>>Bowen: TONIGHT ON BREATER BOSTON A NEW WE CAN SITE AIMED AT MAKING A HOLY GRAIL LIKE SEARCH FOR AT-ONLY-HOME COVID TESTS EASIER BROUGHT TO YOU US BY THE SAME WEB DEVELOPER WHO MADE HER OWN COVID VACCINE WEBSITE LAST YEAR AROUND THIS TIME.

OLIVIA ADAMS JOINS ME, THEN LATER MASSACHUSETTS OFFICIALS ARE CALLING ON HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE TO RETURN UNEMPLOYMENT MONEY WHICH THEY RECEIVED THROUGH NO FAULT OF THEIR OWN.

SOME OWE TENS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS.

WE BAIL OUT BIG CORPORATIONS BUT MAKE OUT OF WORKPEOPLE ANTE UP?

I WILL BE JOINED BY THE GLOBE COLUMNIST WHO BROKE THIS STORY AND FINALLY HOW SARAH PALIN'S DEFAMATION LAWSUIT AGAINST "THE NEW YORK TIMES" COULD BE A GAME CHANGER FOR HOW THE MEDIA COVERS PUBLIC FIGURES.

BRZ THE LATEST COVID SURGE IS WANTING WITH INFECTION RATES FALLING ACROSS THE U.S.

INCLUDING HERE IN MASSACHUSETTS BUT HOSPITALIZATIONS AND DEATHS ARE STILL ON THE RISE.

WE'RE STILL FAR FROM THE FINISH LINE IN THIS PANDEMIC, IN FACT, THE 20% SPIKE IN COVID CASES WORLDWIDE LAST WEEK PROMPTED THE HEAD OF THE WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION TO ISSUE THIS WARNING TODAY.

>> IT'S DANGEROUS TO ASSUME THAT OMICRON WILL BE THE LAST VARIANT OR THAT WE ARE IN THE END GAME.

ON THE CONTRARY, GLOBALLY THE CONDITIONS ARE IDEAL FOR MORE VARIANTS TO EMERGE.

>> Braude: THAT MEANS A LOT MORE TESTING IS LIKELY IN OUR COLLECTIVE FUTURES.

THE ONLY PROBLEM DESPITE FUTURE EFFORTS IN FEDERAL AND STATE LEVELS TO MAKE AT-HOME COVID TESTS AVAILABLE T IS STILL DIFFICULT AND SOMETIMES IMPOSSIBLE TO GET THEM.

THE FEDS ARE TAKING WEEKS TO SHIP THEIR KITS IF YOU ARE EVEN ABLE TO SIGN-- SIGN UP FOR THEM.

THE STATE GOVERNMENT DISTRIBUTED A FEW MILLION BUT IN MANY COMMUNITIES THEY ARE ALL GONE AND THE STORES ARE MOSTLY SOLD OUT.

HERE IN MASSACHUSETTS WE'RE GETTING A NEW WEAPON, A WEBSITE THAT CROWD SOURCES INFORMATION ABOUT WHAT STORES HAVE TESTS IN STOCK AND WHEN.

THE SITE IS COVIDTESTCOLLAB.COM AND THE BRAIN CHILD OF OLIVIA ADAMS A LOCAL WEB DEVELOPER WHO YOU MAY REMEMBER FOR STEPPING IN TO SAVE THE DAY ALMOST EXACTLY A YEAR AGO WITH MA COVID VACCINES.COM TO HELP PEOPLE FIND AVAILABLE VACCINES WHEN THEY WERE LEFT BAFFLED BY THE STATE'S SETUP.

THE GLOBE NAMED HER ONE OF THEIR BOSTONIANS OF THE YEAR.

OLIVIA ADAMS, GOOD TO SEE YOU AGAIN.

>> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR HAVING ME.

>> Braude: CAN WE GET BACK TO THAT AMAZING HOMEMADE WEBSITE OF YOURS, HOW MANY HITS DID YOU GET ON THAT SITE.

>> WE GO OVER 50 MILLION OVER THE COURSE OF THE FEW MONTHS IT IT BACK ACTIVE.

>> Braude: DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA HOW MANY PEOPLE YOU HELPED GET VACCINATED?

>> WE DON'T.

SO THE WEBSITE WAS SO SIMPLE THAT WE DIDN'T TRACK WHAT PEOPLE WERE USING IT, WHERE THEY WENT AND IF THEY GOT, IF THEY ACTUALLY GOT APPOINTMENTS OR NOT.

>> Braude: YOU WERE ON MATERNITY LEAVE WHILE DEVELOPING THIS, IT SAY LEGENDARY STORY.

DIDN'T I READ SOMETIME IN DECEMBER YOU ARE AT THE HOSPITAL WITH YOUR DAUGHTER AT ONE POINT, AND YOU HAVE A LAPTOP ON YOUR LAP, I THINK AND YOU ARE ON THE PHONE WITH THE GOVERNOR OF ILLINOIS EXPLAINING TO HIM HOW TO SET UP HIS WEBSITE, DID I GET THAT RIGHT?

>> YEP, WE WERE IN THE HOSPITAL FOR A TESTING PROCEDURE FOR MY YOINGEST SON.

AND AT THE SAME TIME I WAS IN THE HALLWAY TALKING TO GOVERNOR PRITS GER.

>> Braude: WHY NOT,-- .

>> Braude: WHY NOT, SO WHAT DID YOU DO THIS TIME, HOW ARE YOU GOING TO HELP US ALL GET ACCESS TO THOSE AT-HOME RAPID COVID TESTS IT.

>> YEAH, SO THE BIGGEST DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE WEBSITE THAT I CREATED LAST YEAR TO KIND OF BRING ALL OF THAT VACCINE INFORMATION TOGETHER IN ONE SPOT AND THIS WEBSITE IS THAT THIS WEBSITE RELIES ON OUR USERS TO PROVIDE THAT INFORMATION BECAUSE NOBODY REALLY KNOWS, THERE IS NO CENTRAL LOCATION THAT ARE GIVEN MULTIPLE LOCATIONS TO FIND OUT WHERE, WHICH STORES HAVE WHAT TEST ITS, ET CETERA.

SO WHAT THIS WEBSITE DOES IS IT ALLOWS YOU TO PUT IN THE INFORMATION YOU KNOW ABOUT THE PHARMACIES AND THE RETAILERS NEAR YOU SO THAT OTHER PEOPLE CAN BENEFIT FROM THAT INFORMATION.

SO INSTEAD OF CALLING AROUND TO TALL OF THE WALGREEN'S NEAR YOU OR DRIVING AROUND TO DIFFERENT TOWNS TRYING TO FIND RAPID TESTS YOU CAN LOOK ONLINE AND SEE WHERE PEOPLE HAVE SENT THRAIR AVAILABILITY.

>> AND ARE THEY AVAILABLE?

>> YES, IT ST FUN'S BECAUSE THERE IS NOTHING IN ARLINGTON, AT LEAST RECENTLY AND THAT IS WHERE I LIVE.

SO I WAS HAVING A TON OF TROUBLE BUT I FOUND OUT JUST BY KIND OF WATCHING THE WEBSITE OVER THE PAST FEW DAYS, THERE ARE SOME CVSS AND WALGREENS THAT CONSISTENTLY HAVE THEMENT IN STOCK IN BURLINGTON OR WEGMANS OR WHAT YOU HAVE.

THEY THERE ARE DEFINITELY STORES THAT HAVE THEM IN STOCK AND IT IS KIND OF JUST A SECRET SHOW.

>> Braude: WHEN I SAID A MINUTE AGO WHEN I WAS INTRODUCING YOU, FROM MASSACHUSETTS, AS SOON AS I SAID IT I REALIZED I MIGHT BE WRONG, YOU HAVE A WIDER REACH HERE, DO YOU NOT?

>> YES, SO SOME PEOPLE HAVE PUT IN INFORMATION FOR OTHER STATES.

I HAVE SEEN SOME STUFF FOR NORTH CAROLINA AND GEORGIA AND SOMEBODY PUT IN SOMETHING FOR SPOKANE THE OTHER DAY, IT DEFINITELY HAS THE MOST REACH IN MASSACHUSETTS AND THE MOST USAGE BUT THIS WEBSITE CAN TECHNICALLY WORK ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD.

>> Braude: DO PEOPLE KNOW ABOUT THIS WEBSITE?

I ASSUME IT DOESN'T HAVE 50 MILLION HITS YET BUT IS THE WORD GETTING OUT?

>> WORD ASK GETTING OUT BUT I APPRECIATE CONTINUED MEDIA THROUGH SHARING THROUGH THE PROGRAM AND OTHER PROGRAMS SO MORE AND MORE PEOPLE CAN FIND OUT ABOUT IT.

>> Braude: WHEN YOU WERE HERE LAST TIME WE TALK TBD HOW PIT FULL THE ROLLOUT OF THE VACCINES WERE.

I AM STUNNED BY, I KNOW THE INTENTION IS GOOD.

BUT HOW LITTLE AND HOW LATE THE FEDERAL RESPONSE HAS BEEN HERE.

YOU GO ONLINE WHICH I DID, TO GET FOUR TESTS, THEY RECEIPTICALLY I HAVE GOT THEM AT THE END OF THE MONTH.

THERE IS NO WORD, ARE THERE FOUR MORE NEXT MONTH?

A LOT OF PEOPLE AS YOU KNOW IF YOU LIVE IN MULTIUNIT BUILDINGS WERE KNOCKED OUT OF THE SYSTEM.

ARE YOU SURPRISED ABOUT, YOU KNOW, DEJA VU ALL OVER AGAIN?

IN TERMS OF TESTS, AS COMPARED TO THE NIGHTMARE WITH VACCINES EARLIER ON?

>> YEAH, IT IS NOT SURPRISING, HONESTLY.

I MEAN THIS HAS BEEN THE THEME OF THE WHOLE PANDEMIC, THAT TOO LITTLE TOO LATE.

I MEAN RIGHT NOW WE'RE IN THE MIDDLE OF AN INCREDIBLE SUNCH AND ME BEING A PARENT OF TWO KIDS WHO ARE IN DAYCARE, THEY'RE NOT OLD ENOUGH TO GET VACCINATED, WE HAVE TO GET TESTED ALL THE TIME.

AND FOUR TESTS AT THE END OF JANUARY IS NOT THAT HELPFUL, AND I KNOW PLENTY OF PEOPLE WHO ARE IN SIMILAR SITUATIONS.

>> Braude: WHY DO YOU DO THIS?

WHY DID YOU DO THE FIRST ONE?

I CAN'T REMEMBER WHAT YOU SAID?

AND WHAT ARE YOU DOING THIS, YOU HAVE A JOB, YOU HAVE KIDS, WHY-- YOU DON'T MAKE ANY MONEY ON THIS, I ASSUME.

WHY DO YOU DO THIS?

>> I DO IT BECAUSE I AM A PROBLEM SOLVER AT HEART.

AND WITH MY FIRST WEBSITE I THOUGHT MAYBE A COUPLE OF FRIENDS WOULD FIND IT AND IT WOULD BE USEFUL AND IT JUST BLUE UP.

AND THAT REALLY JUST MADE ME REALIZE HOW MUCH OF AN IMPACT ONE PERSON CAN HAVE, IF THEY PUT THEIR MIND TO IT.

AND THEY SHARE WHAT THEY HAVE DONE WITH THE COMMUNITY.

AND SO WHEN I SAW THIS PROBLEM COME BACK TO ME IN A DIFFERENT FORM I THOUGHT WHAT CAN I TRY THIS TIME, WHAT NEW SKILLS HAVE I LEARNED OVER THE PAST YEAR AND HOW CAN I HELP THE COMMUNITY.

>> Braude: WHEN ARE YOU ANNOUNCING YOUR RUN FOR GOVERNOR, HAVE YOU ANNOUNCED YET OR YOU DON'T KNOW THE DATE.

>> DEFINITELY NOT RUNNING FOR GOVERNOR, THANKS.

>> Braude: THAT IS WHAT SHE SAYS NOW.

OLIVIA ADAMS, CONGRATULATIONS YET AGAIN.

YOU ARE A PROBLEM SOLVER EXTRAORDINARY AIR.

WE WILL GIVE THE WEBSITE IN A MINUTE AND IT IS GREAT TO SEE YOU, THANKS SO MUCH.

>> THANKS SO MUCH, JIM, WE APPRECIATE IT.

>> Braude: WE APPRECIATE IT HERE.

THE WEBSITE IS COVIDTESTCOLLAB.COM AND JOIN US TOMORROW WHEN THE HEAD OF THE CDC MASSACHUSETTS' OWN DR. ROCHELLE WALENSKY WILL BE HERE TO TALK ABOUT THE TESTING SCRAMBLE, THE EVOLVING DEFINITION OF FULLY VACCINATED AND MUCH MORE.

BUT FOR NOW TO ANOTHER PIECE OF MAND FALLOUT.

WHEN THIS ALL STARTED IN MARCH AND APRIL OF 2020 THE MASSACHUSETTS DEPARTMENT OF UNEMPLOYMENT ASSISTANCE WAS FIELDING MORE THAN 600,000 CLAIMS A MONTH.

THEY'RE PAYING OUT MONEY THAT WAS A LIFELINE TO FEEL.

BUT NOW AS THE GLOBE REPORTED, STATE'S DUA IS LOOKING TO GET MUCH OF THAT MONEY BACK TO THE TUNE OF ALMOST $3 BILLION.

MORE PRECISELY, FOR AROUND $719,000 CLAIMS THEY SAY WERE OVERPAID OVER THE COURSE OF 18 MONTH.

LET'S BE HERE, THIS IS-- CLEAR, THIS IS NOT ABOUT FRAUD.

THIS IS MONEY UNEMPLOYED PEOPLE RECEIVED THROUGH NO FAULT OF THEIR OWN AND NOT SURPRISINGLY, IN MOST CASES, SPENT.

JOINING ME TO DISCUSS IS "BOSTON GLOBE" COLUMENESS LARRY EDELMAN.

GOOD TO SEE YOU, CONGRATULATIONS ON THIS.

>> THANKS, JIM.

>> Braude: WE ALSO INVITED THE STATE SECRETARY OF LABOR AND WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT, TO JOIN US.

SHE DECLINED.

SO AS I SAID, LARRY, NO FRAUD.

SO HOW DID THIS THAP?

>> HOW DID IT HAPPEN.

THERE WAS A LOT OF CONFUSION.

I MEAN THINK OF ALL THE JOB LTSES BENEFITS.

JUST TENS AND TENS OF THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE GETTING THROWN OUT OF WORK IN A VERY SHORT PERIOD OF TIME.

AND THEN THE FEDS ROLLED OUT THE FEDERAL BENEFITS, THE EXTENSIONS TO STATE BENEFITS, THE SO CALLED DUA FOR DIG WORKERS AND THAT CREATED ENORMOUS CON FEUTIONZ BECAUSE IT WAS A BRAND NEW PROGRAM, THE DUA HAD TO SCRAMBLE TO GET THEM OUT.

>> SO SHOULD THE STATE GET A PASS ON BLAME HERE BECAUSE OF THE OVERWHELMING DEMAND.

AS YOU SAY, DIG WORKERS WERE NEVER COVERED BEFORE, NOT TO MENTION THE SUPPLEMENT, FOR PEOPLE WHO WERE COVERED.

SHOULD THEY GET A PASS?

I READ SO MANY STORIES IN YOUR PAPER ABOUT THE ANTIQUATED SYSTEM AT THE UNEMPLOYMENT OFFICE.

>> RIGHT, RIGHT, I THINK THAT THE SURGE OF CLAIMS THAT WE SAW DURING THE PANDEMIC WOULD HAVE OVERWHELMED EVEN THE MOST EFFICIENT OF DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYMENT, UNEMPLOYMENT, YOU KNOW, REGARDLESS WHETHER IT IS MASSACHUSETTS.

MASSACHUSETTS DOES HAVE AN ANTIQUATED SYSTEM SO IT JUST MADE MATTERS WORSE.

SO I THINK YOU GIVE A LITTLE BIT OF A BREAK ON THE ACTUAL MISTAKES.

I THINK WHERE THE BLAME COMES IS IN TRYING TO CALL IT BACK.

>> Braude: LET'S TALK ABOUT THAT.

THE STATE IS INTENDING TO DLAW THEM BACK AS YOU SAY.

THERE IS A WAIVER SYSTEM WHERE AN INDIVIDUAL WHO GOT THE MONEY CAN APPLY TO GET A BREAK.

ONE, IS THAT ON THE STATE, FEDERAL OR BOTH.

AND TWO, WHAT IS THE CRITERIA FOR QUALIFICATION FOR A WAIVER.

>> WELL, IT IS ON BOTH.

YOU CAN CLAIM A WAIVER FOR EITHER REGULAR STATE BENEFITS OR THE FEDERAL BENEFITS.

THE CRITERIA ARE A LITTLE BIT VAGUE.

BUT ESSENTIALLY AS SHIRLEY LEON, MY COLLEAGUE WROTE TODAY, IF YOU SPENT THE MONEY ON A MORTGAGE OR JUST BASIC ESSENTIALS, THEN YOU CAN'T CLAIM A WAIVER.

IF YOUR EXPENSES ARE CURRENTLY MORE THAN YOUR INCOME, YOU CAN SEEK A WAIVER.

BUT OR IF YOU BOUGHT LIKE A CAR, LIKE A ONE-TIME BIG EXPENSE, YOU CAN SEEK A WAIVER.

BUT THE PROBLEM PEOPLE ARE HAVING IS THAT THE DEPARTMENT OF UNEMPLOYMENT ASSISTANCE IS HARDLY MUCH ASSISTANCE AT ALL THESE DAYS.

YOU CAN'T GET ANYBODY ON THE PHONE, YOU CAN'T GET A STRAIGHT ANSWER, IT TAKES MONTHS AND MONTHS TO RESOLVE THEES ISSUES, PEOPLE ARE STRESSED OUT.

>> I THOUGHT SHIRLEY MADE A GREAT POINT.

I USED TO BE A LAWYER REPRESENTING TENANTS AND IF A TENANT HAD A LAWYER IT WAS A GOOD CHANCE THEY WOULD GET AN EXTENSION IN TIME TO PAY THE RENT, RENT MAY HAVE BEEN FORGIVEEN.

IF YOU WENT IN AND REPRESENTED YOURSELF, YOU ARE PRETTY MUCH DOOMED TO LOSE.

THAT IS LIKELY THE SCENARIO HERE.

AND I ASSUME AT HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE, MOST OF THESE PEOPLE PROBABLY DON'T EVEN KNOW ABOUT A WAIVER AND IF THEY DO AREN'T GOING TO BE ABLE TO GET A LAWYER.

>> EXACTLY.

SO IF, IF THE STATE COMES BACK AT YOU FOR $20,000, $30,000, IT MAY BE WORTHWHILE TO HIRE A LAWYER WHO MAY CHARGE YOU $3,000 BUCKS TO HANDLE A CASE.

BUT IF YOU ARE A LOW INCOME WORKER AND YOU MIGHT OWE $2000, $3,000, $5,000, THAT MIGHT NOT BE SUMP A GREAT INVESTMENT-- SUCH A GREAT INVESTMENT.

>> Braude: OF ALL THE STUFF YOU HAVE WRITTEN ABOUT THIS, THE ONE LINE THAT I CANNOT GET OUT OF MY HEAD IS NEAR THE END.

I THINK OF YOUR FIRST STORY.

IT IS ALMOST LIKE A THROW AWAY LINE BUT IT STUCK WITH ME.

YOU ARE NODDING BECAUSE YOU YOU KNOW THE LINE I'M GOING TO READ.

THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, AND AGAIN MORE THAN HALF OF THIS MONEY IS FROM THE FEDS.

I SHOULD HAVE MADE THAT CLEAR, ALMOST $3 BILLION.

THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT BAILED OUT WALL STREET INCLUDING AIG.

AND I WILL ADD TO WHAT YOU WROTE, AND AFTER THEY BAILED OUT AIG, AIG GAVE HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN BONUSES, TO THEIR TOP EMPLOYEES.

WHAT IS WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE?

WALL STREET GETS BAILED OUT.

REGULAR PEOPLE WHO ARE SUFFERING WHO MORE THAN LIKELY SPENT THE MONEY, AREN'T BAILED OUT.

THAT IS THE BOTTOMLINE.

>> TO ME THAT'S WHAT IS THE MOST COMPELLING THING ABOUT THIS, IS THE WHOLE UNFAIRNESS OF IT ALL.

AND LOOK, ARE THERE SOME PEOPLE IN THERE WHO TRY TO GAME THE SYSTEM?

ABSOLUTELY.

YOU KNOW, ARE THERE PEOPLE WHO PLAYED BY ALL THE RULES AND ARE ONLY LATER TOLD MONTHS LATER TOLD THAT THEY HAVE TO PAY THE MONEY BACK?

ABSOLUTELY.

I THINK THAT'S MOST OF THE PEOPLE.

AND SO WHY CAN'T WE FIND A WAY TO AT LEAST HIT THE PAUSE BUTTON ON THIS AND TO SORT IT OUT.

COME OUT WITH AN EASE YOUR WAY TO GET THOSE FAVORS,-- WAIVERS, CLEARER RULES MAKE THE PROCESS BETHER KNOWN TO THE PUBLIC AND THEN GO THROUGH IT T FIND THE PEOPLE WHO COMMITTED FRAUD, RIGHT, TAKE THEM OUT OF THE EQUATION.

AND THEN COME UP WITH A SOLUTION FOR THE AVERAGE PERSON.

>> Braude: BUT YOU KNOW, THE MAN WHO IS THE MASTER OF THIS ISSUE, SHIRLEY INTERVIEWED, WHO HAS, YOU KNOW, THE 9/11 FUND, THE ONE BOSTON FUND, ALL OF THAT SORT OF STUFF, I MEAN THE REALITY IS WE ARE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO DO A CASE BY CASE BASIS WITH 700,000 PEOPLE.

WE'LL ALL BE DEAD.

THERE HAS GOT TO BE SOME RULE THAT APPLIES TO THE VAST MAJORITY OF THESE PEOPLE AND THE THING, YET ANOTHER PREDICTION, LARRY THAT I MADE THAT WAS DEAD WRONG, I ASSUMED AFTER YOUR FIRST STORY, ELECTED LEADERS WILL BE LINING UP TO SAY LET'S FIND A WAY TO FORGIVE THAT MONEY.

BUT IS THERE ONE PERSON IN AN ELECTIVE OFFICE WHO SAYS ANYTHING OTHER THAN SOME LEVEL OF SYMPATHY THAT THERE SHOULD BE SOME WAIVERS BUT NO ONE IS TALKING BIG PICTURE, ARE THEY?

>> NO, THEY REALLY AREN'T.

AND YOU KNOW, WE ASKED THE GOVERNOR THIS QUESTION JUST A LITTLE WHILE AGO.

>> Braude: OH, WHAT DID HE SAY?

>> HE SAID YOU KNOW, THAT BASICALLY THEY'RE FOLLOWING THE FED RULESES WHEN IT COMES TO FEDERAL DOLLARS.

BUT THE FEDS ALLOW WAIVERS.

AND HE ALSO SAID SOMETHING STRANGE WHICH I DON'T QUITE GET, IS HE SAID THERE HAVE BEEN NO CLAW BACKS SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT SEM AN PARTICULAR GAME HE IS PLAYING THERE, BUT CLEARLY THE STATE IS DEMANDING THE MONEY AND GETTING THE MONEY FROM PEOPLE, SO I AM NOT QUITE SURE WHAT HE MEANT BY THAT.

BUT WE KNOW HOW BAKER WORKS AND IT TAKES HIM AWHILE TO, YOU KNOW, READ THE TREA LEAVES, SEE WHICH WAY THE WIND IS BLOWING BEFORE HE WILL COME OUT AND TAKE A STAND ON SOMETHING.

SO HOPEFULLY WE CAN JUST KEEP HAMMERING AWAY AT THIS ISSUE, YOU KNOW, AND MAKE IT, YOU KNOW, AS HIGH PROFILE AS WE CAN.

PUT THE PRESSURE ON.

>> YOU KNOW, WE SHOULD SAY, YOU TALKED TO STOP INDIVIDUALS WHO WERE INVOLVED IN THIS.

I KNOW THERE WAS, I THINK A WOMAN WHO WAS IN HER '60S WHO WAS ONE OF THE PEOPLE WHO OWES SOMETHING LIKE $80,000.

SHE'S TALKING ABOUT HOW SHE HAS GOT TO TAKE MONEY OUT OF HER RETIREMENT ACCOUNT, ANOTHER PERSON YOU SPOKE TO STAYED IT WAS ALL SPENT ON NECESSITIES.

HOW DO I BUY A CAR.

HOW DO I GET A MORTGAGE.

WHATEVER.

SO THE PAIN HERE IS REAL, NO?

WITHIN IT'S VERY REAL, IT IT ST VERY REAL.

AND THINK ABOUT IT, IT IS ANALOGOUS TO GETTING THE IR SRK COMING AFTER YOU, OH, WE HAVE AUDITED YOU AND YOU OWE US THIS HUGE AMOUNT OF MONEY.

YOU KNOW, HOW WOULD YOU FEEL.

ALL OF A SUDDEN, YOU KNOW, THERE IS THIS REQUEST FROM THE STATE FOR TEN, 20, $50,000.

>> Braude: WELL, I WOULD HAVE TO DISAGREE, I THINK IT IS FAR WORSE THAN THE IRS AUDITING YOU.

WHEN THE IRS AUDITS YOU, IT IT DOESN'T FOLLOW AN AFFIRMATIVE ACT BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE WHERE THEY SAY THEY GAVE YOU THIS MONEY, NOW GIVE IT BACK.

THE STATE GAVE THIS MONEY, OR SENT THIS MONEY TO INDIVIDUALS WHO IN THE VAST MAJORITY OF CASES IN GOOD FAITH ACCEPTED THE MONEY AND SPENT THE MONEY.

AND NOW TO USE A LEGAL TERM THEY ARE TOTALLY SCREWED.

NOW BEFORE YOU GO, ONE PERSON WHO SHOWED GREAT SYMPATHY IS NOT AN ELECTED LEADER.

I THINK HE TALKED TO YOU, JIM ROONEY, HEAD OF THE BOSTON CHAMBER, WHILE HE IS CONCERNED FOR THE COST OF BUSINESSES THAT CONTRIBUTE TO THE FUND, HE SHOWED A GREAT AMOUNT OF SYMPATHY, EMPATHY FOR THE INDIVIDUALS AND THOUGHT SOME SERIOUS AMOUNT OF RELIEF SHOULD BE GRANTED, AM I CORRECT?

>> YOU ARE CORRECT.

AND BUSINESSES, YOU KNOW, IT IS NOT THERE FOR US TO EXPECT BUSINESSES TO COVER THE COST OF THIS, AND THAT IS WHO FUNDS UNEMPLOYMENT AT THE STATE LEVEL.

NOW THEY DIDN'T FUND THE GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS.

BUT WE SO THAT IS WHY I THINK WE'VE GOT TO HIT THE PAUSE BUTTON AND FIGURE OUT HOW TO DEAL WITH THIS.

>> AND ROONEY SAID TAKE IT OUT OF THE FEDERAL RELIEF, FEDERAL ARPA MONEY.

TAKE IT OUT OF THE STATE SURPLUS.

BUT DO SOMETHING, IF WE CAN DO IT FOR THE BANKS, AS YOU SAID, WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO DO IT FOR REAL PEOPLE.

>> EXACTLY.

>> Braude: LARRY, GREAT REPORTING.

GREAT STORY, STAY ON IT AND WE WILL STAY ON YOU, THANKS SO MUCH FOR YR TIME.

>> THANKS, JIM.

>> Braude: BE WELL.

IT FEELS LIKE HALF A LIFETIME SINCE WE WERE INTRODUCED TO VICE PRESIDENTIAL CANADA, WHO IN MANY WAYS MARKED A NEW ERA OF U.S.

POLITICS.

SARAH PALIN.

AND NOW A LAWSUIT SHE IS FILING COULD MARK A NEW ERA OF MEDIA NORMS.

AT ISSUE IS THE 2017 NEW YORK TIMES EDITORIAL WHICH DE CRIED THE STATE OF AMERICAN POLITICS.

IT IT WAS WRITTEN AFTER FOUR PEOPLE INCLUDING HOUSE WHIP STEVE SCALISE WERE WOUNDED IN A SHOOTING DURING CONGRESSIONAL BASEBALL PRACTICE, BUT IT ALSO REFERENCED THE 2011 SHOOTING OF CONGRESSWOMAN GABBY GIFFORDS AND CLAIMED QUOTE THE LINK TO POLITICAL INCITEMENT WAS CLEAR FROM THAT SHOOTING OF PALIN'S POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE WHICH SHOULD RELEASE A GRAPHIC OF DISTRICTS THAT REPUBLICANS WERE AIMING TO FLIP, MARKED WITH CROSS HAIRS INCLUDING GIVE FORD'S DISTRICT.

THE TIMES ISSUED A CORRECTION THE FOLLOWING DAY SAYING THE EDITORIAL HAD INCORRECTLY STATED THAT A LINK EXISTED BETWEEN POLITICAL RHETORIC AND THE 2011 SHOOTING.

BUT PALIN STILL FILED SUIT CLAIMING THE PIECE HAD DE FAMED HER.

JURY SELECTION IN HER TRIAL WAS SUPPOSED TO START TODAY BUT WAS DELAYED TEN DAYS BECAUSE PALIN TESTED IT POSITIVE FOR COVID.

ACCORDING TO I AND MARK SUPREME COURT CASE "THE NEW YORK TIMES" V SULLIVAN PALIN NEEDS TO SHOW ACTUAL MALL IS TO PREVAIL, SHE SAYS SHE WILL DO JUST THAT.

JOIRNED NOW BY "WASHINGTON POST" MEDIA REPORTER SARAH EL ISON, THANK YOU FOR YOUR-- ELLISON, I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME.

>> THANKS FOR HAVING ME.

>> Braude: BEFORE I GET TO THE TRIAL I WAS READING YOUR TWITTER ACCOUNT.

AND WHEN THE JUDGE ANNOUNCED THAT THE TRIAL WOULD BE DELAYED TEN DAYS, YOU QUOTE HIM AS SAYING, BECAUSE SHE TESTED IT POSITIVE FOR COVID, SHE IS, OF COURSE, UNVACCINATED.

WAS HE SAYING THAT WITH SARCASM OR WHAT WAS THE TONE OF HIS VOICE WHEN HE SAID THAT.

SHE IS OF COURSE UNVACCINATED.

>> HE WAS SAYING SAYING THAT STRAIGHT.

AND I REALIZE THAT IT COMES OFF ON TWITTER AS A BIG EYE ROLL AND WITH SOME SNARK.

AND I WONDERED MYSELF WHAT THAT, OF COURSE, WAS FOR.

AND MY GUESS, AND AGAIN HAVE I NOT CLARIFIED THIS SO THAT IS ALWAYS A DANGEROUS GAME FOR REPORTERS TO SPECULATE IN THAT WAY BUT I WILL PREVASE-- PREFACE IT IT BY JUST SAYING THAT THIS IS MOST LIKELY A CONVERSATION THAT HE HAD THE NIGHT BEFORE WHEN HE LEARNED THAT SHE HAD TESTED POSITIVE.

AND THAT THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT HE WAS SORT OF REFERRING TO, THAT THE LAUERS HAD BROUGHT UP.

AND SO HE WAS NOT-- ANNOUNCING IT IT IN A WAY THAT HE WAS LIKE PRESENTING NEW INFORMATION.

HE WAS SAYING OF COURSE SHE'S UNVACCINATED, WE COVERED THIS BEFORE.

BUT FLA IS ONE INTERPRETATION.

OR HE WAS BEING INCREDIBLY DRY AND I DIDN'T CATCH HIS SARCASM.

>> Braude: GOT IT, OKAY.

SO "THE NEW YORK TIMES" WILL CONTEND IT WAS AN INNOCENT MISTAKE, THEY MADE A MISTAKE, WHICH THEY CORRECTED.

SARAH PALIN WILL CLAIM ACTUAL MALICE, "THE NEW YORK TIMES" VERSUS SULLIVAN STANDARD, OTHER THAN THE FACT THAT I ASSUME SHE WILL CONTEND THIS IS YET JUST ANOTHER LIBERAL RAG OUT TO GET ME, WHAT ELSE DOES SHE HAVE FROM WHAT YOU KNOW TO DEMONSTRATE TO A JURY THAT THERE WAS ACTUAL MALICE?

>> WELL, WHAT HER LAWYERS HAVE SOUGHT TO GET THEIR HANDS ON AND HAVE GOTTEN ARE A LOT OF INTERNAL COMMUNICATIONS OF THE NEW YORK TIMES.

SO JAMES BENNETT IS THE, YOU KNOW, THE FORMER EDITORIAL PAGE EDITOR WHO INSERTED THESE ERRORS INTO A STORY ON DEADLINE.

AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THEY ARE, WHAT THE LAWYERS ARE TRYING TO SHOW IS THAT JAMES BENNETT IGNORED HYPERLINKS IN THE ORIGINAL STORY, HOW COULD HE NOT HAVE SEEN THOSE THINGS THAT WERE IN THE VERY STORIES THAT HE WAS LOOKING AT.

AND THERE IS SOME, YOU KNOW, UNFORTUNATELY FOR THE TIMES, IT IS A PRETTY STUNNING THING TO HAVE NOT SEEN THOSE LINKS IN THE STORIES.

AGAIN, THEY ARE ARGUING THAT HE WAS LOOKING, YOU KNOW, HE TALKS ABOUT HAVING ONE EYE ON THE CLOCK, DEADLINE APPROACHING.

TRYING TO PUNCH UP THE EDITORIAL BUT IT ALL INTERESTINGLY AND AS YOU MENTIONED, THIS IS A JURY TRIAL THAT WILL ALL GO DOWN TO THE CREDIBILITY OF THE WITNESSES AND WHAT THE JURY-- .

>> Braude: JUST TO BE CLEAR THERE WAS AN EDITORIAL WRITER THAT ADDED THE PHRASE IN QUESTION THAT IS THE SUBJECT OF THE LITIGATION, AM I NOT RIGHT ABOUT THAT?

>> CORRECT, WE ONLY LEARNED THIS AFTER THE FACT BECAUSE EDITORIALS IN "THE NEW YORK TIMES" AS IN MANY PAPERS ARE UNSIGNED.

AND SO IT WAS ONLY THROUGH DISCOVERY THAT WE LEARNED THAT THE ORIGINAL EDITORIAL WRITER, ELIZABETH WILLIAMSON HAD HANDED IN HER STORY AND JAMES BENNETT READ IT AND DECIDED TO JUMP IN AND SORT OF PUNCH IT UP.

AND IT TURNED INTO, YOU KNOW, WHAT IT ST TODAY WHICH IS-- NO ONE ARGUES THAT THIS WAS AN UNFORTUNATE SITUATION FOR THE TIMES.

>> Braude: EITHER WAY REGARDLESS OF WHO WINS THIS THING ON THE TRIAL LEVEL, IT'S GOING TO BE APPEALED I THINK QUITE OBVIOUSLY.

IT ULTIMATELY MAKES ITS WAY TO THE SUPREME COURT.

WHAT I HAVE READ FROM A NUMBER OF PLACES INCLUDING IN YOUR NAPE, THAT GORSUCH AND THOMAS, NEIL GORSUCH AND CLARENCE THOMAS, TWO JUSTICES, OBVIOUSLY, HAVE BEEN, I DON'T KNOW, LICKING THEIR CHOPS IS TOO STRONG A SET OF WORDS BUT APPEAR TO HAVE BEEN LOOKING FOR AN OPPORTUNITY TO REVISIT THE STANDARD "NEW YORK TIMES" VERSUS SULLIVAN, AND POSSIBLY RELAX IT SOME, IS THAT YOUR SENSE OF THE WORLD AS WELL?

>> WELL, YES, LICKING THEIR CHOPS WOULD NOT BE MY CHOICE OF-- .

>> Braude: I FIGURED.

>> OF PHRASE, BUT WE DO SEE THAT THOMAS FIRST, HAD INDICATED THAT THE MEDIA ENVIRONMENT HAS CHANGED SO MUCH THAT SULLIVAN, THE SULLIVAN STANDARD WHICH WAS ESTABLISHED IN 1964 IN A CASE VERSUS "THE NEW YORK TIMES" AT THE TIME, IS NO LONGER MEETING THE MOMENT.

AND GORSUCH HIMSELF THEN LATER SAID THAT IT SORT OF SEEMS TO BE A GUARANTEE OF INSURANCE POLICY FOR FALSEHOOD THAT YOU CAN PUT SOMETHING FORWARD, AND NOT FACE ANY REPERCUSSIONS.

SO THE IDEA OF THE STAKES IN THIS TRIAL COULDN'T BE HIGHER FOR PRESS OF FREEDOM ADVOCATES.

>> Braude: I WANT TO GET BACK TO THE STAKES IN A MINUTE.

BUT IT STEAMS TO ME AND THIS IS NOT AN ORIGINAL THOUGHT, I READ IT IN A NUMBER OF ACCOUNTS OF THIS TRIAL, IS THAT WHILE "THE NEW YORK TIMES" IS NERVOUS ABOUT HAVING ITS DIRTY LAUNDRY AIRED ABOUT HOW THEY, YOU KNOW, GET TO EDITORIAL IN PAPER, THE RIGHT WING MEDIA, FOX NEWS AS AN EXAMPLE IN THEIR REPORTING, FOR EXAMPLE, IN THE DOMINION VOTING SYSTEMS WHERE THEY SAY DOMINION RIGGED THE ELECTION TO MAKE SURE THAT TRUMP WOULD LOSE, IT TWOO SEEM TO ME THAT THOSE MEDIA OUTLETS HAVE MUCH MORE TO FEAR THAN PLACES LIKE "THE NEW YORK TIMES" OR "THE WASHINGTON POST," YOU KNOW, REPUTABLE MEDIA OUTLETS, NO?

>> AGAIN, WHAT WE ARE FACING AND LOOKING AT AT THE TIMES, I MEAN IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO SEE WHAT TO STAY WHAT PEOPLE REALLY HAVE TO LOSE.

NORMALLY YOU SAY YES, THE TIMES WAS CAREFUL, IT IS CAREFUL, IN THIS INSTANCE, CERTAIN PEOPLE THINK THAT HOWEVER IN THIS MOMENT OF INCREDIBLE PART SAN-- PARTISAN VITRIOL, SOME PEOPLE THINK THAT "THE NEW YORK TIMES" IS JUST A LIBERAL RAG, NO BETTER THAN, YOU KNOW, WHAT SOMEONE ON THE LEFT WOULD SAY, IS WHAT NEWS MAX OR OAN OR SOME OTHER KIND OF LESS REPUTABLE OUTLET MIGHT BRING TO A CASE LIKE THIS.

AND I THINK THAT, I MEAN MY REPORTING INDICATES THAT THE QUESTION OF THE JURY IS REALLY ONE WHERE IT NAKES IT VERY DIFFICULT TO PROGNOSTICATE.

I HEAR YOUR POINT.

AND IF IT FROM JUST BEFORE JUDGES AND LAWYERS, I THINK THAT QUESTION WOULD BE MORE EASILY ANSWERED.

BUT WE ARE, I TALKED TO SOME LEGAL SCHOLARS AND LEGAL EXPERTS WHO SAY THAT THE JURY WILL NOT BE ABLE TO IGNORE THE AT POS-- ATMOSPHERE IN WHICH THEY IIS.

>> Braude: WELL, SINCE YOU JUST SAID IT IS VERY HARD TO PROGNOSTICATE, LET ME ASK YOU TO PROGNOSTICATE ONE MORE TIME BEFORE YOU LEAVE.

ASSUMING SARAH PALIN WINS THIS THING AT THE ULTIMATE LEVEL, AT THE SUPREME COURT, HOW DOES THAT CHANGE HOW RESPONSIBLE MEDIA OUTLIT-- MEDIA OUTLETS COVER ELECTED OFFICIALS, DOES IT?

WITHIN THE SULLIVAN STANDARD REALLY WAS SET UP TO ENCOURAGE AGGRESSIVE REPORTING OF PUBLIC OFFICIALS, PARTICULARLY, BUT ALL SORT OF PUBLIC FIGURES.

AGAIN, IT WILL WILL DEPEND ON THE KIND OF LANGUAGE THAT ANY KIND OF DECISION THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT WOULD COME DOWN ON IT.

BUT I THINK THAT THERE IS NO QUESTION THAT IT TWOO CAUSE MORE RESTRAINT IN REPORTING IF SULLIVAN WERE SHOW TIGHTENED UP IN SOME WAY, WHEN REPORTERS ARE LOOKING AT TAKING ON A HIGH PROFILE PUBLIC FIGURE THAT THEY WANTED TO WRITE ABOUT OR VECT.

THERE IS NO QUESTION THAT SULLIVAN PROVIDES A LEVEL OF COMFORT WHEN YOU ARE TRYING TO DO THAT TYPE OF IN DEPTH INVESTIGATIVE REPORTING THAT AS LONG AS YOU ARE BEING HONEST AND MAKING YOUR BEST EFFORT, MOST REPORTERS IN THE UNITED STATES WHERE WE HAVE THE FREEST PRESS IN THE COUNTRY, FEEL A LEVEL OF PROTECTION THAT THEY WOULD NOT FEEL IF SULLIVAN WERE CHANGED.

>> Braude: SARAH ELLISON, YOU WILL BE GLAD TO HEAR THE PROGNOSTICATION PORTION OF THIS INTERVIEW IS OVER, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME, YOUR WORK IS TERRIFIC, I REALLY APPRECIATE YOU BEING HERE.

>> THANK YOU AGAIN.

>> Braude: THANKS.

THAT'S IT FOR TONIGHT, PLEASE COME BACK TOMORROW, CDC DIRECTOR ROCHELLE WALENSKY JOINS ME ON ALL THINGS COVID.

WHETHER THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION IS LOSING THE MESSAGING GAME, WHETHER SHE AND DR. ANTHONY FAUCI ARE ON THE SAME PAGE AND MORE.

THAT AND MORE TOMORROW AT 7:00.

THAI FOR WATCHING, PLEASE STAY SAFE.