Has Donald Trump ‘Always Known’ Coronavirus ‘Is a Pandemic’?

That’s not what his early statements on the outbreak indicate.

By
56

At a White House coronavirus task Force briefing on Tuesday, President Donald Trump claimed his tone surrounding the coronavirus has not changed.

“I’ve always known this is a real—this is a pandemic. I’ve felt it was a pandemic long before it was called a pandemic,” said President Trump. “All you had to do was look at other countries, I think now it’s in almost 120 countries all over the world. No, I’ve always viewed it as very serious, there was no difference yesterday from days before. I feel the tone is similar but some people said it wasn’t.”

He followed up with a tweet Wednesday morning, claiming, in part, “I always treated the Chinese Virus very seriously.”

The president is lying.

The World Health Organization declared the virus a pandemic on March 11. Just the day before, President Trump downplayed coronavirus’ impact by comparing then-current statistics to the common flu:

“Look, right now, I guess we’re at 26 deaths, and if you look at the flu — the flu, for this year — we’re at 8 mil- — we’re looking at 8,000 deaths. And, you know, hundreds of thousands of cases, but we have 8,000 deaths. So you have 8,000 versus 26 deaths, at this time.”

Many experts have pointed out that the lethality rate of the coronavirus makes it potentially much more serious than the common flu.

The president went on to claim “testing has gone very well. And when people need a test, they can get a test,” despite the fact that the United States’ coronavirus testing was set back by costly delays. He further argued that “we’re prepared, and we’re doing a great job with it. And it will go away.  Just stay calm. It will go away. … It’s really working out. And a lot of good things are going to happen.”

In remarks before his now-infamous dinner with Brazilian President Bolsonaro on March 7, President Trump responded to a question about the coronavirus coming to Washington, D.C,. by saying, “No, I’m not concerned at all. No, I’m not. No, we’ve done a great job.” Several attendees later tested positive for the virus.

On February 27, the president claimed, “we have done an incredible job.  We’re going to continue. [The coronavirus is] going to disappear.  One day — it’s like a miracle — it will disappear.”

That statement came one day after  President Trump gave remarks alongside the coronavirus task force in which he discussed the coronavirus numbers in the U.S. “I don’t think it’s going to come to that, especially with the fact that we’re going down, not up. We’re going very substantially down, not up.”

And on January 22, when CNBC anchor Joe Kernen asked Trump directly whether he was concerned coronavirus might become a pandemic, Trump said  he didn’t think so. “Are there worries about a pandemic at this point?” Kernen wondered.

“No, not at all,” Trump replied. “And we have it totally under control. It’s one person coming in from China. We have it totally under control. It’s going to be just fine.”

David Leonhardt of the New York Times cited these examples and many other occasions the president has minimized the severity of coronavirus and the threat it poses. Despite President Trump’s claim, it’s clear that his tone has changed. If the president “felt it was a pandemic long before it was called a pandemic,” he chose not to say so on many occasions, and, in fact, sent the exact opposite message to the American public. 

When the president claims he’d “always known” coronavirus was a pandemic and insists he has always treated it “very seriously” he is not telling the truth.

Photograph of Donald Trump and the coronavirus task force briefing the media on Tuesday, March 17, by Drew Angerer/Getty Images.

If you have a claim you would like to see us fact check, please send us an email at factcheck@thedispatch.com. If you would like to suggest a correction to this piece or any other Dispatch article, please email corrections@thedispatch.com

56
By
Comments (56)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Avatar photo
    Richard Gale

    "If you tell lies & you tell then often enough, people who don't know the truth start to believe them." ...Olga Meshoe.

    President Trump does not appear to give the veracity of his comments any thought whatsoever. He plays the American people for suckers, and it looks like he has been right about that. I am so disappointed in the people I had believed to be conservatives.

    Collapse
  2. Avatar photo
    Bill Nelson

    Fact check the Sen. Burr stock sale report.

    Collapse
  3. Avatar photo
    KAM

    Here's the thing I sincerely wonder about Trump's lies:

    Does anyone believe them?

    For those OBSESSED with how much he lies: What are his biggest, most important lies, do you think, and who actually believes them?

    Because if you can't come up with a straight answer, one that doesn't amount to differences of opinion, or alarm over his policies or behavior, if no one believes his prevarications—then are they "lies" in any meaningful sense?

    To me, so much of this feels like the apoplectic big sister who just can't get her parents' to DO SOMETHING! about her bratty little brother.

    Collapse
  4. Deleted Comment

    This comment has been deleted

    1. Avatar photo
      tallcupofcoffee

      I wish you would tone down your tendency, on this site, to stand on the table and rant. I can sort of understand your bent on the NR - especially since that site's comments have just gone to hell. But I think a better tone has been set here and your fervor would be more useful in preserving that tone.

      Collapse
  5. Pop Kennedy

    CDC estimates that influenza has resulted in between 9 million – 45 million illnesses, between 140,000 – 810,000 hospitalizations and between 12,000 – 61,000 deaths annually since 2010.”
    Why is the Wuhan virus different?

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      tallcupofcoffee

      This is covered via legitimate outlets (including this one) so often and so clearly that it's absurd to rehash it in a comment section. If you're unable to find such material, you might question how rounded the sources of your information are or how much weight you're giving them.

      Collapse
  6. Pop Kennedy

    When Roosevelt was writing the draft language for WWII why did he lie and say that he wasn’t?
    It is important for a leader not to put all the cards on the table at once. Otherwise the entire public could panic!

    Collapse
  7. Avatar photo
    David

    I have a mixed response to this article. On the one hand fact checking the president’s response to the current crisis is important. On the other hand it struck me as needlessly antagonistic and not informative for those who read The Dispatch. A fact check of COVID-19 reported information would be more useful.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Jhc

      My take on this particular fact check article is that The Dispatch wanted to stake out its position on Trump. If The Dispatch never comments on any Trump's many misstatements, it'll be accused of sheltering or supporting him. IOW, T.D. needed to do this to demonstrate its independence of the Trump admin and its impartiality.

      But yeah, in terms of news this was real "Dog Bites Man" article. :-)

      Collapse
      1. Avatar photo
        Aylene Wright

        Fact Check articles aren't paywalled, so they do serve as part of the introduction to the project, and I think they may be intended for a more general audience than the subscriber- only ones.

        I have also noticed that both JG's syndicated column and DF's Time column are written for a more general audience than what they write here (or when they used to work at NR.)

        Especially in Jonah's case, his syndicated columns have much less Remnanty eggheaded wonkish stuff, and less GFiley humor. They aren't totally devoid of them, either. But they serve more as an introduction to him, the appetizer, not the full course.

        Collapse
    2. Avatar photo
      Aylene Wright

      I don't have a problem with the article by itself. If all these fact checks were aimed at Trump, that's one thing. However, so far the Dispatch fact checks have covered other politicians, both Republicans and Democrats. But I do think fact checking common misconceptions about COVID-19 would be helpful even if that doesn't involve dunking on any particular political or media figure.

      Collapse
      1. Avatar photo
        David

        As I stated it was not informative to Dispatch readers. The president’s varying position on COVID-19 is well known. I agree the Fact Check has covered other politicians and been informative.

        Collapse
  8. Avatar photo
    Leo Monterosso

    Thanks for the compendium of the President's statements on this crisis. I this will prove to be an excellent resource as the President, who lies with as little effort as he breathes, has now said that he has always recognized this to be a pandemic. His lies need to be exposed and kept out front so that when decision time comes in November the whole record will be laid bare as the electorate votes.

    Collapse
  9. Lane Holby

    Under the current circumstances, this article is simply unnecessary and antagonistic. Why spend time proving something your readers already know? For heaven's sake, we're all Dispatch subscribers -- not exactly a hotbed for undiscerning Trump supporters. Wouldn't it be far more fruitful and beneficial to your readers to use your considerable resources to highlight the data and information being shared by actual doctors and scientists inside and outside the administration? Is it really helpful to continue tearing down the administration during a global crisis? Take the high road - ignore him and keep helping disseminate information that actually benefits people.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Aylene Wright

      I agree with you partially, in that considering what we are dealing with right now, I'd like the DFC to focus more on overall fact checking about the virus as there are a lot if myths out there. But that doesn't mean they shouldn't hold Trump or other politicians accountable. I assume this is meant as partially a revival of the Weekly Standard fact checks and that was a great feature as well.

      I also am wondering if it would be a good idea to include some kind of scoring system, as most fact check sites do. Political hyperbole such as "Democrats support terrorists" has been fact checked here as well, but I think that kind of talk, isn't really misleading people about actual tangible *facts*. It is not as dangerous as "colloidal silver cures COVID-19".

      I also would appreciate some way for readers to discreetly request fact checks.

      Collapse
      1. Avatar photo
        tallcupofcoffee

        Also ditto on fact check requests, but I'm going to pan the idea of a scoring system. I thoroughly appreciate that the Dispatch makes its audience read.

        Collapse
      2. Avatar photo
        Man-Eating Cow

        Ditto taking requests for fact checks.

        Collapse
    2. Avatar photo
      JonathanRRogers

      One use for an article like this is to share with non-subscribers. I don't know if thedispatch.com will eventually require one to be logged in to view any article, but for now, this article is publicly visible.

      Collapse
  10. Avatar photo
    Jenny

    Foremost, I'm sure people who are fans of the President are not happy about this and other fact checks. It doesn't feel good when someone you support makes mistakes. While the argument for all of us coming together and not playing the blame game is a good one, it's also important to hold leadership accountable for what they say. I don't think we need to make a binary choice between the two. Let's still work together for the greater good and critically look at the response from politicians, the media, and the public. None of us have all the answers, and sometimes we need to admit when we are wrong.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photo
      Aylene Wright

      I admit that I thought Joe Biden was toast after he skulked out of NH early knowing he was getting shellacked. Obviously I was totally mistaken about that. And my opinion of his mental state much improved after I saw his 1 on 1 debate with Bernie. Both of them had some gaffes, mistakes and actual malarkey moments, but I didn't get the sense Biden was actually impaired compared to the other septugenerian.

      Collapse
    2. Avatar photo
      Visibly

      In science and based on evidence, we should ALWAYS admit then we are wrong

      Collapse
    3. Avatar photo
      Jenny

      Now that I think of it, I'm probably parroting David's FrenchPress from yesterday. He makes this point much better than I do, and it's worth reading if you're upset about hearing these critiques of the President.

      Collapse
Load More