Trump tests negative for coronavirus: White House physician
Washington: US President Donald Trump has tested negative for the novel coronavirus, the White House physician said, hours after his administration declared the COVID-19 pandemic a national emergency on Friday.
Trump, 73, had taken the coronavirus test on Friday night. The results came out in less than 24 hours.
"Last night, after an in-depth discussion with the President regarding the COVID-19 test, he elected to proceed. This evening, I received confirmation that the test is negative," Dr Sean Conley, the presidential physician, said in a memorandum to White House Press Secretary Stephanie Grisham on Saturday.
"One week after having dinner with the Brazilian delegation in Mar-a-Lago, the President remains symptom-free," he said.
"I have been in the daily contact with the CDC (Center for Disease Control) and the White House Task Force, and we are encouraging the implementation of all their best practices for exposure reduction and transmission mitigation," Conley added.
Trump had resisted being tested for the virus that has killed at least 51 Americans and infected over 2,500 others.
The deadly novel coronavirus has claimed over 5,300 lives and infected more than 142,000 people across 135 countries and territories, with the World Health Organisation describing the outbreak a pandemic on Wednesday.
As part of the precautionary measure to stop the deadly disease from spreading, doctors are advising people to avoid shaking hands.
Trump considered to be a germophobic and not a good supporter of shaking hands over the past few days has been seen shaking hands with people.
"Why are you shaking hands, sir? a reporter asked Trump during a White House news conference Saturday afternoon.
President Trump defended his habit of shaking hands, saying this is a cultural habit that is tough to be done away with.
"Because it almost becomes a habit, and you get out of that habit. And, frankly, I was a non-hand-shaker, for the most part. I've never believed that shaking hands - once you become a politician. And I notice it too: Political people walk up to me, they want to shake my hand. I said, 'Well, you know'," he explained.
"People come up to me, they shake hands, they put their hand out. It's sort of a natural reflex, and we're all getting out of it. All of us have that problem. Somebody comes up to you, they put their hand out -- you probably tend to just shake it. And we're all getting out of that," he said.
"Shaking hands is not a great thing to be doing right now, I agree. But people put their hand out. Sometimes I'll put the hand out. You don't think about it. People are thinking about it more and more. We have to think about it; it's important," he said, referring to the age old cultural practice which is tough to die down.
"Getting away from shaking hands is a good thing, and possibly that's something that comes out of this. Maybe people shouldn't be shaking hands for the long term because it does transmit flu and other things, Trump said.
The World Health Organisation has advised people to stay at least three feet away from someone who is sick or potentially contagious. The US Centre for Disease Control or CDC recommends maintaining a six feet distance.
France is now discouraging cheek-kissing and shaking hands has been suspended in Germany.
Early this week, Trump used the traditional Indian greeting of namaste' when he met the Ireland Prime Minister in the Oval Office of the White House.
Bollywood star Priyanka Chopra Jonas earlier this week on Instagram urged people to use 'namaste' to greet others in the current times.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Ballari violence: Were cops made scapegoats to cover political failure?
Bengaluru: Across Karnataka, a serious discussion has begun after the violence in Ballari and the swift action taken against police officers who were on the ground that day. The core question being asked is simple: when law and order fails, why are police officers the first to be shown the door, while political responsibility is quietly pushed aside?
The January 1 clash in Ballari was not a sudden street fight. It was a political confrontation involving supporters of two sitting MLAs. A banner related to the unveiling of a Valmiki statue became the flashpoint. What followed was stone-pelting, firing, and the death of a Congress worker. The situation spiralled within hours.
Within a day, Ballari SP Pavan Nejjur was suspended. Soon after, senior officers were reshuffled. Deputy Inspector General of Police Vartika Katiyar was transferred. No official reason was cited in the notification. But the timing made one thing clear: accountability, at least on paper, had been fixed.
Since then, there has been unease within police circles and political debate outside it.
Unconfirmed reports that Nejjur attempted suicide after his suspension were firmly denied by senior officers and the home minister. They said he was safe, resting, and under stress. Still, the very fact that such reports gained traction says something about the pressure officers feel when action is taken overnight, without public clarity.
Opposition leaders have called Nejjur a scapegoat, pointing out that he had taken charge only hours before the violence. They have asked how an officer can be blamed for a political clash he barely had time to assess. They have also drawn parallels with earlier incidents where police leadership was suspended after tragedies, while political decision-making remained untouched.
However, responding to this criticism, Home Minister G Parameshwara rejected the argument that the suspension was unfair because Nejjur had assumed charge only hours earlier. “It is not important whether he reported to duty on the same day (of incident) or one hour back. Duty is duty. He is not new to the department. IPS officers are trained to handle such situations any time. If he had acted swiftly and promptly, he could have prevented the situation from escalating.” He had said adding that Nejjur did not discharge his duties properly and that this was the reason for his suspension.
Now, fresh and unconfirmed reports suggest that Vartika Katiyar may have met a senior cabinet minister, questioning why she was made to pay the price for a situation that was political in nature. There is no official confirmation of this meeting. But the talk itself has added fuel to the debate.
What is being discussed in the state is not whether the police made mistakes. Many acknowledge that the situation on January 1 was mishandled. A clash earlier in the day was allowed to cool down without strong preventive action. Later, a banner came up near a politically sensitive location. The crowd should not have been allowed to build up. Better anticipation was needed.
At the same time, critics are asking whether the entire burden can be placed on officers when the trigger itself was political rivalry. Who installed the banner? Who mobilised supporters? Who had armed private gunmen present at the spot? These are questions that are still part of the investigation, yet administrative punishment moved faster than political accountability.
This has led to a wider comparison with past incidents, including the Bengaluru stampede after the RCB victory celebrations. There too, police officers were suspended after lives were lost, while decisions taken at higher levels were defended as unavoidable. Many are now saying Ballari fits into the same pattern.
The argument being made is not that the police are blameless. The argument is that responsibility appears to stop at the uniform. When things go wrong, officers are transferred or suspended to send a message. But when the violence is rooted in political rivalry, that message feels incomplete.
Within police ranks, there is also quiet concern about working conditions. Officers say they are expected to manage volatile political situations overnight, often with little room to push back against powerful interests. When things hold, they are invisible. When they collapse, they stand alone.
The Ballari episode has once again exposed this fault line.
For the government, the challenge is larger than one suspension or transfer. The real test is whether it is willing to publicly acknowledge political failures when law and order breaks down, instead of letting the system suggest that the police alone dropped the ball.
For now, what remains is a growing feeling across Karnataka that accountability is selective. And that whenever politics turns violent, the easiest answer is to change the officers, not the decisions that led to the violence in the first place.
