Your daily 6: NFL fines teams over masks, why America's virus response lags and who's a hypocrite?

(CNN)One of the things that's getting in the way of clear and consistent messaging when it comes to Covid-19 in the US is the country's current divided state, Dr. Anthony Fauci said.

"We are in such a divisive state in society that it tends to get politicized," the country's leading infectious disease expert said Monday night on "The Daily Show with Trevor Noah."

"It's almost the one side versus the other," Fauci said.

The US is now months-deep into navigating the Covid-19 pandemic and several safety measures remain points of contention -- including face masks. While many across the country have embraced experts' recommendations to wear face coverings to protect against the virus' spread, others have protested their use.

"People take sides, like wearing a mask or not is a political statement and that's really unfortunate, totally unfortunate because this is a purely public health issue. It should not be one against the other," Fauci said.

But even Americans who want to follow guidance from experts about Covid-19 ran into a muddied message this week. The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention updated its guidance to say Covid-19 can spread through the air but days later abruptly reverted back to guidance posted months ago -- saying the virus is thought to spread mainly between people in close contact and "through respiratory droplets produced when an infected person coughs, sneezes or talks."

Several studies have shown the virus can spread through small particles in the air.

"It's extremely confusing," Dr. Leana Wen, a CNN medical analyst and emergency physician at George Washington University, told CNN. "And that type of whiplash -- especially without an explanation directly from the CDC -- creates confusion and unfortunately leads to lack of trust in the CDC overall."

That confusion comes at a time many states' Covid-19 trends are heading in the wrong direction and as the US inches closer toward 200,000 lives lost to the virus.

With fall rolling in, the US is heading into what CDC Director Dr. Robert Redfield predicted could be one of the "most difficult times" in American public health. One expert told CNN this week the next months may make for an "apocalyptic fall."

"It's happening because we're forcing schools to reopen in areas of high transmission," said Dr. Peter Hotez, dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine. "We're forcing colleges to reopen, and we don't have the leadership nationally, telling people to wear masks and to social distance and do all the things we need to do."

The US could see another surge of cases and that surge could comef on top of flu season, which health officials have warned could complicate things -- greatly. At least 24 states are now reporting an uptick in new cases compared to the previous week, according to data from Johns Hopkins University -- many of them across America's heartland and Midwest.

Why?

Dr. Jeanne Marrazzo, an infectious diseases expert at the University of Alabama at Birmingham, says there are several factors that could be contributing to the rise in numbers -- including the public's fatigue of pandemic-like conditions.

"And then the second thing is ... the completely contradictory messages that we're getting -- not just the misinformation, but also the confusion about how things are spread."

So far, more than 6.8 million Americans have been infected since the start of the pandemic and at least 199,817 have died, according to Johns Hopkins University.

(AP) — NFL coaches thumbed their collective -- and exposed -- noses at the NFL's mask mandate in Week 2.

The league responded with hefty fines of $100,000 per coach and $250,000 per club. The first three to get fined were Denver's Vic Fangio, San Francisco's Kyle Shanahan and Seattle's Pete Carroll, according to a person with knowledge of the punishment who spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity because the coaches were not identified.

The punishment was meted out a week after the NFL reminded team personnel on the sidelines about the rules for wearing face coverings during the coronavirus pandemic, lest they put the fledgling season at risk.

More coaches and clubs can expect similar punishments as the memo last week from Troy Vincent, who oversees the league's football operations, was largely ignored throughout the weekend.

Among other offenders: Patriots coach Bill Belichick and his offensive coordinator Josh McDaniels, Chiefs defensive coordinator Steve Spagnuolo, Colts coach Frank Reich and Rams coach Sean McVay.

Capping a weekend of deliberate defiance and/or desultory disobedience, Raiders coach Jon Gruden, who said last week he felt Vincent's memo was directed at him, and Saints coach Sean Payton were shown on a split screen Monday night, both of them breaking the rules.

Gruden wore his mask like a chin strap, and Payton sported his gaiter like a turtleneck.

The scenes were similar Sunday with head coaches and assistants apparently finding it too hard to keep their faces covered as required under the league's COVID-19 protocols with either a mask, gaiter or face shield. Players, who, like the coaches, are subject to daily COVID-19 tests, are exempt from the face covering requirements.

Some coaches such as Belichick, McDaniels and Steelers coach Mike Tomlin wore their masks or gaiters over their mouths but not noses. Others such as Carroll, Spagnuolo and Fangio wore their face coverings around their chins or necks, exposing both their mouths and noses.

In his strongly worded memo, Vincent said teams "must remain vigilant and disciplined in following the processes and protocols put in place by not only the league, union and clubs, but also by state and local governments."

Vincent added that, "Becoming careless or ignoring face covering and physical distancing requirements will put the 2020 season at risk."

The rules don't apply to players, but all other individuals with bench area access, including coaches and members of the club medical staff, are required to wear face coverings at all times.

Failure to do so, Vincent warned in his memo, "will result in accountability measures being imposed against offending individuals and/or clubs. The face covering must be worn as designed so that it securely fits across the wearer's nose and mouth to prevent the transmission of the virus."

WASHINGTON (AP) — The "H" word — hypocrisy — is suddenly in vogue at the Capitol as lawmakers debate how quickly to fill a vacancy on the Supreme Court following the death of liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has vowed that President Donald Trump's as-yet unnamed nominee will receive a vote on the Senate floor "this year," but has been careful not to say exactly when that will happen.

Democrats accuse the Kentucky Republican of blatant hypocrisy after McConnell refused to consider President Barack Obama's Supreme Court nominee, Judge Merrick Garland, eight months before the 2016 election.

Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer took to the Senate floor Monday to remind McConnell of his own words hours after the February 2016 death of conservative Justice Antonin Scalia. "The American people,'' McConnell said then, "should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court justice.'' The vacancy created by Scalia's death should not be filled until the election of a new president, he added.

"No amount of sophistry can change what McConnell said then, and it applies even more so now — so much closer we are to an election,'' Schumer said Monday.

But McConnell said it is Democrats who are being hypocritical. What Republicans did in 2016 — blocking a nominee of the opposing party — was "precisely what Democrats had indicated they would do themselves'' when they were in the majority, McConnell said in his own floor speech Monday. He and other Republicans cited a 1992 speech by then-Sen. Joe Biden — now the Democratic nominee for president — indicating that a vacancy occurring in an election year should not be filled.

Biden, Schumer and other Democrats flip-flopped in 2016, in McConnell's telling, because they urged the Senate to act on Obama's nominee.

McCONNELL IN 2016

McConnell stunned the political world in 2016 with his declaration that the Senate would not consider a replacement for Scalia until after the presidential election nearly nine months away. While daring, McConnell said his action was justified by history.

"Remember that the Senate has not filled a vacancy arising in an election year when there was divided government since 1888, almost 130 years ago,'' he declared again and again that year, frequently citing what Republicans called the "Biden Rule." That "rule" — never adopted in any formal sense by the Senate — urged the Senate to delay action on a Supreme Court vacancy until after the presidential election.

"President Obama was asking Senate Republicans for an unusual favor that had last been granted nearly 130 years prior. But voters had explicitly elected our majority to check and balance the end of his presidency. So we stuck with the historical norm," McConnell said Monday as he recounted past fights over the Supreme Court.

2019 McCONNELL STATEMENT

By 2019, with Trump in office and a continued GOP Senate majority, McConnell said Senate action on a court opening close to the election would not be an issue. "Yes, we would certainly confirm a new justice if we had that opportunity,'' he told talk show host Hugh Hewitt in December. "And we're going to continue, obviously, to fill the circuit and district court vacancies as they occur right up until the end of next year."

The main difference? Unlike 2016, when the White House and Senate were controlled by different parties, both are now under Republican control, McConnell said.

"I'd also remind everybody what I just told you, which is the Senate is of the same party as the president of the United States,'' McConnell told Fox News in February of this year. "And in that situation we would confirm" a new justice.

Schumer wasn't buying it. He cited a 2016 op-ed co-written by McConnell imploring that the American people be given the opportunity to "weigh in on whom they trust to nominate the next person for a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court.''

"Now these words don't apply?" Schumer asked. "It doesn't pass the smell test in any way. No wonder Leader McConnell was so defensive in his comments.''

Schumer and other Democrats urged McConnell to abide by his own standard. "What's fair is fair. A senator's word must count for something,'' Schumer said.

LOUISVILLE, Ky. (AP) — Louisville, Kentucky, police said Monday that they had canceled vacations and were setting up barricades in preparation for the state attorney general's announcement about whether he will charge officers in Breonna Taylor's shooting death.

A statement from the department said all requests for vacation and days off were being canceled "until further notice" as the city awaits Attorney General Daniel Cameron's announcement. "It is important to note that (Cameron) has said there is no timetable for the announcement," the statement added.

Cameron said earlier this month that "an investigation, if done properly, cannot follow a certain timeline."

"When the investigation concludes and a decision is made, we will provide an update about an announcement," he said.

Taylor, an emergency medical worker, was shot eight times on March 13 by officers who entered her home using a no-knock warrant during a narcotics investigation. The warrant used was connected to a suspect who did not live there, and no drugs were found inside. The use of no-knock warrants has since been banned by Louisville's Metro Council.

Large protests over Taylor's death that at times became violent erupted in late May in the city but most demonstrations since then have been peaceful, including a massive march outside the Kentucky Derby earlier this month. Celebrities, athletes, activists and Taylor's family have for months pushed Cameron to criminally charge the officers involved in the raid.

Last week, the city of Louisville settled a lawsuit from Taylor's family for $12 million and pledged several police reforms as part of the agreement.

Police said in the statement that they are erecting some barricades in the downtown area. Many of the protests have been at a downtown park and city hall.

Federal officials have closed the federal courthouse and other federal buildings for the week.

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Justice Department identified New York City, Portland, Oregon, and Seattle as three cities that could have federal funding slashed under a memorandum by President Donald Trump that sought to identify localities that permit "anarchy, violence and destruction in American cities."

The designation, which could open the door for the federal government to cut off some funding to the cities, drew immediate criticism from local elected officials. It comes as Trump throughout the summer has cast American cities run by Democratic mayors as under siege by violence and lawlessness, despite the fact that most of the demonstrations against racial injustice have been largely peaceful.

An attempt to cut off federal funding to the cities would likely be met with immediate legal challenges and several federal judges ruled in favor of municipalities over similar attempts to withhold funding tied to immigration policies.

The Justice Department said the three cities were designated because they meet four main criteria, including "whether a jurisdiction forbids the police force from intervening to restore order amid widespread or sustained violence or destruction" and whether the city "disempowers or defunds police departments."

In Seattle, officials pointed to the "occupied" protest zone, also known as the "Capitol Hill Occupied Protest" zone, or CHOP, which emerged during nationwide protests over the police killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis, though Seattle police officers wearing helmets and wielding batons and rifles, cleared the area by force on July 1. In Portland, they pointed to 100 consecutive nights of protests "marred by vandalism, chaos, and even killing" and in New York City, the Justice Department pointed to a skyrocketing number of shootings throughout the five boroughs.

It is not the first time the Justice Department has attempted to take action against city officials for the violent demonstrations.

The department also explored whether it could pursue either criminal or civil rights charges against city officials in Portland after clashes erupted there night after night between law enforcement and demonstrators. For weeks, hundreds of demonstrators gathered outside the federal courthouse in Portland, some throwing bricks, rocks and other projectiles at officers, leading officers to fire volleys of tear gas and pepper balls at the crowd.

"When state and local leaders impede their own law enforcement officers and agencies from doing their jobs, it endangers innocent citizens who deserve to be protected, including those who are trying to peacefully assemble and protest," Attorney General William Barr said in a statement. "We cannot allow federal tax dollars to be wasted when the safety of the citizenry hangs in the balance."

Barr said he hoped the designation would convince the cities to "reverse course and become serious about performing the basic function of government and start protecting their own citizens."

The attorney general's statement drew immediate condemnation from New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio and Governor Andrew Cuomo, both Democrats, who accused the Trump administration of politicization of law enforcement.

"This is just another one of President Trump's games," de Blasio said.

Trump has heaped blame for the unrest on Democrats, who are leading the cities where violence has occurred, and tried to focus squarely on pockets of protest-related violence instead of the larger point of the racial injustice movement.

In a joint statement, de Blasio, Portland Mayor Ted Wheeler and Seattle Mayor Jenny Durkan decried the designation as "thoroughly political and unconstitutional."

"The President is playing cheap political games with Congressionally directed funds. Our cities are bringing communities together; our cities are pushing forward after fighting back a pandemic and facing the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression, all despite recklessness and partisanship from the White House," the statement said.

LONDON (AP) — British Prime Minister Boris Johnson plans to announce new restrictions on social interactions Tuesday as the government tries to slow the spread of COVID-19 before it spirals out of control.

Cabinet Office Minister Michael Gove told Sky News that pubs and restaurants across England will be ordered to close at 10 p.m. and people who can work from home will be encouraged to do so, reversing a government drive to get people back to their offices and other places of employment.

Gove said reducing "social mixing" was key to slowing the spread of the virus. He said it was impossible to say how long the restrictions would be in place.

"What we hope is we can take appropriate steps now, which mean that if we succeed in beating back the virus, then we will in the future be able to progressively relax them," Gove told the BBC. "But what I can't do is predict with absolute certainty."

The prime minister is set to release further details when he speaks to the House of Commons at around 12:30 p.m. (1130 GMT) after meeting the Cabinet and the government's COBRA emergency committee. He will later deliver a televised address to the nation.

Plans to have spectators return to sports stadiums are also likely to be put on hold as part of the new restrictions.

The news comes a day after the British government's top scientific and medical advisers said coronavirus infections were doubling every seven days and could rise to 49,000 a day by mid-October if nothing is done to stem the tide. On Monday, the government reported 4,300 new confirmed cases, the highest number since May.

The U.K. has gradually been increasing restrictions as cases rise, including barring people from meeting in large groups. But the measures are likely to be far less stringent than a nationwide lockdown imposed in March that confined most of the population and closed most businesses. The lockdown was eased starting in June as cases began to fall, but that trend has now been reversed.

Some lawmakers from the governing Conservative Party are uneasy about the move to tighten restrictions on business and daily life, citing the impact on an already-reeling economy and the curbing of civil liberties.

Employers and workers in hospitality businesses are also concerned.

Kate Nicholls, chief executive of trade body UKHospitality said the planned restrictions were "another crushing blow" for many businesses.

But most epidemiologists believe restrictions are again necessary and worry that what the government plans to announce may not go far enough.

Polls suggest a majority of people in Britain support lockdown measures to contain the virus. But they also show that trust in the government's handling of the pandemic has declined after troubles with testing, mixed messages on reopening and the U.K.'s high death toll.

Jennifer Cole, a biological anthropologist at Royal Holloway University, said people's behavior was "the biggest influence" on the spread of the virus.

"Most people know how to prevent spread and, most importantly, how to prevent spread around older or more vulnerable friends and relatives," she said.

"In essence, the government is saying, 'Stay sober, stay sensible and the venues can stay open.' It's a carrot to encourage responsible behavior."

The chief medical officers of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland on Monday raised the U.K.'s virus alert from three to four, the second-highest level, on the advice of the Joint Biosecurity Center. They said cases of COVID-19 were rising "rapidly and probably exponentially."