was in fact, a failing. Do you take responsibility for that?



responsibility at all because we were given a set of circumstances and we 

were given rules, regulations, and specifications from a different time.


UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You said that you don`t take responsibility, but you 

did disband the White House pandemic office and the officials that were 

working in that office, left this administration abruptly. So what 

responsibilities do you take to that? And the officials that worked in that 

office said that you – that the White House lost valuable time because 

that office was disbanded. What do you make of that?


TRUMP: Well, I just think it`s a nasty question because what we`ve done is 

– and Tony has said numerous times that we`ve saved thousands of lives 

because of the quick closing. And when you say me, I didn`t do it.




HAYES: Point of fact, he did do it. His White House did it. Trump also 

announced a set of probably necessary measures to cut regulatory obstacles 

to get testing up to capacity. But as of today, the U.S. still is only 

testing 18,000 people in total. Now that`s quite a bit up, almost doubled 

from where we were last night, but we are still way, way, way behind almost 

every other comparable nation that regard. 


In fact, look at this. Trump`s own former FDA head, OK, this is a Trump 

administration official, was calling for the actions like the ones being 

taken today to be taken six weeks ago, and not in some private backchannel, 

on Twitter where anyone can read it. The rest of the showcase in the Rose 

Garden today appeared to be a bizarre and cynical attempt to pump up the 

stock market. 


Trump came out 30 minutes before the markets closed, and proceeded to 

introduce and hype up CEOs from a who`s who of a big American companies and 

brands from Walmart, Target, and CVS, all of whom saw their stock skyrocket 

in the last 30 minutes of closing. Trump also promised that Google has 

1,700 engineers working on a Web site to facilitate testing, and that 

appears to just be a lie. They don`t. There`s a pilot project from an 

Alphabet company they might test out in the bay. 


Meanwhile, Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced a deal on an aid package with 

tangible benefits. Speaking before the deal was done, Pelosi emphasized, 

“The three most important parts of this bill are testing, testing, testing. 

She also said all coronavirus testing will be free for everyone regardless 

of insurance status. The package also includes two weeks of paid sick leave 

and up to three months of paid family and medical leave, which is probably 

not enough. Definitely not enough, but a good start. They are at least 

tangible deliverables. 


The problem is that all the important stuff or most of the important stuff 

that Trump was offering today is essentially vaporware. It`s something that 

has been advertised but isn`t in stores yet. That`s the stuff that matters. 

Like we need more tests, more ventilators, more capability for hospitals to 

help sick people.


The virus doesn`t care about promises about what will be available. The 

virus doesn`t care about salesmen. It doesn`t care about PR. And so, the 

public health crisis, the very real one in the U.S. and across the world 

continues to unfold. Things are severe, extremely severe. 


In the U.S., there are now over 2,100 cases and 49 deaths. Remember, we 

only passed the 1,000 case mark three days ago. Based on everything we 

know, Italy is probably the closest estimate to the trajectory we`re on 

with a lot of unknowns. Today was Italy`s worst day so far. Italy had 2,500 

new cases just today, 250 new deaths today. More than 1,200 people there 

have now died. 


These crazy new mortality numbers are unnerving because it looks like we 

are – if we continue at our current rate, the U.S. may very well soon be 

in the same place. Here in the U.S., state and local officials continue to 

fill the leadership vacuum left by the White House. So far, at least 17 

states have closed public schools, so as Washington D.C., so is Los 

Angeles, the nation`s second-largest school system. We`re going to be 

talking about school closures later in the program. 


There are rolling out some mobile testing in hotspots like New Rochelle, 

New York and Seattle, Washington. Seattle area has been particularly hard 

hit. The Washington Post reports one study in Seattle shows “Under the 

worst-case scenario. The number of active infections will exceed the number 

of beds by a large margin in the next two weeks.”


Here`s the thing. We still just don`t really know how bad things are 

because of the lack of testing, what epidemiologists call surveillance of 

the virus. But the state of Washington that knows it has a very severe 

outbreak on its hands is taking dramatic steps to stem the spread of the 



The King County Superior Court postpone criminal jury trials for over a 

month. The Seattle Children`s Hospital has halted all elective surgeries. 

Today Governor Jay Inslee ordered all schools in the state closed until at 

least April 24th. Governor Inslee joins me right now. 


Governor, thank you for taking time. I know that you are under a tremendous 

amount of pressure and stress there managing things in your estate. Give us 

a read on how things are in Washington right now.


GOV. JAY INSLEE (D-WA): Well, they`re obviously extremely challenging. 

We`ve gone from about 160 cases four days ago, to 568 today. And so, we see 

that right now, this trajectory is extremely troubling. It`s extremely 

rapid. And it demands that we be aggressive and bold and robust in our 

efforts to reduce the transmission rate. 


So today, I did close all of the schools, public schools and colleges, in 

the state of Washington. We`ve also now extended our ban on gatherings of 

people of any size across the state of Washington. And we did that to try 

to get ahead of this wave. We`ve concluded we needed to do this statewide 

rather than county by county because of this very, very rapid transmission 



So the thing we`re most focused on right now is building our surge capacity 

in our medical system to build the beds, and particularly the ventilators. 

I`m very concerned about our ventilator stock. And we are looking for an 

opportunity to actually start manufacturing them much more rapidly so that 

they will be there when, unfortunately, we think we`ll have thousands of 

people in need in the next several weeks. 


So I would describe this as very challenging, but it`s like my dad used to 

say, when you`re going through hell, keep going, and that`s what we`re 

doing in the state of Washington.


HAYES: You just talked about surge capacity. Can you talk to me now? I 

mean, the big fear for everyone right now, part of the reason that it`s 

shutting entire countries down is that you have happened in one of our 

areas like Seattle, what would happened in Lombardy, Italy or in Wuhan 

which is the medical system simply overrun?


What is your capacity right now in your ICU? Do you have the personal 

protective equipment for healthcare personnel, the N-95 masks, the 

ventilators and the beds that you need now?


INSLEE: We have them now, just barely. The question is we want to make sure 

we have them in several weeks. Just to give you some sense of the scale of 

this, we have about 10,000, 11,000 beds in the state of Washington at one 

time. But if this trajectory continues, by early May, you know, we could 

need another 5,000 beds. So you need a 50 percent surge capacity. That`s a 

fairly conservative estimate. So this is an enormous challenge. 


The good news is we have a good plan for this. But like any plans, we need 

to be flexible, and we need to be really calling, frankly, for a lot of 

volunteers because not only do you need the beds, you obviously need the 

medical personnel, the physicians and the nurses. So one of the things 

we`re doing is looking to bring people out of retirement and bring people 

from other states. So we`ve waived some of the licensure rules. We can get 

more of the practitioner. 


And obviously, we need the equipment, like ventilators. I think 

ventilators, if this continues unabated, will be the thing that we have the 

most concern about. That`s why we`ve actually as a state, gone out and 

looked at our ability to buy ventilators and not just rely upon the federal 

stockpile. I was a little concerned – and we`ve had good cooperation from 

some of the agencies. 


And Mike Pence has been helpful to us. They`ve waived some rules so we can 

get our testing going faster. They`ve helped waived a few things for 

unemployment compensation. So some of these agencies are working well with 



I was a little concerned or I just heard a blurb. I don`t know if it`s 

accurate. From Seema Verma, who we`ve worked closely with. I`m concerned 

that we need a little more room from the federal government to increase the 

ventilator capacity. It is – we will be way too close to it a critical 

situation if we don`t start acquiring those very quickly.


HAYES: Where are you on testing? You just mentioned ramping up testing. You 

have a virology lab that`s been out front on this. I`ve talked to a bunch 

of people over the past day who`d say that in the epicenter of one of these 

sort of outbreaks, in some ways testing becomes just not a priority. I 

mean, people – the priority is caring for the very grievously ill, and you 

can track the virus as you can track the virus, but that`s what you got to 

do. So where are you on that sort of scale?


INSLEE: Well, we`ve been fortunate because we were ahead of most all of the 

states of building our own testing capacity in our state public lab. So in 

the early days, we did have the adequate capacity to test the samples that 

were coming in, in a timely fashion. Now, we got set back a little bit 

because as you know, there was a glitch in the original kits sent from the 

federal government, but we came up with our own system, and we were in 

pretty good shape in that regard.


Right now, we continue to be in fairly good shape, because the turnaround 

time, I just checked on this morning, is from 28 – 24 to 48 hours. So 

we`re pretty good shape. But we want to continue to build that capacity, 

both for diagnostic purposes and for demographic purposes, so we can figure 

out where the hotspots are. 


But a lot of this is, you know, people have anxiety. They want to know 

whether they have the disease. We understand that. So yes, we should 

continue to build our capacity. That is happening. We now are bringing on 

some labs. And I talked to the vice president the other day. He asked 

whether we could actually assume some of the Federal responsibility for 

validating the new systems of testing that the private labs are bringing 



And I think we`re going to be able to do that to help the federal 

government get that job done. We have enough excess capacity in our public 

lab to do that. So I hope we can help out in that regard. So what I would 

say right now is my biggest concern is the medical surge capacity. That`s 

what we`re really focused on, to not get into a situation where we don`t 

have enough ventilators and people not being able to breathe. That`s what 

we`re really focused on.


HAYES: You mentioned – I mean, obviously, your state I think had one of 

the first indications of community transmission. There`s DNA analysis 

suggests that – or RNA analysis that suggests the virus had been there for 

five weeks before it was – it was sort of discovered. Do you have internal 

modeling that lets you get a sense of the scope of what`s happening 

independent of those 564 confirmed cases, which we all know, is not an 

accurate measurement of what`s happened?


INSLEE: Yes. We do have and we`re fortunate we`ve got some of the best 

geneticists in the world right here at Fred Hutchinson University of 

Washington, and we do have modeling that can take the known tests, and look 

at the genetic situation to figure out where they are in the generations 

and do a projection of what you actually have walking around the streets 

undiagnosed. And we`re fairly confident of that.


Unfortunately, it`s in the low thousands at the moment. And if you do the 

projections on that, you know, we think this doubles every week. And so if 

you assumed at the beginning of this week, we had 1,000 or 2,000, that 

means by mid-May, if you do the projections in a geometric modeling, you 

maybe have 60,000-plus by mid-May. 


And if you look at the mortality rates, you`re talking about, you know, 

potentially 2,000 fatalities by mid-May a week, and that doubles the 

following week. This shows why we have to be so focused on building medical 

surge capacity in all its – all of its horizons because you need the whole 

thing. You need the bed, you need the building, you need the personnel, and 

you need the equipment like ventilators. 


So we`ve now assessed the capacity. The Army can be called upon. They have 

these sets, they call them hospitals sets that can come out with dozens and 

dozens of beds. We may be calling upon the Army to help us in that regard. 

But even that will not be enough. We`ve all got to focus on this 

nationally. And that`s the one thing I would say. I would say, any local 

leader, we got to put our shoulder to the wheel on that starting tonight.


HAYES: All right, Governor Jay Inslee, that was really informative, and 

thank you for taking time.


INSLEE: You bet. Wash your hands.


HAYES: I will. I want to bring in a Congresswoman Elissa Slotkin, Democrat 

from Michigan, also former CIA, Middle East Analyst, former assistant – 

Acting Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs 

under President Obama. So my understanding is – here`s my understanding of 

the state of play. A deal was struck between Nancy Pelosi and Steve Mnuchin 

who are directly negotiating. Now everyone is waiting to see in the GOP 

caucus if the president tweets a thumbs up so that they can vote for it.


That is my understanding. Yes, that we`re literally waiting to see sort of 

the white smoke from the White House via tweet. And then until and unless 

we see that tweet, we`re not going to have a vote from the Republicans. 

They don`t want to vote on it until they see how he thinks about it. 


HAYES: But just to be clear, this was negotiated with the Trump 

administration. Nancy Pelosi negotiated with Treasury Secretary Steve 

Mnuchin, a cabinet officials in the President`s administration. Is that 



REP. ELISSA SLOTKIN (D-MI): That`s my understanding. I mean, I was in with 

the speaker yesterday when she had to be interrupted to take Secretary 

Mnuchin`s call. I know they`ve been working this really hard. I hope we`re 

on the brink of a deal, and I hope it works tonight.


HAYES: What do you think of the package?


SLOTKIN: I mean, listen, I think, you know, this would be the second 

package that we`ve done in a week. The first one that we did $8.3 billion 

was just to sort of get going on research for a potential cure, but really 

for treatment, which hopefully would come in a couple of months, and start 

pushing out some of the equipment that we know everyone needs today. 


The bill that we`re looking at is really about just some relief for 

families, particularly workers who are furloughed or not being able to 

work, making sure there`s workers compensation, making sure there`s family 

leave and sick leave for people who don`t have it, just allowing people to 

do the basics that CDC is asking them to do. And then we`ll have to do a 

third package, honestly.


We`ll do something my guess in the next 10 days that`s about the economic 

recovery. But the package to me is something that`s important because we 

want to feel that we`re moving out on something. People need – we just 

heard the governor. You know, Washington State is leading on this. And 

you`ve heard him what he needs. That takes money, so we want to push it out 



HAYES: So the schedule is – everyone is waiting around in the capital, and 

if the president tweets approval, then you can waive the rules and move it 

quickly to the floor and vote for it. But no one can leave until the 

president tweets that he likes it.


SLOTKIN: Yes. I mean, we`re waiting to be called to the floor. It`s not the 

first time, it won`t be the last time, but that is what we are doing. 


HAYES: You just said something interesting because my next question was 

going to be, are you going to get another bite of the apple here, and you 

already said there`s going to be a third package. I sometimes worry when I 

speak to members on Capitol Hill that there`s a little bit of mismatch of 

people`s understanding of the scale of where this might end up and the 

scale of where it might end up. Like, how are you thinking about it? Who 

are you talking to, to get your head around as a member of Congress? What 

period we might be entering into?


SLOTKIN: Sure. So maybe it`s because I`m a former CIA officer and a 

Pentagon official. I really believe in early systematic, prudent planning. 

So our governor in Michigan, Gretchen Whitmer took some, you know, very 

dramatic action. I thought that was extremely prudent to close all schools, 

declare an emergency very, very, very early, before we had even a dozen 

cases in the state. And what she was trying to do is stem the flow in the 

spread of the disease so that we`re not in a situation that you know, poor 

Washington State is in right now. 


So I`m talking to her. She`s calling regular meetings with our delegation. 

But the one that was really informative for me today is I got on the phone 

with 75 leaders from across my district, mayors and town supervisors, fire 

chiefs, sheriffs, just everybody, and we went through. I talked about the 

appropriation that we`re – that we did last week and what`s coming down 

the pike, but then also what we`re trying to get done today, more 

importantly, heard what they need from us. 


And honestly, it mirrors what you just heard from the governor over in 

Washington State, testing, testing, testing, particularly for our 

healthcare workers and our first responders. They want to know that they 

will be able to be tested if they need a test. They also are public 

servants and don`t want to be infecting people by mistake just because they 

can`t get a hold of a test. 


Then equipment, obviously ventilators but also in Michigan, masks, gowns, 

basic stuff. So our governor is working really, really hard and asking us 

to advocate here at the federal level. Then obviously, we have a problem 

with things like childcare. You know, schools are out. We have a problem 

with our business. We`ve certainly been talking about how we`re going to 

get small business administration loans to some of these folks who are 

seeing a repeat of 2008, and can`t last more than a month in some cases 

without taking in some kind of money. 


So there`s stages to this. And I think the most important thing I`ve heard, 

to be honest, is that people are looking for real clarity and leadership. 

And again, from my time at the Pentagon, just be clear, be consistent, take 

action, move, we want to see you moving, and then compassion. Have empathy 

for what people are going through on the ground. That`s what people are 

looking for is a firm, clear hand.


HAYES: Final question and it`s a question on politics which are not the 

most important thing here right now. But everything you do is political 

because you`re a member of Congress. That`s the way democracy works. You`re 

in a swing district, you`re a freshman member of Congress. My sense from 

talking to you is that this is not a tough vote for you. Like this stuff is 

not tough for you in a political sense right now, right? Like there might 

be votes that are tough. This is just not one of them.


SLOTKIN: No. I mean getting assistance out to our states and local 

authorities, no. I mean, that`s not a tough vote. And I got to be honest 

with you, I am deeply invested in the success of this administration on 

this issue, right? And we all should be, right? I`m not going to spend time 

criticizing Donald Trump. Do I love everything that he`s doing? No. But am 

I invested in him succeeding because that is how we`re going to get through 

this? Absolutely.


HAYES: All right, Congresswoman Elissa Slotkin of the State of Michigan, 

thank you very much. 


SLOTKIN: Thanks. 


HAYES: Everyone wants to know where is America`s trajectory with 

coronavirus headed. How long would this last? We`re going to talk to the 

experts about where we are compared to the countries that have gone before 

us and where we are going next.




HAYES: The big question that everyone wants answered right now is what does 

the future hold and how long is this whole thing going to last? The 

frustrating truth is we just don`t know. We can only estimate based on 

what`s happening in other countries further ahead of us on the trajectory. 


According to the latest data on confirmed coronavirus cases from Johns 

Hopkins University, it looks like things are probably not going to pan out 

like they haven`t say Singapore and Japan. We can hope to end up looking 

like South Korea. But if you take a look at Italy, that purple line there, 

it seems like we are tracking most closely to their trajectory as, I should 

note, some other European countries. 


Earlier today, we did get a preview about what one of the leading experts 

in the country Dr. Fauci is anticipating.





DISEASES: These kinds of things generally run out in a few months. 

Hopefully, we`ll make it several weeks, eight, nine, whatever weeks. But I 

can`t give you a number, because it depends on how successful we are.




HAYES: So to be clear, eight, nine weeks, somewhere around there. If that`s 

a median estimate with a huge range, that would put us at hundreds of 

thousands of cases at the current rate of growth. Here with me now to talk 

about the best estimates of where we are in this pandemic, Dr. Ian Lipkin, 

Epidemiologist at Columbia University`s Mailman School of Public Health, 

the Director of the Center for Infection and Immunity where he and his team 

have been working on an improved test for COVID-19, and Helen Branswell, 

Senior Writer on Infectious Diseases at Stat News. She`s been a must-follow 

during this period, doggedly reporting on the coronavirus outbreak. 


Let me start with you, Helen. Where is your sense in the folks that you`re 

talking to about where the U.S. is on this trajectory compared say, to 

other countries?



know, Chris, it`s very, very hard to estimate that because there`s been so 

little testing done here. The sense of how much spread there has been 

taking place in the United States is just not clear. Obviously, the numbers 

that exist are not the true numbers. 


But how deeply into the United States the virus has taken root in and at 

what level it is transmitting is still unclear. And it`s going to take a 

while until more testing is done before we have a better sense of that.


HAYES: You know, we`ve heard from – we heard from the President today, and 

I`ve been hearing this increasingly from folks in the doctors and hospitals 

that testing is not the priority right now, from a medical standpoint. Like 

they want to get people – they want to sort of get the folks that need 

care into their hospitals and ICUs. From an epidemiological perspective, 

though, it seems like you can`t – you really can`t fight this without it. 

Is that fair to say?



PUBLIC HEALTH: I think that`s fair to say and I agree with Helen. I don`t 

think we know where we are in the trajectory of this outbreak. The other 

thing that I think we need to emphasize is that there are many, many people 

who are either asymptomatic or have mild disease who don`t come to the 

attention of the healthcare system.


HAYES: Right. 


LIPKIN: And they are potential sources of infection for some time to come. 

Testing is really critical in containment. And the other type of testing 

that we`ve not done yet at all, is testing for evidence of previous 

infection, which requires antibodies as opposed to molecular methods. We`re 

trying to diagnose people right now who have active infections. But if we 

really want to know the mortality rate, we have to know the denominator. 

And without antibody testing, we won`t have that.


HAYES: Meaning, all sorts of people who, presumably possibly over the last 

two weeks or even longer than that in Washington state who had it, it was 

not that serious for them, they didn`t get hospitalized and they didn`t get 

tested, they`re now fine, but we just don`t know that all that happened to 

them because they haven`t been tested for antibodies?


LIPKIN: And in addition, we have lots of other respiratory disease that`s 

circulating in the community. We still have influenza, we have rhinovirus, 

we have other viruses. One of the things that we try to do is use tests 

that can allow us to not only detect the presence of this virus, but other 

viruses, because some of those have specific therapies. 


And one of the conversations that the governor of Washington was having 

about access to equipment, ventilators and such as very important to that 

because we have drugs that can be useful for treating influenza.


HAYES: Right. Helen, one of the sort of paradoxes or challenges I would say 

here, right, is this is sort of lag time between action and effect, both in 

terms of the sort of five day latency period, but also in terms of the 

drama of that curve, such that people have to take proactive steps. 


I saw today that interestingly enough that Greece announced essentially, in 

almost Italy style lockdown with 133 cases. It seems like there`s a sort of 

lesson being transmuted that you have to act earlier and earlier.


BRANSWELL: Yes. I think people are moving in that direction. You have to be 

a bit careful with that, though. I mean, some of these lockdown measures 

can`t be sustained forever. And, you know, you have to time them 

appropriately. You want to take measures before the virus really gets out 

of control as it did in Italy, for instance. 


But if you do it too soon, you`re really hurting your economy, you`re 

hurting families who may lose wages and you may also undermine people`s 

willingness to participate in these kinds of actions, if they feel like 

they`re doing it for nothing, or that they can`t sustain it.


HAYES: That`s a really good point. And it also points to the other problem 

that is now coming up in China, right, which is what happens after the 

curve. I know that you were in China and you`ve worked with a Chinese. 

They, you know, what they had to undertake to bring it under control is 

basically unthinkable in the U.S. I mean, it`s just complete lockdown of a 

society and total surveillance. 


They did bring it under control. They`re now sort of slowly opening back 

up. How do they think about – how do you think about it as an 

epidemiologist, how they contain it as that happens?


LIPKIN: Well, I think they`ve actually done a very good job and have 

demonstrated to us how you can bring this under control. Now, I understand 

it`s very difficult to lock down an entire city, on the other hand, people 

there wear masks and gloves and take this very seriously. And social 

distancing was something that the community adopted there and this is 

something that we need to move to, as well. 


And one of the points that Helen was talking about in terms of anticipating 

where the virus – how the virus spreads and so forth, as you mentioned, 

the incubation period is five to seven days, but that means that people may 

be asymptomatic and still be spreading the virus, so it`s very difficult to 

contain this.


My expectation is when that we`re down, we`re going to find that there are 

probably 50 to 100 times more people infected than we ever thought were, 

and that`s going to drive that mortality rate down. But given the number of 

people who are infected, there could still be a substantial burden. 


HAYES:  Today Helen, the CDC – The Times acquired CDC internal modeling, 

which was projecting worst-case scenarios. What is your sense of how much 

modeling is being done and how wide the variation and how experts are 

expecting this to go is?


BRANSWELL:  Well, everybody who could model is modeling. There`s almost an 

epidemic of modeling, although of course it`s very useful and appropriate 

to be doing that.


I mean, models are models and they can only be as accurate as the 

information you put into them. 


So you may remember before or during the West African Ebola crisis in 2014, 

there were models that came out early that turned out to be fortunately 

wildly inaccurate. You know, models are a useful tool, but they`re not 

always going to be correct and all the modelers will tell you that, as 



HAYES:  All right, Dr. Ian Lipkin and Helen Branswell, thank you both. 


Coming up, how the people tasked with solving the country`s greatest 

problem are making lots and lots of time to massage Donald Trump`s ego. 

What it means for evidence-based decision making next.




HAYES:  One of the most unnerving and disturbing aspects of this crisis is 

watching people whose prime goal should be giving accurate information to 

Americans, should be giving us evidence based facts about both the pandemic 

and the government response, instead offering up cult-like dear leader 

style praise for Donald Trump. 





inspiration to every American. 


UNIDENTIFIED MALE:  Speaking of being at risk, the president, he sleeps 

less than I do and he is healthier than what I am. 


PENCE:  Throughout this process, Mr. President, you put the health of 

America first. 


UNIDENTIFIED MALE:  The payroll tax holiday is a bold move, it`s a very 

bold move. And this has always been a bold president. 



time by taking that strong action, Mr. president. 


PENCE:  The unprecedented action. 


AZAR:  Thank god he took that action. 


PENCE:  Once again, because of the unprecedented action. 


AZAR:  It was strong action. It was bold. It was unprecedented action. 


PENCE:  Mr. President, from early on you took decisive action. 


AZAR:  You were brave, it was unprecedented, but you protected the American 



UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE:  Can you reassure everyone tonight that there is not a 

shortage of ventilators or ICU units. 



president took bold and decisive action. 




HAYES:  A question about ventilators with no answer, just the president 

being bold.

The president and his team have been acting as though this pandemic is a 

political problem that can be spun away or just drowned in sheer tonnage of 

propaganda, but the virus doesn`t care how much Mike Pence praises Donald 

Trump`s leadership. And right now we don`t know where the virus is. We`ll 

have more on that ahead.




HAYES:  The acute Coronavirus testing shortage in the U.S. means that right 

now as you were just hearing the message from everyone is we need to keep 

the hospitals clear for people with severe cases and you can`t unless 

you`re really sick, which, because we don`t have enough tests makes sense 

from an medical standpoint, but from an epidemiological standpoint we just 

don`t know the scope of the pandemic. We can`t react or take proactive 

measures accordingly, particularly not regionally.


Now, we didn`t have to end up here. A series of failures and missteps by 

the federal government has led us to a point where we are doing less 

testing than any other comparable nation.


Joining me now is Dan Diamond of Politico who has done some very in-depth 

reporting on the federal government`s response. One of his recent pieces is 

titled “Trump`s mismanagement helped fuel Coronavirus crisis.” 


Dan, it`s a great piece, and you`ve done great reporting about this. Take 

us back a few months ago. What were the early missteps in terms of how the 

White House and the president how proactive or not proactive they were in 

going at this?


DAN DIAMOND, POLITICO:  Well, I think it depends how far back you want to 

go. But the starting point for me, Chris would be in January. Secretary 

Alex Azar, the health secretary, did become alarmed about the spread of 

this virus in China. He tried to take that message to the president, but 

the aides around President Trump, some of them who don`t like Azar, who 

have fought Azar, Azar`s own standing had fallen somewhat in the 

administration, some of them thought that this was not going to be a 

presidential priority. So try to steer him away.


By the time the secretary did brief the president, which was mid-January, 

it was around the same time that the first patients were being discovered 

in the United States, people who had returned from China. That could have 

been a moment for urgency, for the administration to really put all of the 

resources that we now see the Trump administration doing.


But in that moment in January, really for much of February, too, the 

urgency just wasn`t there, which public health officials have said 

privately this is a shame. China bought the world time with its significant 

measures to lock-down its population. China made lots of mistakes, too. But 

by seeing the explosion of cases and knowing what was coming, the U.S. had 

time to get ahead, time that was not used to its best advantage. 


HAYES:  You said this in an interview with Terry Gross on Fresh Air, you 

said the president attached to rosy scenarios about Coronavirus, fixated on 

case count and conveyed to staff that low numbers were better politics for 

2020. What do you mean by that?


DIAMOND:  The president and his team knew early on that this any panic, or 

perceived panic, around this virus could be devastating to his campaign. 

President Trump has been able to run ahead of many problems because of the 

success of the economy. This threat, as we`ve seen in recent days, this 

public health threat, is also an economic threat. The president`s team did 

not want to put out notes of panic, did not want to alarm the public, 

perhaps unnecessarily, so there was a lot of wishful thinking, a lot of 

hopeful talk and some efforts to try and pierce that bubble just didn`t get 



Now it`s interesting to talk to some of those officials today, Chris, 

because everyone swears they knew this was a problem, it was just someone 

else around the president who didn`t want him to know, but the president 

himself focused so much on the numbers and the case count. 


I was writing a story and he came out and did a press conference at the CDC 

where I felt like he scooped my story. He said I don`t know if I want these 

patients to come off a cruise ship because I like the numbers where they 

are. That message in public is what he is also reiterated in private.


HAYES:  Meaning, there is a message from the top we don`t want high 

numbers, and high numbers are what you get if you`re testing adequately and 

actually properly surveilling the disease, and so the president has been 

sending a public and private message saying like I don`t want to know 

basically how many cases we have. 


DIAMOND:  I think the message has changed this week especially between the 

prime time Oval Office address, the comments in the Rose Garden today. But 

yes, Chris, the feeling from the top that this could have been a message of 

we need to find every single case in the country, we need to make sure 

every base is covered, the steps that have been taken recently could have 

been taken weeks ago, but the belief was that the border control strategy, 

which the president attached to it, lines up with some of his other 

thoughts on national security, that was seen as sufficient and working. 


HAYES:  Right. 


DIAMOND:  There wasn`t much of an effort to go beyond. 


HAYES:  And that`s – you hear him say that. He says we closed the border. 

We closed the border, which by the way is not really true. I mean, 

obviously we didn`t because there is cases from Wuhan that ended up in the 

U.S. probably transmitted, so there were some travel restrictions, but it 

was not airtight.


But you get a sense when you listen to him when he`s announcing the 

European travel restrictions, that like that`s all you need – build a 

wall, shut it off, but of course the virus got here anyway. 


DIAMOND:  Yes, viruses don`t respect walls all that much. I think that 

public health officials, and I`ve talked to enough, would say the China 

moves were understandable. This was a mysterious virus. It may have slowed 

things down. The Euro moves are little less obvious. It`s clearly spreading 

in the United States. And I think what is complicating, Chris, is we didn`t 

let our European partners know. They were offended. They were upset. And 

there are major corporations that would help us fight and test the virus. 

We need to partner and get supplies from Europe in the weeks and months 

moving forward.


So it`s a moment where there are obvious things that need to be done, but 

some of those things are politically very difficult. And until recently, 

the president and his team were hesitant to lean into them. 


HAYES:  All right, Dan Diamond has been doing great reporting on this, as 

always. Thank you for being with me tonight. 


DIAMOND:  Thank you. 


HAYES:  There is a very real and genuine debate about when to enact a 

citywide or statewide school closure. Should everyone do it or is there 

still room for a case by case approach? We`re going to talk about that with 

some experts next.




HAYES:  We are now seeing widespread school closures across the country due 

to the Coronavirus pandemic. As of right now a number of states and major 

cities have already either closed schools or will do so beginning next 

week. Those statewide closings are every school in the state.


A lot of other school districts remain open, including, perhaps most 

notably, in New York City where there is a large number of cases of the 

virus, and that has people asking why. Well, it`s partly because closing 

schools is a torturous decision for local officials, particularly in a 

decision like New York. New York City has more than 100,000 students that 

are homeless. Those kids depend on the city`s free lunch program, among 

other things. And there are health care workers and first responders here 

in the city who send their kids to public school.


Today, the CDC issued some very belated guidelines on school closures after 

basically everyone had made the decision. It still remains a very vex 



Here to talk about what`s the best policy and how to deal with president of 

the American Federation of Teachers; and Dr. Joseph Fair, a virologist and 



Doctor, let me start with you just on the epidemiology side of this. Like 

what are the pro and con cases for closing schools?



this is a very divided issue even amongst ourselves as public health 



HAYES:  I`ve actually talked to epidemiologists on either side of this, 

interestingly. There has been a lot of consensus on a lot of issues. This 

one splits people.


FAIR:  For me, I tend to be on the side of let`s close the schools because, 

we know kids are not dying from the disease, from the data at least that we 

have, but they are getting infected and they are infectious, so they can 

infect other kids who will then take it home to their high risk 

grandparents or high risk parents in those high risk categories. Children 

are notorious super spreaders of germs of all sorts.


HAYES:  I`ve got three and I know it.


FAIR:  Yes, right?


So, this is no different from that. And so I tend to lean in the corner of 

we need to close the schools. 


HAYES:  Make the argument on the other side. What is an epidemiological 

argument on the other side. 


FAIR:  On the other side of closing the schools. 


HAYES:  Of keeping them open. 


FAIR:  Oh, keeping them open.


Well, unless you close them all at the same time, then we`re going to just 

be in a cycle of one school getting it, the other school getting it two 

weeks later, the other school going to get it three weeks later, et cetera, 

so it has to be all or none. 


HAYES:  Where is your union on this?



the middle of that agonizing debate amongst ourselves. 


HAYES:  I imagine you`re torn. 


WEINGARTEN:  Yes, no, we`re totally torn, but so at the beginning of this 

last two weeks, we were like this is a last resort. This is a last resort. 

We got 2 million kids nationwide who are homeless. We have 31 million kids 

we feed every lunch, you know, 12 million we feed every breakfast. All the 

work we do in terms of health care. Half the kids in the country already 

come in with trauma.


So, all the things that Bill de Blasio and others are saying about the 

impacts, and particularly in terms of what happens with parents and staying 

home, that was why it is a last resort, but this is why we are now leaning 

towards where the good doctor is and where the 36 epidemiologists who sent 

Bill de Blasio a letter this week said, because if you don`t have the 

testing, you don`t know who has the virus. And then you have kids and 

families that are kids going cross city, cross state, all this other stuff, 

and since you don`t know where the vector is, you can be contaminating, 



And so what we`ve tried to do – we`ve worked in New Mexico, we`re working 

with Illinois, we`re working with Michigan, is how do you create feeding 

centers, how do you create online, how do you create child care, so plan 

this, which is what New Mexico is doing all this weekend, what Michigan is 

doing all this weekend.


HAYES:  So, they`re going – so, wait, tell me about that, they want to try 

to square the circle here which is we have kids who need school and depend 

on school to get fed, whose parents depend on us for watching their kids 

essentially, but we want to close the school so there`s some middle space 

that they`re working towards here.


WEINGARTEN:  Yes, for example, Governor Grisham in New Mexico, give her 

lots of props, grab and lunches, trying to figure out with Presbyterian 

Hospital or health association how to do some feeding programs there, how 

to do some child care programs there.


Denver Public Schools, K through 18 have a feeding program. The USDA is 

going to pay for all these things.


In L.A., they`re figuring out family resource centers, 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 



So what`s going to happen in New York if god forbid there`s a cluster that 

all of a sudden shows up in the Bronx or shows up in Brooklyn, and then 

people are going to immediately say we got to close the school tomorrow.


HAYES:  Right, and you want have the plan.


WEINGARTEN:  And you haven`t had the plan. 


HAYES:  I see your point. 


WEINGARTEN:  So, what I`m saying is what you`re seeing all across the 

country now – Ohio, Michigan, Illinois, people are spending all weekend 

long, people spent Thursday, Friday, all weekend trying to plan, and then 

you have the CDC that`s now said, OK, you have to close for eight weeks.


HAYES:  Which – go ahead.


FAIR:  I was just going to say, this is not a decision we take lightly to 

make these kind of recommendations, right. This impacts people in every 

facet of life, especially the low income strata.


HAYES:  Yes…


FAIR:  It`s agonizing.


HAYES:  Yes, I mean, the other thing is that, again, you get to the point -

- I mean, there`s two points here, one on an epidemiological and one that`s 

the social safety net, the epidemiological point is I remember talking to 

an epidemiologist a few weeks ago who made the point that if you don`t 

scale up testing, you will result to blunter and blunter instruments of 

social distancing. So, you actually – like as opposed to the idea of like 

testing will cause panic, what you actually want to do is like see exactly 

where the virus is so that you don`t have to do things like shut everything 



But that`s where we are right now, because we can`t see it.


FAIR:  And you just said the keyword, social distancing. And unless 

everyone social distances, including children, it doesn`t work. 


HAYES:  The other part of this, of course, we saw…


WEINGARTEN:  Which is what we saw in South Korea and in China. 


HAYES:  So the other part of this from a sort of policy perspective, so we 

just – it looks like the president has just tweeted his approval. If you 

were with us at the beginning of the show, we were at a deal worked out 

between Pelosi and Mnuchin, waiting for the thumbs up tweet from the 

president. We just got the thumbs up tweet, which means that will pass.


Paid family sick leave, some emergency medical leave. 


WEINGARTEN:  absolutely imperative.


HAYES:  But part of the issue here right is like all of these policies are 

detached, so if Ohio closes the schools, like good luck parents who have 

jobs, like, unless we`re doing everything possible, we`re…


WEINGARTEN:  I know, but there`s – I mean, you`re totally right, but what 

I want to give some props to Nancy Pelosi and Rosa DeLauro and all of them 

because they have been listening to all of us in terms of how to get these 

policies kind of connected. 


HAYES:  In this process you`re saying? 


WEINGARTEN:  In this process, because if you look at their bill, we kept 

saying you have to increase SNAP, you have to deal with the public charge 

issues, you have to increase Medicaid. We have to do all this stuff because 

if schools are closed, if parents have to stay home, they need that right 

now and the enhanced unemployment right now.


FAIR:  I think we have a precedent for this too. I mean, to give an 

analogy, Hurricane Katrina, Hurricane Sandy, now that we have declared a 

national emergency, FEMA has the power to issue direct funds to people to 

cover rent, food, and day care, et cetera. So that`s doable now presumably 

if we have enough money put aside for that. 


HAYES:  Do you have – I guess final question, you know, there`s a 

workplace aspect to this. All of your focus has been on the children and 

the families, which is good, but obviously you`re a union leader, and you 

have workers, and those workers are in workplaces. And I talked to…


WEINGARTEN:  And I total concurred with – I saw… 


HAYES:  Rich Trumka last night.


WEINGARTEN:  …last night.


HAYES:  Who obviously there`s real concerns there.


I mean, that must be another part of this. I mean, your teachers are going 

to get sick. 


WEINGARTEN:  But it`s not just our teachers, we are the second largest 

nurse union. So this whole notion, and look, if I sound angry, I am. I`m 

not a scientist. I listen to the scientists. How the heck did we not have 

testing? How don`t we have testing. How do we not have a stockpile of N95 

respirators? What happens to the ventilators? 


And so what`s happening is everybody is scared. The fear has now overtaken 

the fact, but all of these kind of processes for safety need to be in 



HAYES:  Randi Weingarten and Dr. Joseph Fair, thank you both for making 



That is All In for this evening. The Rachel Maddow show starts right now.






Copyright 2020 ASC Services II Media, LLC.  All materials herein are 

protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, 

distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the 

prior written permission of ASC Services II Media, LLC. You may not alter 

or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the