So apparently Dr. Fauci is part of the deep state if you believe some right-wingers. Apparently, his security needed to be beefed up due to death threats from some of these people. In addition to other pro-Trump groups:
Outlets such as the Gateway Pundit and American Thinker seized on a 2013 email — released by WikiLeaks as part of a cache of communications hacked by Russian operatives — in which Fauci praised Hillary Clinton’s “stamina and capability” during her testimony as secretary of state before the congressional committee investigating the attacks in Benghazi, Libya.
Even as an agent for the Deep State, it's interesting how Dr. Fauci has put aside that loyalty to help Donald Trump help all Americans through this crisis. But to some, he deserves threats. Hard to believe.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics … story.html
"Hard to believe."
Not the the Era of the Don. Everything against him is the Deep State. Poor baby!
Randy, think about how many times the "Deep State" has been mentioned in these forums. It's an insidious euphemism.
You are aware President Trump handpicked each member on the task force? It would seem odd that anyone that supports Trump would threaten Dr. Fauci.
It also appears that Trump has respect for the Dr., and takes his recommendations very seriously.
I have found no evidence of who threatened the Dr. Only WAPO speculation. I find that very unprofessional.
What? The criticism of him came from Pro-Trump, right-wing publications. You are literally making stuff up out of air. There is no evidence they made threats, but they are the ones calling him part of the Deep State.
I looked but can't find any info on where the death threats came from. Once we have evidence and suspects it will be fair to speculate on the why.
The article identifies publications criticizing Dr. Fauci and questioning his expertise and identifying him as a Deep State stooge. One could extrapolate, but not prove, that those threats are most likely to come from those who think Dr. Fauci is a bad actor.
Are you saying the publications made the death threat?
Your assumptions could very well be correct. Or you could be wrong.
I always like to wait before lobbing accusations. But I do see why some might press forward with it.
No, there's nothing supporting the assumption that the publications made the threats, but they published pieces identifying Fauci as a threat, a menace, a Deep Stater who is their enemy. So it seems logical to assume that readers (who knows, it could be one reader) made the threats or are the most likely to have made the threats since they are the only people in the country reading a publication that thinks Fauci is a threat.
Really? You've seen all publications, online chats, dark web sites, etc. where Fauci was the topic of discussion?
I get where you are coming from but I really need more info before making accusations.
There are a lot of crazy people in the world. Of varying political persuasions.
Even Fox News says that conservatives are mad at Fauci:
"Fauci has drawn the ire of some conservatives for swaying Trump from reopening the economy before Easter. "
If you can't believe Fox News, who can you believe?
https://www.foxnews.com/us/fauci-corona … th-threats
This may come as a shock to you but ire and death threats are not the same. Nor does ire necessarily result in death threats. I don't need some media outlet to tell me that.
It may come as a shock to you, but constant fury from the right -- egged on by Herr Trump -- often leads to violence.
The evidence is the multiple mass murders in the last few years of blacks, Jews and Hispanics.
I think all people of good will have spoken out against the divisive nature of heinous statements such as yours, on mass shootings. I'll continue to agree with them. Inflammatory and less than factual statements whose only purpose is to spread hatred and division serve no purpose in a civil society.
The only thing heinous is your overwhelming hatred of anyone who isn't far right.
Note how you spew venom over my simple quote from a Fox News website. Instead of loving it, you flip out. The evidence is obvious.
I do pity the fact that many who hate justify their hate by accusing others of it.
I have consistently stated that as to the claims of the OP, I'll wait for real evidence of who is responsible for the death threats. I have maintained that posture with my responses to you.
Oh, gosh, no. You have no posture on here other than to:
1. Go off topic
2. Launch insults
3. Never back up statements with credible sources
4. NEVER condemn the right for mass murders
It has been the same pattern for years. Heck, my original post, which was very tame, wasn't even directed at you. But you wanted to spew your usual venom anyway.
Time to say this --- Ignore him, and perhaps he will go away. Don't encourage him, please.
PTP, We can already, and I am sure we see who is spreading hate, and trying to spread discord. I applaud you for keeping your cool. Promismen has made some inexcusable comments.
Wait a second, Promisem's statements should be spoken out against, but the animosity toward Dr. Fauci doesn't?
And criticizing a scientist for providing data and scientific consensus by saying he's a Deep State stooge and effectively "our enemy" has no consequence or isn't a cause that produces some effect?
Is this really your assertion?
Not in the least. What bizarre meandering thought process led you there?
Edit. I've tried to research this. Correct me if I'm wrong but it appears security was beefed up not due to individual threats but comments made on conspiracy theories in far right outlets.
I do wish both sides would stop the ridiculous over the top false and inflammatory claims.
Because that's the first angle you seem to take sometimes. It seems like you're attacking the messenger.
It wasn't meant as any attack. I was just pointing out that people would be better served using their own brains to come to the most reasonable conclusion.
I think, too often, many on the left tend to try to find the most outrageous stand and then try to paint any who disagree with them as holding it. I consider that a willful abdication of an attempt to be civil.
There is no evidence other than speculation in regards to threats to Dr. Fauci. One can't give tell of an incident at this point of if there has been a threat or what form that thread was.
Promisem once again has joined in a conversation an proceeded to direct accusations, insults at one of the users on the thread.
Promisem ---"Oh, gosh, no. You have no posture on here other than to:
1. Go off topic
2. Launch insults
3. Never back up statements with credible sources
4. NEVER condemn the right for mass murders
It has been the same pattern for years. Heck, my original post, which was very tame, wasn't even directed at you. But you wanted to spew your usual venom anyway."
This is a factually an insult directed at PTP.
A big difference in vague unidentifed unverified threat against the Dr.
Not sure why some put up with Promismen BS?
Crank, do you approve of Promismen attacks on others?
Damn. That's a good one. Original, catchy, and a statement in itself. Genius!
Back to the uninvited mockery again. So begins the following pattern:
1. The contemptuous and intolerant man erupts.
2. He ignores the major point and cherry picks two words.
3. He realizes with shame that he has shown once again who he really is.
4. He then bends over backwards to save what's left of his reputation on here and pretends to be a fake nice guy for a while.
5. Something that has nothing to do with him will enrage him once again.
His dark side and Herr Trump's have a lot in common.
"Fauci has drawn the ire of some conservatives for swaying Trump from reopening the economy before Easter. "
Yet, Ms. D. Wallace, the author of the article did not expand on her accusation. No examples, no names, zip. Poorly written article. Nothing to back up her opinion what so ever.
Or from left wingers that think anyone working with Trump rather than against any action he takes just has to be condemned and preferably stopped? We see that in these forums, why not in the rest of the country?
That's a stretch. Does Dr. Fauci deserve this criticism?
This goes to a point I've been making - aggressive animosity toward science and scientists by the Right. This leads to a lack of faith in science overall and when trouble hits, a reliance on your own "natural abilities" or connection to God to solve your problems instead of scientific expertise.
You think it's a stretch? Look through just these forums. You will find hundreds of posts denigrating Trump, and anyone that supports any action he has ever taken. The perceived wrongdoing doesn't have to be true, doesn't have to have actually happened and is usually grossly exaggerated or spun with opinion taking the lead over truth.
As an example I offer a thread going on right now, wherein anyone that voted for Trump, for any reason whatsoever, 4 years ago is to be considered supporting sexual predators and is, in fact, probably one themselves.
And you think people won't try the same thing with Fauci? He's strongly connected with Trump, not just having cast a vote "against, not for, an opponent" but actively helping Trump address the virus. That is far more than is needed to these individuals to arouse their ire and hatred.
Well, all I can say is that the criticism is coming from right-wing publications. Is he a Deep State hack? From what I've seen, there's no worse thing you can say about a person than he's part of the Deep State.
Yes, I get that. I think LtL's statement is spot on here: "I do wish both sides would stop the ridiculous over the top false and inflammatory claims."
I've seen posts (not here) claiming all the medical supplies are going to red states, at the expense of blue states...while nearly all efforts are the opposite. Hospital ships to blue areas. Airlifts of needed supplies, all to blue areas. Ventilators, masks, even people are being shifted to almost exclusively blue states and areas. This is natural and proper, as it is the population centers (almost all blue) in desperate need right now, but nevertheless the statement was put out there in a rather obvious attempt to bash the President.
We're seeing, and have been for some time, a tremendous effort to divide our country, and insisting it is "right wingers" or "left wingers" doing the damage supports and expands that effort. We don't need that - rather that saying it is our political foes doing this, why not be just as truthful and simply refer to them all as "idiots"?
I agree, mostly. I've been doing a lot more research into any statements I find - there was one on Hobby Lobby just this morning. It was about how the wife of the CEO was keeping her stores open because of a message from God. I was going to post it and then I dug into it and discovered that it wasn't entirely true. I'm finding that a lot of statements coming from "my side" are exaggerations. I've been trying hard not to repeat statements without verification - and I've failed sometimes.
What is not debatable is Trump's downplaying of this thing and his delayed response and his unique ability to trust his own judgement above any experts. That is simply fact. Was it just days ago he told us we'd be back to work by April 15? He seems to have no empathy.
Now, is this criticism useful right now? It's probably a waste of time and I'm not even sure it benefits those who are complaining. There will be plenty of time to hash this out later, but given how Trump gaslights everything he does, he's the architect of his own situation. Nobody trusts him one iota, so it's hard to give him any latitude right now or ever. Good God, he just thrust Jared Kushner at us yesterday, who proceeded to blame the Governors for their own situations. Kushner has ZERO experience in medicine. Why is he leading anything? Wouldn't it be more confidence building to give us an expert? Oh wait, he doesn't believe in experts. Yet another signal of that yesterday. His cronies are better than any expert. I'm sure Ivanka will be on the front lines of this soon. At least she displays empathy for people.
Trump's own response to any criticism is always to blame somebody. He never takes responsibility. He blames Obama. He blames anybody. He only takes credit for good things. A person who does the is fundamentally untrustworthy. He never makes any mistakes.
I guess we should be bigger people in light of the situation, but sometimes people get what they give in this world and Trump has ejaculated nothing but blame and vitriol. Human beings being human beings don't exactly feel any kindness toward him. That's what happens when you spend so much time belittling people and demeaning them.
And you have made some very good points about how all this plays out and why. The left blames Trump. But there's culturally more to it. Unfortunately, those reasons are probably too complex for people to bother with. Trump is an extension of our culture.
"Was it just days ago he told us we'd be back to work by April 15?"
No. Whenever it was, it contained the words "we hope" or something to that effect. To my knowledge he never claimed it would be over by Easter despite repeated claims that he did. I've listened to the sound bite too often to fall for that one.
"Nobody trusts him one iota, so it's hard to give him any latitude right now or ever."
Perhaps no one trusts him because of the lies and exaggerations about what he says. Like it will be over by Easter.
"Kushner has ZERO experience in medicine."
Your point? At this time we have plenty of experts in medicine. What we need, more than anything, is someone able to handle the logistics of getting materials produced and delivered to where they are needed. I've read a little about Kushner; he seems to be the "go to" guy when Trump has a problem he can't solve. And he delivers, time after time. THAT'S what we need, not another bureaucrat trying to fill petri dishes with a miracle cure.
"Trump's own response to any criticism is always to blame somebody."
That's almost comical considering the people in these very forums laying blame for everything (bad) possible at Trump's feet, while giving credit for everything (good) to someone else.
"Trump has ejaculated nothing but blame and vitriol."
Haven't watched his recent daily updates, have you? He is probably coming across as more humble than at any point in his life. No apologies, but almost nothing of what you're saying is all he puts out, either.
Wilderness, I appreciate how you're parsing his statement about getting back to work by April 15. You are certainly right. He said something about "hoping", but still, it's a very irresponsible, uninformed thing to say. He said something similar about Malaria drugs - he hoped they would work. He usually gives himself that out.
"I'd love to have it open by Easter" is what he said.
Here's another quote:
"America will, again, and soon, be open for business," Trump said. "Very soon. A lot sooner than three or four months that somebody was suggesting. Lot sooner. We cannot let the cure be worse than the problem itself."
I'm sorry, but stuff like this is either wishful thinking with no basis in fact or outright lying knowing that the "hope" isn't possible. False hope is a terrible thing. Usually, for Trump, it's like he's rolling dice, playing a gamble. If he's right, it's an amazing prediction and "I told you so". If he's wrong, well, that's not really what he meant.
His response to this thing from the start has been to downplay its seriousness - hoping, guessing, denying, blaming. He's just not a leader. It's more how a con man talks, constantly trying to convince you he's got some answer. Con men pretend to be experts in everything and anything, convincing people they know what they're talking about, sounding like an expert.
I agree that lately, he's appeared more humble. I agree that there's a tendency to blame him for pretty much everything. The virus obviously isn't his fault. However, he's even lied about nobody being able to predict this or knowing about it when his own people cautioned him last year. It's admirable to believe the best in people, but nothing in his history or from the people who know him best suggests that such a thing will result in anything but disappointment.
I fear that many Trump supporters will carry that hope to their graves.
I think we have very different views on why he is, or was, making those kinds of statements.
I don't see it as downplaying its seriousness - I see it as offering the people some hope that things will work out. An effort to prevent panic. Trying to spread calm. All exactly what we expect from a leader rather than trying to spread panic.
But either way, it would take a fool to accept the word of an politician, untrained in biology, to think he actually knew what he was talking about. Indeed, anyone trying to read between the lines would know it was nothing but spreading oil on the waters - certainly I took it that way. I probably don't believe any more of what he says than you do, and that was just another case of not taking the word of a politician at face value.
Even the 3-4 months to be open for business - if half the country is shut down for 6 months we may as well close the doors permanently. At least that's MY opinion - we cannot afford to wait longer than that. Whatever the cost in lives, it will be greater as the country grinds to a halt and we face something that will make the Great Depression look like a cake walk. IMHO, and I don't appear to be alone - why the giant spike in purchase of guns otherwise?
I would like to comment on part of this. I haven't seen Trump downplaying anything as much as I've seen him trying to give hope and a calming influence.
I think we all knew this was very dangerous. I see Trump as saying 'don't panic. We'll get through this together.' Honestly, I would expect any president to do that. I think he's done a good job of putting medical professionals at the forefront in the conferences. They give us the facts, and he tries to highlight the best of it.
It's like the malarial drug. Fauci wants more hard data but Trump highlights the evidence coming in from doctors on the front lines who say it works. Trump isn't counter to Fauci. It's two comments in harmony.
Now we've got the hoopla over the ventilators beings 'ours'. All that meant when I heard it is that the federal government has a stockpile they will dole out to the areas that need them. They don't belong to any one state they are a stockpile for the whole country.
I think the left has a different attitude and a lack of understanding of the role of the federal government. The states make their own plans, preparations and policies. The federal government is not designed to overstep the governors. In a situation like this they listen and provide assistance to the states.
I do think if many would shake their bias and put it on the back burner until this crisis was over they would see a federal response that was attempting to navigate in a manner that was taking the initiatives they can, in the space they are supposed to be in, and offering full support to the spaces that are not theirs to control.
And your comment that they knew and weren't prepared is unkind and disingenuous. Yes, it was common knowledge that a pandemsic could happen at any time. But, a pandemic of what? What would be the symptoms? What medical equipment would we find to be needed? How would it spread? What would be the incubation period?
The list of questions are endless. You can't prepare for the unknown. Why did the Obama administration not replenish the supplies they used during (was it) the H1N1 outbreak? Why did that department not point out the shortages after the change in administration? Why did states wait so long to try to quarantine? Could we have mitigated damages by each area that had an outbreak locking down faster so it couldn't spread to other areas? What steps fell under federal capabilities and which under the states?
Making Trump the scapegoat all the way around is pointless, shortsighted and counter productive.
Read this and tell me how you come to that conclusion:
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/15/opin … virus.html
Here's your statement: "I think we all knew this was very dangerous."
Here are some of Trump's words, a snippet from the article:
Trump, however, repeatedly told Americans that there was no reason to worry. On Jan. 24, he tweeted, “It will all work out well.” On Jan. 28, he retweeted a headline from One America News, an outlet with a history of spreading false conspiracy theories: “Johnson & Johnson to create coronavirus vaccine.” On Jan. 30, during a speech in Michigan, he said: “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.”
Is that a person who thought this was serious?
Let's start with...Let's not use the NY Times as our source. They are incredibly biased because they are in the trenches of the virus and running scared.
NY officials were telling New Yorkers in February and the first part of March to go on business as usual. In a city packed together like sardines...is it any wonder such instructions resulted in catastrophe? Your example of Trump's reassurances is in January.
I'll go through the time line and try to respond in detail. I'm not attempting to defend Trump as much as trying to see your point but I'm going to have to go to unbiased sources to research.
What is your unbiased source going to be? Are Trump’s tweets and quotes going to be different in that source?
NYT has a bias, like any source, but they are the journalistic gold standard in the U.S.
I'll just cross reference resources for timelines, mostly. The NY Times has to match up to other sources on those timelines. Then compare where we were to comments made. You have to remember China withheld information, lied about a lot of it and the WHO carried water for them for quite some time. So we have to look at when we began to know the extent of the threat.
I would also point out how much pushback and criticism the administration got when they started trying to minimize cases coming in to the country.
So do you think it is possible that the NYT printed a false timeline?
The criticism I read about his China travel policy (given a positive comment in the NYT piece) is that it wasn’t going to be effective because it didn’t stop people getting into the country other ways.
I think one point where you are being proven right is that this is clearly counterproductive. When we will never even agree on what the facts are, there isn’t much hope about agreeing on policy or solutions.
I don't know. Who does we refer to? You and me or the different sides of the argument.
I will say in a perfect world (perfect for reacting to such a scenario) where you were in charge of everything and no law stood in your way a whole lot more could have been done, sooner.
I'm not so sure a whole lot more could have been done (by anyone).
Something that so many people forget, or just set aside as if it doesn't matter, is that there are costs to anything we did or might have done. Not just money - social, political (from local to US to international politics), economic, legal, psychological, etc. Yes, we could have shut the country down - put national guard in every large city and forbid exit from the home. No trucks on the road, no railroads carrying freight, no electricity as no one to run the generating plants, water/sewer plants shut down with no workers, etc. Obviously something not to be considered, but how far down that road is too far? That's the question.
And that's a valid point. Hindsight is always fun but had the Trump administration called for even just a stay at home order for areas with a small number of cases, back in February, would any governor have followed that advice?
Nope. I doubt even NY would have. They were still advocating going about business as usual in early March.
Wasn't he declared a racist (again) for banning travel from China? What if he banned any unnecessary travel inside the US back in February or even January?
Yeah, hindsight is fun, especially when the goal is to blame someone else for not taking the perfect action in a completely novel situation.
True. But, everyone is scared and even in the best of political circumstances (which definitely don't exist) people would be lashing out blindly trying to lay blame.
More from the blind:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national … rc404=true
A useful action...if the immediate goal is political. Unfortunately that is all too often the case and is most definitely a priority for an awful lot of people in this crises.
Have you found one of these publications? I have not located one.
That does not appear to be one of the "Pro-Trump, right-wing publications" that are making threats. I would like to see some of those publications, with the threat, as well.
Rush Limbaugh isn’t right-wing? The other sources cited are Pro-Trump Facebook groups.
I couldn't find any threats. That is what I wanted to see - publications making threats against Fauci, not a publication saying that someone else has done so without supplying any proof in the way of links or videos.
Nor was the Buzzfeed article written by Limbaugh and as far as I know it isn't owned by him either. Didn't listen to Limbaugh as a waste of my time.
This is obviously a waste of time. If right-wing publications call Fauci a member of the deep state, it stands to reason that those opposed to the deep state would feel threatened.
Here is a link to one of the referenced articles:
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/20 … tooge.html
I must say though, after researching this, the truth is quite a bit more complicated. The article itself is politically incorrect, but quite interesting.
Thank you - that's closer although there were still no threats mentioned.
Yes, incorrect in more than a few places. And so highly spun and slanted as to be almost unreadable. If I had to guess, written by someone that doesn't like gays and doesn't want the "gay scourge" of AIDS to go away.
Actually, it very much reminded me of some of the far left garbage I've read that suffered from the same ailments. An almost total disconnect with reality.
Here's one article from The Gateway Pundit, mentioned in the Post article. If you go to this web site and search Fauci, you'll see the animosity displayed toward Fauci. Again, does it not stand to reason that if you create such animosity, threats are likely to follow:
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/0 … -ethiopia/
"Again, does it not stand to reason that if you create such animosity, threats are likely to follow:"
LOL If threats likely follow animosity, and even .01% of threats get acted on with .01% being successful, Trump would have been assassinated in his first couple of months. So no, in today's age of the net and constant vicious and vitriolic rants about everything under the sun, it does not stand to reason that threats follow animosity. The vast majority are either just that - rants - or an effort to change the political scene (not through violence).
I didn't actually read this one, though I DID skim it. It isn't worth the few minutes of my precious time to read. I may be locked down, but there are still naps to take, and this kind of crap does not take priority over a good nap!
Well, at least we agree that it's crap. However, if you read through it, threads of what is said there is repeated on these forums. This is where the Deep State comes from.
I doubt that's where the mythical "Deep State" comes from. I'm beginning to think that this "Deep State" is nothing more than the power behind the curtain, whether it be corporations buying politicians or the real power at the top of the respective parties. Perhaps a handful of politicians (Pelosi, for instance, and McConnell) pulling the strings for their entire party. And that as such it actually does exist, although not much like what is meant by those referring to it as the deep state. Certainly there is no secret "Illuminati" or freemasons running the country.
Well, it's generally used to denigrate people who have worked in government for a long time.
And that seems fair enough, for with time comes power and control...control never envisioned by those that wrote the Constitution.
There's plenty that the writers of the Constitution didn't envision. Like automatic weapons, video games; etc.
Ironically, sometimes those career officials come in handy. They're the ones that know how things work and can get things done and have established important relationships. When something catastrophic happens, like a terrorist attack or a hurricane or a pandemic, they can carry out a plan.
But if you denigrate those people and fire them and then assume their positions are needless and only judge them on their longevity and not their performance, you find that when you need them, they're not there, and then the wheels of government don't turn when they need to.
Yes, there are times when they can get things done. Things THEY want done - anything else is shunted aside and forgotten. They can carry out a plan...THEIR plan and any others are shunted aside and forgotten.
Yes, they have "connections"...connections to sources of money for their pockets in return for legislation beneficial to the donor. And when a pandemic happens, we see them padding emergency bills with massive amounts of pork to buy more votes and further THEIR plans.
Or maybe, if we fire them, we'll find that the wheels of government turn much better without their delaying tactics and extreme partisanship designed to give them even more power. Maybe we'll find that legislators can actually work together when they and their power plays are gone.
Sorry for the rant; I've become extremely disillusioned with the workings of our government. A pack of children, fighting in the sandbox playing "King of the Mountain" with near total disregard of the results of their play on the people or the country.
I understand your disillusionment, but we're talking about different kinds of people here. We're not talking about the politicians. I think you couldn't be more wrong.
We're talking about people who have dedicated their careers to their jobs. Regardless of who is President, they do them without any fanfare, any accolades. They most often perform those jobs at a high level.
You're talking about legislators. I'm talking about the grunts in the government. The front-line workers. The people who make things happen. There are lots of them and I think you're doing them a huge disservice and insulting their dedication given they usually make much less money than the same people in the private sector.
Civil servants. Trump has utterly dismissed them as worthless, so it should be no surprise that government is having such a hard time. Who wants to work for a boss who thinks what you do is worthless? All those Deep Staters. The cogs that make the machine go. Now the machine is broken, so it shouldn't surprise anyone.
YOU weren't talking abut legislators, but I was.
Yes, I agree that long experience in other jobs is extremely worthwhile...as long as it doesn't build the kind of power our legislators have.
Yes, Trump dismissed most of the people working directly with the President...as has every other president. No one wants people there that flat out don't accept the policies or the person elected to run the country. That will fight to go around or ignore the policies they don't like. That will "leak" everything under the sun. They aren't there to disrupt presidential actions; they are there to support them and see that they become a part of our country. If they won't do that, then remove them.
And that, too, is a good thing, for with the wrong people nothing gets done no matter HOW efficient they are or who they know. But they aren't the Deep Staters, at least not as I see the term. They are the nuts and bolts of the machine, not the driving force steering it. Until, at least, they decide that their own thoughts, feelings and concepts take priority over that of their boss, whereupon they ARE trying to steer it...in a direction the boss does not want to go.
Our government machine, specifically the White House, is not broken in and of itself. The whole system is broken from extreme, over the top, partisanship and an absolute refusal to work with anyone not of the right party as well as make continued, never ending, attempts to push through legislation that fails over and over and over. The current methodology of picking, a little more every year, to reach a goal that was voted down - things like trying to end abortion and gun ownership that see a never ending attack against them. Accept that your extreme views are not the views of the country and back off! But they don't - they keep on year after year.
Well, Wilderness, you and I basically agree on these points. There's absolutely nothing wrong with a President firing political appointees. A lot of people criticized the first bill that got passed, but shouldn't we have applauded it? McConnell put it together without Dem support, then the Dems chimed in, then the two parties came together and worked things out. Isn't that how it's supposed to work?
However, there is a problem when that same President denigrates and belittles career officials who serve multiple administrations, be it regular intelligence officials, career diplomats, or just regular government "cogs". We're seeing the effects of that now. Trump doesn't believe it's the job of the federal government to solve problems, even in times of crisis. He fundamentally doesn't believe government serves a positive purpose, so he sees no problem insulting those who work for it.
It's just fundamentally not the quality of a good leader. When you lead like that, people don't follow. They don't have confidence in you. They don't inspire you to be your best. When that leader removes your support, cuts your funding, denigrates your role, it's hard to do your job well.
The federal government isn't functioning well right now because the leadership at the top is rotten. IMHO.
And just as a funny aside - don't these forums pretty well reflect how our politicians behave toward each other? They just bicker constantly and accomplish nothing productive.
C'mon Crank. Trump doesn't think it's the job of the federal govt. to solve problems...as he works to get hospital ships moved, provide supplies from FEMA and the military, imposes international travel bans, browbeats business to change their manufactured product, on and on the things Trump is working on give the lie to such a statement. I get that you think leadership is rotten, but that isn't a reason to put out such tripe. You know better; for shame.
But Trump DOES have a different view than liberals do about the role of federal government - no doubt about that. And, IMHO, he is right to do so for the liberal faction in this country is all about giving the feds more and more power and authority over states.
"And just as a funny aside - don't these forums pretty well reflect how our politicians behave toward each other? They just bicker constantly and accomplish nothing productive."
For sure. We have half the participants interested only in bashing Trump, whether there is a bona fide reason to do so or not. And the other side very often responds, knowing full well that no minds will be changed and hardly anyone will back off their rant.
Oh, Wilderness, no shame at all. I can provide statement after statement, appointment after appointment of unqualified individuals, that shows an effort by the Trump Administration to make sure government isn't a solution.
You can even see it in how he responds to the states - "solve your own problems!" and forces them to compete against one another for supplies. If there's shame to be had, it's right there. The role he's rejecting is the very one the federal government was established for.
I don't have any problem with smaller government, but undermining its role and effectiveness by denigrating its workers and hiring those with no experience whose interests lie strictly in corporate satisfaction, is a recipe for disaster.
I have no issue with States rights either, but that doesn't mean that each state is own its own. And yes, Trump is responding now, after being dragged kicking and screaming to it.
And even still, he continues to promote unproven Malaria drugs in complete opposition to every medical expert - at the behest of the far right. It's not impossible that the drug is a solution, but it's very interesting that, once again, he knows more than the doctors.
I guess even you and I are showing ourselves as a reflection of our political establishment, even when we probably agree on a lot more than we disagree on. Could you imagine if Trump was your boss? What a horrible thought. Your Trump bashing is my truth-to-power.
"And even still, he continues to promote unproven Malaria drugs in complete opposition to every medical expert - at the behest of the far right."
FDA Approves Emergency Use Of Malaria Drug Trump Touted Despite Scant Evidence That It Works
"Scientists have been quick to try to counter President Donald Trump's praise of a potential treatment for the coronavirus. But some say that since hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine at least don't seem to worsen COVID-19, it might be worth the try. "We have literally nothing else to offer these patients other than supportive care,” said Dr. David Juurlink, an internist from Canada."
. . .
"Many experts say there isn’t enough evidence that the drugs work for the coronavirus, but at least a few say there’s little to lose in giving hydroxychloroquine to patients who are severely ill with coronavirus. (Ornstein, 3/29)
And then there is that small study the NYT reported on:
Malaria Drug Helps Virus Patients Improve, in Small Study
"The malaria drug hydroxychloroquine helped to speed the recovery of a small number of patients who were mildly ill from the coronavirus, doctors in China reported this week."
. . .
“It’s going to send a ripple of excitement out through the treating community,” said Dr. William Schaffner, an infectious disease expert at Vanderbilt University."
I will note, as the article did; that this was a small study that also stated more research was needed.
But . . .
Maybe it isn't against every medical expert's advice. And perhaps that old adage about not letting perfect be the enemy of good or half-a-loaf is better than none come to mind?
Do you really want to stand on the completely negative claim against Pres. Trump's support of the anti-malarial drug combo?
As most medical experts would advise, hope is good, but touting it as a solution is foolish because without wide-scale testing, even the side effects, which may end up killing people on a larger scale, may cause more problems.
Point is, Trump isn't a doctor and neither is Rudy Giuliani and it continues this emphasis that experts aren't really experts and anybody can read something off the internet and offer it up as a "solution". Trump is pushing it to the point where he doesn't even want to let Dr. Fauci speak about it.
From everything that I've read, it's primarily Fox News and extreme right-wing web sites that are pushing this information. As a for instance.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/0 … ent-trump/
Just so you know where this push to use this drug is really coming from and what influences Giuliani and Trump.
https://www.theblaze.com/news/la-doctor … oronavirus
Although I don't know if that is a left or right source
It's interesting. If you Google the doctor's name, he's cited across all kinds of right-wing sources.
The Blaze was a pay television network founded by Glenn Beck and is generally considered pretty right-wing.
While not questioning this doctor's experience, how is it that he's cited in all these right-wing publications and in none of the left-wing ones or even many centrist ones?
And here's why reporting this is very problematic:
He said he has found it only works if combined with zinc. The drug, he said, opens a channel for the zinc to enter the cell and block virus replication.
He added that the drug should not be prescribed for those who are presenting only mild symptoms, as there are concerns about shortages for patients with other conditions who need to take the drug on a regular basis.
So this is anecdotal and we don't know specifically why it works or whether it's the Malaria drug or something in combination.
I completely understand where you are coming from but, honestly, hundreds of thousands of American lives are on the line. If he is a real doctor, of this is real evidence (anecdotal or not) if I were sick, and it's working but it may be one drug or the other that's; helping I'd take both.
We don't have time to wait on clinical trials. If it's not killing them, the drugs are being used off label but they are FDA approved drugs with known and documented side effects it isn't the same as snake oil. It's possible hope.
"While not questioning this doctor's experience, how is it that he's cited in all these right-wing publications and in none of the left-wing ones or even many centrist ones?"
Perhaps he said something positive about Trump sometime in the past 20 or 30 years?
No, please excuse my snarkiness. I should not have said that.
Well, maybe not something positive about Trump, but I did find where the doctor pushed a conspiracy theory for years about President Obama not being born in this country or having a legitimate birth certificate.
So you're right, that's why nobody believes this doctor.
It is Glen Beck. Definitely a Right-leaning source.
But, if you follow some of the internal links, and then Google that data, you find other not-right-leaning sources talking about that same LA doctor, and one other, (a Doc named Zelenko in New York state),that is also claiming good results with zinc+malaria drug combination.
Hmm . . .
I remember reading something about the NY doctor also. It amazes me how innovative and quick on their feet the scientific community is, and has been, on this. There are many stories out there of many possible avenues of hope.
It's been a global effort. The fact that Trump has seen hope in the malarial drug, in my opinion, is only because it's already there, already approved and in use for other things and readily available. It's an avenue to get real help into the hands of doctors the most rapidly. I get his optimistic opinion. I don't understand the vitriol pointed in his direction because of it.
Because doctors are very careful to apply drugs to specific things due to interactions. That's why they test. Frequently, drugs work for one thing, but have very bad results with another. THAT'S WHY. And even this doctor is quick to point out the very specific conditions and combination he's using this - with Zinc and not for mild cases. If there were a plant in Honduras that cured cancer, wouldn't every cancer patient go to Honduras? Yet, there's always some plant in some country that cures something through some miracle.
And like you, I'd try just about anything if nothing else was working. Of course, J.K. Rowling is touting a breathing technique that saved her. Why not push that? The medical community does not recommend treatment based on anecdotal evidence and they are very careful when such anecdotal evidence comes up because so much of it is make believe.
I'll give Trump credit - at least he's not promoting the power of prayer or Jesus. So good on him for that.
Since I don't recall you ever posting a claim to be a doctor, you are in no more of a position to preach about what doctors do, than the rest of us.
Of course drugs interacting can cause positive and negative responses. The point is you are equating anecdotal evidence to no evidence. The anecdotal evidence is derived from doctors using specific medications to treat the virus and doctors reporting their observations of the results.
No blind studies, no double blind studies, no time for clinical trials, etc.
But, and most importantly, drugs already approved for use and distribution. Not ones that may be miracle drugs 10 years from now. Years from now after everyone sick today has already died.
Doctors do not recommend treatment based on anecdotal evidence.
This thing has major side effects and people are now taking it for non-emergency reasons.
https://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory … 9-69997268
Actually they do quite frequently, prescribe medicine for off label use.
I'd just slide into another Trump bash fest on another topic. You can't gain traction with this one.
Should the President be pushing an off label treatment? Not in normal times and maybe not now. But, I can't fault him. I get the why.
You're probably right. I'll pick another topic. I wonder if he has a valid birth certificate.
Oh, wait, I see he just fired another independent official with oversight of the $2 trillion coronavirus funds. I could try that too. I bet that guy is part of the deep state.
So many to pick from and they come at me so fast.
"Just so you know where this push to use this drug is really coming from and what influences Giuliani and Trump."
I wasn't addressing the "who is pushing it" point. I was just noting that perhaps promoting the drug's use wasn't totally unrealistic and irresponsible and that perhaps it wasn't opposed by "every medical expert."
I think that when those perspectives are considered, (as shown by the links and blurbs), then your quoted claim seems to be less than reasonable.
Realistic hope in a dire situation can be a good thing, and it looks like this malaria drug idea could possibly turn out to be a ray of realistic hope. At least there is no evidence, (judging from its long history of use for other ailments), that it is a dangerous hope.
I wasn't really pointing out the source of the pushing to be critical, just. curious as to why the right-wing publications are running those stories and the left-wing and centrist ones are largely not running it. It doesn't really seem like a political thing.
The Right is simply backing up Trump's words re the experimental drugs. Yep, it's political...
It does appear to be a problem created by political bias but in this particular issue that problem does not appear to be the right.
What say you Randy? Do you get as up in arms about off label use of any other drugs or just ones Trump happens to know the name of?
I doubt Trump knows anything about other drugs, Denise. Everything I've read about the malaria drug indicates it isn't very helpful for the coronavirus.
I have more faith in the plasma from recovered patients being used as an antibody to treat the virus. Trump tries to be hopeful, but he may be causing more harm than help, or hope.
Your faith in other things is great. I've got faith that out of all the things they are looking at some will be helpful.
But your faith doesn't even qualify as anecdotal evidence. You just like the sound of it.
I think any reasonable person without political bias or an over inflated sense of their own mental faculties (which cause them to believe the obvious is beyond others) accepts that Trump is nothing more than hopeful.
"But your faith doesn't even qualify as anecdotal evidence. You just like the sound of it."
Projecting a bit, Denise?
On the contrary Crankalicious, I think it is a very political thing.
Right-leaning sources promote it because it supports a president they support and Left-leaning sources don't promote it because doing so would support a president they oppose.
It seems clear to me.
Just read an article by a doctor in California. He's prescribing it with zinc and he said the results are amazing in all patients he's prescribed it too.
"And even still, he continues to promote unproven Malaria drugs in complete opposition to every medical expert - at the behest of the far right. It's not impossible that the drug is a solution, but it's very interesting that, once again, he knows more than the doctors."
Doctors all over the world, including the USA, are providing these drugs to Covid19 patients and having good results. In fact, it has become the first drug of choice. In Michigan, we presently have over 3000 patients taking the drug at Ford Hospital. This presentation was given to one of our State Representatives, she was at death's door...And is home now within days of being treated with Hydroxychloroquine. She thanked our President that brought the drug to her attention. Trump has a forum that gives him the opportunity to reach the American people. I for one he takes the opportunity to make us aware of Hydroxychloroquine. It seems to rub many the wrong way, I appreciated his input and the heads up on this drug. Trump has taken every measure to procure this drug for the hospitals that are using it. In New York and Michigan, it is used as one of the first to treat a patient that is critical. As well as those that request it due to "Right To Try". So if you were dying of COVID19 would you agree to be treated with Hydroxychloroquine?
https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/ … 955430001/
Yes, but some are finding out the the cure may be worse than the disease, Shar.
This is why one has the very choice to either try the drug or refuse it. We all have the right to consider the side effects of any drug. And I can tell you with good assurance that physicians are especially providing anyone that is offered hydroxychloroquine each and every side effect.
One can refuse any drug they are prescribed. I being a nurse support Right To Try.
I see the link I added on my previous post didn't work, Shar. Try this one:
https://www.newsweek.com/swedish-hospit … ts-1496368
The article gives room for concern on the parts of some Doc's due to pts having adverse side effects. There are many that have taken the drug that reports good outcomes. As I side in my comment the physicians are providing the pts with the long list of side effects and giving them the option to choose in situations where the treatments have not worked, and it appears most were at a critical point of their illness. The point is they have the choice. We have little so far to save lives in critical Pts.
Although, I have read there are many drugs being worked on all over the world that are promising in helping cure or at least help with adverse symptoms. I will guaranty you they will also have a long list of side effects just as asprin does or any drug have.
For instance, my doc prescribe Crestor
Muscle and joint pain
Abdominal pain and nausea
Elevated sugar levels
Feeling excessively tired
Loss of appetite
Pain in your upper belly
Yellowing of the skin or eyes
Please consider the drug is given as last-ditch effort or at the request of Due to making a decision to try the drug. I myself if I found I had no other recourse and I was dying, I would take the drug. I would not take it as a prophylactic.to decrease the chances that the illness gets worst or be avoided.
Just my feelings but the drug is needed for the time being. This virus is new, and we just have very little to treat it with when it comes to critical cases. Some that get it have little to no symptoms, some become critical in a short period of time.
All drugs have adverse side effects. When considering any medication I think one must weigh all, the side effects versus not taking the drug for a given health problem. If I have a headache I might not take aspirin due to side effects. If I am treating COVID and they ask me to sign a DNR, I might opt to take that drug. Even knowing the adverse side effects. My common sense would kick in --- death or drug?
Hey, if I were dying from something, I'd try anything.
The point I am making here is that it should be handled more carefully than it is. You just don't roll that grenade out there without caution. I think Trump is fine to suggest stuff if he provides some context and not make it sound like a miracle. It's unproven. He should say so.
If it saves 80% of critically ill patients but causes permanent heart damage in 80% of the mildly ill patients who take it, then that's something he needs to be more cautious about. Those kinds of things are things we don't know.
I mean, of all the misinformation and lies he's spewed, this is lower on the severity scale than most.
As an aside, kudos to Trump's family for doing a good job promoting social distancing. That gave me some hope.
"Trump is fine to suggest stuff if he provides some context and not make it sound like a miracle. It's unproven. He should say so."
I don't approve of Trump touting the drug as a cure-all. I don't mind him bringing the drug to the attention of the public. Keep in mind Doc's are the ones prescribing the drug and offering all the side effects. The side effects are sobering, and I would assume anyone that would consider taking them, take them at their own risk.
"If it saves 80% of critically ill patients but causes permanent heart damage in 80% of the mildly ill patients who take it, then that's something he needs to be more cautious about. Those kinds of things are things we don't know."
This drug has been treating other illnesses for many years. I have a friend that has Lupis and has taken it for years without any problem, and it has helped her cope with her illness as no other drug did. One could say millions are taking the drug without a problem. Although that does not mean some do not tolerate the drug. I will guaranty if this drug caused a large number of adverse side effects it would be pulled by FDA. The drug has been around for many years used for lupus, arthritis, and many other autoimmune diseases. Actually it has been prescribed for years to help children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis.
It seems some are having a hard time with the drug because Trump has been talking about it. research hydroxychloroquine.
I think the problem is occurring due to the drug previously not being used for viruses. This virus causes great pulmonary inflammation due to the virus. hydroxychloroquine is an anti-inflammatory drug. Commonly we use steroids for inflammation in the lungs. It just was not as helpful with this virus, due to the very quick onset of respiratory inflammation COVID19 causes.
Do a bit of reading on what the drug has been used for many years. I think you might realize if the drug is used properly it might be very helpful with the problems COVID19 causes patients. And yes persons with certain heart problems are not candidates to take the drug. However, once again the decision to use hydroxychloroquine for COVID the Docs would be giving all PT the side effects, and if they had a known heart problem they would most likely not be offered the drug. Or folded of the greater danger the drug would pose to them.
Once again it appears some just don't need evidence or facts. Just a Headline... I can't even find any kind of specific threat or what or where the threat came from.
by Ralph Schwartz 3 years ago
It's been an interesting last year in American politics - one of the topics that's been in the news throughout that period is the "Deep State" What are your thoughts? Does a Deep State actually exist? If you are a believer, do you think it's something that can be eradicated? ...
by ahorseback 4 years ago
No deep state - Its all right in front of you !Obviously the Trump Obstruction is laid naked for all to see . The establishment on both sides in DC , WITH what I had always thought [ rightfully so ]was a leftist media - Leftist and Right media collusion , ...
by Kathryn L Hill 3 years ago
The Deep State vs All the Knowledge that we have Gained Regarding the Protection of "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness" as given by "Nature and Nature's God." The Deep State is working behind the scenes to promote their own agenda which seeks to take away the power of...
by Randy Godwin 3 years ago
This surely must be a disappointment for Fox watchers, and especially Hannity and Limbaugh adores. Of course, they'll still make the same wild conspiracy theories about the non-existent cabal as usual, and their fans will believe them....as usual.
by Mike Russo 3 years ago
Trump is ranting in tweets and interviews about the " Criminal Deep State and Spy Gate" What are these entities and where did this start?
by The Minstrel 22 months ago
I don't know about you, but the wagon wheels on this impeachment iniative are starting to come off. The recent challenge by Trump for Pelosi to bring the impeachment inquiry to a house vote is a win-win move. If it comes to a vote and they decide not to impeach, then we go back to waiting for the...
Copyright © 2021 Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers on this website. HubPages® is a registered trademark of Maven Coalition, Inc. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers to this website may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|