Trump Lies, Distortions, and Deceptions About Coronavirus
This forum is to catalogue the many lies, distortions, deceptions, and misinformation Donald Trump has made about his administration's effort to combat the coronavirus. He is doing his damnedest to make you think is doing a 10 out of 10 job when, in fact, it is more like 3 or 4 out of 10 (yes, I will agree he has done a few things right). But the things he has done wrong has COST LIVES, lots of lives - and people should know.
People need to know that Trump is deceiving you. Feel free to add your own but include a date and a quote.
I'll start off with the first one from today.
"We have made great progress with the antibody testing, fantastic progress," Trump said at a media briefing April 5. - NO "we" have not. There is only one FDA approved antibody test available now and the FDA has taken off controls for the production others, many of which can't tell the difference between a cold virus and a COVID virus.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/14/health/c … index.htmlOn 4/14/20, in defending his very deadly decision to not fund the World Health Organization Trump said ""I don't talk about China's transparency," Trump responded. "You know, if I'm so good to China, how come I was the only person, the only leader of a country, that closed our borders tightly against China?" - That, of course is a lie. He has praised China and China's transparency on several occasions in January, February, and March.
Backtracking on a claim the previous day that he has "Total Authority" (he does not) over governors regarding reopening their states to business, on 4/14/20, Trump said ""I will be speaking to all 50 governors very shortly and I will then be authorizing each individual governor of each individual state to implement a reopening, and a very powerful reopening plan, of their state at a time and in a manner as most appropriate." - AGAIN, misleading. He does not need to "authorize" something the governors can legally do in the first place.Yesterday's Trump Show was something else to see, Scott. You can tell he's getting really desperate as his world falls down around him. He's getting ruder by the day to those asking questions he doesn't want to respond to, as if he wasn't rude enough already.
This is the second Chloroquine study that says that Trump's hyping missed the mark by a lot. https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/15/health/n … index.html
ON 4/15/20, Trump fired off another series of lies, false claims, deceptions, and misinformation.
1. "His language got tougher on Wednesday, when he said the administration is reviewing "the organization's (WHO) cover-up and mismanagement of the coronavirus outbreak." - While the WHO did fumble its initial response to the pandemic - but not as badly as Trump has - there is no evidence they tried to cover anything up; Trump made that up.
2. At Wednesday's briefing, the President repeated his claim that he inherited a "bare cupboard" of medical supplies to fight coronavirus from the Obama administration." - The "cupboard" was somewhat bare in 2016, true, but Obama had set up a robust response mechanism for the next pandemic which Trump largely dismantled. His statement is doubly disingenuous because Trump knew the cupboard was bare in 2017 and did nothing to replenish it plus he had been briefed on how to respond to the nest pandemic, which he ignored.
3. "At this moment, nobody needs them (ventilators) We have to remember, during the surge, nobody's needed them for weeks now. But we'll have them for stockpiles," - That is simply a pair of lies.
4. Trump repeated his false claim for the third time that "On Wednesday, Trump said, "If we're not happy, we'll take very strong action against a state or a governor if we're not happy with the job a governor is doing. We'll let them know about it. And as you know, we have very strong action we can take, including a close-down."
Asked what he meant by "a close-down," he said, "We have the right to do whatever we want, but we wouldn't do that, but no -- we would have the right to close down what they're doing if we want to do that. But we don't want to do that. And I don't think there'll be any reason to do that. But we have the right to do that." - No, he doesn't
5. Another oft-repeated false statement ""Nobody can take advantage of our farmers. We have a lot of money we've taken in from China, we're going to be distributing that money from Sonny (Perdue) to the farmers," Trump said. "And there's tremendous money, over and above that, that money was paid directly into the Treasury of the United States. This has never happened to China before. They never gave us 10 cents. Now they're paying us billions of dollars and we appreciate it." - Again, simply a series of lies. It is American businesses and American taxpayers who pay the tariff taxes, not China - everybody knows that.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/15/politics … index.htmlPerhaps, in the interest of completeness and fairness, you should include the lies being presented about Trump's actions? Like the ones you've made here?
Feel free to list the "lies" in Scott's post, Dan. Are you saying Americans aren't the ones paying the tariffs, and the Chinese are?
"there is no evidence they tried to cover anything up; Trump made that up."
"Obama had set up a robust response mechanism for the next pandemic which Trump largely dismantled"
" That is simply a pair of lies. (that no one has needed the extra ventilators)"
Have at it.You avoided my query re the tariffs, Dan.
Trump did dismantle the response mechanism and called it "streamlining." He also had three years to replace the emergency supplies need for a pandemic he was warned might be coming.
He also didn't follow the pandemic playbook written in 2016 by those medical professionals who had the knowledge to compile it.Simple -
1. Since there is no evidence that the WHO covered anything up, Trump had to make it up.
2. "The Global Health Security and Biodefense unit — responsible for pandemic preparedness — was established in 2015 by Barack Obama’s National Security Advisor, Susan Rice ( here ). The unit resided under the National Security Council (NSC) — a forum of White House personnel that advises the president on national security and foreign policy matters.
In May 2018, the team was disbanded and its head Timothy Ziemer, top White House official in the NSC for leading U.S. response against a pandemic, left the Trump administration, the Washington Post reported ( here ). Some members of the global health and security team were merged into other units within the NSC, the article said."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?reload=9& … 42G8Wus4kA
3. Outbid and Left Hanging, States need Ventilators - https://www.reuters.com/article/us-heal … SKCN21S20D
I see Wilderness dodged Randy's point about Americans paying the Tariff taxes.Absolutely. No evidence of WHO hiding things or simply taking the word of the Chinese for everything even though it was pretty obvious from the start that their story was neither truthful nor complete. Of course, we're hearing from all over the world that is incorrect, but hey - it allows a good bash, doesn't it?
Yep. And Trump largely dismantled it...by getting rid of a handful of administrators that the people there agreed were not needed as the unit was too top heavy. No, the team was NOT disbanded.
Not a single person in this country has gone without a ventilator when one was needed. So where is the need for another hundred thousand? So NYC can hoard them in warehouses "just in case"? Obviously a false statement, then.
(Don't know what tariffs have to do with the corona virus. Just another bashing effort, then, which I'm not very interested in as we see hundreds all the time. Much like yours - either completely false or so grossly exaggerated as to be useless.)No, you simply want to avoid admitting Trump lies about the tariffs regularly. You apparently believe him....
"Don't know what tariffs have to do with the corona virus. "
You want to change the topic from "Trump lies dostortions and deceptions about coronavirus" to "Trump lies about tariffs", have at it. Not interested.Apparently you didn't read the original post from Scott you responded to, Dan. You challenged the veracity of the OP, but failed to mention number 5 in Scotts OP.
But try to act as though it wasn't there to begin with. I understand....It's simple really, Wilderness - Trump brought the subject up during his coronations briefing, so I called him out on the lie.
Take your issue up with Trump, not me.What was the title of this thread again? Oh yes - "Trump Lies, Distortions, and Deceptions About Coronavirus"
I don't believe that Trump put that title there...Stay on topic, Randy, and you might get an answer. Deviate to "TRUMP LIES" and you won't get much from me as I've heard those exaggerations far too many times to be interested.
Sure Dan, you'd be glad to say Trump lied about the tariffs if it was only on topic.
I made none. In any case, this is about the President of the United States lying to the American people. Nothing less and nothing more.
BTW - here is the TRUTH about why the "cupboards were bare"; the Trumplicans (formerly Republicans). President Obama asked for the money to replenish the stockpile and Trumplicans who controlled Congress said NO!.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/ob … RO?ocid=stWait. Obama asked for money and "Trumplicans" (who did not exist then) said NO!?
You've been taking lessons from Trump, haven't you? Or will you spin it so that anyone not agreeing with your philosophy, now or at any time in the past, just has to be a "Trumplican"? Still a lie, spin or no spin, though.What philosophy. Just pointing out facts, I guess you have blind spots in your ability to read. You keep missing critical words that other people write and then make false statements as a result.
Exactly what does "Trumplicans (formerly Republicans)" mean to you when I am talking pre-2017? Seems to me the obvious meaning is former Republicans, who are Trumplicans today, PREVENTED Obama from filling the cupboards. That last phrase, of course, was the important point which you ignored.Yep. Just pointing out facts. That nonexistent "trumplicans" said "NO!". Just facts, for sure.
"Exactly what does "Trumplicans (formerly Republicans)" mean to you when I am talking pre-2017?"
It means, to me and any other reasoning person, that you are again lying and spinning facts into what they are not. That you are playing word games to once more bash Trump (and anyone not of your political persuasion), even though he wasn't even on the scene then.And again you ignore the important point that Obama tried to replenish the national stockpile and was stopped by the opposing party. Why is my terminology more important to you than the fact the Obama was prevented from doing the right thing and that Trump is lying about it today??
Seems to me your priorities are all screwed up.It wasn't Republicans--now Trump cronies--who blocked Obama's refilling the cupboards, Dan? I understood completely what Scott was saying. Apparently you didn't, or didn't want to.
Oh, I understood him all right! Anyone remotely connected to Trump, or recognizing any good things Trump accomplishes, is a vile Trumplican. In addition, anyone from the past that promoted anything Republican is a Trumplican as well.
Just another good swing at the President, nothing more. It Fitted in quite will with the title of this thread: "Bash Trump at every opportunity, and if you can't find one, make it up!".Then you tell us why Obama didn't refill the cupboard, Dan. Are you saying it wasn't the republicans who prevented this from happening?
How in the world would I know? I don't have your private crystal ball that tells you what other people are thinking.
"Republican" has nothing to do with it (you're trying to change the subject again): it has, and has since mentioned, to do with applying the label "Trumplicans" (derogatory, intended to demonize Trump and anyone not on the "bash Trump" bandwagon) before Trump appeared on the scene. As such it is just another word play, meaningless outside of just another swing at the President.You don't need a crystal ball, Wilderness; just an ability to read and accept the facts as they are presented to you such as what was in that ProPublica research.
FUN FACT - The latest estimate is that the GDP will fall to -0.3% growth. The question is, would it had fallen as much if Trump had acted faster?
IMO, yes it would have, and probably more deeply, had Trump recognized the problem early on and did what South Korea, Iceland, Singapore and some other countries did. BUT, there would be far few cases and far fewer dead people had he been competent. We would be in a deeper recession sooner, but would have gotten out of it sooner as well and recovered faster than will be the case because he dilly-dallied, failed to do the proper testing, and tried to open up the economy too soon"BUT, there would be far few cases and far fewer dead people had he been competent."
You are assuming that abject poverty and a failed economy will not produce deaths in an of itself. This is quite false, as evidenced over and over throughout the world. At the same time you are assuming that we can hand out money indefinitely, money we don't have but simply printed out of thin air; this, again, has shown to be false over and over in world history.
We are all playing a guessing game here, and all have differing opinions. But it doesn't add to the equation when one makes assumptions or ignores the reality of history, as you and those promoting an indefinite shutdown are doing."You are assuming that abject poverty and a failed economy will not produce deaths in an of itself. This is quite false, as evidenced over and ...." is another one of your famous non-sequiturs. It has nothing to do with the lead-in sentence.
I recognize that Trump as occasionally done something right. Does that make me a Trumplican? No! A Trumplican is somebody who defends Trump beyond reason. Trumplicans overlook his lies, his misogyny, his racism, his incompetence, is mental illness, his erratic behavior, his criminal behavior.
You overlook these things which makes you a Trumplican. I do not which means I am a rational person.
ON 4/16/2020. "Trump said some states could be ready to enter phase one of the reopening process as soon as Friday because, when it comes to coronavirus, "you have states without any problem." He added that some states are "at a point where there is almost nothing" in terms of coronavirus cases, and that "you have states with few cases and those few cases have healed." - Both of those claims are Lies. No state, at this point in time, meet the criteria to get into Phase 1. And ALL states have active and growing number of Covid cases and Deaths each day. It is true, however, that in some states, the RATE of growth is slowing.
Have you included those people getting well, out of the "infected" classification, when you claim that the growing number of covid cases is still rising? Or are you still counting them as a "covid case", whereupon it will grow for another 10 years?
Same thing for death tolls; is the death rate, per day going down or are you counting every death as an increase?In total numbers, I look at total deaths or cases. But what matters is if 1) there are new cases/deaths each day and 2) is the rate of change accelerating or decelerating or remaining relatively constant
No state has a zero rate of increase in either cases or deaths. A few states like WA have a low rate of increase of around 2.8%. Other states like Utah have a low, but increasing rate of growth. Some states have very high rates of increase like SD at 16%
You can see how each state is doing here
https://hubpages.com/health/Coronavirus … d-Fictions4/16/2020
Trump’s False Claims about Pelosi and Chinatown
President Donald Trump is making false and exaggerated claims about House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s Feb. 24 trip to San Francisco’s Chinatown. Pelosi urged people to shop and eat there at a time when tourism was suffering because of the novel coronavirus, which originated in China late last year.
https://www.factcheck.org/2020/04/trump … chinatown/No, what matters is the increase/decline of new cases every day. More, even, than the number of deaths each day.
NYC, for instance, is seeing a negative first derivative when looking at new cases by day. That means that there are fewer and fewer new cases each day, even though the total number of cases continues to increase (the slope can never go negative on that graph).
Graph the number of new cases each day. When the slope turns negative it means we have a handle on it and are "winning", if that term can ever apply when people die. Unfortunately, time is an issue, and even the two week period we're trying to use is barely (if that) sufficient to truly get a handle of what we're experiencing.
The graphs in your article only refer to cumulative cases, and can never either level out (unless the virus is completely eradicated from the face of the earth) or especially decline. As such it is not of much value in determining when we should risk going back to "normal" (or an unreasonable facsimile thereof).Wilderness: Here is my graph of the whole U.S. that I have been tracking since March 29. It shows the Active, Recovered, Fatalities, and Totals for the whole 21 day period. Since it was started on March 29, it is a magnification of the top of the curve. The yellow line represents the totals so far. Notice, there is no appreciable flattening of the curve. My sources are the CDC and the WHO. If you can't read it, use the zoom control in your browser to enlarge it. Blue is active; red is recovered; and grey is fatalities.
Again, the cumulative total, particularly for the entire country, is not the indication we need to look at to see if a state or smaller locality should open things up some.
That requires looking at a graph of the new cases each day, for the past 2 weeks or month, of that area. Trump, I believe, has said 2 weeks, which is minimal but perhaps the best we can reasonably do.
Using your graph it will undoubtedly be months before it "flattens" (read: has what you consider to be a low enough slope, but unspecified, not "flatten"). Which means Montana, Alaska, Idaho and the smaller population states must maintain controls because Louisiana has entered the "growth" stage. Doesn't make sense.
If we use your graph, and draw a line across the tops of the blue markers, we can see that the "active cases" has very nearly stabilized. Certainly it is not growing as fast as it was. Still, it also shows that Louisiana (just an example, not actual) is growing while NYC is declining, giving rise to a slope that is still quite positive. Does that mean that NYC has not crossed the high point and is going down? Certainly not - it means that other parts of the country are still in the "upswing" phase.
Not sure what your yellow line means: Active + recovered + fatal? That will never come down for as Active falls, recovered + fatal rises.Wilderness: Thanks for your comments. I changed the bars to trend lines. Notice any one of the three variables will affect the slope of the total. Therefore, the Total trend is a function of the three variables. Notice between April 13 and 14, the active cases flattened and so did the Total trend line.
4/17/2020 “LIBERATE VIRGINIA, and save your great 2nd Amendment. It is under siege!”
https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/t … cna1186586Better as it is a little easier to see.
But still think you're barking up the wrong tree, for what matters (relative to re-opening the country) is not how many have died or even how many active cases there are, but how many new cases are found each day. Locally, not country wide, and I still don't know what the "total" line represents.
Consider that the "active" line is indicating how many people, right now, are sick from getting the virus a month ago. We don't care for a month (or more - some are hospitalized for as long as 2 months) is too long to wait. We need to know how many are just now getting sick, for when that number falls consistently for a couple of weeks it's time to consider re-opening at least a local area or state. Fatalities also has a rather large problem, for (hopefully) we're learning how to treat those that are ill, with the result that fatalities (hopefully) will fall regardless of how many are sick or have been sick for a while. Using a falling line there could easily result in re-opening too early.Wilderness: Those lines are plotted daily. Here is the data table for each day for the four variables. If you want to do the math to see the delta change, subtract one day from the previous day. What I am interested in the flattening of the total curve. You are interested in the difference of the day-to-day change. I might be able to do it in Excel. The top row is Active; next is Recovered, next is Fatal, and then Total.
That's what I'm saying - you're looking for a low, but undefined, slope of the blue line. Forget the others - the blue one is the only one that matters. It cannot reach a zero slope, ever, for we are stuck with this virus for years to come if not forever and there will always be a few cases somewhere, just as we see with the common flu. It can only get low, but you haven't given any thoughts at all about what "low" means to you, whereas if the new cases daily are plotted when the slope goes negative (for an acceptable period of time), any amount, we're obviously winning.
Another problem is that the slope of that line lags far behind, in time, what is actually happening today. It includes cases a month or more old cases (likely a majority of them) and that is irrelevant to the question being asked as to when to open. This, too, is important for we desperately need to open our nation again; we can't simply wait until we feel totally safe. We WILL see additional cases, and fatalities after opening and must accept that it is going to happen.
Plus, of course, you're only looking at the nation as a whole, while the only pertinent information is what local conditions are. We are NOT going to treat every town, city and state identically, based on the worst case seen; not a single person anywhere is advocating that.I follow the following on a US basis as well as state-by-state basis.
1. Total Cases (and national deaths) (plotted)
2. The daily percent increase
3. The 10-day moving average of the daily increases (plotted)
4. The 1st difference between daily increases (the number of new cases)
5. The 2nd difference between daily increases (acceleration-deceleration)
6. The 1st difference of the 10-Day MA (acceleration-deceleration)
To meet one of the guidelines to get to Phase 1, the 2nd difference needs to be negative for 14 straight days.
What makes those number, mine included, somewhat meaningless is because of the huge lack of testing, we have no idea of the total new coronavirus cases that occur daily and how it has actually spread. One study being done in Santa Clara, CA suggests there are 50 times as many COVID cases out there than the statistics show. How are they learning that? Antibody tests which show 50 times as many people who have the antibodies than should have.
Bottom line, our charts are plotting a myopic view of history. What to look for now, however, is an increase in new cases in about 15 days has these protesters get sick and spread it to many other people.
During a recent coronavirus briefing - "As millions of Americans begin their second month under lockdown, President Donald Trump is rewriting the history of his coronavirus response. In doing so, he is giving the public an inaccurate and cherry-picked retelling of what he did in the pivotal early months.
As part of this effort, during Monday’s, 4/13/2020. daily coronavirus briefing, the White House played a propaganda video describing Trump’s “decisive actions” to deal with the pandemic. After facing questions about why the video omitted nearly the entire month of February, the White House followed up on Tuesday, 4/14/2020 with a series of talking points about his “strong action” during that month. - THAT isn't really true
I'll let this article articulate why
https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2020/04 … nnotation/Just curious, but do you spend you days searching diligently for dirt to fling at your president? Do you make any attempt to try and determine truth, or just accept exaggerations and spin as gospel?
This one is yet another such lie, for Trump did not sit idly by and do nothing in February. THAT isn't really true.You seem to spend your days making up excuses for Trump's idiotic words and actions, Dan. You and a few other enablers on these forums try explain away anything he says as being taken out of context or simply avoid admitting when he lies daily.
What did he do in February of such import? We still don't have enough tests for those who want to be tested so they can return to work.Nope, it only takes a few minutes to find more facts about Trump's pathological lying. As YOU well know, there isn't ONE false thing I have presented so far.
BTW, did I say T"rump did not sit idly by and do nothing in February. " ? No, I did not. - As unusual, YOU MADE THAT UP."THAT isn't really true <that he took action in February>"
Seems pretty close to me.
""We have made great progress with the antibody testing, fantastic progress," Trump said at a media briefing April 5. - NO "we" have not. There is only one FDA approved antibody test available now and the FDA has taken off controls for the production others, many of which can't tell the difference between a cold virus and a COVID virus."
I'd say that having even one, when we had zero a couple of weeks ago, is "great progress". You will, of course, disagree even though it is far above what we DID have.
As far as ANY of the tests being allowed "many of which can't tell the difference between a cold virus and a COVID virus.", well, such a statement would be all the better for proof. Frankly I don't believe you; you are stating that the FDA is knowingly allowing the sale of fraudulent tests and I don't think they are. Though they must carry a warning that we have not checked them for veracity, that is a far, far cry from allowing the sale of tests that we know do not work.
(You do understand that those tests, known as "titers" do not check for the virus but for antibodies? I assume you do, and that you are simply careless with your terminology, but if I'm wrong then you are intentionally trying to convince a reader that antibody tests are worthless; an outright lie).Again you dissemble, Wilderness. Trump said he took "SERIOUS action" in February. As the accompanying article clearly shows, he lied. He did NOT take Serious action.
Yes, I do disagree. Having just one does nobody any good now does it. Nor does having just one type make the kind of "great progress" that Trump is exaggerating about. In fact, a couple of weeks ago, there were at least three products out there, only one of which was FDA approved in any form. Now there are several that have some sort of FDA approval. Where did I say the "FDA is KNOWINGLY allowing the sale of fraudulent tests?" If anybody said that, Trump said that.
https://www.fr24news.com/a/2020/04/fda- … arket.html
The fact is, "great progress" happens ONLY when effective tests are available when somebody wants one and we are far, far away from that. Remember, Trump LIED many weeks ago now that if you want a Covid test you could have one? Well, that STILL isn't even close to being true.
Where, exactly, was I being uncareful with my terminology? I think all I did was quote your role model. Also, where did I try to convince ANYBODY that the antibody tests are worthless. It seems to me Trump was falsely doing that. As USUAL you are making things up again.
Whoops, I meant "As Usual You Made That Up"
"President Donald Trump's latest coronavirus press conference on Saturday afternoon was littered with false claims about both the pandemic crisis and various unrelated matters Trump decided to talk about, from North Korea and Iran to Chinese tariffs."
ON 4/18/2020, Trump claimed - ""Now they're giving you the other -- it's called 'testing, testing.' But they don't want to use all of the capacity that we've created. We have tremendous capacity ... they know that, the governors know that. The Democrat governors know that. They're the ones that are complaining," he said." - A few lies packed into a few sentences. "They don't want to use" is a LIE. The fact is, they CAN'T use the capacity because they can't get swabs and reagents. Also, it is NOT only the Demcoratic governors complaining, it is Republicans as well.
""In speaking to the leaders of other countries this morning, they said this is incredible the way you've done this so quickly," Trump said, without naming any foreign officials. "You know, we're only talking about a few weeks since everybody knew this was such a big problem." - This is another common LIE from Trump. It has NOT been a few weeks since people knew this was a big problem. Trump was told multiple times starting in January this was going to be a pandemic, yet he took little action until later March.
""We started off with a broken system. We inherited a broken, terrible system. And I always say it, our cupboards were bare. We had very little in our stockpile. Now we're loaded up." - Actually, Obama left a robust system which Trump partially dismantled and underfunded. Trump DID NOT ensure the stockpile was full even though he had almost four years to do it.
"Speaking about testing for the coronavirus, Trump said, "I inherited broken junk." This is a claim he has made multiple times, and which we have fact checked multiple times as well." - The faulty initial test for the coronavirus was created during Trump's administration in early 2020 by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Since this is a new virus that was first identified this year, the bad tests couldn't possibly be "inherited." "He is lying. He is lying 100%. He is lying because he is trying to shift blame to others, even if the attempt is totally nonsensical," Gregg Gonsalves, an assistant professor in the Department of Epidemiology of Microbial Diseases at the Yale School of Public Health, said of an earlier version of this Trump claim.I covered this one already but needed to add some more FACTS to show Trump is Lying.
""Now they're giving you the other -- it's called 'testing, testing.' But they don't want to use all of the capacity that we've created. We have tremendous capacity ... they know that, the governors know that. The Democrat governors know that. They're the ones that are complaining," he said." - Trump is calling OH Gov Dewine, MD Gov, Hogan, NE Gov Ricketts Democrats since they have all complained about the lack of testing.
Here are other non-Covid lies Trump decided to tell during his Covid rally.
"He claimed that as part of the Iran nuclear deal, the US agreed to give Iran $150 billion dollars." - No we didn't! We unfroze Iran's own money - Big Difference.
"He also doubled-down on the idea that China is providing the US several billion dollars in tariffs, arguing that the Chinese, not Americans, are paying the tariffs on imported Chinese products." - Trump Lies again about this. It is the American public and American businesses who foot the bill from the tariffs.
This is a new lie for me "Trump also alleged that President Obama wanted a relationship with the North Korean leader but that Kim Jong Un refused to meet with him." - There is no evidence (and would be totally out of character for a real US president) that Obama tried to get a meeting with Un. Instead, President Obama said many times he would not meet with Un.Yes, I was laughing at Trump's falsehoods yesterday as he keeps doubling down on them despite they are known lies. His supporters don't care if he lies with many of them following suit as we can see on these forums.
A new tranche of lies, most of them repeats:
ON 4/19/2020, Trump said, speaking of the reagents for the tests - ""We're in great shape. It's so easy to get." - That is a flat out LIE. If they were, governors would have them. Republican Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan said on CNN's "State of the Union" on Sunday that his state is experiencing shortages on both swabs and reagents; Hogan said, "to try to push this off to say that the governors have plenty of testing, and they should just get to work on testing, somehow we aren't doing our job, is just absolutely false."
"If people feel that way, you're allowed to protest," President Trump said. "I watched the protest, and they were all six-feet apart. I mean it was a very orderly group of people. And but ... you know, some have gone too far, some governors have gone too far. Some of the things that have happened are maybe not so appropriate." - Another blatant LIE which I observed myself. While a few maintained 6 feet, most did not. I will be looking for spikes in Covid cases in about 10 days in my data.
"In a heated exchange with CBS News White House Correspondent Weijia Jiang, Trump said "I did a ban, where I'm closing up the entire country." Trump referred to these restrictions on travel from China and parts of Europe as "bans" multiple times throughout the briefing." - Trump did not close up the entire country. It's also misleading to call the travel restrictions Trump announced against China and Europe a ban because they contained multiple exemptions. Only foreign nationals who had been in China, Europe's Schengen area, the UK or Ireland within the past 14 days are outright banned from entering the US.
'While discussing the impact coronavirus has had around the world, Trump said, "nobody ever thought this could have happened, a thing like this," in reference to the coronavirus pandemic." - Another LIE MANY people knew this was going to happen and they told Trump about it from mid-January on.
"Speaking about testing for the coronavirus, Trump said, "Look, I told you, we inherited a lot of garbage." He added, "We took -- they had tests that were no good. They had -- all the stuff was no good. It came from somewhere, so whoever came up with it. " - Nope, Not True. Why? Because the coronavirus was new; there was nothing to inherit, lol. "He is lying. He is lying 100%. He is lying because he is trying to shift blame to others, even if the attempt is totally nonsensical," Gregg Gonsalves, an assistant professor in the Department of Epidemiology of Microbial Diseases at the Yale School of Public Health"
https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/19/politics … index.htmlLet's start today's set of Trump Lies with one I watched yesterday.
ON 4/20/2020: "A reporter reminded President Donald Trump that he held campaign rallies in February and March. He responded by suggesting he didn't recall these rallies -- and saying that hasn't left the White House in "months" except for a coronavirus-related trip to Virginia in late March.
Trump's laughably obvious false claim about his travels was one of several false claims at his White House coronavirus briefing on Monday."
TRUMP on Testing - "Trump claimed people are talking about the need for more coronavirus testing because they want to damage him politically, paraphrasing their supposed thoughts as follows: "'Testing, testing. Oh, we'll get him on testing.'"
Later, asked why he sees the bipartisan outcry over testing as a personal attack, Trump said, "It's not bipartisan. It's mostly partisan." - "The Republican governors of Ohio, Nebraska, Maryland and Massachusetts, Republican Senate health committee Chairman Sen. Lamar Alexander and other Republicans have all spoken in the last week about challenges obtaining testing materials or the need for more testing." - Yes, Partisan, all Republicans, lol
On travel BANS again: "Trump said: "We put on a ban of China where China can't come in and before March we put on a ban on Europe where Europe can't come in, so how could you say I wasn't taking it seriously?" - 1) they weren't 'bans' but restrictions with many loopholes; 2) China was in January; 3) Nothing in February; 4) Europe, less the UK and Ireland, was in March; 5) UK and Ireland were included later in March.
Non-Covid related Lies yesterday - "Trump said that the US used to have a $500 billion trade deficit with China, citing this figure as evidence of how he believes the US has been taken advantage of economically under previous administrations. Trump claimed before he took office, China "came in and they took $500 billion a year for many years, anywhere from $200 (billion) to $550 billion a year out of our hides." - The HIGHEST deficit recorded was $381 billion. The overall trade deficit has grown substantially under Trump.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/20/politics … index.htmlYes I saw him trying to recall his rallies in those months after he "shut things down." He seemed surprised when asked about them and then angry afterwards. Does he think people can't remember this stuff?
ON 4/5/2020 Trump lauded hydroxychloroquine, he said: "We bought a tremendous amount of … hydroxychloroquine, which I think is, you know, it’s a great malaria drug. It’s worked unbelievably, it’s a powerful drug on malaria. And there are signs that it works on [coronavirus], some very strong signs. And in the meantime, it’s been around a long time, and also works very powerfully on lupus. So there are some very strong, powerful signs, and we’ll have to see. Because again, it’s being tested now, this is a new thing that just happened to us, the invisible enemy, we call it.
… It’s a very strong, powerful medicine, but it doesn’t kill people. We have some very good results and some very good tests. You’ve seen the same test that I have. In France, they had a very good test. But we don’t have time to go and say, gee, let’s take a couple of years and test it out. And let’s go and test with the test tubes and the laboratories. We don’t have time. I’d love to do that." - A larger VA study just found the 1) hydroxychloroquine didn't work and 2) it killed some people. So much for Trump's strong push for Miracle Cures."Link, please, to a published, peer reviewed, large scale double blind test of hydroxychloroquine and the corona virus?
Best I can find is this statement in connection with the VA test: "There certainly are a lot of disclaimers with this study, which studied only 368 patients, was not peer-reviewed, and was not randomized — and we’re not sure of the ages of the patients or any underlying morbidities — but at least it’s something to offset the many anecdotes from doctors and even patients themselves who say it’s been a lifesaver."
So, at best, it was an indication that it may not work. Hardly the same thing as your off the wall, wild claims that 1) it doesn't work and 2) it kills people. Is this just more gross exaggeration (along the lines of what Trump does), or was it just a lie (along the lines of what you claim Trump does)?Trump has a lot of international backing in that regard. Trump has unified the entire world!
Rembrain: Please tell me how an agenda of economic nationalism unifies the entire world? Whether you realize it or not, this is what Trump's plan is and he is taking his advice from Steve Bannon. Look him up.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_nationalism
Yet you buy Trump's false claim based on a tiny study in France. Give me a break Wilderness, stop being hypocritical.
The VA study was a bust
Brazil stopped their study because of risk of death
No other study reaches the accolades you and Trump give to it.
BTW, I didn't make the claims, the VA did. Of course since they disagree with Trump, they are lying. lol,
https://www.dw.com/en/chloroquine-is-in … a-53188219
The bottom line there are clinical trials are needed to be finished before you and Trump continue to advertise the benefits of this treatment. But for some reason, a lack of good evidence doesn't stop you.You're right - the VA was a bust. Outside of showing we need more tests, your claims are not shown to be true.
You didn't make the claim? "A larger VA study just found the 1) hydroxychloroquine didn't work and 2) it killed some people. So much for Trump's strong push for Miracle Cures." If that didn't come from you, where did it come from? I don't believe the VA said "So much for Trump's strong push for Miracle Cures." - that can only be from you.
Yes. We need more clinical trials to support your claim. The claim that you made, just as Trump did, without sufficient evidence to support it...except that Trump made it crystal clear that it was a possibility that it might work, while you made it crystal clear that it is a fact that it kills people. For shame.
I'd be interested in seeing the copy/paste of where I gave accolades to the drug as a Covid-19 cure ("...accolades you and Trump give to it".). Or is that just another lie, just as you claim Trump is doing?So, Wilderness, you believe that the VA DIDN'T say that the chloroquine wasn't effective and that they experienced a higher death rate? You need to go back and read the facts rather than making things up.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/21/health/h … index.html
Your blindness, Wilderness, is truly awe inspiring.
A "possibility"??? Is that why he said "take it, what have you got to lose?" There is a whole minutes long montage of Trump pushing this "possible" miracle on his true believers.
"What have you got to lose?" - How about your life!! Why don't you go and take it?And your desperation to bash trump is just as awe inspiring.
Who did the VA administer it to? Terminal patients that they couldn't help any other way? Did the chloroquine cause the deaths or were they "scheduled" to happen in any case? Did they do a double blind test, or did doctors know full well who had it and who did not? Who did the peer review, and where was it published?
You know as well as I do that all of these are pertinent, and important, questions...yet you won't consider them in your efforts to show Trump a liar, for you don't care. Just that you have something that you can twist into Trump's fault and detriment.
It is almost comical, or would be if circumstances were different, how hard you try to demonize your President, while committing the exact same actions you are so upset about when he does it.
As far as the VA saying chloroquine caused deaths as you carefully insinuate...no, I don't believe that any more than I believe they said "So much for Trump's strong push for Miracle Cures.". Although you seemed to attribute that to them with your italics, they did not say it.
They VA did an "anecdotal" test, not a true study of the efficacy of chloroquine. They simply tried it on a small selection of patients - they did NOT take the steps to provide an actual study. And they know that, just as both you and I do - they are also smart enough to understand they cannot make claims about their test which they cannot support, which you apparently do not. Or at least you would have your readers believe that you don't understand that, but again I'm not sure I believe that either, for I think you are fully aware of what such a study would require. You just don't want the reader to know that it was never intended as a scientific study of the efficacy of chloroquine on the Covid virus, for if it was it ruins your whole rant.
(You never did give a copy/paste of my accolades of chloroquine - did it slip your mind or did you give up on that tale?)1. I can't copy and paste everything you wrote, the sum total of which is total agreement with anything Trump claims - including chloroquine
2. What "desperation"?? I don't have to even come close to breaking a sweat in finding things Trump does which effectively Bash himself. There is hardly a day goes by (and sometimes even an hour) where he doesn't do something reprehensible that needs to be called out.
As to the VA test, it was hardly "anecdotal" as you wrongly call it. It was true clinical trial with control groups. For the third time -
https://www.contagionlive.com/news/prep … h-systems-
Please admit you are wrong and stop trying to rewrite history like Trump does all of the time.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3GuNbGC2D_8
Here is today's installment of Trump Lies from yesterday.
ON 4/21/2020 Trump MISLEADS with "Trump was responding to a question about how the federal government would retrieve funds from large companies securing loans through the Paycheck Protection Program, which were supposed to be for small businesses. "Harvard's going to pay back the money. They shouldn't be taking it. ... I'm not going to mention any other names, but when I saw Harvard, they have one of the largest endowments anywhere in the country, maybe in the world, I guess. And they're going to pay back that money." - In fact, Trump's ignorance gets in the way here - Harvard did receive funding from the coronavirus relief money, but Trump didn't distinguish between two separate sources of federal funding within the CARES Act coronavirus package -- the Higher Education Emergency Relief Fund and the Paycheck Protection Program. The relief fund is primarily meant to provide financial relief grants to students. The paycheck program is a set of loans meant for small businesses, which Harvard never applied for or received
On Protests (to help more people die) - ""And I've watched some of the protests -- not in great detail, but I see that. And they're separated...a lot of space in between," Trump said. "I mean, they're watching, believe it or not, social -- they're doing social distancing, if you can believe it. And they are. And they're protesting, but they -- the groups I've seen have been very much spread out. So, I think that's good." - Trump has "selective seeing". I have seen lots of footage on different protests and saw very little in the way of purposeful "social distancing".
Again with the Lie about the trade deficit with China - "Trump repeated his frequent claim that the US trade deficit with China used to be as high as $500 billion: "I even asked the leaders of China, how -- how did this ever happen? Where our country loses tens of billions of dollars a year. And I don't mean just tens. Take a look: $200 billion, $300 billion, $400 billion, $500 billion a year. How did they ever let a thing like this happen?" - First, the deficit has not been as high as $400 billion, let alone $500 billion. Second, ANY economist will tell you there is nothing wrong with 99% of all trade deficits; they are a function of free-trade between nations.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/21/politics … index.html4/22/2020 Trump Campaign Takes Pelosi’s Words Out of Context
https://a.msn.com/r/2/BB130AIK?m=en-us&ocid=News
Here is a unbelievable beauty from yesterday that highlights Trump's lack of mental acuity (and ability to speak coherently)
ON 4/22/2020 - "We don't want to rebounds after all this death -- death -- that we've suffered," Trump said. "Not work -- I don't view it 'work'; I view it [as] 'death' that was unnecessary. It should have never happened. It should have never left that little area where it started. You know it and I know it and they know it." - I am not sure how to be polite after that abomination, so I won't say a thing ... I don't think I need to.Yes I heard this bit of rambling from the stable genius. And his supporters claim Joe has problems speaking.
Using UV light as a treatment!!! - O, man. if it was not so serious I would have died from laughter.
"Loose Lips Kill People"- while #Trump didn't actually push to ingest #disinfectant, his words were so ill-chosen #lysol was forced to warn people to NOT drink their product to protect against #Covid_19!!
https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/24/business … index.html
Where UV lights (of the proper wavelength) are useful is killing virus's on surfaces (not your skin), mail, groceries, etc. One of the two wavelengths that kill virus is safe for skin, but the other, the more common one, is not. I bought each of my offices one to use.Anyone that thinks drinking cleaning products is good for you has far more problems than listening to Trump. Blaming Trump for the idiocies of such people is ridiculous - you cannot cure stupidity, and neither can you be blamed for it.
I disagree, anyone who suggest someone drink or inject disinfectants can be blamed for being stupid.
It is like Wilderness trying to hold Jim Jones blameless for the killing of his flock.
From now on it will be "Drinking the Trump Lysol" instead of the kool-aid, Scott.
And like Esoteric to deny any responsibility of the flock. Regardless of your liberal philosophy that only you know what others should do for they are but children in your eyes, it is not true. People DO have a responsibility for themselves and their actions...including drinking the Kool-Aid.
And therefore you hold Jim Jones (and Trump) blameless.
You also, by the above comment, don't beleive:
- Advertising works - That companies waste billions on it.
- Brainwashing is real
- Propaganda works - That Himmler was a fool in even trying
- Demagoguery works
- That some people aren't wired to "follow the leader""And therefore you hold Jim Jones (and Trump) blameless."
Nice try. Now can you produce a copy/paste where I said that? Or even insinuated it is true? Or are you simply putting words in my mouth (again) that never came from me?
That is not the point. Wilderness, and you know it since you are deflecting so badly. While it is true many Trump supporters take Trump's words as gospel and will suspend their common sense and drink the Lysol as he suggests, it is HIS UTTERING that suggesting as President of the United States that is so - well - Stupid and dangerous.
No, there was no deflection. You just skipped over the point without ever seeing anything but TRUMP LIES!!!
You may have decided, under the control of your TDS, that anyone not bashing Trump on a daily basis is stupid enough to drink Lysol, or inject it. This is patently untrue, and anyone that stupid (of either party, with or without TDS) has far greater problems than Trump or anything he says.
It may be the Liberal mantra - that all people are but children, incapable of making reasonable decisions - but there is no truth in it. Just an excuse for controlling others to the maximum extent possible.- TDS. So you resort to referring to the left as having the fictional Limbaugh and Hannity mental disease when you make excuses for the man-baby?
No surprise! Wilderness: As I said before, you have to forgive Trump for being a stable genius. He has led a very sheltered, privileged, entitled life. I would bet you dollars to doughnuts, he has never entered a grocery store or a hardware store in his entire life. Therefore, he has no idea what he is talking about. He gets his misinformation from frauds like himself, and if it fits his agenda, he runs with it.
The problem is his supporters see him as the anointed one and they actually believe his is a stable genius and he can fix anything. Therefore, they may try drinking his elixir of Lysol. and shine UV light in their mouths to reach their lungs.
If he was being sarcastic to the journalist, why did he turn his head towards Faucii and Brix and suggest that they run a study on his miracle find that "knocks out the virus in less than a minute." ?
You constantly harp about how we bash Trump. The real reason is because he deserves it based on his very vulgar dangerous behavior. Trump uses his briefings to promote himself for re-election. But the more he uses them, the more he is exposing his true character and nature.
He doesn't even know how to act presidential or even care. He only cares about one thing right now and that is to get re-elected. He knows that if he is not re-elected, he becomes fair game for the obstruction of justice crimes he committed. He also knows AG Barr will not be there to bail him out.I couldn't have stated it more "nicely," Mike.
Thanks Randy. Just calling them as I see them!
Yes, of course - all Trump supporters are just idiots and morons (literal, not figurative) and you are so much smarter than they are. Hateful and offensive speech, to be sure, but sooo smart. At least compared to anyone that isn't on your personal bash Trump bandwagon.
Are you thinking there will be run of UV lights now, as there was on TP? Time to get in on the ground floor! (I'll watch from the sidelines.)I don't believe you are an idiot or a moron, Dan. We probably have more in common than we realize. But you see Trump as an asset, and I see him as a deficit.
And that's the name of that tune!
Wilderness: I'm not so smart, but I do have common sense and can understand when I see a person who is so desperate about being re-elected that he will say and do anything, even if it means risking others lives.
I can also see a president who is so insecure, that he conducts his own marathon press conferences that have hijacked the corona virus task team of expert scientists. He stands in their T.V. frame like an imposing sentinel to make sure they don't say anything to injure his fantasized image of himself. He then insults the press core when they ask valid questions. By the way, isn't that in violation of the freedom of the press?
It's apparent he doesn't know anything about the virus, how it infects people, how it attacks the lungs, causes the immune system to go bananas, and presents its symptoms. But he makes the experts stand for hours while he babbles on about how great his country was and how it will sky rocket once this is all over.
He suffers from narcissism, sociopathic lying, and the Dunning Kruger Effect. That effect makes people think they know more about a subject than the experts do, but they are so dumb about it, they don't even know they are dumb. It's like somebody who thinks they can fly an airplane, but they know nothing about aerodynamics.
I hope and pray that he is through with these inane press conference that are no more than a substitute for his campaign rallies.
I'm hope there is not a run on UV lights or any other kind of lights."...I do have common sense..."
Then you fully understand that it isn't the "Trump supporters" that are going to inject Lysol or turn a UV light into their throats. It is the (literal) morons among us; those too stupid to understand to not drink poison and that UV light in the throat will not kill the virus.
Then the question becomes "Why did you say such a stupid thing yourself"? Are you just ranting, saying anything that comes to mind that might convince others to join your hatred of Trump?
Were you just talking to be offensive? To tell readers they are too stupid to not drink poison? Did you intend to offend? If so, why?
Lastly, what incredible rationalization can you use to separate your stupid statement from that of Trump? Because "more is expected of him" and that makes it OK for you to make the same kind of stupid remarks he does?Wilderness: All of the questions you just asked are all loaded questions. No I'm not still beating my wife. You are trying to get me to incriminate myself instead of defending Trump and I'm not going to play that game. You don't defend Trump because at this stage, there is no defense for him. It is all on video for the world to see, except for Fox News which spins and edits the videos. They are as dangerous to this country as Trump is.
Why did you make such a foolish and offensive statement?
There - that isn't loaded in any possible way. Why did you say such a thing? (You stuck your foot in your mouth yourself, I didn't do it for you. Can you extricate it now? With more grace than Trump showed?)Wilderness: Yes your question is loaded. It assumes that I made a foolish and offensive statement. It's only your opinion that it is foolish and offensive. First off, Trump doesn't show grace.
He is one of the most vulgar and offensive human beings I know. Do you think interrupting reporters questions before they even finish the question is grace? Do you think calling them the fake news is grace? Do you think telling them to shut-up when they are asking valid questions is grace? Do you think contradicting Faucii and Birx is grace? Do you think telling them they have no brains is graceful?
You can't even defend him, without making him the victim. He is the typical bully. He will attack and then when others ask pertinent questions, he will play the victim and tell them they just asked a nasty question and then won't answer it. Everything I just stated is verifiable on video. If you don't believe me, I will post the videos.Of course it was an opinion that your comment was foolish and offensive. But that doesn't mean it was loaded.
Trump did not show grace, correct. Neither did you with the claim that Trump supporters are stupid enough to inject Lysol.
Yes, Trump is vulgar and offensive (your opinion) - does that mean you get to be that way, too? Does another rant about Trump mean it was OK to make such a statement as you did? This is called "deflection", and has nothing to do with loaded questions; the question posed was why you think it was OK to post offensive remarks about Trump followers, and a rant about Trump has nothing to do with that question.
So...for the third time, why did you make the statement that Trump followers are stupid enough to inject poisons into their body to kill the virus? I could guess, but then you call it a loaded question, so I'll just leave it at the question again - why did you make such an offensive remark? (No, I'm not asking for another rant about the evils of Trump; I'm asking why you made the remark.)Wilderness:
This is what I actually said: "The problem is his supporters see him as the anointed one and they actually believe his is a stable genius and he can fix anything. Therefore, they may try drinking his elixir of Lysol. and shine UV light in their mouths to reach their lungs."
This is what you are saying I said: "So...for the third time, why did you make the statement that Trump followers are stupid enough to inject poisons into their body to kill the virus?"
The key difference here is I didn't say they were stupid. I said, they believe in Trump as the anointed one and they may try drinking his elixir of Lysol. and shine UV light in their mouths to reach their lungs.
I noticed in your arguments that you like to use the phrase, "Are you saying and what you are saying is...That is a technique for putting words in peoples mouths and then you accuse them of actually saying that. I never said they are stupid enough to inject poison into their body...You did.
Why do you think that the makers of Lysol and other chlorine based products have just put out statements to not ingest their products when it is written right on the label? It's because of Trump's stupid statements...and that is a fact.
Lots of morons... https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/ … oronavirus
Yes there are. And every single one a "Trump supporter". We know this because peoplepower personally visited and spoke to each and every one, asking them their political persuasion.
Nothing new, though - we've had idiots injecting cocaine, LSD and most anything else they could find. Huffing freon and THC, swallowing opioids and speed. All poisons, disrupting the proper functioning of the human body.I dont know about every single one. But we have to count Trump as a Trump supporter, right?
Well, that was the comment - that Trump supporters will drink the Lysol. Not just Trump (who must not a supporter of himself as he won't drink), but the rest of the supporters as well.
But you don't have the President of the United States telling his supporters to go use LSD, Cocaine, etc. now do we? THAT IS THE POINT.
Go back and read again: the point was the peoplepower decided, and publicly proclaimed, that those following Trump are also the ones stupid enough to poison themselves.
Do try to stay with the topic rather than forever drifting off into "TRUMP BAD!!!".Do you even know what the topic of this thread is, Dan? Perhaps you need to reread it.
Yes, more is expected from the leader of the Free World, Dan. Do you enjoy being part of his cadre? Does it make you feel proud when he spouts gibberish as medical advice?
If you're not embarrassed by his latest statements, then nothing more needs to be said.
At least those who continue to support Trump after being exposed to his true, extremely flawed, extremely dangerous character are.
That you fiind him "extremely dangerous" as he works (effectively) to improve the nation and it's people, has exactly zero to do with reality. Perhaps it is those that simply ride the bandwagon, without thinking for themselves, that are unintelligent enough to drink the Kool-aid!
But how can any reasonable person get past the fact that MOST (and I am talking about more than 50% of any substinative thing he says) things that come out of Trump's mouth or twitter finger are LIES, Deflections, Deceptions, and Misinformation. How can that be the so-called TDS when it is the TRUTH.
I would say the proper definition of TDS is Trump Denying Syndrome. This is where Trump supporters deny he ever lies or does anything wrong.Once more: the point is not that you think Trump is awful: it is that you and others are following his path of being offensive and insulting...while constantly berating him for the same kind of words you are producing.
Please, try to stick to the point and reply to it, not the TDS requiring that everything you post has to do with Trump being evil (and anyone not bashing him repeatedly is of the same disgusting ilk; evil). Respond to what was said, not what the TDS is pushing you to say.
You see, most of us can do that. We can think about something other than Trump being bad. We can say something other that "Trump Bad!". Work on it.Are you saying that when Trump lies, we shouldn't call it that because it is insulting?
You also miss the point about the "bashing". If he didn't deserve to be called out on things and people bashed him anyway, like your side did with Obama, then that would be properly classified as bashing.
BUT, if people continually call out Trump on the bad things he does, that is, by defintion, NOT Bashing. Instead, it is telling the TRUTH. A truth your side doesn't want to hear and therefore misname it "bashing" and "TDS".
Another thing you don't get - "WE ARE responding to things he said" I post his quotes all of the time. (I didn't today because he didn't say anything yesterday.)
It shows that Trump is not scientifically schooled. (neither is he willing to listen to science) Compare him with Merkel and... well you can't compare the two actually. completely different leagues.
Sad thing is, that he is tweeting things and telling things on youtube in a position of power. People believe him, just like sect leaders are believed by the thousands, although they are talking complete gibberish.
Question: as it looks asTrump is not handling this crisis properly, are there any other public figures where people are hoping to get answers from in the US?Andrew Cuomo is the voice of reason thus far.
He is the Governor from New York isn't he? Any other news from other Governers of hard-hit regions like Illinois, Michigan, California, Florida?
If I put myself in Trump's place, he comes from privilege and entitlement. Therefore, I'm sure he has never used Lysol or even knows what it is. He has had other people that worked for him use it. In a sense, he is encapsulated from the real world on such things as grocery shopping or using cleaning products that contain bleach.
Therefore ,without knowing what it is he is not only suggesting that we use it internally, but he asked the experts to do a feasibility study. When questioned about it, he becomes very defensive with the reporters and ends up attacking them and calling them the fake news when he doesn't have a clue of what he is talking about.
I think inside, we are seeing a very insecure person that hides behind his bullying. The problem is his supporters tend to believe everything he says and Fox News will spin it to make it look like Trump is the victim. I'm so sick and tired of him being in front of the task force and running his own press conferencesI do believe Trump is losing it with his desperation for a virus cure. Anyone can see he doesn't want hard questions put to him and thus, he cuts them off and insults the reporters instead of taking the question.
Even his supporters see this happening, but only those die-hard Fox News watchers will deny he does this. After referring to the virus as fake news Hannity and Co. had to backtrack quite a bit, as they've also done with the hydroxycloriquine "cure" touted by the king.My turn in the barrel Mike. I am only responding to your comment to take my lumps.
I frequently argue with Trump bashers over the obviousness and shallowness of there complaints. But . . . I can't find any rational mitigation for this "disinfectant" thing. What the hell could he be thinking?
Wait, don't answer that. It was a rhetorical question. I could probably write your, (generic), answers as well as you could.
. . . . and then I hear the 'I was speaking sarcastically' explanation. Geesh
ps. I'm gonna bookmark this one for those folks that say I am a Trump defender ;-)
GANot much excuse for his remark, or the one saying he was sarcastic.
But then there isn't much excuse for anyone stupid enough to inject or even drink Lysol or bleach as a cure for the virus, either. Or, IMO, the company that found it necessary to reinforce the warnings on the can with a public announcement not to inject or drink it.You forget Dan, there are a lot of Trump voters still out there.
No wonder neither Fauci or Birx appeared today for questions. You could see the look on her face yesterday. It seemed to say, "Shut the hell up!" The poor lady is trying the best she can to get through this daily fiasco.Of Course this leads to Trump LYING again on 4/24/2020, which has just been referred to..
"President Donald Trump lied Friday when he said he was being "sarcastic" when he asked medical experts on Thursday to look into the possibility of injecting disinfectant as a treatment for the coronavirus.
Doctors and the company that makes Lysol and Dettol warned that injecting or ingesting disinfectants is dangerous. But when Trump was asked about the comments during a bill signing on Friday, he said, "I was asking a question sarcastically to reporters like you just to see what would happen."
He then suggested he was talking about disinfectants that can safely be rubbed on people's hands. And then he returned to the sarcasm explanation, saying it was "a very sarcastic question to the reporters in the room about disinfectant on the inside."
A reporter noted that he had asked his medical experts to look into it. Trump responded: "No, no, no, no -- to look into whether or not sun and disinfectant on the hands, but whether or not sun can help us." - I don't need a Facts First from CNN on this one since I watched it. I had to replay it to make sure Trump wasn't joking. He wasn't, he was as serious as a heart attack (which might happen when you inject yourself with Lysol).
https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/24/politics … index.html
What is more amazing to me than the President of the United States being a pathological liar, is how many Americans drink his Kool-Aid (or is it Lysol) now.
Right behind that is the criticism by the Kool-Aid drinkers of those who keep pointing out Trump's lies. For some unknown, unfathomable reason, they think we are Trump bashers for pointing these lies out.No, we should not bash him for being a moronic liar who's putting his own people at risk. It hurts his feelings and we don't want that.
I heard that calls to the Illinois poison control center increased sharply after Trump's advice to his supporters to drink disinfectants and shine a great light on themselves.
I read someplace that demographers are finding that the coronavirus may cost Trump his election - and not for the obvious reason that he is making a fool of himself with all of his lies and deceptions. It seems that his most loyal voters, old folks, are dying off in droves due to the virus (that we knew). What they found interesting is they may be dying off in large enough numbers in the battleground states to actually reduce his voting block.
Then add to that my thought that between now and the election, the people most likely to catch and die from Covid are Trump voters (because they won't take proper precautions and want to "open up" too soon) and therefore will make it even harder to win."I heard that calls to the Illinois poison control center increased sharply after Trump's advice to his supporters to drink disinfectants and shine a great light on themselves."
Yes, I heard that too. That calls to poison control increased (to around 100) after Trumps statement...to the entire nation. Have you joined peoplepower in insinuating that the people stupid enough to be willing to drink poison are all Trump followers? Or perhaps joint Trump, albeit in a more "hidden" way, in insulting those not of your political persuasion?
Looking at your last paragraph, it seems the first is more true than the second. Without any knowledge whatsoever of who isn't taking "proper precautions", you are willing to step up to the soapbox and declare they are Trump voters.
Same question to you as to peoplepower, then: what makes you believe you have the right to act as Trump does and insult/offend those on the other side of the political fence, simply because they are on the other side? Are you learning from Trump?I don't see where we even come close to what Trump does. First, when we criticize, it is based on objective facts - something that is foreign to Trump. And that is just an observation from over four years of watching Trump operate.
It is an objective, fact-based statement that Trump has lied, misinformed, given false statements, etc over 15,000 times since taking office. Probably more than the rest of the presidents put together. (That is unknown since nobody had to keep track of how many times a president did those things before)
Now, is it offensive or insulting to observe that a person who denies such facts is not rational and that it is rational to throw their support behind a person who does that when TRUST in the word of a president is paramount to successful leadership?
I don't think it is. You do, of course, because you are on the receiving end of it.
Almost two months ago Trump said about Covid cases "We are close to zero", meaning he thought it was about over in the United States. Today, we are approaching 1,000,000 cases and 60,000 dead WRONG AGAIN.
Two months ago we were "close to zero", meaning we didn't have many cases. You're WRONG AGAIN. (being "close to zero" does not mean it is over; it means there aren't many cases at that time - you don't get to insert meaning to justify your rants.)
Wilderness: What you and Trump don't understand is the exponential spread rate of the virus and the spread interval. The corona virus has an average spread rate of 3. What that means is one person can infect three people. Those 3 people can infect 9 people. Those 9 people can infect 27 people. Those 27 people can infect 81 people and so on. It's a multiplier of 3.
The spread interval is the time that it takes from the time a person contracts the virus until symptoms show up. That interval for COVID19 is much slower than for other viruses therefore, its symptoms are delayed.
So why am I telling you this? Because Trump didn't and still doesn't understand the exponential rate nor the spread interval. That's why he said, "Why should I shut the country down? There are only 15 people infected and it will be gone in a month, like a miracle."
He also doesn't understand that there are two parts to testing. One is the collection of the specimen and the other is the actual testing. He holds up a swab stick and says this is all there is to testing.
He does not understand the logistics of testing and the supply chain. He should step aside for the good of the country and let competent people make the decisions about testing. He has no analytical or empathetic abilities like Governors Coumo and Newsome. They will not open up their states until the spread rate is less than one.
His focus is opening up the country as fast as he can because he wants to make it look good for his re-election But because he doesn't have a clue about how the virus can rebound it will more than likely be to his detriment and many more people could die as a result of his demands.I understand full well the exponential growth of biological organisms such as a virus.
But what you don't seem to understand is that you cannot (truthfully) change the meaning of words to suit your desire to demonize Trump. "Close to zero" does NOT mean future growth is minimized; it means there aren't very many cases AT THAT TIME. You don't get to change it to mean "there won't be any more".
So yes, you (again) lied when you claimed he said something different, or that he meant something he didn't say. Nor does going off on a tangent about opening the country before you think we should, or about how it will affect the election, have anything to do with how many cases we had in February. Just more deflection and attempt to demonize the man rather than address his actual words.
Reasonable people understand that "close to zero" does not mean it is over. But whoever believed Trump was reasonable??? But thanks for the opening:
Jan. 22: “We have it totally under control. It’s one person coming in from China. We have it under control. It’s going to be just fine.” — Trump in a CNBC interview.- Today we have almost 1,000,000 cases and 55,000 dead - then we had 1 case in America that we knew of.
Jan. 30: “We think we have it very well under control. We have very little problem in this country at this moment — five — and those people are all recuperating successfully. But we’re working very closely with China and other countries, and we think it’s going to have a very good ending for us … that I can assure you.” — Trump in a speech in Michigan. - Today we have almost 1,000,000 cases and 55,000 dead - then we had 30 cases in America.
Feb. 10: “Now, the virus that we’re talking about having to do — you know, a lot of people think that goes away in April with the heat — as the heat comes in. Typically, that will go away in April. We’re in great shape though. We have 12 cases — 11 cases, and many of them are in good shape now.” — Trump at the White House. - Today we have almost 1,000,000 cases and 55,000 dead - then we had 12 cases and 1 dead in America.
Feb. 23: “We have it very much under control in this country.” — Trump in speaking to reporters.- Today we have almost 1,000,000 cases and 55,000 dead - then we had 35 cases and 1 dead in America.
Feb. 24: “The Coronavirus is very much under control in the USA. We are in contact with everyone and all relevant countries. CDC & World Health have been working hard and very smart. Stock Market starting to look very good to me!” — Trump in a tweet.- Today we have almost 1,000,000 cases and 55,000 dead - then we had 53 cases and 1 dead in America.
Feb. 26: “So we’re at the low level. As they get better, we take them off the list, so that we’re going to be pretty soon at only five people. And we could be at just one or two people over the next short period of time. So we’ve had very good luck.” — Trump at a White House briefing.- Today we have almost 1,000,000 cases and 55,000 dead - then we had 60 cases and 1 dead in America.
Feb. 26: “And again, when you have 15 people, and the 15 within a couple of days is going to be down to close to zero, that’s a pretty good job we’ve done.” — Trump at a press conference. - Today we have almost 1,000,000 cases and 55,000 dead - then we had 60 cases and 1 dead in America.
Feb. 26: “I think every aspect of our society should be prepared. 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.” — Trump at a press conference, when asked if “U.S. schools should be preparing for a coronavirus spreading.”- Today we have almost 1,000,000 cases and 55,000 dead - then we had 60 cases and 1 dead in America.
Feb. 27: “It’s going to disappear. One day — it’s like a miracle — it will disappear.” — Trump at a White House meeting with African American leaders.- Today we have almost 1,000,000 cases and 55,000 dead - then we had 60 cases and 1 dead in America.
Feb. 29: “And I’ve gotten to know these professionals. They’re incredible. And everything is under control. I mean, they’re very, very cool. They’ve done it, and they’ve done it well. Everything is really under control.” — Trump in a speech at the CPAC conference outside Washington, D.C.- Today we have almost 1,000,000 cases and 55,000 dead - then we had 68 cases and 1 dead in America.
March 4: “[W]e have a very small number of people in this country [infected]. We have a big country. The biggest impact we had was when we took the 40-plus people [from a cruise ship]. … We brought them back. We immediately quarantined them. But you add that to the numbers. But if you don’t add that to the numbers, we’re talking about very small numbers in the United States.” — Trump at a White House meeting with airline CEOs. - Today we have almost 1,000,000 cases and 55,000 dead - then we had 158 cases and 11 dead in America.
March 4: “Well, I think the 3.4% is really a false number.” — Trump in an interview on Fox News, referring to the percentage of diagnosed COVID-19 patients worldwide who had died, as reported by the World Health Organization.- Today we have almost 1,000,000 cases and 55,000 dead - then we had 158 cases and 11 dead in America.
March 7: “No, I’m not concerned at all. No, we’ve done a great job with it.” — Trump, when asked by reporters if he was concerned about the arrival of the coronavirus in the Washington, D.C., area. - Today we have almost 1,000,000 cases and 55,000 dead - then we had 435 cases and 19 dead in America.
March 9: “So last year 37,000 Americans died from the common Flu. It averages between 27,000 and 70,000 per year. Nothing is shut down, life & the economy go on. At this moment there are 546 confirmed cases of CoronaVirus, with 22 deaths. Think about that!” — Trump in a tweet." - Today we have almost 1,000,000 cases and 55,000 dead - then we had 704 cases and 26 dead in America.
March 10: “And we’re prepared, and we’re doing a great job with it. And it will go away. Just stay calm. It will go away.” — Trump after meeting with Republican senators. - "Today we have almost 1,000,000 cases and 55,000 dead - then we had 994 cases and 30 dead in America.[/i]
A day later, on March 11, the WHO declared the global outbreak a pandemic.
And yet YOU take what this man says seriously!! I don't get it. You aren't one of the Trumplicans who will drink the Lysol.Can you show where Trump said "It's over"? And then can you tie it directly to the current cases being "close to zero" (as in the same sentence or paragraph)?
No. You cannot. So when you post a timeline of the epidemic, months beyond the statement you wish to portray as meaning "there is no epidemic" although it said nothing of the kind, it has exactly zero to do with what Trump said, or with your insinuation he said it was all over. Just more attempts to Bash, then, using spun words and meanings that were never there?
Do you not find that more than a little disingenuous? It is, you know, exactly what you complain Trump does: exaggerate, change meanings, etc., and here you are following his footsteps while trying desperately to change the topic to something more amenable to demonizing your president.
Eso, you and a handful of others here absolutely kill me. You use Trump's methodology; twisting, spinning, lying, etc. ... and then complain vociferously when he does the same thing.Can you point out the "twisted" spun lies in Scott's timeline?
I have already done so, beginning with the insinuation that Trump meant there was no pandemic with the words "close to zero".
Sure, he was saying it "sarcastically" as he did with suggestions of using antiseptics and light as a cure. And as he did yesterday when he asked why the reporters didn't return their "Noble" prizes?
The stable genius you admire doesn't realize the Pulitzer Prize is awarded to journalists, not the Nobel. But keep defending his stupid comments. Someone needs to...As with Peoplepower and Esoteric, you may not change the topic to something more conducive to bashing Trump. This time it was changing "close to zero" cases to "there is no pandemic" and that simply was not true. Your side trip into prizes has no bearing whatsoever...except to bash Trump, which I'm not interested in.
And Just like People, you are trying to change it to a defense of Trump, when everything I've had to say concerned the spin and lies produced in this forum. Statements by posters, not by Trump.Wilderness: Whether you realize it or not, here is what the OP wants this forum to be about.
"Trump Lies, Distortions, and Deceptions About Coronavirus"
"This forum is to catalogue the many lies, distortions, deceptions, and misinformation Donald Trump has made about his administration's effort to combat the coronavirus. He is doing his damnedest to make you think is doing a 10 out of 10 job when, in fact, it is more like 3 or 4 out of 10 (yes, I will agree he has done a few things right). But the things he has done wrong has COST LIVES, lots of lives - and people should know.
People need to know that Trump is deceiving you. Feel free to add your own but include a date and a quote.
I'll start off with the first one from today."I understand that. And if you didn't want to change the topic to your own (or that or Esoteric's) language then you should not respond to a comment.
But you DID respond...to a comment about a comment by a poster here rather than Trumps. Once more, what I see is a forum dedicated to lies from Trump...and full of lies about Trump. If you don't wish to discuss those lies, then don't respond. Pretty simple.I did. Several times in this thread. Go back and read them. So far your only reply to what was said is that I cannot "read between the lines" as you can. Translation: I'm not willing to spin Trumps words to suit my purposes as you are.
You're right, too.Good thinking, Dan. Trump doesn't require any sort of assistance with spinning his words to suit his purpose.
You may wanta take some of those Clorox chewables.My wife and I are laughing our asses off listening to Trump's news conference. I am up to six outright lies so far., now seven .... now eight
Trump says Big Study - people who lose their livelihood can die as well (trying to argue against social distancing.)
We are going to more than double SOON (they said that last February, five or more times, then did it again in March, then again in April.
Did 200,000 tests in a single day, Pense says. They promised that 1 1/2 months ago. We've done 5 million tests now when 20 million should have been done.
One misinformation by saying America has done more tests (which is true) than any other country but NOT SAID, is that our PER CAPITA rate is very low.They were being "sarcastic," Scott. This seems to be excuse of the month now. But Dan will consider this "bashing" as well. No fair counting the lies...
Wilderness: You are defending Trump whether you realize it or not. Claiming we spin Trump's words to suit our own purpose is defending him. What do you call it?
I assure it's not difficult. Although you will have to stop "reading between the lines" and spinning his words into something more conducive to your goal of demonizing him.
In other words, check your claim of what he said against what he actually said. You'll find lots of times that the claim being made is untrue.
(You could start with the claim he told people to drink Lysol, or inject it - I've watched that video clip a half dozen times and haven't seen yet where he said that, or encouraged it. Every time I see it, he turns to his expert and asks if we can find some way of making it work inside the body - not a single viewing produced your version of his remarks)Wilderness: That's really great. But somebody with a modicum of what Lysol is would no better than to believe finding some way of making it work inside the body. Its most active ingredient is lye for God's sake. That is why it is called Lysol.
If he understood how the virus has to get to the lungs in order to reproduce then he would understand that shining a light on the outside or inside of the body isn't going to work. Lysol and sunlight can kill the virus on surfaces, if it hasn't already died on it's on.
O.K. so the president doesn't have to know those things, but a president should have enough common sense to leave those types of discussions to the experts.
Trump is so desperate to get re-elected, he can not stay out of the limelight and will do and say crazy sh*t that he has no knowledge of because he has led a sheltered life when it come to experiences that the common person has had. But being the stable genius that he is, he can't help himself.
It sounds like I'm bashing him, but I am really trying to be empathetic with him. I can put myself in his place and see what he is going through. Even that he has to lie and say it was sarcasm to save face.No argument with any of this.
But it has zero to do with what I had to say in the comment you replied to, which was that it was a lie to claim Trump said to drink Lysol, or inject it, or even encouraged people to do so. He did not, but the claim was made anyway.Wilderness: I never said that. And I copied it from my post of 45 hours ago. So if you want to verify it just go back to my post from 45 hours ago.
This is what I actually said: "The problem is his supporters see him as the anointed one and they actually believe his is a stable genius and he can fix anything. Therefore, they may try drinking his elixir of Lysol. and shine UV light in their mouths to reach their lungs."
Good, then we can finally agree on something."I disagree, anyone who suggest someone drink or inject disinfectants can be blamed for being stupid."
https://hubpages.com/education/forum/34 … ost4134814
"Therefore ,without knowing what it is he is not only suggesting that we use it internally," <This one is from you>
https://hubpages.com/education/forum/34 … ost4134837
"More concerning, though, is the number of people who actually went ahead with the suggestion."
https://hubpages.com/education/forum/34 … ost4135166
But he said he was talking to the reporters, not the experts, Dan. Or don't you believe him?
Wilderness: You like to say we are demonizing Trump. To demonize means to be wicked and threatening. Trump's counter-punching and lashing out at his opponents is threatening and revengeful and his over 15,000 lies and misinformation are morally evil.
But he can't help himself. That's the way he is wired. I have never seen him apologize for anything or admit that he has ever made a mistake. That says a lot about a persons character.
I don't want him as my president and that is neither wicked or threatening. It is my prerogative and I will not support him. You may call it demonizing as you wish.Agreed, it's our right and duty to speak out against what we see as a bad leader of the country. Some Trump loyalists remind me of the people of Germany who defended Hitler's actions and words, although I don't believe Hitler lied as much as Trump does.
A sad statement for the present time...."Trump's counter-punching and lashing out at his opponents is threatening and revengeful"
And that makes it OK for you to do it?
"But he can't help himself."
OK - then what is your excuse for behaving in the same manner?
If you think "not supporting" Trump is the same as posting hundreds (thousands?) of public posts exaggerating and spinning whatever he does (with an occasional outright lie thrown in for good measure), from the biggest soapbox in history, you really need to re-think your position.
But it is certainly your prerogative to say what you will (except for the lies). Just as it is his, right?Where have we have spun ANYTHING? Where have we behaved like Trump? All we have done is copy his quotes and comment on them.
Dan knows this already, Scott. He's ran out of excuses as have many of Trump's proud base. It's sad to watch....
Of course he knows it, but because he can't defend Trump with facts or reasonable logic, he is left with false accusations.
Where did I say Trump "TOLD" people??? You are making that up aren't you. Did he "encourage" it? Yes, I believe I heard him do that. Also, Snopes says that claim is true.
"THE PRESIDENT: Right. And then I see the disinfectant, where it knocks it out in a minute. One minute. And is there a way we can do something like that, by injection inside or almost a cleaning. Because you see it gets in the lungs and it does a tremendous number on the lungs. So it would be interesting to check that. So, that, you’re going to have to use medical doctors with. But it sounds — it sounds interesting to me."
REMEMBER, this is the President of the United States giving credence to clearly ridiculous ideas. NOBODY, but Trump and his rabid followers, thinks what he says is "interesting" is worthy of consideration.
What do people who know say about it?
Dr. Vin Gupta, a pulmonologist and global health policy expert and NBC News contributor, said:
“This notion of injecting or ingesting any type of cleansing product into the body is irresponsible, and it’s dangerous. It’s a common method that people utilize when they want to kill themselves.”
I have listened to Dr, Sanjay Gupta says the same thing.on several occasions.
"Reckitt Benckiser, the British company that manufacturers Lysol and Dettol, published a statement on its website saying that “under no circumstance should our disinfectant products be administered into the human body”: - IF THIS thing Trump found "interesting" is so benign, why were the makers of Lysol forced to publish that?
If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen, Dan. You voluntarily posted on the topic to defend Trump's outrageous statements. Plus, you have your own"spin and lies" you put forth as truth, so be indignant when called on it,
I don't blame you for not wanting to comment on his latest fiascos though, as there's not too much you can say to defend his tweets and lies. Be proud of him....Once again, an outright lie - the truth is not in you Randy, for I did not defend Trump at all. Just pointed out that the statements being made here were as false as what was being complained about.
As I mentioned elsewhere it kills me to see people crying crocodile tears about how awful Trump is, how he lies and all, and then repeating the same actions themselves. Be proud of yourself for fitting into Trump's shoes so well.
NO, you didn't, not once other than to admit you don't know how to interpret what people say.
Wilderness: Oh so you agree to Trump's methodology of twisting, spinning lying, exaggerating, changing meanings etc, and then you say we are as bad as him.
So you are really caught in a paradox my friend. You defend Trump, then you say we are using the same methodology as he does. Ergo, you like Trump but don't like us when you claim that we do the same as he does.
What part of verbatim quotes don't you understand? There is no spin. How can a virus just go away and not be at zero infections? How many people are infected with polio right now?..zero.
You give us a task to tie it directly to the current cases being "close to zero" (as in the same sentence or paragraph)? So in your world when that can't be done, Trump is vindicated...Long live King Trump.And now you put words in my mouth (again) that were never there. You even claim I defended Trump, when I have done no such thing: everything I've posted here concerns your words, not those of Trump. The only truth in your first paragraph is that I find your methodology similar to his: the rest (that I approve of it) is an outright lie.
Go back, People, and re-read this thread. I took exception at your lie about what Trump said and I said so. I didn't not "defend" Trump: I only commented on what you had to say. If you don't like it pointed out that you are using the same kind of tactics Trump does then don't use them.
Like most people, I can read between the lines. You may not have that ability, but you would be the exception.
You may not have noticed, Wilderness, but NOBODY, including yourself, says precisely what they mean. But normal people can read the context, take into account what has been said before, and draw a reasonably good conclusion as to meaning.
And it is clear that Trump meant to say, wrongly, that the virus was going away.I get that. I also get that anything and everything you choose (choose!) to read into Trumps words is something bad. And somehow you find that reasonable, but nobody else does.
No doubt it IS clear as a bell to you...because that's what you want it to be. As it always is with you - something to continue the Trump bashing with.
But some of us, most of us, will attempt to make calls based on the surrounding topic, the context, and other factors. Not just that we want something to complain about.No, Wilderness, ONLY YOU do not.
How can you possibly overlook that he said:
6 Times between Jan through Mar that HE has the virus under when he obviously DID NOT
5 Times between Feb through Mar that the virus "would go away" or similar words.
1 Time that the WHO death rate was wrong when it was not
1 Time that "he is not concerned"
1 Time that the number of cases were going DOWN, not UP (when they were going up)
How is it that you totally miss his belief that the Pandemic is no big deal? I worry about your objectivity.
"After walking out of Friday's coronavirus briefing without taking questions, President Donald Trump embarked on one of his more noteworthy weekend tweetstorms.
It went like his tweetstorms usually do.
There was self-pity and self-aggrandizement. There were grievances and attacks. And, as is the case so often, there was outlandish dishonesty.
Trump tweeted and retweeted more than 35 times apiece on Saturday and Sunday -- including six deleted tweets recorded by Trump-tracking website Factba.se. His messages were littered with false claims, some of them downright bizarre. Here are fact-checks of the lowlights:"
"Was just informed that the Fake News from the Thursday White House Press Conference had me speaking & asking questions of Dr. Deborah Birx. Wrong, I was speaking to our Laboratory expert, not Deborah, about sunlight etc. & the CoronaVirus. The Lamestream Media is corrupt & sick!" he wrote on Twitter." - HE IS LYING, I watched him, so did the everybody else. And it is Trump who is Corrupt & Sick
""I work from early in the morning until late at night, haven't left the White House in many months (except to launch Hospital Ship Comfort) in order to take care of Trade Deals, Military Rebuilding etc..." - Again False. First, he spends a whole lot of time watching TV and tweeting. Second, he held a rally in NC on Mar 2; was in PA on Mar 5; Georgia on Mar 6; Mar a Lago on Mar 7 & 8; Orlando on Mar 9; FEMA on Mar 19; then in February he was in India, had five rallies around the country, and played a lot of golf.
"Over three tweets, Trump repeated his familiar complaint about how reporters were awarded the Pulitzer Prize for their coverage of the Trump-Russia story -- except, instead of the Pulitzer, Trump four times used the word "Noble," apparently misspelling "Nobel."
After he was roundly mocked for both the spelling error and the prize mix-up, Trump deleted the tweets. But he also offered a ridiculous explanation: he had intentionally used "Noble," as "sarcasm."
"Does anybody get the meaning of what a so-called Noble (not Nobel) Prize is, especially as it pertains to Reporters and Journalists? Noble is defined as, 'having or showing fine personal qualities or high moral principles and ideals.' Does sarcasm ever work?" - Like his Friday lie that he was being "sarcastic" when he mused about people injecting disinfectant, this is obvious nonsense. There was no indication he was being sarcastic in the tweets about the "Noble."Only fools will buy his excuses,Scott, but there seems to be many of his base trying to.
ON 4/27/2020 Trump releases is next set of misinformation - and Pence joined him.
Starting with Pence: "(Trump said the number of tests conducted would soon be much more than double the current level.)
A reporter then asked Pence what went wrong before -- after his early-March claims that four million tests would be available by the following week. Pence said last Friday, a month and a half after those March comments, that 5.1 million Americans had been tested.
Pence responded Monday: "I appreciate the question, but it represents a misunderstanding on your part and frankly the -- a lot of people in the public's part -- about the difference between having a test versus the ability to actually process the test."
Pence said "the old system" was not able to process the tests at the necessary volume. When a reporter pressed him, asking if he had just been talking in March "about tests being sent out, not actually being completed," Pence said that was correct." - If there was a misunderstanding, Pence's own remarks helped create it. When Pence said on March 9 and on March 10 that 4 million tests would be distributed before the end of the week (that would have been by MARCH 13). This is now the end of April, in addition to 1 million already distributed, he did not explain that those millions of tests could not be processed anytime soon. (misleading at best)
"At Monday's news conference, the President was asked about China's role in the pandemic. Trump repeated his regular false claim that the US "never took in 10 cents from China" before he took office." - Facts First: Not only are Americans bearing most of the cost of Trump's tariffs but the US has also had tariffs on China for more than two centuries, generating an average of $12 billion a year from 2007 to 2016.
"Trump also mentioned his oft-repeated false claim about placing travel restrictions on China due to the coronavirus.
He claimed during Monday's news conference that "we closed the border," adding: "We put a ban on China, other than our citizens coming in." - While he did put SOME restrictions on travel, it was hardly a "ban"
""I could tell you that Nancy Pelosi was dancing in the streets in Chinatown. She wanted to go. 'Let's go out and party.' Now that was late into February, so you don't mention that. But you could mention that," Trump said." - Facts First: There is no available footage of Pelosi dancing in the streets of San Francisco's Chinatown during her February 24 visit, and she did not call for people to "go out and party." She did visit the neighborhood amid concerns of rising anti-Chinese bigotry, and she did encourage people to visit the area, but Trump has repeatedly exaggerated what she said and did. During her trip, Pelosi walked around Chinatown, visited businesses and a temple, and ate at a dim sum restaurant.
"During Monday's news conference, Trump was asked about comments former Vice President Joe Biden made that he believes Trump may try to delay November's presidential election. Trump said he hadn't thought about changing the date and then launched into a new false claim -- suggesting that Biden didn't make those comments himself.
"That was just made-up propaganda. Not by him, but by some of the many people that are working, writing little statements," Trump said, later adding: "He didn't make those statements. But somebody did. But they said he made it." - Trump just can't stop lying. "Facts First: Biden did make those exact statements at a virtual fundraiser last week, according to a pool report. "Mark my words: I think he is going to try to kick back the election somehow, come up with some rationale why it can't be held," Biden said at the virtual event."It's actually amazing to see a world without world leaders. Today we face a huge crisis and America, Russia and China are nowhere to be seen on the world stage..
Europe is struggling to hold it together as the North, South and East have different ideas about the rescue budget. and the UK has disappeared too.
Such a small virus with huge consequences. l.
Trump doesn't understand what's happening nor will he listen to scientists unless they do what he suggests...in the meantime Blaming other countries or organizations. Johnson is nowhere to be seen or heard. Putin, does he still exist? And what was the name again from the leader of China? The one in North-Korea is also lost and The Dutch prime minister is a disgrace in helping Europe.
From the big countries the only world leader to me who kept a strong, sensible, and empathetic leadership is Angela Merkel. (could it be because she has a science background...)The 4/28/2020 installment of Trump Lies, Distortions, and Misinformation.
ON FAUCI - "You go back, and you take a look at even professionals like Anthony were saying, 'This is no problem.' This was late in February. This is no problem. This is going to blow over." - Facts First: Trump is wrong that Fauci publicly said the virus was "no problem" and would "blow over." What did Fauce REALLY say? "At this moment, there's no need to change anything that you're doing on a day by day basis. Right now, the risk is still low," Fauci said, "but this could change. I've said that many times even on this program."
"When you start to see community spread, this could change and force you to become much more attentive to doing things that would protect you from spread."
When asked how the outbreak would end, Fauci stated that the situation could escalate." Something Trump was NOT saying. He was saying he had it under control and the virus would disappear.
ON GOING TO ZERO - ""When you have 15 people, and the 15 within a couple of days is going to be down to close to zero, that's a pretty good job we've done." When challenged about this false claim Trump responded "It will go down to zero, ultimately,[/b[" Notice how Trump moved from "a couple of days" to "ultimately". - Facts First: Cases are now over 1 million!
ON TESTING - "Trump argued once again that any coronavirus testing issues were the fault of others, claiming, "We inherited a very broken test." - Trump needs to understand that his was a "novel" virus and therefore [b]there was no test to inherent. Instead, the CDC developed a flawed test rather than use one approved by WHO.
IF YOU REPEAT A LIE OFTEN ENOUGH ... "Speaking in the East Room Tuesday afternoon, he claimed that he "closed down" the US and its borders, adding, "I did a ban on China from coming in, other than US citizens." - It was NOT a BAN, it was limited travel restrictions with lots of holes in it.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/28/politics … index.htmlAnother Lie from 4/28/2020 - ""Many very good experts, very good people too, said this would never affect the United States," Trump told CNN's Jim Acosta on Tuesday. "The experts got it wrong. A lot of people got it wrong and a lot of people didn't know it would be this serious." - Such an obvious lie. He had been briefed many times on the potential for a massive outbreak in America from mid-January!
You know you can get into a heap of trouble for bugging the white house so you can report on everything Trump heard or was told.
So Trump didn't get warnings about the virus? Okay.
It was a question in response to your last comment, Dan. Or did you seriously believe Scott bugged the WH?
No I don't, but how else would he know Trump has never been told "this would never affect the United States,"? By "Many very good experts, very good people too"?
The only thing I can think of is that he has everywhere Trump has been (including the entire White House) bugged, and has gone through those tapes hour by hour, since Jan. 1. Surely he wouldn't make such a claim unless he knows that Trump was never told that!I thought he was referencing Jim Acosta's interview with Trump in the post you responded to?
Randy: Wilderness can't defend Trump and he knows it. Therefore he is deflecting by questioning the sources of the facts and how they were collected.
He is implying that the only way Scott could have come across that information is to bug the White House. That is such a weak ploy and he knows it. Everyday, Trump comes out with more lies. I can't even keep up with him anymore.
And then he accuses me of using Trump's tactics in my comments. That is such a false equivalence.You'll see more desperate measures to defend Trump in the months to come, Mike. Shar already bowed out of the political forums, and some notables--who post memes and other pro-Trump propaganda--have been missing for a while.
Yes she did. Perhaps tired of being told she was defending Trump by pointing out the fallacies in the Trump Haters posts. I suppose that is defending Trump, though, by insisting on truth from those making claims. I guess.
Or not.She was indignant for being proved wrong, Dan. Like many other Trump enablers....
Oh, I don't think Trump needs anyone to enable him - he does that quite well all by himself! I'm surprised you didn't notice...perhaps you were looking too hard for something to gripe about.
1. Regarding "looking hard". As I have said before, we don't have to look hard at all since Trump gives us wonderful fodder every day.
2. If YOU enablers didn't support Trump, then he wouldn't be destroying the country, would he?I haven't supported him - only called you on your lies.
He isn't "destroying the country" - he is doing more good than the last half-dozen presidents have.You know as well as I do, even if you refuse to discuss his accomplishments. Nevertheless:
He is cutting illegal border crossings.
He is promoting fair trade agreements
He has taken China to task for intellectual theft
He promotes America rather than other countries
His actions produced the lowest unemployment seen in decades and the lowest black unemployment ever.
That's a starter. Now go ahead and tell us that those things are NOT good for America, or that Obama did them, not Trump.Wilderness: It's apparent you used points from Trump's state of the union speech. So here is the Fact Check on his speech.
https://www.factcheck.org/2020/02/factc … e-union-3/I thought those stats sounded familiar. Your link puts things in the correct perspective, Mike. Unless one believes Trump's words, of course.
Of course they sound familiar! Would you expect Trump to exclaim over his failures? No - he will mention his successes.
But as far as "perspective" - check my previous reply, where the link simply goes into a different topic, but one close enough that if a gullible readers isn't paying attention they'll swallow it as something it is not.No, I expect him to embellish his failures to make himself believe them to be successes. A gullible supporter will believe him as well.
Wilderness: You didn't read down far enough to the analysis. Scroll down and read the analysis. And after that, then scroll down further and see the source for the claims. You will see that you are the one who is weasel-wording the facts.
But all of this really doesn't matter because what you have listed as Trump's great accomplishments was in the past and doesn't apply to the Trump of today.
He has made a soup sandwich out of trying to manage this crisis by lying, playing to his bases fantasies, self-aggrandizing, and blaming others for his lack of leadership.
He is putting his re-election above the lives of others. He and his team are the least qualified to handle this crisis, excluding Faucii and Birx. They have no plan other than to get him re-elected. When it comes to leadership in this crisis, he doesn't hold a candle to Cuomo and Newsome.Ah. So the greatest disease disaster in recent history hits and because he didn't do what you think he should have all of his previous accomplishments don't count.
Should I be surprised at your reaction, even to the point of your reading his mind once more?What previous accomplishments? He has done very little that is good for America. His greatest accomplishment from where I sit is help depopulate the world. Look how many undocumented men, women, and children he has helped kill. Look at how many Kurdish dies as a result of him abandoning them. Look at how many Americans have died needless deaths because he was so very slow to (and in many cases failed) to act to protect us from the virus.
Maybe you think he should be like that Las Vegas mayor who said it wasn't her job to protect the people who elected her.
But beyond that, let's say a very successful and beloved priest murders someone in cold blood (there is a similarity here with Trump's incompetence). Are you saying that because he did good deeds before, he should be forgiven his murder??Yes, I know. I gave you a list of accomplishments, you provided a link talking about other things and think that shows he has done nothing. You even go on to now claim he is killing people - yet another lie from a Trump copy.
What else should I expect? Certainly not a rational, well thought out analysis of his performance!I searched on accomplishment and found this:
He is cutting illegal border crossings --> AFTER increasing them well above what Obama left him
He is promoting fair trade agreements --> I don't know about the "fair" part of that but he has broken many trade promises America has previously made to other nations - terrible{/b]
He has taken China to task for intellectual theft --> [b]I will agree with that, but so have previous presidents
He promotes America rather than other countries --> As has every President before him, so what is new?
His actions produced the lowest unemployment seen in decades and the lowest black unemployment ever. --> Only after Obama gave him a great start on that path. On the other hand, Obama had to take an almost depression and skyrocketing unemployment and turn it around leading to the Longest recover in American history which brought with it the lowest unemployment in a very long time as well as the longest unbroken string of employment gains in history. Trump can make No Such Claim, can he?
Bottom line, it is OBAMA who did great stuff, Trump has done, well, nothing. And now he is killing Americans with his terrible response to Covid."AFTER increasing them well above what Obama left him"
You mean after Trump improved the economy so that there was more incentive to enter than ever before? Leaving out a vital part of the information, aren't you? The whole story is usually important, you know.
"He has taken China to task for intellectual theft --> I will agree with that, but so have previous presidents"
Perhaps they did, though I certainly never heard of it. And the result of their actions? The Chinese never changed a thing and kept right on stealing. If nothing else we got a better trade deal out of Trump's effort - the others just got China to sell us more while accepting excuses for them to buy less.
"As has every President before him, so what is new?"
Of course, as Obama apologized the world round for US actions, as he gave in to every demand made and financed the rest of the world on our dollar. As he made trade agreements favoring everyone but the US. Right!
And finally, of course Obama is responsible for the lowest unemployment in recent history. And of course he did wonders for Black unemployment. The only thing Obama did was buy his way out of a recession - a tried and true tactic, though under his great leadership we got nothing for it. No new infrastructure, no new museums or highways...nothing but richer banks and corporations. At least in the past we got dams, the interstate highway system, etc. Obama gave us nothing.
But that's what I said, isn't it? You will give Obama credit for everything Trump has accomplished. Does it make you happy to spin it into what it isn't, just to demonize Trump?No, I don't mean after Trump "improved" the economy. His record is no better, and in some ways is worse, than Obama's (and now its worse) so that does NOT qualify as an improvement.
-- Trump NEVER had 5% quarterly growth - Obama did once
-- Trump NEVER had 4% quarterly growth - Obama did three times.
-- Trump NEVER had quarterly growth > 3..5% - Obama did six times
-- Trump's net trade is worse than Obama's
So tell me something that is true.
What proof do you have that China has changed their ways regarding intellectual property after Trump bankrupt so many farmers with his trade war?
I don't give Obama credit for anything Trump has accomplished - mainly because Trump has not accomplished anything that is noteworthy.
"Of course, as Obama apologized the world round for US actions, as he gave in to every demand made and financed the rest of the world on our dollar ..." - THAT, of course, are longstanding FALSE conservative talking points.
"As he made trade agreements favoring everyone but the US. Right!" - THAT is not true either, just a Trump lie.
"And finally, of course Obama is responsible for the lowest unemployment in recent history. " - WHERE did I say that???? You are making things up again. Just to REFRESH your memory I said something like "Obama set the stage for the results that have occured during Trump's administration. So long as the next president didn't screw things up too bad, ANY president would have seen the same results. Trump didn't screw things up enough to alter the downward unemployment slope.
"The only thing Obama did was buy his way out of a recession" - YOUR implication is that that was a bad thing. You must be REALLY pissed at Trump now for "buying" his way out of the covid crisis.
"No new infrastructure, " - Thanks to the Republican Congress. It is not like Obama and the Democrats didn't try.
As to what Obama "gave" us, I offer this
http://hub.me/ablPBOf course - Obama had a recession to recover from, making it fairly easy to have high GPD numbers. Trump reached employment/unemployment numbers not seen for decades, if ever, and GDP numbers everyone predicted we would never see again, but it was because of Obama's work in over regulating and over taxing business which encouraged business to expand/return to the country. Makes perfect sense! (That's sarcasm if you didn't pick it up.)
"And finally, of course Obama is responsible for the lowest unemployment in recent history. " - WHERE did I say that????
You missed the sarcasm; Obama did nothing of the sort yet you give him credit for it anyway.
No, Obama did the right thing by buying his way out of the recession. I just wish we had something show for the expenditure - in previous times we did, but we have nothing to show for Obama's spending. No new infrastructure, no new space accomplishments, nothing but more money for huge corporations and, of course, his worthless ACA that did nothing to add to health care for any but a tiny minority while spending billions.Wilderness: What does Trump have to show for all of his spending? Answer: No new infrastructure, no new space accomplishments, nothing but more money for huge corporations ...Funny I just copied that from your reply.
Are you trying to insinuate that the "virus stimulus" is in the same category, the same type of action, as a recession recovery?
Gotta love that "nothing but more money for huge corporations" as I open my $2400 stimulus check. As my neighbor sits home drawing more in unemployment that he was earning. As my daughter in law applies for a grant to help her small business. Typical spin and falsehood from the liberal side.Wilderness: You do know there is no such thing as a free lunch? There is a price we pay for everything. Here is Trump's debt and counting.
[url=usdebtclock.org/url]Wilderness: You do know there is no such thing as a free lunch. There is a price we pay for everything. Here is Trump's debt and counting. The federal debt to GDP ratio in 2000 was 58.14%. It is now 116.60%. But it's O.K. because Trump doesn't deal in numbers, except the ones he makes up.
https://usdebtclock.org/
" Obama had a recession to recover from, making it fairly easy to have high GPD numbers. " - THAT might be true if we were talking about 2010 or 2011, which you are clearly ignoring. But the fact is from 2012 on, we were recovered and that is when Obama had all of those great numbers, numbers Trump has never achieved.
"You missed the sarcasm; Obama did nothing of the sort yet you give him credit for it anyway." - AND WHERE did I give him credit for it other than setting the stage??? YOU are making things up again.
" I just wish we had something show for the expenditure" - SO YOU think:
-- The longest period of GDP growth in American history is nothing?
-- The longest period of consecutive job growth in American history is nothing?
-- Record breaking stock market recovery is nothing?
Amazing!!
Yet you think Trump policies that bankrupt farmers is a good thing
Yet you think Trump policies that directly lead to many deaths of men, women, and children are a good thing?
Yet you think that making an enemy of the world is a good thing?
Yet you think politicizing the Justice Department, DOD, the Intel community and every other thing Trump sets his eyes on is a good thing?
Yet you think giving tax breaks to corporations so they can buy back their stock and pay their overpaid executives even more money is a good thing?
Yet you think giving millionaires and billionaires huge tax breaks while giving 99% of the rest of Americans next to nothing is a good thing?
Yet you think denying millions of people adequate (or even any) health insurance is a good thing?
What an interesting, upside down world you live in Wilderness.All I can say to this list of imagination is to wonder how you will spin it to give Obama the credit when our economy recovers from the virus shutdown. Better start working on that - it won't be easy. I'm sure you will find a way, though.
Do you believe Trump will mount a fast economic recovery? He didn't have to before....
I believe the economy will take at least a year to recover. Perhaps much more, depending on if we see another surge in the virus.
No, all he had to do before was produce an economy and workforce the likes of which we hadn't seen for decades. And if you are black, the likes of which we had NEVER seen.He inherited a growing economy, Dan. He didn't simply "produce" it. Now we'll see what a stable genius he really is.
Right. Growing at a snails pace, in the slowest recession/depression recovery in history. And he turned out the highest employment/lowest unemployment if most of our memories.
But that was Obama's work, of course, when he produced that snail like recovery, right?We'll see how well he does with a recession like Obama inherited from Dubya.....perhaps. But we may see the same thing several democrat POTUS's had to deal with after conservative administrations ruined the economy.
Should have seen that coming, shouldn't I? Always the "conservative administrations" ruining the economy as liberals turn us into a socialistic state with no rewards for hard work and no reason to keep business in the country.
Wilderness: What do you call the stimulus checks? They are pure socialism and the biggest part of them go to corporations. Conservatives create the financial mess and liberals end up bailing them out.
It happened with Reagan, and George W. Why, because they deregulate the financial markets so corporations can get their big bucks. Look what Paulson did with his bailout, he paid off the commissions to all the banks and mortgage companies that were involved in sub-prime and all the other exotic instruments. That is what Obama inherited and cleaned it up for Trump.You forgot to mention that banks and mortgage companies were required to make too many sub-prime mortgages, required by congress. Or that banks objected, saying it could not be sustained.
Or does that tiny portion of "The Whole Story" not fit with only conservatives ruining the economy and must be left out as a result?Wilderness: Who was in control of congress at the time? It was the Bliely Leach Gramm Act, all republicans who removed the last remnants of the Glass Stegall Act which prevented banks and investment companies from co-mingle their assets. That is the whole story. Without that, there would have been no sub-prime mortgages and other exotic instruments to scre*w the public. They thought they could mitigate the risk by repacking loans into Collateralize Debt Obligations. But it didn't work...did it? You can thank your conservative buddies for that.
Yes it was. All those bad loans "trickled" down to bite us all and create the biggest recession since the 30's.
Indeed, damn those democrats controlling congress and the WH during these times!
Unlike your modus operandi (always assign blame to Trump, anyone not on the bandwagon bashing him and any Republican in general) I made no mention of the party of the majority in congress. Only that the President was not guilty of doing anything wrong (except perhaps signing the bills). I didn't even assign blame, except to congress as a whole; the entity that caused the damage.
I thought we were discussing causes of bad economies the Dem. POTUS's inherited? I didn't mention Trump in the past recessions either.
Give me an example of the last Dem. POTUS who inherited a growing economy from the Right?No, we were discussing the causes of the last big recession and whether it was the fault of the then president, as was implied.
Okay, then I blame Dubya and his go-along-with Congress both. The Left had very little chance of ruining the economy as they were basically powerless during this time.
Randy, I know you will hate me, but if you blame Bush, you have to blame Clinton as well - he signed the infamous bill that repealed Glass-Stengal.
I'll give them both a bit of credit then. Where credit is due...but then there was Haliburton to throw into the equation. I'd never heard of a no-bid contract before they received one. It smelled to high heaven when the VP's old company got the job.
This cost an untold amount of money to be syphoned off by Bush's cronies, not to mention the Katrina fiasco. It all adds up.I was a career civil servant (Air Force) and worked as a cost and economic analyst in support of procurement.
Yes, there are certain "no-bid" contracts but they have to meet stringent criteria. One is that it must be proved there is no other alternative. Somehow, I bet there were many alternatives to Halliburton since they don't have a unique skill set. So yes, it smells as did many of the Katrina contracts did.Those $14 peanut butter sandwiches were superb during Katrina! Along with the $50 cases of coke made in-country during Desert Storm. Haliburton charged $1200 a day for guards, then subcontracted the jobs out to another contractor who took his cut and passed the jobs on to another contractor, and so on through more contractors until the last one paid $125 a day for African security people.
In other words, the US paid Haliburton an extra $1075 a day for a $125 job. Just a tiny example of huge sums being wasted to feather the pockets of Dubya's cronies. Brilliant economics!
For sure. The president created and passed those ridiculous laws forcing sub-par loans onto banks. Makes perfect sense that he would simply by-pass congress, sneak into the federal register, and write in those laws and rules.
Did you miss the word "Congress" in my comment?
"Makes perfect sense that he would simply by-pass congress, sneak into the federal register, and write in those laws and rules." - Why not?? Trump does it all of the time. If he could, he would get rid of Congress as an impediment to his imperial rule.
Also Randy, remember that Wilderness has no problem with Red-Lining; it is just one of those things blacks have to live with because they are lower on the social hierarchy (NOT!)
Whether Republican or Democrat, it was NOT the president. Which is what you implied when you blamed the White House for what happened.
No, it is NOT the "whole story". The "whole story" includes congressional rules passed to include a requirement that far too high a percentage of sub par loans had to be made, forcing loan institutions to make low quality loans. And the banks reply to those rules, replies that told congress what would happen with the misbegotten attempt to ensure everybody could have a house whether they could pay for it or not. And then DID happen.
The rest came AFTER - AFTER the damage was done with thousands of loans made to people that could not make the payments.
And YOU forgot to mention that those loans where but a small percentage of all of the bad subprime mortgages. So try again at addressing "The Whole Story".
Unfortunately, that is not true. Subprime mortgages cannot be a subset of subprime mortgages.
I suppose you could support, to at least some degree, that variable rate mortgages absolutely destined to rise to an unsustainable level of interest is a subset, but you must then also claim that people are to stupid to do simple arithmetic. Is that your claim?Are you saying that every subprime loan 1) was given to people with bad credit with no ability to pay back or 2) failed??
I am not the fool you think I am; there are virtually no cases of 100% in anything to do with human interaction and that includes financial matters.
Well it sounded like 100% . I am not sure else to take "Unfortunately, that is not true. Subprime mortgages cannot be a subset of subprime mortgages." in response to my true statement that the subprimes to prevent Redlining by some banks is only a small percentage of the total subprimes issue.
So what is the percentage of Redline subprimes which you claim caused the 2008 Great Recession? Is it 90%? 80%? 70%? What is it?
One of the six common causes behind ALL major financially-based recessions are:
1. Greed
2. Easy Credit (gov't policy)
3. An asset which people find valuable (most of time this is some form of real estate) causing an asset bubble
4. Uncontrolled speculation on that asset (gov't policy)
5. A poorly regulated financial sector (gov't policy)
6. A precipitating action which bursts the asset bubble.
In almost all cases, if any one of these six are missing, there will be no recession, or if there is one, it will be minor.
https://hubpages.com/politics/A-Short-H … eir-Causes
"Always the "conservative administrations" ruining the economy " - [b]Historically, that is true.
From my hub and book:
* Depression of 1807
* Depression of 1815
* Recession of 1822
* Panic of 1825
* Long Depression of 1873 - 1885
* Panic 1896
* Recession of 1921
* Great Depression on 1929
* Recession of 1958 followed by the Recession of 1960
* Recession of 1973
* Great Recession of 2008
The couple of recessions before 1807 where from external causes and the few recessions in between the dates listed were from non-financial causes (like Covid will be for the Recession of 2020) or under liberal Republican admininstration.
So, do you want to rethink your position on the goodness of conservative economics?
Right, growing at a small, BUT SUSTAINABLE pace. You forgot some key words there.
You also forgot to mention Trump is also growing, at least through 2019, at a small, but sustainable pace. Why did you forget to mention that? Because it makes Trump look bad in your eyes.
BTW - I do not put the current economic crises on Trump like I do the previous one on Conservatives. What I will "probably" put on him is how deep and long it will be through his very slow and counterproductive response. I need more data to be sure.
What is without question Trump's fault is thousands of needless deaths because his chaotic response and lack of leadership.I have asked on these forums several times just what the poster would have done as President, given the same information and political climate Trump has, during the first month or two of the Corona problem. Not a single person has answered with anything...except "I would have followed the playbook" with giving any specific information.
Can you do better? Given the circumstances, what would YOU have done? And precisely how would it have saved "thousands of needless deaths"?DEFLECTION, but I will answer anyway (I am talking about January actions)
1. I would have set up the coronavirus task force as soon as I have been briefed that a pandemic was coming. And put a scientist in charge (or at the very least Azar)
2. I would have gathered the governors and developed a comprehensive national plan on how the nation was going to respond
3. I would have immediately started the hunt for a vaccine in America
4. I would have accepted the WHO testing protocol while developing one ourselves.
5. I would have gotten the ball rolling to ramp up to testing whatever the number scientists said was need, which I think is now in excess of 500,000 a day. In April, the average is 146,000 per day. So much for Trump's statement that we don't need anymore testing.
6. I would not have Downplayed the seriousness of the pandemic as Trump has done and still doing
7. I would have shown national leadership from day on.
8. I would have opened up the national stockpile (which belongs to Americans, btw) in January.
In February when we saw how things were spreading all over the world, I would have put in more comprehensive travel restriction on all incoming flights.
Trump did none of those things.Then you are a fool.
1) You would spend millions of dollars...on a report from the lying Chinese that there was a disease that might spread.
2) You would have spent millions more in personal meetings with governors over a matter with any specifics at all, and without any knowledge of what might be required.
3) You would have started a hunt for a vaccine...without any information of what it would be for. No DNA, no samples, no nothing.
4) You would accept the protocols from a political entity more interest in protecting China than the world.
5) You would have "gotten the ball rolling" to ramp up testing. Sure you would...without having a test to use.
6) You would have scared the country witless with endless claims of armageddon.
7) You don't have any leadership to show, given your response to 1-6.
8) You would have given the entire stockpile to NYC. A great move...if you care more for politics than anything else.
You would have increased restrictions on incoming flights...and been sued silly by Americans all over the world including those in this country that wanted relatives from Europe, Australia, and anywhere the pandemic had taken a hard hold.
A great plan...if reality is not a part of it and you're willing to kill the economy on reports of a "what if" from China.1) No, unlike you I listened to the healthcare professionals..
2) Given all of the briefings Trump received I suspect there was quite a bit of information available.
3) There was all of that available - that is why they new it came from bats
4) Shows how much you know. The protocols WHO was offering were developed by Germany
5) There was a test to use in January.
6.) There you go making things up again. I didn't say there was going to be an armageddon now did I? I said I wouldn't LIE to America like Trump has.
7.) How do you know that??
8) Again you are making things up - why do you keep saying that. I said no such thing now did I?3) My bad - I had thought the DNA was available only later on.
But why would you claim no one was working on a vaccine? "Backed by a fresh $9 million grant from the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI), which receives money from public and private funding, Inovio Pharmaceuticals will begin developing the vaccine along with University of Pennsylvania-based research facility, the Wistar Institute, to ensure that it is available within the next few months."
There were at least 2.
https://www.foxnews.com/health/coronavi … sequencing
published Jan 29. Or were they just lying in that report?
Or were you saying that Trump (and you) should have hit his private bio lab and done the work himself, as you would have done?Sometime in January is when first I heard they had traced the DNA back to the bats because of its very close similarity to SARS.
I didn't say NO vaccine was being sought, just not by Trump. He didn't start his search until much later (sometime in February). The fact that some of the companies you mention receive public money doesn't mean it was a Trump initiative.
And now Trump is ignoring the international effort and going it alone (China seems to be doing the same thing)I recall the bats. I also recall hearing, later on, that it likely isn't true.
As far as trying for a vaccine, the CDC was working on it early on. Again, what do you expect Trump to do: hide out in his private lab until he finds one? He gave the task to our very best to find a solution; that they haven't done so is his fault, right?I heard the same thing ... from right-wing pendents. I listen to the scientist. Did you know your side is waging a war against Remdesivir? Bad-mouthing it ever chance they get.
Wrong again. All Trump had to do was continue what Obama started. ANY president after Obama, assuming they didn't screw up the economy, would have have had the same result as Trump (but without all of the farm bankruptcies he caused)
Without question, had Clinton won and we had the exact same economy as Trump had in 2019, without the trade war, Conservatives would be whining about how poorly it is doing. They would ask were are the 4% quarters Obama had? Where are the 5% quarters.Sure they would have. After all, business wants massive regulation, tremendous taxes of their profits and trade policies favoring every nation but the US. That's why they never left the country for greener pastures, after all!
Surely you can imagine just how foolish such statements are?Businesses and you want no regulation, the environment, social justice, fair play be damned. After all, you are a social Darwinian.
In any case, businesses seemed to be doing just fine under those so-called "massive regulations" now weren't they . And now that they are all gone, they aren't doing any better, are they? And now, pollution of all types is starting to rise. (It took coronavirus to clean the air temporarily),
And those so-called "tremendous taxes" fallacy. Why is it that the average corporate rate was about 18%?? Why did all that tax refund get spent on stock buybacks making stock owners wealthier and on much higher salaries to overpaid senior executives. Why DIDN'T they reinvest the money like was promised?Sure, businesses were doing just fine...as they left the country in droves. Doing fine in their new digs across the ocean.
Perhaps the average corporate tax rate was 18% because there no profits to be made.
Buying stock, whether in a company your already control or in a totally new one, IS an investment.Boy, what an unreality you live in.
Corporations were doing great after Obama beat the Great 2008 Conservative Recession into submission. Record profits for many corporations
Buying back your own stock by DEFINITION is not investment by any stretch. I is simply a way to drive up stock prices. In any case, the GDP reports are pretty clear there was no investment.Sure they were. After they took their manufacturing and operations overseas so they could earn something. Can you possibly believe that high taxes and regulation produce higher profits (for the one regulated and taxed, not their competition)?
Of course buying stock is not an "investment"...if you never gamble. For the millions that do gamble in the market it is considered an investment.Wilderness: Let's be clear. All of Trump's decision making and actions about the Corona Virus are based on how he can best get re-elected. He could care less about the people. He does not have the capacity for compassion and empathy.
His attacks, lashing out of to his opponents, firing the deputy IG's his delays, his controlling the press briefings and turning them into a campaign rallies, is for one thing only to get re-elected.
He laments about his great economy and presidency like King Arthur in Camelot. What he needs to do is put aside his politics and save the people. But he is not capable of doing that. So therefore, he is not the kind of leader we need right now. He and his staff don't have the right stuff to lead us out of this crisis."All of Trump's decision making and actions about the Corona Virus are based on how he can best get re-elected."
Nice statement. You have proof of his intentions? Or is just another opinion, based on a dislike of him? This kind of thing, being presented as factual, is yet another example of spin and untruth presented by you. You asked for a sample; here is one. The next paragraph is another.Wilderness: Here is the difference between an effective leader and Trump. Yes it is my observation, but also verifiable. If you watch the real news instead of Trump's state run propaganda channels.
Coumo’s Leadership:
1. He is analytical
2. Data driven
3. Unemotional
4. Compassionate
5. Empathetic
6. Answer questions truthfully
7. Is articulate
8. Plans for coming events
9. Supports his people
10. Apolitical
11. Uses powerpoints with graphs and charts to explain complex issues
12. Delegates responsibility
13. Makes decisions about the virus based on data and the science
14. If makes mistake will blame himself
15. Understands supply chain issues and tries to work around them
Trump’s Leadership
1. Lies constantly
2. Exaggerates constantly
3. Is impulsive
4. Requires constant self-adoration
5. Attacks those who criticize him
6. Plays the victim
7. Is revengeful
8. Does not support his people
9. Has constant turnover of staff
10. Inarticulate
11. Goes off script
12. Fakes amnesia
13. Is not a team player
14. Hates the science and data of the virus and makes decisions based on his gut feelings
15. Does not know how to use powerpoints
16. Uses tariffs to punish China
17. Starts and believes in conspiracy theories against him
18. Believes he is the supreme leader
19. Plays to his base’s fantasies
20. Motivation is politically driven to get re-elected
21. Has no plan, but decrees orders
22. Does not understand supply chain issues and has no work-around.
23. If makes mistake will blame othersYou forgot to include that Cuomo will cry and stomp his feet until he has all the resources of the nation stored in his warehouses. The rest of the people mean nothing to him.
I particularly like that Trump sees conspiracies against him...as the media conspires to spin everything the show against him. And, of course, it is [ii]extremely[/i] important to be proficient in PowerPoint - what is a leader that can't make a powerpoint presentation?And Trump will play his usual blame game and "poor me" trying to get sympathy from his base. Everyone else sees through it...
Trump supporters buy it hook, line, and sinker.
Wilderness: Powerpoint is a means of communication to the public. As they say a picture is worth a thousand words. Cuomo uses power points to explain complex concepts like R naught to the public.
If they understand that, they understand how quickly this virus can spread. I don't believe Trump can still explain what it is. If you ever watched Cuomo's presentations, you would understand how important they are and not use sarcasm to belittle them.
Trump would probably make a good leader in a war where his men are trapped and it is a do or die situation that they come out with all guns blazing. That is the kind of leader he is. All or nothing at all and totally fanatical to take out his enemy.That's what I said (although sarcastically) - a president that can't produce a fine powerpoint presentation is no president at all. Only a president that can do that can understand how quickly a virus can spread - being able to use that software is a vital part of understanding pandemics and viruses.
I trust you understand how silly that sounds. How did we ever function without Microsoft?The president doesn't want fine PowerPoint presentations. He has thrown many a briefer out of his office for using such help aids to help him understand something. Problem is, he just doesn't want to understand as has been obvious to even a casual observer.
Wilderness: I hate to tell you this. If you think that power points are used to calculate how fast a virus can spread, then you have just shown your ignorance as to what that software is about. However it is used by scientist and other professionals who want to present complex concepts to their viewing audience.
As far as Trump's science ability goes, please read this.
Trump says he shares his famed uncle’s science genius. A friend says the uncle ‘would have been horrified.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics … r-BB13z5ohWilderness: Feast your eyes on this. This is what a professional leader does.
https://www.fastcompany.com/90483382/th … owerpointsYou're the one that gave a powerpoint presentation as an example of great leadership, not me. You're the one that insinuated it is necessary for controlling the virus, not me.
I found it ridiculous and said so.Wilderness: I never said that. Please copy and paste where I said that. How in the h*ll is presentation software going to be used to control the virus? That isn't even an argument but does show your desperation to defend this out of control president.
Not the presentation itself; the ability to create that presentation. You promote it as a great value Obama had and Trump doesn't. Although I have grave doubts that Obama created any himself - he merely used tools someone else created.
(Do you need me to copy/paste what you wrote?)Wilderness: It's apparent you know nothing about powerpoints. It doesn't matter who creates them. It could be the art department or graphics department. It is the contents that is given the them is what is important and how they are presented by the user. It's apparent Trump has none of the skills or resources.
Here is what he presented on April 13 at the task force briefing. That's his extent of using graphics media. It was to aggrandize him and to put down others. It had nothing to do with the briefing. He was using the briefings time slot to campaign for himself.
https://youtu.be/LUXsgVA8lN8
https://youtu.be/ZUfV1i62hKwAgain, it wasn't me that made the comment; it was you that put Obama's use (and implied creation) of the presentation as a necessary ability to be president and solve the Corona emergency.
I only poked fun at the idea.Wilderness: O.K. Now i'm going to ask you to copy and paste where I said that. You are saying I implied that. But it was by your inference that you came to that conclusion. How you interpret what I said is your problem not mine.
You know why the real media doesn't like Trump? Because from the very beginning of his term, he has called them the fake news, when in fact, they are the real news and the fake news is really Trump's propaganda channel.
If you were a reporter or a journalist that was trying to do a good job, how would you like to be called the fake news?
Fox news is run by the Murdoch family who's mission is to denigrate democrats and promote republicans and now Trump. The virus could care less who's side you are on, but Trump and his cohorts want to make this political so that he can get re-elected at the cost of forsaking human lives as long as he can get his economy up and running. He is very dangerous at this point in time. What would you rather have an economy or saving lives?Sure! Under Cuomo's great leadership (re: Corona Virus) we see:
"11. Uses powerpoints with graphs and charts to explain complex issues"
Under Trump's lack of leadership we find:
"15. Does not know how to use powerpoints" (although I would submit you haven't a clue if he can or not; only that he has not done so in the past with his media reports.)
https://hubpages.com/education/forum/34 … ost4136616
Want to try again and claim you didn't say it?
The rest of your post here once more degrades into simply bashing Trump or anyone remotely connected to him. Not interested. Whether I would rather have an economy (albeit one so poor people die from starvation or other facets of extreme poverty) or not has zero to do with such foolish comments as the ability to use Powerpoint is necessary to provide leadership in a pandemic response.
Watched the lady on his team and her "show and tell" (don't recall if a paper graph or powerpoint) the other day and got tired of having the camera ignore her presentation and focus solely on her fact. Apparently the media doesn't find such things valuable, no matter what you think.Wilderness: "11. Uses powerpoints with graphs and charts to explain complex issues" - What's wrong with that? It's a fact and I showed you how he uses them effectively to communicate to his audience.
"15. Does not know how to use powerpoints" (although I would submit you haven't a clue if he can or not; only that he has not done so in the past with his media reports.) - Until he does, it is fair to say he doesn't
So you look at one instance of a lady using powerpoints and the camera doesn't focus on her powerpoints. Therefore, all power points presentations are not effective and the media doesn't find them valuable. That sounds like your logic.Why do you keep insisting I said powerpoint is not for viruses or not effective?
I've made it plain (very plain) that I neither said nor meant anything of the sort; I only take umbrage at your statement (or implication if you wish) that the ability to do so is necessary to be a good leader in dealing with the virus. While stating that you know Trump is incapable of doing so because you haven't seen him do it.
No, it is NOT "fair" to say he is ignorant of how to use it because you haven't seen him do it. That is exactly the kind of twisted logic you use to show him as a fool, but is rife with logical error.
It is this type of nonsense "You forgot to include that Cuomo will cry and stomp his feet until he has all the resources of the nation stored in his warehouses. The rest of the people mean nothing to him." that destroys any credibility you have as a thoughtful person.
Trump is now trying to can the HHS inspector general who recently put out a Covid report that contradicted Trump.
It is an ability that most human beings have to connect the dots.
Isn't it your "opinion" that we ar basing Trump because we keep pointing ot all of lies, distortions, misdirection, and false statements.
Aren't connecting those dots and drawing the conclusion we hate Trump, which in my case is false. I can hate his actions but I can't hate a man so mentally ill he can't help himself.
He is no better than a drug addict, except in this case his drug is himself with his extreme narcissism.
BTW, what percent of American businesses made the unpatriotic choice of moving their headquarters to another nation in order to get tax advantages? Was it 1%, 2%? I know it wasn't very many.
You need to take some courses on the stock market.
The "Investment" comes when a company either starts up or issues new stock in order to raise capital. Any other time, it is simply 1) trading around assets and provides zero money to the company traded or 2) buying back stock to (money you just paid to others) reduce the number of outstanding shares in the market with the hope of raising the per share price of the stock. In the latter case, that is pure greed on the part of company doing the buyback on behalf of the shareholders. Not one dime goes into the company's coffers - [b]in fact, it is a way to get rid of excess capital (like from the GOPTaxScam giveaway.
You didn't explain why the amount of investment did increase, per the GDP figures, after the GOPTaxScam?
That leads to an interesting question. While Obama's (and Bush's - I will give credit where credit is due) actions unquestionably led to stopping a depression from happening and the mess conservative economics got us into, I think it can be fairly said that Trump won't do anything to get us out of this debacle - in fact, he keeps doing things to make it worse.
Now, why do I say that? Because he has purposefully abdicated his leadership responsibilities over to the governors and local leaders. (In a failed hope that by passing the buck will help him win in November)
As to how fast the economy will recover - I do not have high hopes. While there is, as of yet, no inherent weakness in the economy like there was in 2008, Trump's lack of action and many governor's attempts to restart the economy of their states will make things worse and introduce a structural weakness that will be much harder to overcome.
Fauci and others are predicting a resurgence this Fall, Americans are left with two choices: 1) shut down the economy again and 2) accept many more deaths in order to go to work. Until there is a vaccine or a cure or until enough people have been infected (and can't recatch it) to reach herd immunity, it would seem to me to be a binary choice.
Personally, I don't think we need to wait until Fall for a regeneration of cases. The 30 some governors who are reopening will do that for us. I hope I am wrong but I fully expect to see by May 15, a sharp increase of cases, and by May 31, deaths from this virus.
Bottom line, until people can go about their daily business without fear of getting really sick or dying from the virus, the economy will never recover to what it use to be.
One of these days I hope you make sense, Wilderness
Fair enough - I feel the same way about you. When you finally climb down off your bandwagon (presumably when a Democrat takes the office) you may finally quit spinning everything to make false claims that Trump has done nothing but bad. Probably not, but we can hope.
Show me where I spin. Show me were I exaggerate (unless it is sarcasm). Show me where I tell falsehoods.
When have I EVER said Trump has done NOTHING but bad. I can show you were I have said he has done a few good things, because he has; just nothing major.I did. You just didn't like it so diverted into something else.
No you didn't. You just pointed out things you called "spin" which really wasn't, I told the Truth
Show me where I truly spun something by misleading or lying?You've seen them. You just don't like to discuss them and will change the topic every time.
Don't forget that Truth does not include your exaggerations, your spin, your assumptions or your opinions.
Oh gawwwwdddd, I know this is between you and Wilderness, but the temptation to respond to a comment such as yours is almost irresistible.
But . . . the force is a strong in this one. I will resist.
GA
Oh he embellishes some! Not as much as those trying SO hard to prove he lies or has done nothing, but yes, he embellishes.
He "embellishes" some??? LOLOLOLOL I know you are being sarcastic now.
Well, he may not be up to your level, but he has been know to occasionally embellish, spin and exaggerate.
"Oh he embellishes some! "
I nominate this comment as the understatement of the decade.I don't know I'd go that far. That "the media is biased" is a strong contender for the "understatement of the decade", as is "it's just another flu bug". Or even "China is not our friend".
Well, I'll just mention a couple of the points in your link.
"Trump boasted that the “unemployment rate for women reached the lowest level in almost 70 years.” That’s true, but it had been trending down for several years before he took office. "
So what he said was true.
"The president boasted that “a long, tall, and very powerful wall is being built” along the southern border, and more than 100 miles have been completed. But only one mile is located where no barriers previously existed."
This, too, is then true. Odd, as well, that no mention was made of just what that previous barrier was - was it a single strand of barbed wire on falling down posts?
"Trump said “illegal crossings” at the southwest border “are down 75% since May.” But total apprehensions in 2019 were 81% higher than in 2016, the year before Trump took office."
This one is a nice change of topic, from total illegal crossings to how many were caught. No indication of whether crossings were down or not, then.
"Trump said “300,000 working age people” left the workforce during Obama’s eight years. Actually, the workforce grew by 5.4 million."
Again, a deflection and change of topic. The workforce can grow (by illegal aliens as an example) while working age Americans leave it. No indication his statement was false, then.
This is a major problem with what you continually produce as evidence of "TRUMP LIES". Spin (such as the first one), deflection into something else and outright falsehoods. You need to take far more care in what you produce as "evidence".
(Incidentally, my points were NOT from his SOU speech - they came from gathering facts over years.Again we see a lot of examples of how Wilderness takes things literally, to a fault, and comes up with the wrong answers.
Context - Trump has spent four years tearing down everything Obama did and not giving him credit for the the things he can't destroy - like a history of falling unemployment numbers.
Wilderness appears too naive to understand that when Trump is bragging about low unemployment numbers, he is stating that he, and only he, is responsible for them. As far as he is concerned, unemployment was very high when he took office.
As to the wall - Trump PROMISED to build 1,950 miles of impenetrable wall between Mexico and the US. He also promised that Mexico would PAY for it. In the SOU in February, he claimed that 100 miles of new wall have been built. He again claimed it in April. Both were LIES. Almost all of the 100 miles that have been finished are REPLACEMENT barriers. He might have built a few miles of brand new wall.
"Again, a deflection and change of topic. The workforce can grow (by illegal aliens as an example) while working age Americans leave it. No indication his statement was false, then." - TALK ABOUT not defending Trump. That is an absurd statement Wilderness.
SO just to take YOUR claim literally, as you love to do, what you just implied is that 5.4 million illegal aliens joined the American workforce while 300,000 working age American citizens left it. Again - absurd."Reading between the lines", Eso? In order to make accomplishments look like failures? I noticed as well you didn't list just what kind of "wall" was replaced so I'll ask again - was it a strand of barbed wire on rotting posts as we see so many pictures of? Was what he replaced effective to a high percentage?
Yes, he promised. And perhaps he'll deliver - have you forgotten Obama promised health insurance for everyone...and then said he would have to win re-election (which turned out to be true) as soon as he was in office? Plus, of course, Congress voted in his abomination whereas it does everything possible to stall Trumps plan to shut down illegal border crossings.
And no, I implied nothing of the sort. It was very (very!) plainly listed as just one possibility. One example of how the numbers could turn out the way they did. Could be legal immigrants (we got millions in during Obama's reign, after all) and he made it possible for millions more of illegal aliens to work legally. More spin from you, with false allegations, but it didn't work, did it?
Except there were no fallicies. That is Trump's way of doing things, not ours.
Right. No fallacies at all. Except the lies, the exaggerations and the spun reports of what was meant. Just like Trump's normal method of communicating.
You claim you know that not a single person told him that. You know it.
Yes, that is exactly Trump's tactics; lie, spin and exaggerate for you know nothing of the kind and know that as well as I do.
Once more, I did not defend Trump; I commented on your statement when you made a claim you cannot begin to support in order to claim Trump lied.????? "You claim you know that not a single person told him that. " - WHO Claims that???
"Another Lie from 4/28/2020 - ""Many very good experts, very good people too, said this would never affect the United States,"
Ring a bell?Is that not a quote from your post? Where you claimed Trump lied? One you have zero ability to support?
What the hell are you talking about Wilderness? You are making zero sense.
"Another Lie from 4/28/2020 - ""Many very good experts, very good people too, said this would never affect the United States,"
How do you know what he was not told? Without bugging the White House, that is?
Because if he was told that it gives the lie to your statement?You do know who the quote if from, don't you WIlderness? It is Trump talking (or rather lying)
Yes. Trump said it. And you claimed, without proof, that it was false.
How did he lie but you didn't? That you don't know if his statement was true or not, but claimed it was not, is a lie in and of itself.
And what makes you deflect into proposing, falsely, somebody "bugged" the White House?
Regarding Trump's LIES about him doing a great job on Testing - at today's WH round table where CEO's pushed back on his Lie that the media is after him.
:"Early in the White House roundtable, Trump boasted of how well he says his administration has done in supplying ventilators and masks, saying you don't even hear about these issues anymore, and about how well he claims it has done on testing. He added, "And you shouldn't be hearing about testing, but that's the last thing they can complain about, I guess."
Talk about testing is not an anti-Trump scheme. Rather, it's talk about a matter vital to the country's future. Public health experts, who say the Trump administration was too slow to create an adequate testing system, have emphasized that conducting far more tests now is critical to limiting the further spread of the virus and safely lifting economic restrictions.
Republican governors and corporate executives have emphasized the same. When a reporter asked Wednesday if any of the executives present were worried people won't really come back to their businesses until there is a coronavirus vaccine, Nassetta spoke up -- and used the word "testing" three times.
Nassetta said "of course we worry about it." Customers are "desperate" to get back out and travel, he said, but want safety. He continued: "...Our customers are saying they're looking for the government, both state and federal government, to focus on testing so that they understand, you know, what real mortality rates are..."
Nassetta argued that more testing would help customers understand that people who are not elderly or infirm are probably at much lower risk than originally estimated. Then, after touting a new Hilton cleanliness program, Nassetta said his customers "want to know that people are being responsible. Right? They want to know that we are doing the testing, the social distancing..."
We still have a lot to learn about the coronavirus and mortality, and we know the virus can kill even younger people without serious health problems. Again, though, Trump had just said that you shouldn't even be hearing about testing. Here was a business leader, invited to the White House by Trump's own staff, talking repeatedly about the importance of testing while on camera with Trump."Another Trump LIE on 5/3/2020 ""I am greeted with a hostile press the likes of which no president has ever seen," Trump said at the Fox News town hall Sunday night.
"The closest would be that gentleman right up there," Trump said, pointing to the 16th President's statue. "They always said nobody got treated worse than Lincoln. I believe I am treated worse."
What is the LIE(s)? 1) He is faced with a hostile press (except for FakeFoxNews). They are Not hostile, they are all asking legitimate questions about things he has said and done. The fact that he doesn't like the questions doesn't make them hostile.
2) Since the press is asking reasonable questions then he couldn't be treated worse than some people think is the greatest president ever.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/04/politics … index.htmlThis comment looks to be one of opinion, so I thought I would chime in. I find it surprising that you would say that it is a lie that Pres. Trump is faced with a hostile press. And I think it is even more than generous that you say that press is only asking "reasonable" questions.
But wait, whether or not the president deserves a hostile press has no bearing on my comment. That too is an opinion question and I am not asking it or addressing it.
When a press has the bad manners to ask "hostile" questions that are not germane to the moment, in inappropriate settings—like a press meeting and photo-op with foreign leaders, I don't see how they cannot be viewed as hostile press.
They are almost like these forums, no matter the topic/occasion—it's 'get Trump time'.
Bottom line; it is only your opinion that his statement was a lie. You have no facts to back-up this one.
GAThe president was hostile. Nothing new there.
Was the question hostile?
"What do you say to Americans that are scared though? 200 are dead, nearly 14,000 who are sick, millions, as you witnessed, who are scared. What do you say to Americans who are watching you right now who are scared?"
Would this be the same question?
"What do you say to Americans who are watching you right now who are scared by this coronavirus?"
GAGA: He was just qualifying his question with data. With your question it gives Trump the opportunity to say something like, "there is nothing to worry about. It's under control." He would spin it into something that was a fantasy, which he loves to do. But Acosta's question gave him no room to do that, so he came back with a personal attack against Acosta.
5/5/20 Another misleading, $7 million ad put out be Trump campaign about Trump and Coronavirus. In it, a segment of a CNN (which Trump falsely thinks is fake news) where Wolf Blitzer and Dr. Gupta talk about state stay-at-home orders reducing the number of Covid deaths. The ad is cut and pasted together to make it seem like Trump's partial travel restrictions were responsible. CNN has sent a cease and desist order to remove the false advertising.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/04/media/tr … index.html
FACTOID: Between 18% (movie theaters) and 41% (golf courses) of Americans favor reopening certain businesses. The average seems to be about 28%.5/6/2020: While Trump honors a nurse, he embarrassed her on national television. When asked a question about availability of PPE, she tried to be PC by saying "I think it's sporadic," answered Sophia L. Thomas, president of the American Association of Nurse Practitioners. "I mean, I talk to my colleagues around the country. Certainly there are pockets around the country where PPE is not ideal, but this is an unprecedented time.
The infection control measures that we learned back when we went to school, one gown and one mask for one patient per day -- this is a different time," she said, adding that she has been reusing a single N95 mask for "a few weeks now."
PPE has been sporadic, but it's been manageable. And we do what we have to do," Thomas said. "We are nurses and we learn to adapt and do whatever we can do for our patients to get the job done and the care provided, and that's what we will continue to do as Covid-19 continues."
Trump immediately disputed her by saying ""Sporadic for you but not sporadic for a lot of other people," the President told her.(remember she is the head of the AANP and is speaking for many, many nurses)
Then he LIES by saying "Because I've heard the opposite," Trump said. "I have heard that they are loaded up with gowns now. We had empty shelves and empty nothing because it wasn't put there by the last administration.""Then he LIES by saying "Because I've heard the opposite," Trump said. "I have heard that they are loaded up with gowns now. We had empty shelves and empty nothing because it wasn't put there by the last administration."
Assuming you have proof of what Trump did not hear in order to call him a liar, we would like to see that proof. Link, please, proving that no one in the world told him that?Only when he tells us who these mysterious people are that tell him the opposite and supply their bona fides that they know what they are talking about. I believe the nurse over the pathological liar. I know you don't, but the I do.
BTW, the LIE is "they are loaded up with gowns" since there is no report of that being true (and that nasty nurse was talking about PPE in any case) it must be a lie. As to the "heard" part, that carries as much weight for truthfulness as when I say "I HEARD that Trump is a pediphile".
His "heard" is no better than mine.You made your own claim; support it with facts or back off of it.
Or is the LIE that no one has told him that?
Correct; his "heard" is no better than yours. So why was it a lie? Because your "heard" is better than his?Trump is a pathological liar. Consequently, anything he says is probably a lie, simple as that. Would you believe ANYTHING Un says, Hitler says, Hussein says, Stalin says? Trump is no different than them.
Also, many, many public reports that even YOU have seen supports the nurse and says Trump lied - AS USUAL.Is it a lie if you make claims about a person without being able to support them? Beyond, that is, "Well, they are a pathological liar so we know this was a lie, too."?
You might want to be a little cautious with spreading your opinions as truth without being able to support them with factual data. There ARE libel laws, you know.It is not my opinion, Wilderness, it is the conclusion of many mental health care professionals as well as the massive weight of provable lies.
This scientist has studied liars as a career - https://www.chicagotribune.com/opinion/ … story.html
Then we have one of your heros, Ted Cruz, saying Trump is a pathological liar - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bz44wKK … 0&t=0s
Here is a very respected magazine doing an analysis of all the presidents lies. - https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/ar … us/608647/
This book by mental health experts lays out in each analysis how Trump is a pathological liar - it is a great read if you want the truth.
https://www.amazon.com/Dangerous-Case-D … 1250179459
This is an article from the author of the above book, Dr. Bandy Lee
https://www.salon.com/2020/03/23/dr-ban … rus-worse/
Here is a source for all of Trump's lies and false statements accumulated by a caring Canadian -
https://projects.thestar.com/donald-trump-fact-check/
I can get you a lot more if you need."Then we have one of your heros, Ted Cruz..."
OK, Mr. Trump-wannabe - I barely know who Ted Cruze is (a politician, I think, which would absolutely take him out of the "hero" category), let alone call him a hero. Doesn't stop you from following Trump's lead in lying, though, does it?
Or was just another insult because you have nothing else to say?You barely know who Senator and former presidential candidate Ted Cruz is???? Your credibility and veracity are now blown all to hell.
Based you your writings, Ted Cruz is you. And yes, it was an insult, I admit.
NOW, how about the rest of them or are you just going to keep on ignoring them as well as the TRUTH which Cruz spoke about Trump?
Wilderness:
politifact.com/factchecks/list/?speaker=donald-trump&ruling=falseNice side step. Is there a reason you don't want to discuss the question?
I notice, WIlderness, that you not only didn't sidestep all of the evidence I offered that Trump is a pathological liar, you simply ignored it. Then you falsely claim that PeoplePower did sidestep the question when he offered more evidence when he addressed it head on. Is that called two-faced or hypocrisy?
LOL Eso, you have posted claim after claim after claim about Trumps lies. And I have pointed out, time after time after time, that the ONLY way they could be called lies...is after spin, exaggeration and assumption by you. Just like the assumption that GA is ragging you about - that because you (and other Trump haters) think Trump is a pathological liar it means that you can claim anything you don't like to hear is a lie by him. Yes, I could probably have gone through every claim you made in the last bogus list, but you would just ignore them or claim you have the right to call them lies because you have decided you don't like the man.
As far as PP sidestepping: I asked a direct question and he responded with a link that was totally irrelevant to the question. It is, therefore, neither two faced OR hypocrisy.Wilderness: Please enlighten me. What was the question that you asked that I side-stepped?
What are lies (only one of which can be excused)
Error—a lie by mistake. The person believes they are being truthful, but what they are saying is not true.
Purposeful -- a lie made on purpose. The person knows they are being untruthful.
Omission – leaving out relevant information. Easier and least risky. It doesn’t involve inventing any stories. It is passive deception and less guilt is involved
.
Restructuring—distorting the context. Saying something in sarcasm, changing the characters, or the altering the scene.
Denial—refusing to acknowledge a truth. The extent of denial can be quite large—they may be lying only to you just this one time or they may be lying to themselves.
Minimization—reducing the effects of a mistake, a fault, or a judgment call.
Exaggeration—representing as greater, better, more experienced, more successful.
Fabrication—deliberately inventing a false story.
Trump does ALL of those almost ALL of the time!!!
5/7/2020: WH (Dr. Brix) asked for more guidelines from CDC to open safely. After receiving the 17-page report, Trump tossed it into the trash because it interfered with his politically-driven reopening goals. (My observation is "what guidelines"? Only a small handful of states are abiding by the original guidelines while the rest are telling Trump to take a hike (which he lets them do) and kill tens of thousands of extra Americans in the process.
Now Trump wants to add to that death toll in order to get re-elected.
https://www.cnn.com/us/live-news/us-cor … index.html (you'll need to scroll down to get to the story)I think the most depressing thing about Donald Trump is not his simple lies and misconceptions about reality. But his lack of empathy. In times of crisis and human suffering, he is unable to grasp the emotional stress and grief many people have at this moment.
I think in times like these you need leaders who trust science and who have empathy and understanding with those working on the frontline. Those who have to work in Bakeries, food sores, hospitals, care homes, rubish collectors. Those are the people who work with risk for life but are hardly mentioned in the daily speeches Trump gives.
Trump never supported science. And the vice president is also not supporting science but thinks that praying is a vaccine.
This combination of not trusting science and not connecting with the emotions of the people on the ground has lead to a misunderstanding of the crisis and how to tackle it.
Take care and stay at home."In times of crisis and human suffering, he is unable to grasp the emotional stress and grief many people have at this moment."
Why do you say that? Because he is at the center of decision making, takes an objective stance and tries to make the best objective decision possible? One that is the best balance between the virus and the nation of people that are losing everything? Does he not show empathy because he will allow additional COVID deaths by not shutting down or because he will allow additional suffering from people without homes, savings or even food by shutting down?What I mean Wilderness is that in times of emotional stress people want compassion, Of course, a leader should make the best objective decision possible. But by doing so you can show empathy. Trump does not. You can do both. Explaining the tough decisions you have to make as a leader and caring for the people who are losing their jobs and relatives. I have not heard sincere empathy towards the ordinary people of the US who are risking their lives today.
Trump is not addressing the nation when he speaks. He is not speaking to you or about you. He is speaking about external factors and the number of ventilators.I doubt Trump has ever made a substantial "objective" decision. If fact, he is proud that he doesn't. How many times has he said he thinks with his stomach?
As you should have learned about the many authoritative books of how Trump operates, he is the opposite of "objective".
Let me remind everybody what the characteristics of Trump's Narcissistic Personality Disorder are:
1. Grandiose sense of self-importance - CHECK
2. Lives in a fantasy world that supports that sense of grandiosity - CHECK
3. Needs constant praise and admiration - CHECK
4. Exploits others without guilt or shame - CHECK (this includes pathological lying)
5. Frequently demeans, intimidates, bullies, or belittles others - CHECK
6. Reacts negatively to criticism. - CHECK
https://www.healthline.com/health/narci … r#symptoms
This fits Trump to a "T"
I have written a few hubs on this aspect of Trump based on the book by Dr. Bandi Lee The Dangerous Case of Donald TrumpYou may prefer compassion: I would choose results that work the best possible for as many people as possible.
How do you have sympathy for both those that are losing jobs and those that are dying?
You may hear nothing but ventilators when he speaks: I hear him talk of first responders, nurses, etc. and the horrors they go through.You may chose results, and downplay compassion and empathy (very conservative of you) but he hasn't produce any results that either, has he (unless you consider excess death results).
"You may hear nothing but ventilators when he speaks: I hear him talk of first responders, nurses, etc. and the horrors they go through."
Do you really? Or are you at a point that you will defend Trump no matter what because you are fed up with all the criticism he gets? (fairly or unfairly). I can understand that position. But I think you should always be critical because nobody is perfect. To blindly follow somebody is dangerous.I also heard him effectively call that nurse he was so-called honoring a liar when she spoke the truth to him about the problems she and her peers are currently having getting PPE..
Turn the question around - are you so disgusted and hate filled that you don't hear what is said but instead wait to pounce on anything that could possible be used to demonize the man?
But defending Trump? Is it a defense of Trump to point out that your statement was false - that there HAVE been words of empathy and caring if you don't simply ignore them as not fitting into your personal agenda against Trump? Is that defending Trump or pointing out errors in YOUR words?For me, No. Just being clear-eyed.
You are defending Trump when the statement you claim to be false is, in fact, not false.
Be careful of Wilderness' sharpshooting skills, Peter. So long as Trump has said just ONE empathetic thing, which he has, proves that he is an empathetic man. No matter that ONE thing was among 1,000 that weren't empathetic but should have been.I don't think my statement was false. I do think Trump lacks empathy and has Asperger syndrome to a certain degree.
And Trump is not the only president/prime minister who "forgets" to address the nation on an emotional level. The Prime minister of the UK and The Netherlands have the same problems.
I think a lot of politicians are used to talk about figures and economic policies, forgetting that behind all those figures there are real people.
And normally they don't have to show empathy as they do their business behind closed doors. But in these special times, something more is asked from our leaders and many are failing in this respect.And you may be correct although I would question your expertise to diagnose Asperger's.
Perhaps I'm just different, for I'm not interested in the slightest in emotional, comforting words that mean nothing except "I'm declaring that I care about you, whether I do or not". I want hard plans, numbers and facts - I will determine if they care based on the results of their plans.haha, yes, no, I'm no more an expert on Asperger's then you are. And it's my opinion, not a fact.
But I do think to address a nation on an emotional level is super important in times of crisis. I just have to think of the speeches of the Dutch Queen who was in Londen during WWII, who addressed weekly the nation with words of courage. The same I think can be said about the speeches of Roosevelt during the War I believe. Do not underestimate the power of emotions. You win a presidency on emotions, not on facts. And Trump touched the right emotion during his campaign, Clinton did not. But for so far I can see it, Trump lost this connection to address the nation. As you can not blame a virus. You can not say "lock it up". You need to evoke different emotions to fight the battle against COVID. You have to address compassion, togetherness (instead of republican vs democrats), you have to help each other instead of America first.
That's what I think.Not saying you're wrong at all - it is most likely a fact that the people both need and want an emotional speech dripping tears over their plight.
I'm just not one of them, far preferring to hear how govt. is going to end that plight. What's going to change, why, and how it will help me and help the nation as a whole.That's ok. I know what you mean. I would be in need for a bucket for my second-hand dinner too, if I saw the president with a child on his knees...(scenes you often see during campaigns.)
And would rather like to see somebody explaining the plan of action. And definitely I would like to know the why's and how's. Why do I have to stay at home? For how long? How is the crisis developing? What is the plan for beating the virus and what is the plan for after the crisis? (A question I hardly heard from any government I'm following, US, UK, Spain, Holland.)
But the crisis is about people, jobs are lost. incomes are vaporizing. And I hate it to hear for instance that the Prime minister of Holland is giving 4 billion to the KLM and only 300 million to the culture sector. Knowing that the culture sector is 3.5% GNP and KLM only 1% of the GNP. - But this is maybe a different topic. But an important question to ask is: How are we rebuilding the country. Every country will do this differently I guess. But for sure it has to be different and will be different than before the virus crisis.Peter, it may be off topic (or maybe not - it is vaguely connected to the KLM vs culture thought), but what frightens me more than the virus and the fatalities it brings is that no one will speak, or is allowed to speak, on the results of the truly massive giveaways that some governments are doing, including the US and, I think the UK.
Any economist that dares to mention it is promptly shut down as "uncaring" and their voices silenced. Anyone that agrees with Trump that we MUST re-open, and soon, gets the same treatment.
But IMO, it is an issue that we are going to face whether we want to or not. We made, IMO, a bad error when we began paying people more than they earned by working because it simply means they will sit at home as long as possible before being forced back to work, increasing the giveaways of money we don't have, yet it was and is applauded. Things such as that are simply set aside and never discussed and that bothers me. A lot.The crisis is often misused. During the crisis of 2008 more bonuses were given away than ever. More millionaires got their state sponsorship than ever.
I would say bail out the workers, not the banks.
I did not know the US had such a great dole system. Or are the wages just so low that the dole is higher than a 0-hour contract or a waiter who is living of tips instead of the payment of the restaurant owner?
My opinion is a bit different Wilderness. I think that it's in the best interest of the economy to have good unemployment benefits. As if people don't have money, they can't buy things. If people can't buy stuff the economy goes down. If people have more money to spend, people can develop themselves better and get a better life.
Also, it is a myth that people won't do anything if you give them more money then an ordinary job. That's simply not the case. People without a job get depressed, don't know what to do, feel guilty, are unhappy with themselves. People rather want to work for $100 then do nothing for $150. Working means self-esteem, it means doing something for the community, it means feeling useful. People, in general, don't want to be a coach potato even if they get paid.
I'm a huge advocate of a universal income. So you don't have to worry about the basic things in life. And you can develop yourself to the fullest.
And the thing about the free market. It does not exist. If you really want the government to stop giving money to companies your hamburger would be $20, your bread would be $5. The whole agricultural sector is hugely subsidized. A company like Uber has never made a profit in its life. And is making yearly billions of debts. This is capitalism gone wrong, badly wrong. Don't get me wrong, I do not support communism as a system for a country, it does not work. But the capitalism that we have today does not work either.
So back to the theme of COVID. After this crisis, I think we should do things differently.Yes, we have very differing philosophies in giving money away - the difference between modern socialism and capitalism.
For instance, I have been able to understand the idea that taking money from one person (who then has less to spend) and giving it to another (who then has more to spend, in exactly equal amounts) results in more spending for the economy. Makes zero sense to me.
We also very much disagree with people not wanting to work; your comment that a universal income, without working for it, gives a chance to "develop themselves"; that means doing whatever they want, from being a couch potato to simply vacationing all the time. I know I'm quite happy in retirement, not working on anything I don't want to. People work to support themselves, not because they want to; few have jobs they actually enjoy and wake up in the morning excited to go to work.
Both capitalism and socialism must be mixed with the other in order to have any kind of workable society, but it is my opinion that the US, and certainly the UK, have both crossed over into more giveaways and free lunch than is good for them. It reduces incentive, it provides a nanny state where people are not responsible for themselves and in the long run will fail. TANSTAAFL - There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch, and all that "free" money ultimately comes from someone that works for it but doesn't benefit from their work.Wilderness: What good does it do if Trump is opening up business and corporations that increase supply without demand? In order for there to be demand, people have to be healthy. If he is sending people back to work without knowing whether they are healthy or not does not seem right to me.
We already have too much supply in some areas where they are plowing under crops, dumping milk, and killing livestock that is not going to market. Until they fix that disconnect, it is not going to work to increase further supply.
THe problem with your statement, Wilderness, is that based on hundreds of other posts you have written that I have read, you don't want gov't " to end that plight.". According to you, that is not the gov'ts job.
Wilderness: I agree with everything that Peter Streep wrote. You totally disregarded what he said. Trump has no respect for science and he never will. He is a used car salesman that uses truthful hyperbole to sell you a car. His talk is fraught with it. He speaks in half truths and half lies. If you support him, you believe the half truth side. If you don't support him, you believe the half lie.
A classic example is the PPE stock pile. He said he inherited a broken system and the cupboard was bare. The cupboard wasn't bare. There were just not enough mask in the inventory because Obama used some of them for the Ebola virus. But if you believe the cupboard was bare, then you believe that Obama left him a broken system. But when I did the research, I found he was lying about the system being broken. You see how that works?
The virus is science. It is not politics. It doesn't care when Trump schedules it to be over or how positive he is about it being over, or when business are open or not.
Trump does not show empathy in his speeches. He is not capable of putting himself in the place of others emotionally. His needs and his motivation are to get re-elected and he will use every tool in his slimy tool box.
It's too bad that this virus raised it's ugly head in an election year and that Trump can't be impeached a second time. He has made himself untouchable and he knows how to use it against his enemies. He is just like a drug lord or the head of the mafia. If he doesn't like you, he will get rid of you and no body can touch him. He has made a mockery of the whole balance of power system in the constitution...Long live King Trump.By the way, isn't 1) "truthful hyperbole" an oxymoron? and 2) isn't "truthful hyperbole" just another way of lying?
And what masks were left in the stockpile were useless, having passed their life span years and years ago. Is there a reason you leave this out when trashing the president and praising Obama?
I'm very sorry, but while the virus is science, responding to it is far more than that, and politics is playing a very large part in it. To deny that obvious fact is ridiculous as people all over the nation are protesting both sides of the lockdown.
If Trump has made it impossible for Democrats to create another faux impeachment process to advance their political agenda and fix the election, more power to him.Wilderness: You didn't read this did you?
https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2 … kpile-wro/
You just said I side-stepped your question. Here are the sources for this claim. Where are your sources for stating what was left in the stockpile was useless?
Rev.com, Transcript of White House briefing, April 6, 2020
White House Briefing, April 3, 2020
White House Briefing, March 26, 2020
Greg Burel, Evolving the Scope of the Strategic National Stockpile, November 2019
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Emergency Medical Countermeasures Enterprise (PHEMCE) Strategy and Implementation Plan, 2017-18
Factcheck.org, Trump Falsely Claims He Inherited ‘Empty’ Stockpile, April 3, 2020
USA Today, Fact check: Did the Obama administration deplete the federal stockpile of N95 masks? April 3, 2020
ProPublica, How Tea Party Budget Battles Left the National Emergency Medical Stockpile Unprepared for Coronavirus, April 3, 2020
AP, US ‘wasted’ months before preparing for coronavirus pandemic, April 6, 2020
ASTHO, Assessing policy barriers to effective public health response in the H1N! Influenza pandemic, June 2010
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Budget document, Feb. 11, 2011
VICE News, The U.S. Has a Classified Stockpile of Ventilators and Masks, But It Won’t Save Us From Coronavirus, March 17, 2020
CBS News, Largest U.S. stockpile of medical supplies is "very stressed," former director says, March 30, 2020
National Academies, The Nation's Medical Countermeasure Stockpile: Opportunities to Improve the Efficiency, Effectiveness, and Sustainability of the CDC Strategic National Stockpile: Workshop Summary, Oct. 24, 2016
Washington Post, Inside the secret U.S. stockpile meant to save us all in a bioterror attack, April 24, 2018
Washington Post, Face masks in national stockpile have not been substantially replenished since 2009, March 10, 2020
New York Times, The U.S. Tried to Build a New Fleet of Ventilators. The Mission Failed. March 29, 2020
Emergent BioSolutions, Press release, July 30, 2019
Bloomberg, Hospital Workers Make Masks From Office Supplies Amid U.S. Shortage, March 17, 2020
Los Angeles Times, A disaster foretold: Shortages of ventilators and other medical supplies have long been warned about, March 20, 2020
PolitiFact, Barack Obama says Congress owns sequestration cuts, Oct. 24, 2012
PolitiFact, Federal pandemic money fell for years. Trump’s budgets didn’t help, March 30, 2020
PolitiFact, Fact-checking Jared Kushner’s comments on the national stockpile, April 3, 2020
Email interview, Ellen Carlin, a professor at the Georgetown University’s Center for Global Health Science and Security, April 7, 2020
Email interview, Ned Price, Obama administration National Security Council spokesman, April 7, 2020
Email interview, Dara Alpert Lieberman, director of government relations for the nonprofit Trust for America’s Health, April 7, 2020
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Fiscal Year 2018 Justification of Estimates for Appropriation Committees, accessed April 8, 2020
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response Budget and Funding, accessed April 8, 2020
Email interview, Stephanie M. Bialek, Stockpile Communication Services Section chief at the Division of Strategic National Stockpile in the HHS Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response, April 7, 2020
https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2 … kpile-wro/This talk about and focus on what Obama left Trump. It is mute and is meaningless
What is not meaningless is that Trump was warned by the Trump administration about the possibility of a pandemic.
What is not meaningless is that Trump disbanded the NSC office set up by Obama to plan for and manage pandemics. Imagine how many lives Trump cost with that decision!!
What is not meaningless is that Trump transition team went through a tabletop exercise about what might happen in a pandemic.with the Obama administration - Trump ignored it.
What is not meaningless is that Trump THREE YEARS and a sympathetic Congress (which Obama did not, btw) to replenish it. He didn't do that so [u]it is 100% on him[/u
So please admit it was Trump who blew it, not Obama, move on to something that means something.psst . . . you shouldn't leave such an easy opening. It's 'moot' not "mute."
GADamn it, one of these days I will learn proper grammar. I catch that error about 1/2 the time. They even sound different, when properly pronounced, and I still don't catch it.
This goes beyond Covid, but let me offer you people who think Trump is a Truth-Teller a challenge. Let me start by listing five Lies, as defined below, which Trump as provably make, then you come back with five lies that Biden, Obama, and Clinton have made (that would be a total of fifteen). Then I will come back with five more, then you do the same until one of us runs out. I know this will go on for a few iterations because there is no question all three of your assignees have lied.
But let's see who runs out first.
What are lies (only one of which can be excused)
Error—a lie by mistake. The person believes they are being truthful, but what they are saying is not true.
Purposeful -- a lie made on purpose. The person knows they are being untruthful.
Omission – leaving out relevant information. Easier and least risky. It doesn’t involve inventing any stories. It is passive deception and less guilt is involved
.
Restructuring—distorting the context. Saying something in sarcasm, changing the characters, or the altering the scene.
Denial—refusing to acknowledge a truth. The extent of denial can be quite large—they may be lying only to you just this one time or they may be lying to themselves.
Minimization—reducing the effects of a mistake, a fault, or a judgment call.
Exaggeration—representing as greater, better, more experienced, more successful.
Fabrication—deliberately inventing a false story.
I'll start with my favorite one:
1. “I have great respect for Angela and I have great respect for the country,” said Trump. “My father is German, was German, born in a very wonderful place in Germany so I have a very great feeling for Germany.” - 4/3/19: during a press conference with the Nato secretary general, Jens Stoltenberg. - he has claimed this three times. His father was born in New York
2. "Anybody that wants a test can get a test. That’s what the bottom line is".- 3/6/2020: At a CDC press conference. It wasn't true then, it isn't true today, and it won't be true for many months to come.
3. "You know, if I'm so good to China, how come I was the only person, the only leader of a country, that closed our borders tightly against China?" - 4/14/2020: at a Covid TF press conference. His policy had many, many exceptions to them and our borders were rather porous.
4. “It’s going to disappear. One day it’s like a miracle—it will disappear.”, speaking of Covid. 2/27/20: At the WH. The context was that it would disappear soon, like around Easter and not "one day" three years in the future. It also will not be from a miracle , but from hard work and suffering.
5. "If the economic shutdown continues, deaths by suicide “definitely would be in far greater numbers than the numbers that we’re talking about” for COVID-19 deaths." - He has said this many times. The possibility of this happening is zero. Annual suicides in America are around 47,000. Today, Covid deaths are new 80,000. You do the math.
There are my five. How about yours. In fact, to make it easier on you, just give me five between Biden, Obama, and Clinton. with dates, if possible. You can start with Obama's "You can keep your doctor promotion of ACA" (which was actually the plan at the time he said it)I see on one took up the challenge. That means Trump Supporters agree noone (or group of people) lie more than Trump does.
5/11/20: On the way home I listened to Trump tell me (at least three times) that "if I want a (coronavirus) test, I could get one", or words to that effect. So when I got home, I called up my local hospital and asked for a Covid test. After they said no, I told them that Trump just said I could get one. I wish I could report that they laughed, but they didn't, they just said it will a very long time before there are enough tests available to give one to anybody who wants one.
Now do note, that the surgeon general (I think that is who it was) tried to correct Trump by saying the word should be "needs", not "wants". But Trump shook him off and said "wants" at least two more times.
Bottom line, Trump lied - AGAIN about something very important to Americans.
He also made racist comments to a Chinese-American female reporter and was very rude to another female reporter before bolting from the stage. Both, in character for Trump.Hmm. I don't think I've ever seen Trump "bolt" anywhere. Frankly I don't think he's capable of "bolting" - every move is at a walk, and a fairly slow one. Perhaps an exaggeration - does that make it a lie?
Figure of speech meaning he left abruptly you sharpshooter you. So no, not a lie.
When you repeatedly use the word "want" instead "need", that is a bold-faced lie,
Trump and Pence are SO DUMB, they don't realize they are trying their hardest to put a Democrat in the WH before Biden (ByeDon) gets there.
If both get Covid, then Nancy Pelosi becomes President.5/11/2020:
"1. "We're here today to provide an update on the unprecedented testing capacity developed by the United States, the most advanced and robust testing system anywhere in the world, by far." - I don't know about the "most advanced" but the "most robust" is simply a lie by exaggeration. Just because the US belatedly did more tests than any other nation is moot (not mute this time). That number is not relevant until you divide it by population. Only recently did America pass South Korea on that score. Because they did it MUCH sooner, their rate of death due to Covid is MUCH lower than ours. Today, the US is 40th in the world in testing per capita - hardly what Trump makes it out to be.
"The Lost Month: How a Failure to Test Blinded the U.S. to Covid-19" -- The New York Times, March 28, 2020. And away we go!
Trump says this "2. "We have really had a very good relationship with the states and the governors and other representatives within the states, a relationship." But then says this:
""She's not stepping up. All she does is sit there and blame the federal government. She doesn't get it done. And we send her a lot." -- Donald Trump on Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer"
Then this:
"Governor Cuomo should spend more time 'doing' and less time 'complaining'. Get out there and get the job done." -- Donald Trump on New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo"
Then this:
"@JBPritzker, Governor of Illinois, and a very small group of certain other Governors, together with Fake News @CNN & Concast (MSDNC), shouldn't be blaming the Federal Government for their own shortcomings." -- Donald Trump on Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker"
And finally this:
"If they don't treat you right, I don't call." -- Donald Trump on governors"
Now this isn't a lie, per se, just really, really dumb - 3. "It should have never been allowed to happen; it should have been stopped at the source."
This is a lie by many types of definition - 4. "In every generation, through every challenge and hardship and danger, America has risen to the task. We have met the moment and we have prevailed." - Trump "said" he was talking about testing. By every objective standard we have not prevailed over testing. Currently we are about 30% of what is needed. The minimum experts say we need are 1 million tests per day. Currently we are around 300,000 per day nationwide - 3 months into the pandemic!So it is a lie that our testing is "robust". We are testing more, per capita, than S Korea, but because in the past we could not do that it means Trump lied when speaking of capabilities today - he exaggerated when he used the word "robust" in reference to today's capacity because it wasn't always that way.
Just who is exaggerating here? Who is lying about the "robustness" of US testing today? Trump, who you agree told the truth about our performance, or the one that says because it used to be different it is not robust today regardless of performance?And there you go distorting things again, Wilderness. First, you limit you critique to South Korea after I already pointed out there are 40 other countries doing better than Trump on a per capita basis - today!
We are NOT robust today, by any since of the word, we aren't even "just getting by" yet. Robust would be a million tests a day. We aren't even doing 300,000. Give me a break."Just because the US belatedly did more tests than any other nation is moot (not mute this time). That number is not relevant until you divide it by population. Only recently did America pass South Korea on that score."
Guess one of us can't read. Pretty sure it isn't me - I don't see anything here (except the comparison to the Gold Standard of S. Korea) comparing numbers on a per capita basis.Wilderness: Of course you are not going to believe it, because it's from CNN.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/12/health/u … index.htmlShould I believe CNN (known to grossly spin and twist their "reporting") or should I believe Esoteric (also known to grossly spin and twist his "facts) who makes a statement and then declares Trump lied because the statement wasn't true weeks ago even though it is today? And then tries to change his statement to what it was not? Tough choice.
I didn't address the truth of Trump's statement: I addressed the lie from Esoteric that he made in spinning what was said into what it was not.Wilderness: CNN is only known to grossly spin and twist their reporting when stated by Fox and Trump. In reality, Fox and Trump are the fake news and grossly spin and twist their reporting.
Which is where Wilderness learns how to do it so well.
For sure. Of course that is your opinion...up against millions of people that feel CNN is naught but another talk show any more. Should I believe you or should I take the opinion of millions plus my own eyes?
No need to guess on this one.Actually, the majority of people don't trust Fox where they do trust CNN to tell them the truth.
Think about it, you have a few million right-wing die-hards who watch and salivate over Fox. The many millions of other people who want real news split their time before much more believable outlets such as ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, NPR, BBC, MSNBC, and a bunch of other fair outlets.
In other words, while Fox may have a lot of viewers, combined CNN and MSNBC have more with Fox being the far-right view, CNN is moderate to left, and MSNBC far-left.The majority of the people trust CNN to tell the truth? And consider NBC, MSNBC and ABC to be fair? Not too bright as a nation, are we? Particularly MSNBC as a far-left source that is "fair"? You have got to be kidding - the only people that could possibly consider them as "fair" are the far left themselves!
In one of the essays in The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump it discusses the likelihood that rabid Trump supporters have the same characteristics of their chosen hero. Specifically mentioned and analyzed is the high degree of narcissism displayed by his supporters.
That is why your claim that we are "Not too bright as a nation, are we? " does not surprise me coming from you.
"You have got to be kidding - the only people that could possibly consider them as "fair" are the far left themselves!" - Assuming you are talking about MSNBC, you are probably correct.
But then "You have got to be kidding - the only people that could possibly consider them as "fair" are the far Right themselves!" - this is, of course, referring to Fox viewers.
The simple fact is, survey after survey after survey find people trust Fox less, much less in some cases, than mainstream media outlets.
https://www.businessinsider.com/most-an … mes-2019-4
https://www.thewrap.com/msnbc-and-fox-n … udy-finds/ (This one rates Fox high, but below MSNBC. The rest trail behind)
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/20 … s-source-/ (This one is interesting because when people were asked which network is the MOST trustworthy, it came out 23.5% for Fox, 10.4% CNN, 6.8% MSNBC. BUT, when asked who is the LEAST trustworthy, Fox also won with 39.4%!, while CNN came in at 21.1% and MSNBC at 5.9%. Bottom line, Fox has a net Negative)"In one of the essays in The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump it discusses the likelihood that rabid Trump supporters have the same characteristics of their chosen hero. Specifically mentioned and analyzed is the high degree of narcissism displayed by his supporters."
No bias in the article, right? With terminology like "rabid Trump supporters" and "narcissism displayed by his supporters" there is no perceptible bias at all.
Does you last paragraph tell you anything about your polls? Maybe that they don't mean much at all - that playing number games results in a conclusion without connection to reality?"Rabid Trump supporters" is my term, not theirs. But the other is their considered, expert opinion after much study of the matter. So, correct, no bias.
Not on my part sense my description is accurate. The proof is in words y'all write.
No, your last paragraph tells me you don't know squat about polls and polling.
Now let me go look and see what lies Trump told today or yesterday..Wilderness: If Trump hasn't heard a conspiracy theory by noon, he will start his own, just to keep the focus off of his screw ups. Now we have Obama gate...give me a break.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 … -unmaskingSo these (unbiased) reporters have done "much study" on Trump supporters and found that over half of them are narcissists. You do understand that that is at least a quarter of the nation (if you actually believe such a stupid statement); nearly 100,000,000 people. At worst it hovers around 20% or the 325M population of the nation. And you still consider that to be abnormal to the point of bringing it to the attention of the world? Of course, they specified, according to you, simply "Trump supporters", not just half of them; to my simple mind that should mean at least 3/4's of Trump supporters, very effectively making that "narcissism" quite normal. No more reason for rabid Trump haters (my term) to comment on it than if it were blue eyes or brown hair. It's about like saying that Trump supporters have an IQ of 100.
Do you recall the polls last election? Did you believe them? Perhaps it is YOU that doesn't know squat about polls and polling. Hint: you can produce a poll that will tell you anything you want to hear.
Try not to lie yourself this time around when you report on "Trump's lies". It's becoming all too common.Why do people have to spend so much time correcting your mistakes, Wilderness??
You just wrote "So these (unbiased) reporters have done "much study" on Trump supporters and found that over half of them are narcissists." - which is NOT what I sourced - you just made that up - AGAIN
What "reporters"?? Where did I talk about "reporters"? How do you come up with such nonsense?
In the real world I actually referred to the book The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump by Dr. Bandi Lee and at least 27 other mental health experts. You do understand, I hope, that these people are not "reporters". I sourced one of the "essays" written by one of those experts
Do I recall the polls from the last election, I sure do. In 2018, they predicted the Democrats would trounce the Republicans in the House, and that is exactly what happened.
If you are referring to 2016, the polls near election day also called it right. An average of the major national polls had it as a statistical tie a week before the election after the effects of Comey, the Russians, and Clinton's terrible campaign decisions did their work. While yes, most of the polls had Clinton ahead by a few points, most were in something called the Margin of Error; you may not be aware of what that is. But if a result is within the MOE, then the difference is statistically zero.
Further, in the three states that counted, PA, WI, and MI, two of three of those were also statistical ties. Only one had Clinton ahead outside the MOE.
So yes, the polls were correct!Reporters: whoever wrote the article you linked to and reported their findings. Do you (again) need a copy/paste of your statement to see what you said? Because it was "Specifically mentioned and analyzed is the high degree of narcissism displayed by his supporters.". With no percentage given it is reasonable to think they meant over half. If you believed they meant 5% of Trump supporters you should have said so as a very relevant bit of information. (Or did you leave that part out as part of the campaign to convince readers of something isn't true?)
LOL The last presidential election, which I'm absolutely positive you understood.
Sure the polls were correct...as the country was told right up to election day that Trump was a sure loser. YOU may not have heard that, but everyone else did. There was just one man that predicted correctly, from his own polls, and that man was on Trump's team - even so he was not believed until the very end.It is interesting to note, everyone, that Wilderness refuses to believe that a mental health expert wrote the article I am referring to. I wonder why that is?
And yes, that was these experts conclusion, extreme narcissism is rampant among rabid Trump supporters.
There you go moving the goal posts again WIlderness, a very Trumpian thing to do. I don't care what pundits were "telling" America. You were talking about polls and after getting defeated there, you switched to something called "heard".
An average of the polls clearly showed the race tightening up after Comey foolishly reopened with such fanfare the short-lived investigation into Clinton's emails. By the time he sheepishly closed it again, the damage (along with the Russians which we didn't really know about then) did its damage.
By the time of the election, the average of the polls (which I closely followed but you didn't - you just repeat Right-wing talking points) had the race a statistical tie.I don't believe them because I do not believe, for one second, that a group of so-called "experts" did a study on enough "rabid Trump supporters" to justify a conclusion that "extreme narcissism is rampant among rabid Trump supporters". If they did, please point to peer reviews of that same study, along with the details of the study.
You may fall for such crap because it gives the conclusion you wish to hear, I don't and neither does any thinking person.
Well, I didn't check any of the polls in 2016 (and don't think you did either) for proper methodology and size; all I had to go on was the reports of polls from media. From which I continued to "hear" that Clinton was going to be President. Not that it was too close to call, not that Trump had a chance of winning; that Hillary Clinton was the next President.Of course you don't believe them because they disagree with your preconceived notions. You won't check the book out because you are afraid of what you would find from people who really know what they are talking about.
Your's is a favorite tactic of the Right-wing - deny science. You see that here with James denying climate science. It goes hand-in-hand with fundamentalist Christianity.
Actually I do check poll methodology, that is what a good analyst will do and I am a good analyst with over 20 years of experience.
You are a good example of why you shouldn't listen to pundits but use actual data like I do.
I bet you are one one of those Right-wing Trump supporters that think Dr. Fauci is a fraud.No, I'm not going to buy a book to read right wing lies and exaggerations.
And your's is a favorite tactic; take any ridiculous claim, declare it to be "science" and thus true. I asked for peer review of their study and conclusions (that's part of "science" you know) - is there a reason that you don't provide any? Perhaps because there is none of this "science"?
Sure you did. You checked the methodology of all the polls in the last week of Trump's election. Right. (Not that it would matter if your check was similar to the "science" showing Trump's supporters are, on the average or as a group, badly narcissistic.)And there you go striking out blindly against professional experts. Here is who you are making fun of:
Dr. Bandy Lee - "r. Bandy Lee is a forensic psychiatrist and an internationally recognized expert on violence. Trained in medicine and psychiatry at Yale and Harvard Universities, and in medical anthropology as a fellow of the National Institute of Mental Health, she is currently on the faculty of Yale School of Medicine’s Law and Psychiatry Division. She served as Director of Research for the Center for the Study of Violence (Harvard, U. Penn., N.Y.U., and Yale), co-founded Yale’s Violence and Health Study Group (MacMillan Center for International Studies), and leads a project group for the World Health Organization’s Violence Prevention Alliance. She has consulted with the governments of Ireland and France, as well as Alabama, California, Connecticut, Massachusetts, and New York on violence prevention programming in prisons and in the community. "
Philip Zimbardo, Ph.D., is a professor emeritus of psychology at Stanford University, a professor at Palo Alto University, a two-time past president of the Western Psychological Association, and a past president of the American Psychological Association.
Robert Jay Lifton is a lecturer in psychiatry at Columbia University and Distinguished Professor Emeritus at The City University of New York. His books include, most recently, Witness to an Extreme Century: A Memoir (Free Press, Simon & Schuster, 2011), Death in Life: Survivors of Hiroshima (University of North Carolina Press, 1991 [1968]) which won a National Book Award, Hiroshima in America: A Half-Century of Denial (Harper Perennial, 1996), and The Nazi Doctors: Medical Killing and the Psychology of Genocide (Basic Books, 1986).
Judith Lewis Herman (born 1942) is an American psychiatrist, researcher, teacher, and author who has focused on the understanding and treatment of incest and traumatic stress. - Herman is Professor of clinical psychiatry at Harvard University Medical School and Director of Training at the Victims of Violence Program in the Department of Psychiatry at the Cambridge Health Alliance in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and a founding member of the Women's Mental Health Collective. - She was the recipient of the 1996 Lifetime Achievement Award from the International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies and the 2000 Woman in Science Award from the American Medical Women's Association. In 2003 she was named a Distinguished Fellow of the American Psychiatric Association.
Thomas Singer, M.D. is a psychiatrist and Jungian psychoanalyst with particular interests in contemporary political and social movements. He has written and/or edited several books including the newly published Psyche and the City: A Soul's Guide to the Modern Metropolis (editor) which has been published by Spring Book Publications, The Cultural Complex (co-edited with Sam Kimbles), The Vision Thing, Who's the Patient Here? (with Stu Copans, M.D.), A Fan's Guide to Baseball Fever: The Official Medical Reference (with Stu Copans, M.D.), Placing Psyche: Exploring Cultural Complexes in Australia, and Listening to Latin America: Exploring Cultural Complexes in Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Mexico, Uruguay, and Venezuela.
This is just a very few of the 33 contributors to The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump which lays out an overpowering presentation, with many, many examples from Trump's videos, writings, and speeches, of how mentally ill Donald Trump is.Your point? That 33 people makes it OK to publish statements without proper research to back it up? Because I am 100% positive that no research they did could ever result in declaring that 40% of the American population are narcissistic (the approximate percentage of people that "support Trump").
Do you agree, or do you think that a minimum of half the American population (Trump supporters plus any narcissists on the liberal or "undecided" side) are narcissists? Did you even stop to consider what such a statement means, what it says about people in general? Or did you just grab onto another opportunity to bash Trump or anyone not on the Trash Trump bandwagon?And how do you know they didn't do proper research??? I read the book and it seemed well sourced to me. And again, like Trump, you try to minimize the facts. You say 33 "people" and the truth is they are 33 experts (which I realize has no meaning to you) who are tops in their fields.
No I do not agree that "a minimum of half the American population" . I am not sure why you posit such a ridiculous claim. What I will say, based on the experts, that a majority of rabid Trump supporters are like Trump in most ways, including extreme narcissism, misogyny, homophobia, bullying, islamophobia, xenophobia, etc. The one Trump trait that I don't attribute to these people is pathological lying.
Trump is known as a Double High. He would score high on both the Right-wing Authoritarian Follower Survey as well as the Social Dominance survey. It is the latter where pathological liars exist. The former are prone to believe those lies."No I do not agree that "a minimum of half the American population" . I am not sure why you posit such a ridiculous claim."
That is based on your claim that the book says that Trump supporters are narcissists. As approximately half the country are supporters then, adding in those narcissists that are NOT supporters gives, as a minimum, approximately half the country. It's simple arithmetic, albeit arithmetic based on a ridiculous, stupid and offensive claim.
But if you don't like that explanation, your next paragraph is that a "majority of rabid Trump supporters are like Trump in most ways, including extreme narcissism, misogyny, homophobia, bullying, islamophobia, xenophobia, etc." Unless you will now choose to define "rabid Trump supporters" as a tiny fraction of supporters, it still leads to well over a quarter of the nation, given that half the nation are supporters and a majority of those is a quarter of the nation at a minimum. Will you stand firm on this - that at minimum a quarter of the nation is properly described as "extreme narcissism, misogyny, homophobia, bullying, islamophobia, xenophobia, etc." or will you back off once more?
(Are sure you wish to continue digging this silly hole, or will you accept that your claim is ridiculous on the face of it? Along with the book you supposedly quoted in making it in the first place?)I see you are back to ignoring words in order change the meaning. Until you put the word "rabid" (they chose a kinder description), then all you are doing is perpetuation a lie.
"Rabid" are Trump supporters who would follow him even if he did murder someone on 5th Ave - they would find a way to excuse it
"Rabid" are the Trump supporters who think the 16,000+ lies (broad definition), which have been verified are themselves lies
"Rabid" are the Trump supporters who don't see him as xenophobic (as opposed to those that do, but just don't care.)
"Rabid" are the Trump supporters who don't see him as a bully (as opposed to those that do, but just don't care.)
"Rabid" are the Trump supporters who don't see him as a racist (as opposed to those that do, but just don't care.)
"Rabid" are the Trump supporters who don't see him as misogynic (as opposed to those that do, but just don't care.)
"Rabid" are the Trump supporters who don't see him as a sexual predator (as opposed to those that do, but just don't care.)
"Rabid" are the Trump supporters who don't see him as dangerously narcissistic (as opposed to those that do, but just don't care.)
"Rabid" are the Trump supporters who don't see him as a dangerously mentally ill (as opposed to those that do, but just don't care.)So basically "rabid" means anyone not on your bandwagon.
Which puts it squarely back onto what I said; half the nation is a narcissist. You can't support that silly notion and neither can the "experts" who you say made the same claim. Nor can you support, in the smallest amount, that the same half the nation is "extreme narcissism, misogyny, homophobia, bullying, islamophobia, xenophobia, etc." (I suspect those are YOUR words and not from the "experts" in your biased book).
I ask again - do you wish to continuing digging this hole to bury yourself in or do you wish to back off these ridiculous claims?Nope, "rabid" means that small subset of people in America that meet the definitions I provided. I am guessing you might be on some mind expanding drug to reach the conclusion you just did.
"Which puts it squarely back onto what I said; half the nation is a narcissist. " - NOPE, only you think that.""Rabid" are the Trump supporters who don't see him as a racist (as opposed to those that do, but just don't care.)"
""Rabid" are the Trump supporters who don't see him as a dangerously mentally ill (as opposed to those that do, but just don't care.)"
I would have to say that very few Trump supporters see him as either a racist (because he isn't) OR as "dangerously mentally ill" (again, because he isn't). That leaves the entire group of Trump supporters as "rabid Trump supporters", which means they are "extreme narcissism, misogyny, homophobia, bullying, islamophobia, xenophobia, etc." in your words. Which in turn means nearly half the country.
Are you positive you don't want to back off this claim rather than simply keep digging it deeper? It's to the point you don't seem able to even remember what you posted, let alone draw conclusions from it."I would have to say that very few Trump supporters see him as either a racist (because he isn't) OR as "dangerously mentally ill" (again, because he isn't)" - YET HE IS on both counts. You just can't see it because you don't want to.
One poll (with others coming in with similar results) shows 57% of all Adults think "Trump’s policies have been bad for Muslims"
56% of all adults think "Trump’s policies have been bad for Hispanics"
47% of all adults think "Trump’s policies have been bad for Blacks" (75% of blacks think this)
"Fifty-seven percent of all adults, including more than 8 in 10 blacks, three-quarters of Hispanics and nearly half of whites, said they think Trump is racist. Eighty-five percent of Democrats consider Trump racist, but just 21 percent of Republicans agree."
By doing some math, that means 65% of Independents think Trump is a racist (assuming equal numbers of Ds, Is,and Rs were in the sample - which is normal. Even it the numbers were tilted heavily to the Ds, then 57% of Independents still think Trump is a Racist.
The question you have to ask yourself, why do so many Independents see Trump as a racist? What is it these people see that you don't?
As to his mental stability, I will leave it to the experts and this string of articles on the subject, but will also offer all poll where a whopping 48% of Americans Question Trump's mental stability - an amazing number. 47% see him as mentally stable. Of those polled, an expected 75% of Democrats think Trump has mental problems while a surprising large 14% of Republicans think so. But what is critical is that 46% of Independents think he is not mentally competent. 55% of women think he has a problem! WOW! What do you think that women, who are more perceptive than men in these matters, see that you don't?
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/01/ … lth-354902
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/01/ … lth-354902
58,000 mental health professionals say Donald Trump is too unstable to be president. Here’s a deep dive into the diagnosis and what could happen because of it.
https://medium.com/@shanesnow/donald-tr … ab6db008c4
https://www.euronews.com/2020/03/02/tru … us-outbrea
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/worl … 46771.html
https://www.businessinsider.com/psychia … ng-2019-12 (Another 350 mental health professionals tell Congress Trump has major problems)I won't dispute the first two (Muslims and Hispanics) as closing our southern border and stopping traffic from terrorist supporting countries will be bad for Muslims and Hispanics in the general sense. That doesn't make Trump racist.
In addition I truly doubt that 80% or blacks think him racist as he has done more for blacks than any president in modern history. Now Democrats - I don't doubt that they do - they will swallow anything their beloved leaders tell them without bothering to consider the charge, just as you do.
"58,000 mental health professionals say Donald Trump is too unstable to be president."
Now that's a load of crap...unless you will now publish a list of 58,000 mental health professionals that have publicly said Trump is too unstable to be president?
Not interested in your diagnosis from quacks making their opinions public without even a single interview with the man. No "professional" would ever do that - if nothing else it violates their professional ethics standards.
All of which has nothing to do with you silly claim that half the country (or more) are subject to "extreme narcissism, misogyny, homophobia, bullying, islamophobia, xenophobia, etc."First, calling them "quack" without even looking into their stellar credentials says you are not to be taken seriously and are just another highly partisan, very high scoring Right-Wing Authoritarian Follower (which means you checked your brain at the door when it comes to Trump).
Second, you trample on the 1st Amendment rights of these experts who simply describe what they see, read, and hear using their extensive training and experience. They only need to meet the person to determine why[ he is the way he is. They do not need personal interviews to see that he lies, that he expresses racist views, that he checks all of the boxes for a dangerously narcissistic personality.
Finally, as experts in this field, they have a duty to warn an unsuspecting public. It is no different than a professional weatherman not warning the public about a Cat 5 Hurricane that is about to hit them.
I guess you are one of those who believe if you repeat a lie often enough, some people will believe it. Well, your oft repeated lie "All of which has nothing to do with you silly claim that half the country (or more) are subject to " is just that, a distortion of what I really said" which again destroys your own credibility and makes you know better than Trump.
Now, even a blind person, let alone experts in the field, can see that he fits the definition of several serious disorders: From the DSM-V
Antisocial Personality Disorder (3 or more needed)
* Failure to conform to social norms with regard to lawful behavior - CHECK
* Deceitfulness: repeated lying, using aliases (which he did in the past), conning others for personal profit or pleasure - CHECK
* Impulsivity and failure to plan ahead - CHECK
* Irritability and aggressiveness - CHECK
* Reckless disregard for the safety of self and others - PASS
* Consistent irresponsibility such as repeated failure to maintain consistent work behavior or honor financial obligations - CHECK
* Lack of remorse, or rationalization or being indifferent to having mistreated, hurt, or stolen from others - CHECK
Paranoid Personality Disorder (needs 4 or more)
* Suspects, without sufficient evidence, that others are harming, deceiving, or exploiting him - CHECK
* Preoccupied by the truthfulness and loyalty of associates - CHECK
* Reluctant to confide in others - PASS
* Reads "hidden" demeaning or threatening meanings into remarks by others which are, in fact, benign - CHECK
* Persistently bears grudges - CHECK
* Perceives attacks on his character or reputation that are not apparent to others and is quick to counterattack - CHECK
* Has recurring suspicious, without justification, of spousal infidelity - PASS
Narcissistic Personality Disorder (needs 5 or more)
* Grandiose sense of self-importance - CHECK
* Preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brialiance, ideal love. - CHECK
* Believes that he is "special" and can be understood by and associates with other special or high-status people - CHECK
* Requires excessive admiration - CHECK
* Has sense of entitlement - CHECK
* Interpersonally exploitative - CHECK
* Lacks Empathy - CHECK
* Often envious of others or believes others are envious of him - CHECK
* Arrogant - CHECK
Now, how hard was that. Each one is observable and does not need deep consultation. It only needs someone who is capable of understanding the meanings of the symptoms and can be unbiased in their application or provide examples of behavior that qualify.We will have to agree to disagree here, for I do not see a health "professional" as one that makes a diagnosis without an examination. Viewing a faux political "persona" presented to the public is insufficient, IMO.
But I will say that it is very easy to do - you did that when you proclaimed all Trump supporters (150,000,000 people) to be classified as "extreme narcissism, misogyny, homophobia, bullying, islamophobia, xenophobia, etc.". No exam - you haven't even begun to scratch the surface of meeting, seeing or hearing these people - but are still willing to make an exceedingly foolish and offensive claim.Wilderness and Scott: You guys are both off into the weeds in an exercise in futility. Let's get back to what this forum is about. Here is the latest Trump's escapades.
5/19/2020 Trump says he has been taking hydroxychloroquine for two weeks. However, there is no proof that he is actually taking it. His doctor's memo only states he agreed for him to take it. It's just like Trump to fake it, because he knows it has detrimental side effects.
Trump is blaming the WHO for being partial to China about the virus. Now he is threatening to freeze funding to the WHO unless they clean up their act. Another strategy right out of his playbook for distracting and shifting his blame to others.Wait. This thread is about Trump lying - he says he is taking a drug but he must be lying because you have no proof of it. Is that how it works? If you can't prove truth (without trying) then it has to be a lie?
That's as bad as claiming half the nation is extremely narcissistic because they support Trump!Wilderness: Tell me where it says the doctor prescribed the drug to Trump.
This memorandum is what you provide as proof positive that there is no prescription AND that Trump is not taking the drug?
As with Esoteric, you're really stretching for anything to complain about - you know as well as I do that a memorandum to the press secretary that does not indicate a prescription is hardly proof there isn't one. This doesn't even indicate the president is, or is not, taking hydroxychloroquine! Just that, in general, benefits outweigh the risks of doing so.
You also know as well as I do that not every piece of paper coming from the doctor will indicate treatment Trump is undergoing - using an irrelevant statement as proof that a specific treatment is NOT being taken is not reasonable.Wilderness: That is the genius of Trump's diabolical strategies. You never know for sure one way or the other. He does the same thing with his conspiracy theories. When asked questions, his strategy is say that many people have told me, they tell me, I get phone calls and letters from all kinds of people. He does it all the time, because he covers his a** this way. It becomes open-ended so that he can use it over and over again. Just like Obama was born in Kenya.
I think it says far more about the "genius" of the Trump haters of the world that will take anything - anything at all - and turn it into a lie. He says he heard something - they will declare it a lie although they have zero idea if he did or not. Not an error, not a mistake, not a minor exaggeration (most common in the political arena) - an outright lie because that's what they want to declare to the world.
And those same people will then feign astonishment when called on their own lie, as if they can't imagine themselves doing what they are so concerned Trump does. They will wiggle like a worm on a hook, providing "proof" that has nothing to do with their claim, while maintaining it is true. Or that they didn't say that, while repeating that it is true
Read the last couple of pages on this thread about Trump supporters - approximately half the country - being extreme narcissists along with several other offensive labels.Wilderness: When Trump gets his fake amnesia, he suddenly doesn't know people who he is with in pictures or on you tube videos. Just like he did with the inspector general he just fired and demoting the head of Biological Advanced Research Department. He claims he didn't know him, but he says he looked and acted like a disgruntled employee.
Is Trump taking hydroxyclorhqinine? You don't know and I don't know and chances are we will never know. That's what he does. He leaves things open ended. You can re-frame all you want, but the facts don't lie.You are correct; I don't know and you don't know. Why then do you insinuate that he must be lying?
Wilderness: My point is when Trump makes indeterminate statements what he is doing is playing to both sides. If you are a supporter, you perceive it as not lying. If you are not a supporter, you perceive that he is lying.
The doctor could have said, I advised him to take the drug. Trump could have said, he prescribed the drug. But he wants it to be indeterminate by design. Just like his conspiracy theories. He can't even articulate what Obamagate is about, other than he was an incompetent president. Even the AG refuses to investigate it.You may perceive that he is lying, for that is the goal you search for.
Others perceive that the statement's truth is unknown.
Which is what I said - some people will search for anything at all that can be spun and twisted into a lie, in order that they can declare the President a liar.Wilderness: Then tell me why Trump can't even articulate what Obamagate is about?
Nope, still wrong WIlderness. We only report obvious lies, he makes plenty, so we don't have to "turn" anything? Nor do we have to "declare" anything a lie because they are lies, provable ones.
"Called out on what lies"? When have we ever lied? When have you EVER proven we have lied?
WIthout a doubt it is you doing the wiggling.Go back through this thread; I have called you over and over on your claims of lying and so far you haven't provided evidence of a single one.
23."I understand you very well, better than you understand yourself." - Yeah right, and "only I can fix it" - a sure sign of dangerous narcissism.
24. "Now that we're doing so well on tests and so quick and so fast, five minutes, et cetera, and so accurate, you're complaining that we're getting too many tests. So you can't win." - We are NOT doing well. Some of the ones that are available are quick and fast, most are not. If he is talking about the rapid tests all of the WH staff are lucky to get, you have a 25% chance of actually having Covid when it says you don't.
25. "As far as Americans getting a test, they should all be able to get a test right now. They should be able to get a test." I tried and I couldn't get one and was told I won't be able to get a test (unless I was sick) for the foreseeable future.
28. "The 20,000 [cases] -- the numbers are way down from what they were two weeks ago. I mean, the numbers are really coming down; they're very substantially -- and this weekend was one of the lowest we've had. This is, you know, the numbers are coming down very rapidly -- all throughout the country, by the way." - For the past eight days, the "numbers" have been 24,655; 25,631;29,531; 29,162; 25,524; 20,329; 18,196; 22,321 (btw, they come down almost every weekend and then go back up)
29. "But as far as the models are concerned, if you go by the model, we were going to lose 2.2 million people." - A Lie, no model has predicted that yet.
30. "We're at the lowest of all of the models. I mean, if you look at, I guess that 120,000 -- 100,000 to 120,000 people would be at the low side. And we're at -- there's nothing low." - "Now we're going toward 50,000 -- I'm hearing, or 60,000 people. One is too many. I always say it. One is too many, but we're going toward 50,000 or 60,000 people. That's at the lower -- as you know the lower (end of the projections) was supposed to be 100,000 people." -- Donald Trump, April 21
5/11/2020
5. "In the fourth quarter we're going to do very good and next year I think we're going to have one of the best years we've ever had because there's a tremendous pent-up demand." - What is noteworthy about this claim is the shift in Timeline. His initial over-the-top exaggeration was that the economy would immediately bounce back once the country began reopening. Many states are reopening the economy right now and the economy is not "bouncing back".
8. "We had the best economy in the history of the world, not just here but anywhere in the world." - A LIE
9. "We had the best economy anywhere in the world and we were going for numbers, whether it was unemployment numbers where we had our best numbers. Employment also numbers. Little different." - Can someone please decipher this?
15. "Very soon. I mean, really, very soon." - "This is Trump's response to a question on when the average person will be able to be tested for coronavirus "every day as they go back to work." It is a Lie. The current HHS estimate for September is 50 million tests a month. Trump is saying we will be doing 160 million tests a day well before September. Also remember, Trump, et al have been promising massive testing "soo" since February. Today, we are doing less than 300,000 tests a day - and at least a million are needed to reopen the economy safely5/14/2020
Today, Donald Trump, the so-called President of the United States, probably uttered the stupidest, most disingenuous set of words in his infamous life.
BUT FIRST, there is this (more stupidity)
"After touring the medical supply distributor Owens and Minor in Allentown, Pa., the president — he and White House chief of staff Mark Meadows were the only members of the tour group not wearing masks "
Now, what did he say?
"“And don’t forget, we have more cases than anybody in the world,” he added. “But why? Because we do more testing. When you test, you have a case. When you test, you find something is wrong with people. If we didn’t do any testing, we would have very few cases.” - WHAT????
Think about what he said. He said that if we hadn't done any testing, there would not be 1.4 million cases of Covid reported today. The corrolary is that if there had not been any testing, then very few people be dead from coronavirus, rather then the 84,000 and counting that there are today.
Further, and this is what Trump is really after, if there was no testing, then there would be no social distancing (because there is no cases, no pandemic) and the country would remain open and he could win the election.
Not sure how he would explain away why a million or more people would be dying of unknown causes. But that is NOT his problem, its the Democrats fault, after all.5/15/2020
Trump claims that he will have the material and infrastructure to deliver 100 - 200 million vaccines by Dec 31, 2020, He has failed to provide the material and infrastructure to deliver Covid testing so far AND for the months to come. Why would he think, unless he is delusional, that he would be able to do that for vaccines. I know he doesn't drink, but I wonder if he does dope.5/16/2020
Now granted, Donald Trump himself didn't say this, his son did, but it is close to some foolish thing he did say:
"And they think they're taking away Donald Trump's greatest tool, which is being able to go into an arena and fill it with 50,000 people every single time, right?
So they will and you watch. They'll milk it every single day between now and November 3, and guess what? After November 3, coronavirus, will magically all of a sudden go away and disappear and everybody will be able to reopen."
He is nuttier than his dad.Do YOU think we'll still be in lockdown mode come November? Or was the root of the statement quite true?
I suspect we will be there again (we aren't now anymore) because I fear there is going to be an explosion of cases and deaths.
Why do I say that? Because there is not near enough testing to find most of the positive cases (remember there are 20,000 new ones a day right now and it is not declining very much). That means there are ACTUALLY between that and 1,000,000 new cases a day (if you are to believe one report which found 50 times as many cases as was expected).
And if you cannot identify who is positive, then you can find out who they might have infected and test them nor can you isolate them.
And now that you have some states opening up in a more or less uncontrolled fashion, new hot spots are bound to pop up in bars, churches, crowded beaches and other places where lots of people gather and don't bother to stay away from each other or wear masks.
It is just the nature of the beast which is even worse because you have a president begging people to do things that will increase the chances of spreading the virus.Well, you may be right on this one - we may have another outbreak. Or, given that 1M per day of new cases, that would mean something like 200M that have had the disease by the end of the year (if the trend does not accelerate, which it probably will with 1M new cases daily). And that in turn means that we should be getting pretty close to that dream of having herd immunity we keep hearing about.
Either way, though, my personal opinion is that the people will not tolerate another shutdown...and they're right, too, for we cannot afford to do that again this year. But even if we could afford it, I don't see people accepting it for another go-around even though the recipients of those giant unemployment checks would make some of them quite happy to at least pay lip service to staying home. Even liberal style giveaways and fiscal ignorance won't keep people inside their doors again. Pure opinion, and based only on what I see on social media, the news and in the stores, but I just don't think it could be pushed through once more.I totally understand your point. But, if true, what does it say about a people who are willing to sacrifice so many others so that they don't have to sacrifice some comfort themselves. That would be sad.
Wrong question. The right one is what does it say about people that either too stupid to understand very basic economics (such as balancing their spending with their income or that printing too much money causes runaway inflation) or don't care who gets hurt as long as they aren't subject to the .000001% probability (or whatever tiny fraction of the population it turns out to be) of serious harm or death from the virus?
I have been saying for a long time that there is more to the question of shutdown than how many lives might be saved from the virus. You may not believe it personally but it is quite true - there must be a balance struck between saving lives from the virus and saving people from the ravages of a broken, non-functioning economy. There will come a time, in the not too distant future IMHO, that we are going to be forced to accept virus deaths in order to maintain a functioning country. Pray that before that time comes we have an effective treatment and an effective vaccine for it is coming.I would agree, but what is your personal break even point assuming they opened the economy smartly, which is not happening for the most part.
Will you accept 100,000 dead in 4 months? 300,000 dead in 5 months? 500,000 dead in 6 months? What number is right for you?Tough call. Very tough.
But it also cannot be done that way - at best the number of deaths is a guess, a projection and can only be based on guesses as to what scientific discoveries will be made. IMO, we are doing the right thing with Trump's basic plan, modified by individual governors. Some governors will open too fast, some will take too long - mine is about right, IMO. We are in phase 2 of 4, with most businesses outside of bars and large gatherings open with strong efforts made to continue distancing, etc.
Again, IMO, if we aren't going full bore, or at least with no major restrictions, within the next 2-3 months we're going to lose the game. So we have to be open for business by that time. We could probably survive losing our sports - football, baseball, hockey, etc. - but not much more. Losing the tourism industry, for example, is not acceptable.
And it doesn't really matter if projected deaths are half million or a million - we cannot continue the shutdown beyond that point. Does that make sense - that we go as far as we can without losing our economic base and open regardless of the projected death toll? Whether you agree or not, is it making sense? Put the economists on the problem, put the health care people on it, put businessmen on it...then one man (Trump) make the final call based on ALL facets and pass that information to states. I understand full well you won't accept Trump under any circumstances, but if you can come up with a better candidate than the President of the United States I'm open to suggestions.
5/19/2020
In his letter to the WHO Trump falsely claims " the organization ignored "credible reports of the virus spreading in Wuhan in early December 2019 or even earlier, including reports from the Lancet medical journal."
That, according to the Lancet is a big, fat, Trumpian Lie!! They reported " The Lancet, however, said Tuesday "this statement is factually incorrect" and that it "published no report in December, 2019, referring to a virus or outbreak in Wuhan or anywhere else in China."This doesn't have anything to do with Trump's lie (just his campaign to disenfranchise voters), but it bears reading to see how far the Right has taken up from the vision our forefathers had for this nation.
"Under his order, which the Texas attorney general said he would immediately appeal, voters under the age of 65 who would ordinarily not qualify for mail-in ballots would now be eligible.
Biery's ruling covers Texas voters "who seek to vote by mail to avoid transmission of the virus."
In a lengthy order, which he opened by quoting the preamble to the Declaration of Independence, Biery said he had concerns for the health and safety of voters and stated the right to vote "should not be elusively based on the whims of nature."
"Two hundred forty-years on, Americans now seek Life without fear of pandemic, Liberty to choose their leaders in an environment free of disease and the pursuit of Happiness without undue restrictions," Biery wrote.
"There are some among us who would, if they could, nullify those aspirational ideas to return to the not so halcyon and not so thrilling days of yesteryear of the Divine Right of Kings, trading our birthright as a sovereign people for a modern mess of governing pottage in the hands of a few and forfeiting the vision of America as a shining city upon a hill," he said."Sorry - I side with Trump on this one. While I understand that Democrats are making a huge push to suddenly turn the country into vote-by-mail it is the wrong way to go. Democrats know that, too - the primary reason to do so is to gain more votes from people not eligible to vote. Dead people for instance, and illegal aliens (that's another tale as they are working hard to give foreign citizens the right to vote in our election). This whole thing is just another way to gerrymander - to change the voting in such a way as to benefit one party over another.
The only verifiable instance of fraud that had ANY impact on an election in recent memory is in North Carolina where Republican operatives manipulated absentee ballots.
You are willing to risk people's lives, it appears, for something that has less of a chance of happening than lightning striking you.
So you think giving more people access to voting is gerrymandering? Interesting.Well, you seem to be claiming that fraud does not happen with mail in ballots.
While ignoring that there is no method of knowing who sent it in, that tens of thousands of dead people are on the voting rolls, that Democrats are slavering at the mouth to get illegal aliens to vote (pretty easy with mail in ballots), etc.
Don't be silly - mail in voting does not give more people access - the tiny percentage that actually have no access already use the method. It just provides more opportunity for voter fraud and more Democrat votes. The same reason gerrymandering is used, in other words - to gain votes for a particular party.I don't "seem" to be claiming it - I AM claiming.it. Other than the fraud committed by the North Carolina Republicans there is zero evidence of the type of fraud Trump is lying about ever even coming close to influencing an election in my lifetime.
Now you may be willing to go stand in line with potentially infected people who refuse to wear a mask, that is your choice, but don't presume to risk other people's lives by making them do so as well.
As to the assumption that mail-in voting increases turnout, I am on the side that says yes. After having just researched it, the answer turns out to more nuanced.
In studies of Oregon and absentee ballots, the answer is yes, but with caveats.
In a Cambridge study using an experiment I didn't quite understand, but didn't want to spend the money to see the details, the answer they got was for general elections the answer was, to my chagrin, No, in fact that with the two large California counties they used, it reduced turnout slightly.
For special elections, on the other hand, mail-in ballots DID improve voter turnout.
Anecdotal evidence from Rockville, MD, who switched to mail-in balloting and closed their polls saw a doubling in voter turnout.
NCSL found "Turnout—Some reports indicate that because of convenience, voter turnout increases. These reports assert that turnout increases by single digits for presidential elections and more in smaller elections. See this 2013 report on all-mail ballot elections in Washington and this 2018 report on all-mail ballot elections in Utah. Effects on turnout can be more pronounced for low propensity voters, those that are registered but do not vote as frequently."
And yet another study comes up with this "Vote-at-home systems increase turnout - Research shows that average turnout in the three VAH states beats virtually any combination of other states:"
Bottom line, it seems that, especially for special elections, do not lower turnout and, despite Cambridge's one data point, can reasonably be expected to increase turnout.
By the way, studies show mail-in balloting does not give either party an edge.
5/19/2020
"Trump was reminded by a reporter on Tuesday that the FDA has said hydroxychloroquine should not be used outside of a hospital setting or research studies. - Trump interjected: "No. That's not what I was told. No.""
This is one of those "I was told" or "I wasn't told" types of Lie. It is a lie because it is not even close to reasonable that he was so-called "told" something opposite of what the FDA has published.. What if Obama said "I was told Trump was a Martian spy", Trump supporters would have to admit Obama is telling the truth if they buy into the ludicrous response by Trump.
Now I will wait for a Trump supporter write well "he could have been told that" and I will respond that I was told Trump has three heads, but we just can't see the other two. It makes about as much since.
Trump lambasted a study that had found no benefit from hydroxychloroquine in a group of veterans with the coronavirus who were given the drug. He called it a "phony study" and said it was done by "obviously not friends of the administration" who wanted to "make political points."
The President made similar comments earlier on Tuesday, speaking of an unspecified "bad survey" that was "a Trump enemy statement." On Monday, he claimed the study at the VA was done by "people that aren't big Trump fans."
He also complained Tuesday that the drug had been given to people who were "old" and "ready to die."
There is no evident basis for Trump's claims that the study of veterans was designed to hurt him. While there are valid criticisms of the study -- which was small, retrospective, focused on seriously ill patients, not peer-reviewed and not randomized or controlled -- Trump has provided no proof for his claims of some sort of political plot. The authors of the study explicitly acknowledged that it has significant limitations. Larger, peer-reviewed studies have also concluded that hydroxychloroquine has not benefited coronavirus patients . - This is a clear indicator of the extreme paranoia that Trump suffers from.LOLOLOLOL
Trump lies because you don't think he was told what he said he was. Not because you know he was told no such thing, but because you don't like what he was told and therefore his statement that he was told that is a lie.
https://hubpages.com/education/forum/34 … ost4138916
Yes, Trump was told that hydroxychloroquine is a valuable treatment for COVID. Which makes the liar someone other than him, doesn't it?Then you believe Trump lives in a bubble with no contact with the outside world; that Dr. Fauci or Brix never told him the opposite; that no one ever put what the FDA posted in front of him; that he never personally read anywhere what taking the drug for Covid outside a clinical trial or hospital was a bad idea.
Remember what Trump's response was to - a reporter pointing out to him what his own administration said. The purpose of Trump's denial was to repudiate the Truth. It makes no difference whether somebody (I was "told" it was by a three-year old chimpanzee) at some point in time might have actually told him that. What makes a difference is that he was calling the reporter a liar in his repudiation.YOU'VE heard the drug should not be used and that it should. YOU made your own choice about which piece of advice is sound.
But Trump is not allowed to do that, right? Because his determination does not match yours. Explain, please, why your determination, made with far less information than his, is superior (and is somehow always superior!
)
And then explain how his true statement (what he heard) is a lie but your statement (that he lied when he said that) is not, even as you now say it was true. Please.Trump says it should be used (what have you got to lose, remember?) while ALL experts say it shouldn't.
I listened to the experts while Trump did not. Now of course Trump can attempt suicide if he wants, but he can't encourage his blind followers to do the same by example. If he is taking it, he [b]must[/b\ keep that information to himself.
There is no doubt in my mind people will now die because of him.
What is the lie? The lie is when he said, in response to the reporter, that NO, the FDA did not say that. Yes they did. (you do know you are deflecting, don't you?)
5/20/2020
"In his tweet Wednesday morning, Trump falsely claimed Michigan would send absentee ballots to 7.7 million voters. But he also threatened to "hold up funding to Michigan if they want to go down this Voter Fraud path!"
The voter fraud from mail-in ballots claim is a lie. There has been zero evidence of fraud which impacted an election from main-in balloting save in one case - that was when North Carolina Republican operatives manipulated absentee ballots to swing an election to the Republican candidate. But that wasn't "true" mail in since the Republican's collected up the ballots from voters and did something illegal with them. Trump has more of a chance of being struck by lightening than there being significant mail-in ballot fraud
ALSO - he abused his power by threatening Michigan.I have a quiz for everybody. Which is the lie?
“I’m not a politician.” (CNN, August 11, 2015) OR “I’m no different than a politician running for office.” (New York Times, July 28, 2015)
“I’m totally pro-choice.” (Fox News, October 31, 1999) OR “I’m pro-life.” (CPAC, February 10, 2011)
“Look, I’m very pro-choice. I hate the concept of abortion. I hate it. I hate everything it stands for. I cringe when I listen to people debating the subject, but you still—I just believe in choice. … I am strongly for choice, and yet I hate the concept of abortion. … I am pro-choice in every respect … but I just hate it.” (NBC News, October 24, 1999) OR “I am very, very proud to say that I’m pro-life.” (Cleveland, Ohio, August 6, 2015)
“I prefer to come to work each day and just see what develops.” (Trump: The Art of the Deal, 1987) OR “You can’t just sit around waiting for deals, opportunities, or a lucky break.” (Trump: Think Big, 2007)
“My motto is ‘Hire the best people, and don’t trust them.’” (Trump: Think Big, 2007) OR “Surround yourself with people you can trust.” (Trump: How to Get Rich, 2004)
“My motto is ‘Hire the best people, and don’t trust them.’” (Trump: Think Big, 2007) OR “Surround yourself with people you can trust.” (Trump: How to Get Rich, 2004)“They are the most dishonest people in the world. The media. They are the worst. They are very dishonest people. They are terrible.” (Indianapolis, April 20, 2016) OR “OK, no, I don’t hate anybody. I love the media. They’re wonderful.” (Indianapolis, April 20, 2016)
And then there is this "“If you equivocate, it’s an indication that you’re unsure of yourself and what you’re doing. It’s also what politicians do all the time, and I find it inappropriate, insulting and condescending. I try not to do it.” (Trump: How to Get Rich, 2004)Okay My Esoteric, this one got me. I am not quibbling with your "quiz," I am just noting that my first response was to think politics. (Hmm . . . did I just weigh in on that "I'm not a politician" question?)
GAGranted, most of these will have nothing to do with Covid yet, but how do they put it in court, "it lays a foundation"?
I also realize that for some of these much time has passed between changed views. And I don't hold people changing their opinion when new facts come in - but - there is a point when the frequency of it (within very short time spans) where it becomes a method of operation. The best example of that in the first set I offered was the pair about the media.
5/20/2020
"His claims against Joe Scarborough, the host of MSNBC's "Morning Joe," are among the most outrageous. He renewed them in earnest last week, asking in a tweet: "When will they open a Cold Case on the Psycho Joe Scarborough matter in Florida. Did he get away with murder?" - THIS is the President of the United States, mind you! But the TRUTH is "Authorities in Florida have answered -- adamantly -- no. They ruled the 2001 death of Lori Klausutis, who worked as an aide in Scarborough's congressional office when he represented Florida's 1st District, accidental. And they have not described the matter as a "cold case."
I posted this once already and focused on the "voter fraud" lie. This time I will point out another. ""Breaking," he wrote, "Michigan sends absentee ballots to 7.7 million people ahead of Primaries and the General Election. This was done illegally and without authorization by a rogue Secretary of State. I will ask to hold up funding to Michigan if they want to go down this Voter Fraud path!"
His claims were false; the state's secretary of state announced Tuesday that all registered voters would receive vote by mail ballot applications, not the ballots themselves. He made similar claims against Nevada in a subsequent tweet." - There is nothing illegal about mailing out ballot applications (his original post just "ballots"), many states do it include many Republican states.5/21/2020 Trump says the virus will go away without a vaccine.
https://www.factcheck.org/2020/05/trump … t-vaccine/Just finished updating my Covid tracking spreadsheets and it is becoming very clear the health professionals were right, the nation opened up to soon. Across the board, save for those states who took coronavirus seriously, the rate of new cases is increasing; in some states, rapidly.
Has the next wave begun?Could this noted increase be due to much higher testing rates? It seems so to me.
Perhaps a ratio, (percentage), comparison would add some perspective?
GAGA: Here is everything you wanted to know about the statistics on the virus, sliced and diced many ways.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/coronavirus?ocid=stThanks Mike. Although there was a lot of information in your link, I didn't locate any data on positives vs. total tests ratios. A quick look at a CDC site did find that nationwide as of 5/20 the rate was 13% of 12+ million tests.
My question wonders what that percent was on earlier dates, like 4/20? I suspect the percentage might be higher, making claims of increases due to reopening less than reliable
GAGA: This may help you, but you may have to do some interpolation of historical data by state.
https://covidtracking.com/about-data/vi … tion-guide
MikeThanks again Mike, that one did do the trick. Just using that link's numbers, it does appear that the positive percentages are declining, and, although with only one week to compare—positives continued their decline even after the partial reopening, (5/15).
I will save this link to check back in another 10 days to see if that trend changes after more reopening contact.
Here is the trend mentioned:
2/20
2 tests, 2 positives
100%
3/20
206,304 tests, 28.285 positives
14%
4/20
4,032,723 tests, 777,068 positives
19%
5/15 (general partial reopen date)
10,739,347 test, 1,434,235 positives
13.36%
5/20
12,637,495 tests, 1,542,054 positives
12.2%
https://covidtracking.com/about-data/vi … tion-guide
GAGA: Just messing around, but I created a chart for what you found. Maybe it can be updated monthly.
MikeThat is interesting data, but at the moment, it doesn't tell us anything definitive.
I took weekly snapshots and the averaged the resulting percentage to get 15.9% with a standard deviation of 2.7%. (I excluded the date before 3/21/20 as too small). This means that to be statistically different from the mean at a 95% (assuming the rations are normally distributed) confidence level, the ration must drop to below 8% or rise higher than 23.7%.
Now, having said all of that I did notice that from 3/21 to 4/11, each succeeding ratio was higher than the previous one. And from 4/18 to 5/23 there is a steady decline.
Through into the mix that until recently, only sick people were tested. Over the last week or so, a few localities are letting anyone who wants to be tested, included those with no symptoms.
Initially, only really sick people who met other criteria that would point to being Covid positive. Consequently, as more and more people presented themselves, then a higher percentage would show up positive.
As the criteria was relaxed, more and more sick people who weren't covid positive were being tested which must lower the percentage, which is what we are seeing now.
After that, it is a crap shoot. As more and more asymptomatic people present themselves I suspect the rate is going to increase again. The reason being is it seems reasonable to me that the only non-sick people who will get tested suspect they may have been exposed. Therefore, it would seem this population would have a higher mix of positives in it.
Only time will tell.Go for it buddy. My interest is to simply understand what will happen with increased contact.
GA
This is probably what you are looking for.
https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/testing/individual-states
But, one must be careful with the data presented.
Total daily deaths have varied roughly between 25,000 and 35,000 with a potential uptick the last few days.
At the same time, after testing started increasing from its plateau at 150,000 per day to the current 400,000, it grew about 2.7 times. On the other hand, the positive rate decreased at about the same amount from 16.1% to 6% or 2.7 times decrease.
I must think more about that, but at first blush, I don't think that provides very useful information.
What I have to try to figure out is what would be the number of positives had the rate of testing remained constant at 150,000 per day. If more testing DOES catch more positive cases, then under the constant testing per day scenario the number of positive cases would be getting less and less. But I am not sure how to get there from the data i have right now.You keep right on 'thinking' about it Scott. You are welcome to it. ;-)
My interests only goes as deep as understanding the general trend as it will be affected by the reopening.
I strongly believe we must work to reopen our economy sooner rather than later and it is the risk trade-off that the tests vs. positives numbers will show that will influence my opinion.
GAGA: One thing to keep in mind is the incubation period of the virus. It can be up to two weeks or more before a person presents any symptoms of the virus or they could be asymptomatic and be a carrier without presenting any symptoms.
Therefore, a person can test negative one day and test again the next day and be positive. So my point is the data can be skewed by the incubation period of the virus. Even the antibody tests at this point are not reliable. You can be tested for antibodies and they show positive, but your antibodies may not be strong enough to do give you immunity from the virus.
It makes it very difficult to open the economy when you don't know if you are safe or those who you work with are carriers of the virus. That's why the scientist are saying there could be a rebound effect later on this year. The trade-off is going to be tough.I am aware that the incubation period can, and probably mistaking the test numbers less indicative than they appear. I noted in another response that June 15-20 will probably be the earliest we can judge the effects of reopening—which started 5/15.
GA
"Reopen" is an undefined term given there are many ways to do it, a few are smart, many are dumb and dangerous.
It boils down to "how many lives is an increase of .1% GDP worth?" I would bet liberals and most independents would rather open very slowly and smartly while conservatives not so much.
The argument that some people might die if you keep the economy closed is just a red herring because those numbers will be miniscule when compared to the number of deaths from just throwing the economy wide open as Trump is wants."It boils down to "how many lives is an increase of .1% GDP worth?"
I was so sure that was coming next that I nearly noted in my previous response that I was sure that would be your next question.
So, I have decided that 117,313.5 deaths are an acceptable price for me to be able to go shoot some pool and guzzle a few beers with my arms wrapped around the camo shoulders of my militia buddies.
As for your "red herring" thought, I strongly disagree.
GAYes you should have because that is the choice politicians have to make.
So, given the way many states reopened, your pain threshold will probably be broken. My best guess at the moment is Jun 6, 2020. After that point, you should be pushing to lock things down again.
GA, yes, that could certainly be part of the reason. The real indicator will be is if the number of admissions into hospitals go up. But right now, there isn't enough data determine if the amount of testing is related to the number of new cases.
I ran a couple of multiple regressions on some normalized data looking for a relationship. The first time I ran it, the sign on the "test" coefficient was wrong, meaning that has the number of tests went up, the lower the case count.
The second time I ran it with more data accumulated, it now trends in the proper direction at this point in time. Unfortunately, the percent of variation explained by my variables (tests and population density) was only fair-to-middling.
I think the reason why the relationship is not stronger is that they still so little surveillance testing going on. Almost all of the people being tested in most states are already sick. As surveillance testing increases then that is when you should see testing related increases.
I'll update the data again next week and see if things improve.
That said, there will be a point where more testing won't necessarily lead to more cases. But we have some time to go before that happens since testing is still so far behind what is needed.A recent explanation demonstrated that data like the numbers I looked at; tests vs. positives, can only be a broad generalized indicator because of issues with different ways states are reporting their numbers.
Some states include positive viral tests and positive antigen tests in their numbers which can skew the numbers when compared to states that only report viral tests as positives.
Considering how many folks only suffer mildly with Covid-19 before getting over it, (meaning no hospital visit), I am not sure I would place such importance on the hospital admissions numbers.
Of course, I am just guessing, but I think the best indicator will be the original tests vs positives ratio four weeks from 5/15. This will paint the picture of the effect of increased social contact during the reopening by allowing the 1 to 2-week incubation/display period to be represented in the testing numbers.
GA
5/24/2020
"TRUMP: "The United States cannot have all Mail In Ballots. It will be the greatest Rigged Election in history. People grab them from mailboxes, print thousands of forgeries and ‘force’ people to sign. Also, forge names. Some absentee OK, when necessary. Trying to use Covid for this Scam!" — tweet Sunday."
What a lie since he knows that is not true.
"THE FACTS: Voting fraud is rare.
It’s true that some election studies have shown a slightly higher incidence of mail-in voting fraud compared with in-person voting, but the overall risk is extremely low. The Brennan Center for Justice said in 2017 the risk of voting fraud is 0.00004% to 0.0009%." ALSO "Trump’s push for in-person voting runs counter to the current guidance of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention" Meaning Trump is purposely endangering people's health and lives just like the Trumplicans in Wisconsin did - making dozens of people sick.
"TRUMP, on the 2016 election: "I’m fighting the deep state. I’m fighting the swamp. ... They never thought I was going to win, and then I won. And then they tried to get me out. That was the ‘insurance policy.’ She’s going to win, but just in case she doesn’t win we have an insurance policy." — interview aired Sunday on “Full Measure with Sharyl Attkisson.”
THE FACTS: He's repeating a false claim that there was a conspiracy afoot to take him out if he won the 2016 presidential race, based on a text message between two FBI employees.
Trump has repeatedly depicted the two as referring to a plot — or insurance policy — to oust him from office if he beat Democrat Hillary Clinton. It’s apparent from the text that it wasn’t that."
"TRUMP: "I’ve received a lot of positive letters and it seems to have an impact. And maybe it does; maybe it doesn’t. But if it doesn’t, you’re not going to get sick or die. This is a pill that’s been used for a long time — for 30, 40 years on the malaria and on lupus too, and even on arthritis." — remarks on May 18.
TRUMP: "It doesn’t hurt people." — remarks Tuesday after a GOP policy lunch." - A Big Fat Lie
FACTS: It does hurt people when used off-label. If fact it kills people, as several studies have shown including a very big study. Since it does kill people using it as Trump wants people to use it and Trump is telling true believers to use it, he is in effect signing the death warrant for a few of them.
"TRUMP: "You know we got the Veterans Choice." — remarks Friday at veterans’ event.
TRUMP: "We’ve done the greatest job maybe of anything in the VA, because I got VA Choice ... approved." — remarks on May 18.
THE FACTS: False. He didn’t get Veterans Choice approved; President Barack Obama did in 2014. Trump expanded it, under a 2018 law known as the MISSION Act." Why does Trump lie so much?""THE FACTS: Voting fraud is rare.
It’s true that some election studies have shown a slightly higher incidence of mail-in voting fraud compared with in-person voting, but the overall risk is extremely low."
Indicating a lesser degree of something as fact would seem to fall into the category of calling something exaggeration and hyperbole more so than a provable lie. Can you prove those things won't happen in the future, (2024)?
"THE FACTS: He's repeating a false claim that there was a conspiracy afoot to take him out if he won the 2016 presidential race, based on a text message between two FBI employees.
Trump has repeatedly depicted the two as referring to a plot — or insurance policy — to oust him from office if he beat Democrat Hillary Clinton. It’s apparent from the text that it wasn’t that."
What was the insurance policy the text spoke of? What is your proof that it wasn't what was claimed? As we continue to learn more, are you sure you want to defend Strzok and Page?
It looks like you are getting a little 'loose' with your "facts."
GANope, but Trump is stating the fraud claims as fact now. And it isn't true. In any case, the Trumplicans will have a chance to prove it in court since that is the basis of challenging CA's mail-in ballot order.
Insurance policy? Whatever the two FBI agents texted about. From their texts, one can easily see Trump is being very paranoid.Yet you don't know what their "insurance policy" texts were talking about, but even not knowing, you still claim it a fact that it wasn't what Pres. Trump said, right?
GAAnd why do I personally need to know about that?? All I need to know is Trump was talking about it as if it were really true and examination of the texts proves him a liar.
That is all that matters, isn't it. He made a false claim, period.No, that is not all that matters. If you are going to call something a lie you need to be able to support that claim.
If you don't know what the "insurance" texts meant, then how can you legitimately determine someone else's interpretations of those texts are a lie?
"You don't 'think' Pres. Trump's interpretations of what those texts mean are true, but what you "think" is a far cry from the standard of declaring something a "fact."
When you can prove that what those texts did mean is contrary to what Pres. Trump is declaring them to mean—then you can claim factual support for your statements. Until then you are only offering your opinion—not facts.
Regardless of appearances, patterns, or trends, you cannot claim your opinion to be fact without actual factual support. Hence my claim that you are playing "loose" with your claims of "facts."
Can you prove me wrong? Can you provide facts that support your opinion
GAGA: There are many types of lies, but saying something untrue with the intent to deceive, is what Trump does. So by your definition when he says "many people" have told me so and there is never any proof of "many people." Is he lying with the intent to deceive? I would say he is.
Just like his conspiracy theories they are open-ended and never proven. When he says, voting by mail creates fraud and it is proven that is untrue. Is he lying with the intent to deceive?
https://www.factcheck.org/2020/04/trump … formation/"I would say he is."
And there is the difference peoplepower. Your statement is your opinion and is a valid statement.
However, ". . . voting by mail creates fraud and it is proven that is untrue. " is not a valid statement as My Esoteric's own quoted blurb notes it has not been disproven.
GAAnd you are being disingenuously picky and intellectually dishonest. Shall I start looking for your misplaced commas?
So I will leave you to your fantasy that Trump is not a pathological liar and keep posting his lies.". . . disingenuously picky and intellectually dishonest"
. . . and that is bullshit My Esoteric.
Are you saying I am being "disingenuously picky" because I am arguing the difference between opinion and fact? That doesn't seem picky to me, so what am I being disingenuously picky about?
And "intellectually dishonest"? About what? What does your "misplaced commas" reference mean?
I take your charges seriously bud. I think you owe me the courtesy of an explanation to support them.
As to your "fantasy that Trump is not a pathological liar" final word . . . When have you ever seen me address that? Is that the only conclusion you can imagine if someone doesn't agree with you?
I can understand your frustration that you have not been able to convince me that your opinion is fact—when you are so certain it is, but take a breath and step away for a moment. There is no need to let that frustration degenerate into personal attacks when your points should be so easy to prove if you are right.
GAGA: Trump is stating drug use, mail fraud, and the deep state as fact. But his facts are wrong. I call that lying with the intent to deceive or pure ignorance, or playing to his base...what do you call it?
https://apnews.com/fe3bff525afa93918f8f4f6d1843440c
MikeIf your statement is true, then I would call that wrong—claiming an opinion to be a fact. It is as wrong when the president does it as it is when anyone else does it.
Is it the same as a lie? Is the claim stated to be a fact, or is it stated as if it were a fact? I think I will stick with calling it wrong.
Just as a side note; even your linked article generally says Trump is wrong, rather than saying he is lying.
GA
No, because you are picking at immaterial things that have nothing to do with the larger picture that Trump is deceiving part of the public and trying to deceive the rest.
If you want to use the possibility that there is a one in a million, or whatever the number might be, that he could possibly be correct in some alternate universe to show that he might not be lying, be my guest.
It is not my opinion that Page was telling the truth while Trump is lying, it is the assessment of many people in the know that her story rings true. And since I have to pick to chose between the two, I will pick the one known for telling the truth (Page, in case you didn't know it) as opposed to one who lies the majority of the time. To me, it is a no-brainer.That doesn't cut it Scott. Where is my pickiness and dishonesty?
In your world of facts, you seem to be saying that "one-in-a-million" and "assessments you trust" are enough to constitute facts.
From my perspective, (whether you call it nitpicking or intellectually dishonest), you have only supported your opinions with the opinions of others. What is your acceptable formula; how many opinions does it take to turn an opinion into a fact?
Your comment; "If you want to use the possibility that there is a one in a million, or whatever the number might be, that he could possibly be correct in some alternate universe to show that he might not be lying, be my guest"' sure seems like support for an opinion, not a fact.
If a theory, (opinion?), can be discredited by even a one-in-a-million chance then that theory is discredited and not considered fact. Do your facts have a lower threshold of truth?
If a fact, (your opinion), can be disproven—even if it takes one million and one tries, doesn't that remove it from the "fact" category?
You still owe me an explanation for your charges of pickiness, (commas?), and dishonesty.
You are either right or you are wrong—or you misspoke. Which is it?
And for clarification, I was never addressing this point:
"No, because you are picking at immaterial things that have nothing to do with the larger picture that Trump is deceiving part of the public and trying to deceive the rest."
. . . I have always been addressing your comments. (note that I left out your "deceiving" adjective).
GAApparently there are no "facts" in your world, GA, based on your criteria.
Well, that is certainly all the support you need, right? There are no facts in my world.
Kellyann has alternate facts, and My Esoteric has his facts. All is good in the world.
I guess that ends the "disingenuously picky" and intellectually dishonest" part of this discussion. Apparently your "facts" are above dispute.
I would offer one bit of unsolicited advice, there is one fact that exists in my world. It is; an "I think", or "It appears," or It seems," might add a bit of credibility to your 'factual' declarations. As it stands, your declarations of fact are sorely lacking of support by anything more than just other opinions. And that just ain't enough for non-like-minded folks.
Do you accept the same validation for Trump supporter's views? That they can find supporting opinions makes their declarations fact, right?
GA
What if Trump wrongly said that 2 to the nth power is NOT greater than 2 to the nth minus one power with 'n' greater than 0. Would you ask me to prove that?
As to me proving it, I say again, I don't need to because as what I posted contained research by others who I trust (which is why I called it a lie). But since you are forcing me to waste my time proving the obvious -
"When former FBI lawyer Lisa Page and former FBI agent Peter Strzok discussed a so-called "insurance policy" involving then-candidate Donald Trump and the Russia investigation in 2016, they were discussing how quickly to proceed with the probe, Page told lawmakers last year.
Page told House lawmakers in a closed-door interview that the text message about an "insurance policy" if Trump won the 2016 election — which Republicans have cited to point to the anti-Trump bias the investigators exhibited — was a reference to the fact that the FBI's counterintelligence investigation into whether members of Trump's team were colluding with Russia would take on a greater significance if he was in the White House.
"If he is not elected, then, to the extent that the Russians were colluding with members of his team, we're still going to investigate that even without him being President, because any time the Russians do anything with a US person, we care, and it's very serious to us," Page said.
"But if he becomes President, that totally changes the game because now he is the President of the United States," she continued. "He's going to immediately start receiving classified briefings. He's going to be exposed to the most sensitive secrets imaginable. And if there is somebody on his team who wittingly or unwittingly is working with the Russians, that is super serious.""As to me proving it, I say again, I don't need to because as what I posted contained research by others who I trust..."
LOL Esoteric, you will trust anyone that jumps on the bandwagon of demonizing our president. Even if obviously false (Trump supporters are ex
