[OutsiderFan]

Again, pointing out facts that highlight mishandling is not blaming. It's simply bringing important truth to light:

[tweet]https://twitter.com/JDiamond1/status/1253056646802214912[/tweet]

[OutsiderFan]

Again, pointing out facts that highlight mishandling is not blaming. It's simply bringing important truth to light:

[tweet]https://twitter.com/JDiamond1/status/1253056646802214912[/tweet]

[burger]

Just to clarify: Dr. Bright is a vaccine development expert and was in charge of the agency leading development of vaccines and drugs to fight the virus.

His HHS bio is cached here: https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/s...clnk&gl=us

I look forward to hearing how this is China's fault.

[burger]

Just to clarify: Dr. Bright is a vaccine development expert and was in charge of the agency leading development of vaccines and drugs to fight the virus.

His HHS bio is cached here: https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/s...clnk&gl=us

I look forward to hearing how this is China's fault.

[cardcrimson]

Going to the media about his whistleblower complaint before he's even filed his whistleblower complaint? 

Seriously, in the middle of a crisis, he wants the Inspector General to investigate why he's being pushed aside? I think he's made the Executive Branch's case very well all by his big self.

[cardcrimson]

Going to the media about his whistleblower complaint before he's even filed his whistleblower complaint? 

Seriously, in the middle of a crisis, he wants the Inspector General to investigate why he's being pushed aside? I think he's made the Executive Branch's case very well all by his big self.

[oregontim]

Again, pointing out facts that highlight mishandling is not blaming. It's simply bringing important truth to light:

I agree. Thanks for posting this. Calling out official actions like this one, which appears to degrade effective management of public agencies working on a pandemic is sounding an alert, not just "blaming." The use of "blaming" is a deflection tactic of those being criticized. In a crisis, it's dangerous. It's silencing dissent over health-related decisions that affect us all.

[oregontim]

Again, pointing out facts that highlight mishandling is not blaming. It's simply bringing important truth to light:

I agree. Thanks for posting this. Calling out official actions like this one, which appears to degrade effective management of public agencies working on a pandemic is sounding an alert, not just "blaming." The use of "blaming" is a deflection tactic of those being criticized. In a crisis, it's dangerous. It's silencing dissent over health-related decisions that affect us all.

[dabigv13]

This is incredibly alarming but not surprising. This administration doesn't tolerate dissent even when the science is sound (reflect on our national weather service being forced to do backflips when a local branch had the temerity to refute Trump's hurricane predictions).

Our executive branch is actively hindering a science based response to this pandemic. And because of that, more people will die than otherwise should, and our economy will be more hindered than it otherwise would.

[dabigv13]

This is incredibly alarming but not surprising. This administration doesn't tolerate dissent even when the science is sound (reflect on our national weather service being forced to do backflips when a local branch had the temerity to refute Trump's hurricane predictions).

Our executive branch is actively hindering a science based response to this pandemic. And because of that, more people will die than otherwise should, and our economy will be more hindered than it otherwise would.

[OutsiderFan]

Going to the media about his whistleblower complaint before he's even filed his whistleblower complaint? 

Seriously, in the middle of a crisis, he wants the Inspector General to investigate why he's being pushed aside? I think he's made the Executive Branch's case very well all by his big self.

So you are in favor of science being pushed aside for political and perhaps corrupt reasons? Given Inspector Generals were being fired last week in other areas of government, and what we know about truth being hidden, why would you not hire a lawyer and go to the media if concerned about public health? Going public also protects Dr. Bright from retaliation.

[OutsiderFan]

Going to the media about his whistleblower complaint before he's even filed his whistleblower complaint? 

Seriously, in the middle of a crisis, he wants the Inspector General to investigate why he's being pushed aside? I think he's made the Executive Branch's case very well all by his big self.

So you are in favor of science being pushed aside for political and perhaps corrupt reasons? Given Inspector Generals were being fired last week in other areas of government, and what we know about truth being hidden, why would you not hire a lawyer and go to the media if concerned about public health? Going public also protects Dr. Bright from retaliation.

[cardcrimson]

So you are in favor of science being pushed aside for political and perhaps corrupt reasons? 

No, of course not. I just have an inherent distrust of blatantly one-sided statements pushed to a breathless media by attorneys representing clients who may or may not have gotten their nose out of joint.

Wasn't there a thread somewhere about the dangers of propaganda? It doesn't just come from Russia, China and Iran. Anybody heard from Michael Avenatti lately? Used to be a mainstay on CNN and MSNBC. . . .

---

Here's how CNN reported the story yesterday, with quotes from the HHS.

"On April 17, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) announced a new public-private partnership -- the Accelerating COVID-19 Therapeutic Interventions and Vaccines (ACTIV) partnership -- to accelerate the development of COVID-19 vaccine and treatment options. At the same time, given the simultaneous importance of accelerating the development of diagnostic tests for COVID-19, Dr. Rick Bright will transfer the skills he has applied as Director of the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) to the National Institutes of Health, as part of a bold plan to accelerate the development and deployment of novel point-of-care testing platforms," the HHS statement said.
The spokesperson added: "Dr. Bright brings extensive experience and expertise in facilitating powerful public-private partnerships that advance the health and well-being of the American people. Gary Disbrow with the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response will serve as the acting director of BARDA."


Guess he didn't like the new role.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/21/politics/...index.html

[cardcrimson]

So you are in favor of science being pushed aside for political and perhaps corrupt reasons? 

No, of course not. I just have an inherent distrust of blatantly one-sided statements pushed to a breathless media by attorneys representing clients who may or may not have gotten their nose out of joint.

Wasn't there a thread somewhere about the dangers of propaganda? It doesn't just come from Russia, China and Iran. Anybody heard from Michael Avenatti lately? Used to be a mainstay on CNN and MSNBC. . . .

---

Here's how CNN reported the story yesterday, with quotes from the HHS.

"On April 17, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) announced a new public-private partnership -- the Accelerating COVID-19 Therapeutic Interventions and Vaccines (ACTIV) partnership -- to accelerate the development of COVID-19 vaccine and treatment options. At the same time, given the simultaneous importance of accelerating the development of diagnostic tests for COVID-19, Dr. Rick Bright will transfer the skills he has applied as Director of the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) to the National Institutes of Health, as part of a bold plan to accelerate the development and deployment of novel point-of-care testing platforms," the HHS statement said.
The spokesperson added: "Dr. Bright brings extensive experience and expertise in facilitating powerful public-private partnerships that advance the health and well-being of the American people. Gary Disbrow with the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response will serve as the acting director of BARDA."


Guess he didn't like the new role.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/21/politics/...index.html

[Farm93]

So you are in favor of science being pushed aside for political and perhaps corrupt reasons? 

No, of course not. I just have an inherent distrust of blatantly one-sided statements pushed to a breathless media by attorneys representing clients who may or may not have gotten their nose out of joint.

Wasn't there a thread somewhere about the dangers of propaganda? It doesn't just come from Russia, China and Iran. Anybody heard from Michael Avenatti lately? Used to be a mainstay on CNN and MSNBC. . . .

Funny thing... I think I saw that he was released temporarily because of the lack of containment of COVID19.  

Guess there is at least one person out there that is happy when the federal government officials elect to reassign vaccine scientists to other projects.

[Farm93]

So you are in favor of science being pushed aside for political and perhaps corrupt reasons? 

No, of course not. I just have an inherent distrust of blatantly one-sided statements pushed to a breathless media by attorneys representing clients who may or may not have gotten their nose out of joint.

Wasn't there a thread somewhere about the dangers of propaganda? It doesn't just come from Russia, China and Iran. Anybody heard from Michael Avenatti lately? Used to be a mainstay on CNN and MSNBC. . . .

Funny thing... I think I saw that he was released temporarily because of the lack of containment of COVID19.  

Guess there is at least one person out there that is happy when the federal government officials elect to reassign vaccine scientists to other projects.

[BostonCard]

Regardless of whether he was pushed out for political purposes or not, Bright leaving BARDA is a big deal and very disruptive in a time where BARDA is helping to coordinate the public and private development of not just vaccines but also drug studies and treatments for COVID-19.  I think it was a mistake to reassign him whatever the reason, in the midst of a pandemic.

BC

[BostonCard]

Regardless of whether he was pushed out for political purposes or not, Bright leaving BARDA is a big deal and very disruptive in a time where BARDA is helping to coordinate the public and private development of not just vaccines but also drug studies and treatments for COVID-19.  I think it was a mistake to reassign him whatever the reason, in the midst of a pandemic.

BC

[2006alum]

Going to the media about his whistleblower complaint before he's even filed his whistleblower complaint? 

Seriously, in the middle of a crisis, he wants the Inspector General to investigate why he's being pushed aside? I think he's made the Executive Branch's case very well all by his big self.

Out of curiosity, what case do you think the Executive Branch has been making? I'm genuinely curious.

[2006alum]

Going to the media about his whistleblower complaint before he's even filed his whistleblower complaint? 

Seriously, in the middle of a crisis, he wants the Inspector General to investigate why he's being pushed aside? I think he's made the Executive Branch's case very well all by his big self.

Out of curiosity, what case do you think the Executive Branch has been making? I'm genuinely curious.

[cardcrimson]

Going to the media about his whistleblower complaint before he's even filed his whistleblower complaint? 

Seriously, in the middle of a crisis, he wants the Inspector General to investigate why he's being pushed aside? I think he's made the Executive Branch's case very well all by his big self.

Out of curiosity, what case do you think the Executive Branch has been making? I'm genuinely curious.

For moving him out of a position that requires leadership. Don't think I've ever read a book on leadership that recommended running to attorneys and the media as a best practice.

And before all of you jump on Trump and his "leadership" or lack their of, the people that appointed him to his position have the opportunity to remove him come November.

[cardcrimson]

Going to the media about his whistleblower complaint before he's even filed his whistleblower complaint? 

Seriously, in the middle of a crisis, he wants the Inspector General to investigate why he's being pushed aside? I think he's made the Executive Branch's case very well all by his big self.

Out of curiosity, what case do you think the Executive Branch has been making? I'm genuinely curious.

For moving him out of a position that requires leadership. Don't think I've ever read a book on leadership that recommended running to attorneys and the media as a best practice.

And before all of you jump on Trump and his "leadership" or lack their of, the people that appointed him to his position have the opportunity to remove him come November.

[OutsiderFan]

Why would a guy claim he was being improperly demoted and file a whistleblower complaint if he was really being moved to do more important work at the NIH, as the CNN statement claimed?

Makes zero sense.

[OutsiderFan]

Why would a guy claim he was being improperly demoted and file a whistleblower complaint if he was really being moved to do more important work at the NIH, as the CNN statement claimed?

Makes zero sense.

[Goose]

Why would a guy claim he was being improperly demoted and file a whistleblower complaint if he was really being moved to do more important work at the NIH, as the CNN statement claimed?

Makes zero sense.

It clearly wasn't a promotion. However, it could well be that he didn't support some programs that his supervisors believed were important. We don't yet know. It could be he was correct and his bosses are doing stupid things. It could be just an honest disagreement. In any case, I must say that I prefer an approach much more similar to the one General Mattis took. If he strongly feels there is has been improper activity, the correct response is to resign and highlight, in detail, exactly why. If you aren't willing to fall on your sword. maybe you aren't so sure you are right.

[Goose]

Why would a guy claim he was being improperly demoted and file a whistleblower complaint if he was really being moved to do more important work at the NIH, as the CNN statement claimed?

Makes zero sense.

It clearly wasn't a promotion. However, it could well be that he didn't support some programs that his supervisors believed were important. We don't yet know. It could be he was correct and his bosses are doing stupid things. It could be just an honest disagreement. In any case, I must say that I prefer an approach much more similar to the one General Mattis took. If he strongly feels there is has been improper activity, the correct response is to resign and highlight, in detail, exactly why. If you aren't willing to fall on your sword. maybe you aren't so sure you are right.

[2006alum]

For moving him out of a position that requires leadership. Don't think I've ever read a book on leadership that recommended running to attorneys and the media as a best practice.

Where did you see the Executive Branch has gone on record to say he was relocated due to failed leadership? This story suggests there hasn't been a stated reason on the record yet:

[tweet]https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1253110846596808706?s=20[/tweet]

An NIH spokesperson said on Tuesday that Bright would be working to accelerate the development and deployment of new point-of-care coronavirus testing platforms.
The agency has not responded to a request for comment.
Bright is represented by attorneys Debra Katz and Lisa Banks of Katz, Marshall & Banks.
In a statement, Katz and Banks said Bright's removal was "retaliation plain and simple. The results from the Administration’s refusal to listen to the experts and to sideline those like Dr. Bright who point out any errors in the government’s response will continue to be catastrophic for the American people."
Katz and Banks said they will request that the Office of Special Counsel seek a stay of Bright's termination, and that he be permitted to remain in his position pending an investigation.

Incidentally, this quote also explains why he went to lawyers and the media - he wants the Office of Special Counsel to seek a stay of his termination and be permitted to remain in his position. If what he says is true is true, that seems like the only way he'd be able to do that. Given how quickly Trump has terminated IGs lately, I suspect his reason for going public was to ensure there would be some actual accountability.

[2006alum]

For moving him out of a position that requires leadership. Don't think I've ever read a book on leadership that recommended running to attorneys and the media as a best practice.

Where did you see the Executive Branch has gone on record to say he was relocated due to failed leadership? This story suggests there hasn't been a stated reason on the record yet:

[tweet]https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1253110846596808706?s=20[/tweet]

An NIH spokesperson said on Tuesday that Bright would be working to accelerate the development and deployment of new point-of-care coronavirus testing platforms.
The agency has not responded to a request for comment.
Bright is represented by attorneys Debra Katz and Lisa Banks of Katz, Marshall & Banks.
In a statement, Katz and Banks said Bright's removal was "retaliation plain and simple. The results from the Administration’s refusal to listen to the experts and to sideline those like Dr. Bright who point out any errors in the government’s response will continue to be catastrophic for the American people."
Katz and Banks said they will request that the Office of Special Counsel seek a stay of Bright's termination, and that he be permitted to remain in his position pending an investigation.

Incidentally, this quote also explains why he went to lawyers and the media - he wants the Office of Special Counsel to seek a stay of his termination and be permitted to remain in his position. If what he says is true is true, that seems like the only way he'd be able to do that. Given how quickly Trump has terminated IGs lately, I suspect his reason for going public was to ensure there would be some actual accountability.

[cardcrimson]

For moving him out of a position that requires leadership. Don't think I've ever read a book on leadership that recommended running to attorneys and the media as a best practice.

Where did you see the Executive Branch has gone on record to say he was relocated due to failed leadership? This story suggests there hasn't been a stated reason on the record yet:

I didn't. You asked me what I thought the case they were making. I responded with what I thought. The guy might be the greatest researcher and expert on vaccine development alive. Doesn't necessarily make him a leader or the appropriate guy to head an organization developing vaccines during a time of crisis, or anytime frankly. And, when someone is removed from a leadership position, it's typically not appropriate to cast aspersions. Management 101.

[cardcrimson]

For moving him out of a position that requires leadership. Don't think I've ever read a book on leadership that recommended running to attorneys and the media as a best practice.

Where did you see the Executive Branch has gone on record to say he was relocated due to failed leadership? This story suggests there hasn't been a stated reason on the record yet:

I didn't. You asked me what I thought the case they were making. I responded with what I thought. The guy might be the greatest researcher and expert on vaccine development alive. Doesn't necessarily make him a leader or the appropriate guy to head an organization developing vaccines during a time of crisis, or anytime frankly. And, when someone is removed from a leadership position, it's typically not appropriate to cast aspersions. Management 101.

[Genuine Realist]

Again, pointing out facts that highlight mishandling is not blaming. It's simply bringing important truth to light:

[tweet]https://twitter.com/JDiamond1/status/1253056646802214912[/tweet]

Disgruntled bureaucrat goes public. It's hard to opine from a distance.

What is crystal clear is that Trump's re-election depends on how well the C-19 crisis is handled. He knows that. To side immediately with the bureaucrat makes no more sense than siding automatically with Trump.

[Genuine Realist]

Again, pointing out facts that highlight mishandling is not blaming. It's simply bringing important truth to light:

[tweet]https://twitter.com/JDiamond1/status/1253056646802214912[/tweet]

Disgruntled bureaucrat goes public. It's hard to opine from a distance.

What is crystal clear is that Trump's re-election depends on how well the C-19 crisis is handled. He knows that. To side immediately with the bureaucrat makes no more sense than siding automatically with Trump.

[stupac2]

I just deleted a bunch of posts that weren't even attempting to be about covid. If you want to pick random partisan fights there's the entire rest of the internet for it.

If this drifts again I'm just locking it.

[stupac2]

I just deleted a bunch of posts that weren't even attempting to be about covid. If you want to pick random partisan fights there's the entire rest of the internet for it.

If this drifts again I'm just locking it.

[BostonCard]

Disgruntled bureaucrat goes public. It's hard to opine from a distance.


What is crystal clear is that Trump's re-election depends on how well the C-19 crisis is handled. He knows that. To side immediately with the bureaucrat makes no more sense than siding automatically with Trump.

Motivations matter not a whit.  What matters is actual performance.  BARDA was doing a lot not just to fund a bunch of efforts around fighting COVID-19 but to help coordinate the research, and to encourage best practices.  For example, BARDA is funding J&J's vaccine development efforts, including the manufacture of large quantities of vaccine at risk, so that if it works J&J is ready to deploy immediately rather than having to ramp up production.  A leadership change at this time certainly brings a lot of risks with it, whatever the motivations.

BC

---

I just deleted a bunch of posts that weren't even attempting to be about covid. If you want to pick random partisan fights there's the entire rest of the internet for it.

If this drifts again I'm just locking it.

Please no more posts about Supreme Court confirmation hearings that have nothing to do with COVID-19 or the response to it.

BC

[BostonCard]

Disgruntled bureaucrat goes public. It's hard to opine from a distance.


What is crystal clear is that Trump's re-election depends on how well the C-19 crisis is handled. He knows that. To side immediately with the bureaucrat makes no more sense than siding automatically with Trump.

Motivations matter not a whit.  What matters is actual performance.  BARDA was doing a lot not just to fund a bunch of efforts around fighting COVID-19 but to help coordinate the research, and to encourage best practices.  For example, BARDA is funding J&J's vaccine development efforts, including the manufacture of large quantities of vaccine at risk, so that if it works J&J is ready to deploy immediately rather than having to ramp up production.  A leadership change at this time certainly brings a lot of risks with it, whatever the motivations.

BC

---

I just deleted a bunch of posts that weren't even attempting to be about covid. If you want to pick random partisan fights there's the entire rest of the internet for it.

If this drifts again I'm just locking it.

Please no more posts about Supreme Court confirmation hearings that have nothing to do with COVID-19 or the response to it.

BC

[Genuine Realist]

Disgruntled bureaucrat goes public. It's hard to opine from a distance.


What is crystal clear is that Trump's re-election depends on how well the C-19 crisis is handled. He knows that. To side immediately with the bureaucrat makes no more sense than siding automatically with Trump.

Motivations matter not a whit.  What matters is actual performance.  BARDA was doing a lot not just to fund a bunch of efforts around fighting COVID-19 but to help coordinate the research, and to encourage best practices.  For example, BARDA is funding J&J's vaccine development efforts, including the manufacture of large quantities of vaccine at risk, so that if it works J&J is ready to deploy immediately rather than having to ramp up production.  A leadership change at this time certainly brings a lot of risks with it, whatever the motivations.

BC

---

I just deleted a bunch of posts that weren't even attempting to be about covid. If you want to pick random partisan fights there's the entire rest of the internet for it.

If this drifts again I'm just locking it.

Please no more posts about Supreme Court confirmation hearings that have nothing to do with COVID-19 or the response to it.

BC

I agree that motivations matter less than performance, though they do overlap. Assuming the discharged employee is in the right, however, and that his performance was not deficient, seems to me to be making some premature assumptions. I'd actually be a bit more sympathetic to Barda if he had remained quiet.

[Genuine Realist]

Disgruntled bureaucrat goes public. It's hard to opine from a distance.


What is crystal clear is that Trump's re-election depends on how well the C-19 crisis is handled. He knows that. To side immediately with the bureaucrat makes no more sense than siding automatically with Trump.

Motivations matter not a whit.  What matters is actual performance.  BARDA was doing a lot not just to fund a bunch of efforts around fighting COVID-19 but to help coordinate the research, and to encourage best practices.  For example, BARDA is funding J&J's vaccine development efforts, including the manufacture of large quantities of vaccine at risk, so that if it works J&J is ready to deploy immediately rather than having to ramp up production.  A leadership change at this time certainly brings a lot of risks with it, whatever the motivations.

BC

---

I just deleted a bunch of posts that weren't even attempting to be about covid. If you want to pick random partisan fights there's the entire rest of the internet for it.

If this drifts again I'm just locking it.

Please no more posts about Supreme Court confirmation hearings that have nothing to do with COVID-19 or the response to it.

BC

I agree that motivations matter less than performance, though they do overlap. Assuming the discharged employee is in the right, however, and that his performance was not deficient, seems to me to be making some premature assumptions. I'd actually be a bit more sympathetic to Barda if he had remained quiet.

[BostonCard]

BARDA is the agency; Bright is the agency director who was moved out.

I've had interactions with BARDA, which on the one hand makes me capable of evaluating it, but also probably biases me.  That being said, I've seen no indications that BARDA's performance has been subpar.  In fact, I'd say that the speed with which Moderna was able to open its clinical trial of the vaccine is a testament to how BARDA can enable and accelerate private research.  That oral diagnostic touted in another thread? BARDA is funding and lending expertise (https://www.biospace.com/article/release...self-test/).

In an HHS where there have been high profile flubs by both the CDC and FDA, BARDA actually has stood out as an agency that has stepped up to the challenge.

BC

[BostonCard]

BARDA is the agency; Bright is the agency director who was moved out.

I've had interactions with BARDA, which on the one hand makes me capable of evaluating it, but also probably biases me.  That being said, I've seen no indications that BARDA's performance has been subpar.  In fact, I'd say that the speed with which Moderna was able to open its clinical trial of the vaccine is a testament to how BARDA can enable and accelerate private research.  That oral diagnostic touted in another thread? BARDA is funding and lending expertise (https://www.biospace.com/article/release...self-test/).

In an HHS where there have been high profile flubs by both the CDC and FDA, BARDA actually has stood out as an agency that has stepped up to the challenge.

BC