Politicizing the Coronavirus Outbreak

  
By:  Vic Eldred  •  3 months ago  •  244 comments


Politicizing the Coronavirus Outbreak
“We will see more transmission of cases in the United States,” Azar told CBS’s “Face the Nation.” “It’s simply just a matter of math.”

Leave a comment to auto-join group We the People

We the People


Yesterday the President held a press conference to address the outbreak of the Coronavirus. He had asked congress for  $1.25 billion in new money for vaccine development and purchasing protective equipment, in addition to spending unused funds earmarked to fight Ebola. (Total $2.5 billion). The response was immediate, totally political and based on what we've experienced with democrats, totally predictable. 

“This is shameful,” Pelosi told reporters on Capitol Hill when asked about the administration sending a $2.5 billion supplemental budget request to combat the illness. “He puts forth a proposal now that is meager, anemic in terms of addressing this. Ebola, we did $5 billion. And now they’re trying to take the Ebola money and spend it here.”

https://thewashingtonsentinel.com/nancy-pelosi-uses-cdcs-coronavirus-warning-to-blast-president-trump/

Senate Minority leader Chuck Schumer demanded $8.5 Billion be made available! Maybe thinking the President would turn away the exorbitant demand. Instead the President welcomed it during his press conference, saying "We'll take it."

A side note to what Schumer wants:

"Schumer said Sunday that a Stony Brook University professor who was visiting family in Wuhan is among those trapped in the country as a result of flights being suspended.

“My office is working with the State Department and embassy officials to ensure the Stony Brook professor is in constant contact with U.S. officials and we are all working to arrange a flight home for him ASAP,” Schumer said."

https://nypost.com/2020/01/26/schumer-calls-on-feds-to-declare-coronavirus-outbreak-a-public-health-emergency/



In other words, should the virus spread and become a major epidemic - it was the President's fault!  Should the President stop all travel into the US - he's a "racist."  Progressives wouldn't be hoping for a major outbreak in the US, would they?


merlin_169602189_48e3adba-d059-405b-a69f

The President put VP Mike Pence in charge of the effort to combat the Coronavirus in the US. There are 60 cases within the country thus far.


This is something we should be united on. Progressives have sunk to another low point.



 


Article is Locked


 

Tags

jrGroupDiscuss - desc
smarty_function_ntUser_is_admin: user_id parameter required
[]
 
Vic Eldred
1  author  Vic Eldred    3 months ago

For your approval: The democratic response to the administration's handling of the Coronavirus outbreak.


Rules of civility apply

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.2  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @1    3 months ago

This should be this 'president's non-handling of the coronavirus outbreak.  

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.2.1  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @1.2    3 months ago

And what exactly do you disagree with?

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.2.2  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.2.1    3 months ago

What is there to agree with?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.2.3  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @1.2.2    3 months ago
What is there to agree with?

So, you have no idea what is being done?

And no idea what you are disagreeing with?

Got it.

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.2.4  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.2.3    3 months ago

No, this 'president' has no idea what is being done, what is to be done, what should be done.

Got it.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
1.2.5  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @1.2.4    3 months ago

You've had plenty of time to google what the administration is doing, but you haven't.
So you don't know and you don't care, your'e simply against Trump.

We all got it!

 
 
 
Tessylo
1.2.6  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @1.2.5    3 months ago

Why would I google anything when this 'president' isn't doing anything?

I got it!

 
 
 
squiggy
1.2.7  squiggy  replied to  Tessylo @1.2.6    3 months ago

When I googled 'trump coronavirus', I got about 788,000,000 results in .58 seconds. I can't believe you've read them all.

 
 
 
JBB
2  JBB    3 months ago

Putting ineffectual Pence in charge is no comfort.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
2.2  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  JBB @2    3 months ago

Really?  Finding fault even with that?

Oh, that's right AOC is against it and a reporter, her face twisted in anger, questioned it!

 
 
 
devangelical
2.3  devangelical  replied to  JBB @2    3 months ago

what if pence were to visit each of those unfortunate americans afflicted and offered to pray with them? that would be comforting to at least half of america.

 
 
 
Ronin2
2.3.1  Ronin2  replied to  devangelical @2.3    3 months ago

What if Pelosi would do her damn job for a change and actually pass a bill for funding; instead of just politicizing it. Like she did with her so called border security proposal?

She is great at criticizing; and piss poor at getting things done. Unless she can put a few poison pills in the bill; she isn't interested.

 
 
 
devangelical
2.3.2  devangelical  replied to  Ronin2 @2.3.1    3 months ago

legislation is based on compromise from both sides of the aisle, not just one side. sounds like somebody has got nancy confused with moscow mitch, the white house bitch.

 
 
 
Ronin2
2.3.3  Ronin2  replied to  devangelical @2.3.2    3 months ago

So you think the f'ing Dems are willing to compromise? ROTFLOL.

The bitch isn't willing to compromise on anything. Seems asking for a clean billing to cover an "epidemic" is too damn much for those on the left.

 
 
 
devangelical
2.3.4  devangelical  replied to  Ronin2 @2.3.3    3 months ago
moscow mitch, the white house bitch.

The bitch isn't willing to compromise on anything.

Seems asking for a clean billing to cover an "epidemic" is too damn much for those on the left.

like all the clean bills offered up by the right from 2010 to 2017? look at the bright side, covit19 might help clean out some of the old legislative deadwood when it blows up in DC.

 
 
 
lady in black
3  lady in black    3 months ago

Rush limpballs is the first one to politicize it with his bs conspiracy theories....

https://news.yahoo.com/limbaugh-and-trump-fuel-coronavirus-conspiracy-theories-202831981.html

Limbaugh and Trump fuel coronavirus conspiracy theories

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
3.1  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  lady in black @3    3 months ago

I suppose some will hang onto an outrageous statement from Rush Limbaugh for dear life. Limbaugh is not the Speaker of the House, nor is he the Senate Minority leader. When they talk crazy, it divides the nation. We need unity on this.

 
 
 
Tessylo
3.1.1  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1    3 months ago

It's your 'president' who is fueling Rush to spread this conspiracy theory.

When the 'president' and Rush talk crazy, it divides the nation.  We need unity on this.  

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
3.1.2  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @3.1.1    3 months ago

When the Speaker of the House says “What he’s doing is late, too late, anemic,” she added. “Hopefully, we can make up for the loss of time but we have to have professionals in place, resources that are adequate and not use scare tactics about people coming back to our country” - you agree?

Let me ask you straight out - should we accept any flight coming in from China right now?

 
 
 
Texan1211
3.1.3  Texan1211  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.2    3 months ago

Has anyone found out how much money Nancy Pelosi's Congress has appropriated for the coronavirus outbreak?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
3.1.4  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Texan1211 @3.1.3    3 months ago

So far 0. She is just bad mouthing the President. Schumer wants $8 Billion. The President says "I'll take it!"

 
 
 
devangelical
3.1.5  devangelical  replied to  Vic Eldred @3.1.4    3 months ago
Schumer wants $8 Billion. The President says "I'll take it!"

... so he can misappropriate that money for something else that panders to his base.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
3.1.6  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  devangelical @3.1.5    3 months ago

So which way do you want it? 

 
 
 
squiggy
3.1.7  squiggy  replied to  devangelical @3.1.5    3 months ago
so he can misappropriate that money

Perhaps that's why he sought $2.5b. Why seek and squander pork? Congress loves to spray a problem with cash.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
4  Just Jim NC TttH    3 months ago
Ebola, we did $5 billion. And now they’re trying to take the Ebola money and spend it here.”

Well Nan sweetie, they didn't need all of it for Ebola evidently or there wouldn't be any left to "take". I am truly amazed some days wondering if these people actually feed themselves.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
5  Sean Treacy    3 months ago

If Nancy wants 8 billion, pass a bill. That's her job, not Trumps.

 
 
 
Tessylo
6  Tessylo    3 months ago

88098554_10158001792197346_7821356903119

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
6.1  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @6    3 months ago

How about speaking for yourself?

 
 
 
Tessylo
6.1.1  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @6.1    3 months ago

Yeah, how about it Vic?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
6.1.2  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @6.1.1    3 months ago

You've been called. Are you holding any cards at all?

 
 
 
Tessylo
6.1.3  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @6.1.2    3 months ago

87504333_900412880391439_176474729250344

 
 
 
Tessylo
6.1.4  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @6.1.2    3 months ago
You've been called. Are you holding any cards at all?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
6.1.5  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @6.1.3    3 months ago

In any event, almost every story that’s been written about the funding crisis at the CDC offers these two budget numbers:

2010: $6.467 billion
2014: $5.882 billion

What is also rarely mentioned is that CDC’s funding had   tripled   from 2001 to 2010, with big spikes in spending after the 2001 anthrax attacks and then again after the 2005 avian flu scare.

Yet, if there is a money crunch, perhaps the CDC needs to rethink it’s scope. The CDC can’t afford   to keep a aerial ‘bio-containment unit’ on retainer , but it does have  museum , a massive staff and a lots of waste and fraud. In 2007, Senator Coburn’s office   authored a 115-page report   detailing things like the CDC budget gimmicks, the agency’s hundreds of millions of dollars of waste on junkets and elaborate digs and its institutional failures to actual ‘control diseases’ – and this includes AIDs prevention. It’s doubtful things have gotten better.

The CDC, an agency whose primary mission was to prevent malaria and then other dangerous communicable diseases, is now spending a lot of time, energy and money worrying about how much salt you put on your steaks, how often you inhale second-hand smoke and how often you do calisthenics.  Though the CDC has done an admirable job in managing the panic surrounding Ebola, it is, historically speaking, a national leader in unscientific panic mongering. You might remember when top CDC scientists declared the “epidemic” of obesity would soon be the leading contributor to preventable death in the United States? The CDC claimed it obesity deaths had risen 33 percent between 1990 and 2000. It claimed that 400,000 people would die from being overweight.   It turned out these numbers were made up , and the CDC was forced to revise the estimate by a mere 1,400 percent. That hasn’t stopped it for continuing to scare us about salt, sugar and anything else the Center for Science in the Public Interest (sic) is wringing its hand about these days.

https://thefederalist.com/2014/10/03/the-cdc-doesnt-have-a-funding-problem-it-has-mission-creep-problem/


PS

Stop with the posters

 
 
 
Tessylo
6.1.6  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @6.1.5    3 months ago

Yup, all the 'president' does is spew hot air.

We're talking about now, 2020, not 2010, not 2014

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
6.1.7  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @6.1.6    3 months ago

We are talking about the administration's policy on handling the virus....you know, the one you can't seem to explain to us.

 
 
 
Ender
6.1.9  Ender  replied to  Vic Eldred @6.1.5    3 months ago

The federalist?...

The Trump administration recently requested $2.5 billion in emergency funds to prepare the U.S. for a possible widespread outbreak of coronavirus . Critics, though, are pointing out that money might not be necessary if the administration hadn’t spent the past two years largely dismantling government units that were designed to protect against pandemics.

The cuts started in 2018, as the White House focused on eliminating funding to Obama-era disease security programs. In March of that year, Rear Adm. Timothy Ziemer, whose job it was to lead the U.S. response in the event of a pandemic, abruptly left the administration and his global health security team was disbanded.

That same year, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) was forced to slash its efforts to prevent global disease outbreak by 80% as its funding for the program began to run out. The agency, at the time, opted to focus on 10 priority countries and scale back in others, including China.

Also cut was the Complex Crises Fund , a $30 million emergency response pool that was at the secretary of state’s disposal to deploy disease experts and others in the event of a crisis. (The fund was created by former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.)

Overall in 2018, Trump called for $15 billion in reduced health spending that had previously been approved, as he looked at increasing budget deficits, cutting the global disease-fighting budgets of the CDC, National Security Council (NSC), Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and Health and Human Services (HHS) in the process.

The effects of those cuts are being felt today. While the CDC announced plans to test people with flu-like symptoms for COVID-19, those have been delayed and only three of the country’s 100 public-health labs have been able to test for coronavirus. The administration’s request for additional funding came roughly two weeks after officials said HHS was almost out of funding for its response to the virus.

https://fortune.com/2020/02/26/coronavirus-covid-19-cdc-budget-cuts-us-trump/

donald has been slashing their budget. He now also wants to take any ner funding for the virus from othet programs designed to help the poor like the winter heating fund.

So no, it is not all about people eating salt.

 
 
 
squiggy
6.1.10  squiggy  replied to  Tessylo @6.1.3    3 months ago

80765505_2775654252494215_29564974876044

 
 
 
Tessylo
6.1.11  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @6.1.5    3 months ago
Politics

Trump Didn’t Just Botch the Coronavirus Response. He Enabled Its Spread.

Michael Daly
The Daily Beast February 28, 2020, 5:29 AM EST
680c6db10df23a3030149bb7a14ef4ef
Reuters

Even as China was announcing that its deaths from the novel coronavirus had   surpassed its toll from SARS , President Donald   Trump   released a proposed budget for 2021 that slashed funding for our chief defender against epidemics by 18 percent.

Within the overall proposed cuts detailed on Feb. 10 for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention was a reduction in spending to guard against “emerging and zoonotic diseases” from $635,772,000 to $550,464,000. 

Zoonotic diseases are those that have crossed from animals to humans, as the   novel coronavirus   is believed to have done. The $85,308,000 proposed budget cut is less than the cost of 5 miles of border wall.

The budget proposal would save the cost of another 2 miles of border wall by zeroing out a $40 million funding line for the Epidemic and Lab Capacity Program. The ELCP supports state labs that monitor health emergencies at the local level. A state lab in Texas confirmed the first case of Ebola in the U.S. in 2014. 

For the cost of less than 7 miles of border wall, the proposed budget would leave all of us less protected against a potential epidemic. The Trump administration made its priorities even more explicit when Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar discounted a suggestion that border wall funds could be diverted to fight the spread of the coronavirus. 

We might have had earlier warning of the   outbreak , but previous budget cuts caused the CDC to end its global security program in China in 2017.

In another failure of foresight two years ago, the White House eliminated the National Security Council’s position for combating global health crises. The NSC’s Senior Director for Global Health Security and Biothreats post was held by the highly regarded Rear Admiral Tim Ziemer—whose sudden departure in May of 2018 happened to coincide with a new Ebola outbreak in Africa.

That outbreak proved to be no threat to America, so most of us quickly forgot about it. So what if there was no longer anybody on the security council to guard against such threats? And as long as the rich are getting their tax breaks and the stock market is booming, who cares if the CDC is being cut year after year?

But fear of this new bug caused the stock market to tank this week. And worrisome news came on Wednesday even as Trump was insisting there is little cause to worry because of his bold, prescient leadership. 

California made the startling announcement that a resident of Solano County had tested positive for novel coronavirus without having traveled abroad or coming in contact with somebody known to be infected. The chronically underfunded public health system had needed four days to make the diagnosis, as the swab had to be sent to the CDC, which is hampered both by a shortage of tests and reliability problems with the ones it does have.

Trump Spends 45 Minutes With ‘Deep State’ Play Actors Amid Coronavirus Mayhem

We can only hope that the doctors were able to get as much information as they could from the patient before she was intubated. One near-certainty is that she got it from somebody who is still out there.

Our Germophobe-in-Chief should consider that a president is as vulnerable as anybody else to a virus. President Woodrow Wilson was stricken while visiting France during the Spanish flu pandemic early in the last century. Wilson survived, but some historians believe he suffered lasting neurological damage that became apparent at the negotiating table, making for considerably less art to his dealing.

Wilson could have just as easily caught the flu at the White House. And the present viral threat could arrive there as easily as any other place with a cough or a shaken hand.

During  Wednesday’s press conference, Trump announced that he was putting Vice President Mike Pence in charge of responding to the threat.

Nobody who is aware of Pence’s role in enabling an   HIV outbreak   when he was governor of Indiana could have been rightly heartened by his new role. But one hopeful sign came when Pence enlisted the help of a physician scientist who has been leading the national fight against HIV. Dr. Deborah L. Birx  will now direct the effort against novel coronavirus. She is held in nearly as high esteem as Rear Admiral Ziemer, but she is only now being put in place. Ziemer would have already been on the case had he not been pushed out. 

Other hopeful news came with word that state laboratories across the country are poised to start testing for novel coronavirus. That effort will initially require $25 million, which is all but sure to be allocated now that Trump is suddenly prepared to answer the threat with bigger than big bucks

But the time to hire a fire chief and fund firehouses is before a fire.

And not even a thousand miles of border wall can keep out what may be already spreading amongst us.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
6.1.12  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @6.1.11    3 months ago

He proposed cuts!!!!!!!

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
6.1.13  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Vic Eldred @6.1.12    3 months ago

Exactly and thanks to MUVA for providing this elsewhere..........

https://apnews.com/d36d6c4de29f4d04beda3db00cb46104

He may have dropped or put on hold some staff but did NOT cut the budget.

 
 
 
Tessylo
6.1.14  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @6.1.12    3 months ago

Did Trump Fire the US Pandemic Response Team?

As a new coronavirus spread in 2020, so did concerns about the United States' preparedness for a potential pandemic.

  • PUBLISHED   26 FEBRUARY 2020
Claim

The Trump administration fired the U.S. pandemic response team in 2018 to cut costs.

Rating

rating-true.png
True

Origin

Amid   warnings   from public health officials that a 2020 outbreak of a new coronavirus could soon become a pandemic involving the U.S., alarmed readers asked Snopes to verify a rumor that U.S. President Donald Trump had “fired the entire pandemic response team two years ago and then didn’t replace them.”

The claim came from a series of   tweets   posted by Judd Legum, who runs Popular Information, a newsletter he describes as being about “politics and power.” Legum’s commentary was representative of sharp   criticism   from Democratic legislators (and some Republicans) that the Trump administration had   ill-prepared   the country for a pandemic even as one was looming on the horizon.

Legum outlined a series of cost-cutting decisions made by the Trump administration in preceding years that had gutted the nation’s infectious disease defense infrastructure. The “pandemic response team” firing claim referred to   news   accounts   from Spring 2018 reporting that White House officials tasked with directing a national response to a pandemic had been ousted.

Rear Adm. Timothy Ziemer abruptly departed from his post leading the global health security team on the National Security Council in May 2018 amid a reorganization of the council by then-National Security Advisor John Bolton, and Ziemer’s team was disbanded. Tom Bossert, whom the Washington Post reported “had called for a comprehensive biodefense strategy against pandemics and biological attacks,” had been   fired   one month prior.

It’s thus true that the Trump administration axed the executive branch team responsible for coordinating a response to a pandemic and did not replace it, eliminating Ziemer’s position and reassigning others, although Bolton was the executive at the top of the National Security Council chain of command at the time.

Legum stated  in a follow-up tweet that “Trump also cut funding for the CDC, forcing the CDC to cancel its efforts to help countries prevent infectious-disease threats from becoming epidemics in 39 of 49 countries in 2018. Among the countries abandoned? China.” That information was confirmed by 2018 news  reports  stating that funding for the CDC’s global disease outbreak prevention efforts had been cut by 80%, including funding for the agency’s efforts in China.

On Feb. 24, 2020, the Trump administration requested $2.5 billion to address the coronavirus outbreak, an outlay critics asserted might not have been necessary if the previous program cuts had not taken place. Fortune   reported   of the issue that:

The cuts could be especially problematic as COVID-19 continues to spread. Health officials are now warning the U.S. is unlikely to be spared, even though cases are minimal here so far. “It’s not so much of a question of if this will happen in this country any more but a question of when this will happen and how many people in this country will have severe illness,” Dr. Nancy Messonnier, the director of the National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases, said during a press call [on Feb. 25].

The coronavirus was first detected in Wuhan, China, in the winter of 2019, and cases   spread   around the globe. The U.S. had 57   confirmed cases   as of this writing, while globally,   roughly   80,000 patients had been sickened with the virus and 3,000 had died. As of   yet , no vaccine or pharmaceutical treatment for the new coronavirus. Data from China suggests the coronavirus has a   higher   fatality rate than the seasonal flu, although outcomes depend on factors such as the age and underlying health of the patient.

Readers can find the latest coronavirus information from the CDC   here .

 
 
 
Tessylo
6.1.15  Tessylo  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @6.1.13    3 months ago

Trump didn’t just hand off the coronavirus epidemic to Pence—he lied about the threat to Americans

One Wednesday evening, Donald Trump held a press conference to announce how the United States would address the looming threat of the 2019 novel coronavirus. Trump’s primary action was to place Mike Pence—a man who not only   directly intervened to help make an HIV epidemic in Indiana   worse, but also wrote columns expressing   doubt about the link between cigarettes and cancer —in charge of the epidemic. Why Pence? According to Trump, people with actual experience in the area were too busy. So apparently Pence will handle what could be the most pressing issue facing the nation because he has some free time.

For nearly an hour, Trump rambled in a  terrifyingly incoherent appearance  that sent the stock markets into an after-hours nosedive. Again and again, Donald Trump insisted that there were 15 cases of COVID-19 in the United States, listing off the outcome of some of the first cases to be diagnosed, and ignoring the fact that the actual number is 60. And that 60 includes the first case in the United States to have no known contact with someone who traveled to a region where the infection is rampant. While Trump was waving off the crisis as something that would never happen, it gave every appearance of already being in the room.

This is an accurate transcript of a small portion of Trump’s press event. See if you can discover the true number of coronavirus cases in the United States from listening to what he told the public.
Uh, as most of you know, uh, the … the level that we’ve had in our country is very low and those people are getting better, or we think that in almost all cases they’re better or getting better. We have a total of 15. We took in some from Japan, you heard about that, because they were American citizens and they were in quarantine. And, uh, they’re getting better too.

But we felt we had an obligation to do that, it could have been as many as 42. And uh, we found that … we were … it was just an obligation we felt that we had. We could have left them and that would have been very bad. Very bad, I think. American people. And … they’re recovering.

Of the 15 people, the original 15 as I call them, uh, eight of them have returned to their homes, to stay in their homes, until fully recovered. One is in the hospital. And five have fully recovered. And one is, we think, in pretty good shape. In between hospital and going home.

So we have a total of … but we have a total of 15 people. And, uh, they’re in the process of recovering. Some having already fully recovered.

Again, the number of coronavirus cases in the United States at the time of the press event was 60. In order to try to make the number seem smaller, Trump, along with Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar, continually left out not only cases that had been diagnosed on board the Diamond Princess cruise ship before being returned to the United States, but both cases from diplomatic flights and the Diamond Princess passengers who had been tested and confirmed after returning the United States. The whole “15 cases” thing appears to be an arbitrary division created simply to make the incidence sound small—in spite of reality.

And here’s something critical that seems to be getting overlooked. Those “original 15” that Trump mentioned included the case in California that appears to be the first known case of possible   community spread  within the United States. Here is Azar speaking   on Wednesday morning , hours before Trump’s press event:

As of this morning, we still had only 14 cases of the novel coronavirus detected in the United States involved travel to or close contacts with travelers. Coming into this hearing, I was informed that we have a 15th confirmed case, the epidemiology of which we are still discerning.

That case that they were “still discerning” was the California case. As   UC Davis Medical Center has made clear , that patient was transferred to it from another hospital on Feb. 19—over a week ago. It requested testing for COVID-19 at that time, but was turned down because the CDC   was not looking for community-spread cases . However, after UC Davis insisted, the CDC did conduct a test on Sunday. The results of that test were confirmed on Wednesday.

Not only did Trump and Azar handle their press events by deliberately underplaying the number of cases being treated in the United States, but they were also aware that coronavirus was circulating in the population before Trump stepped behind the podium. That patient was one of the “total of 15” that Trump kept talking about. He just didn’t share that with the public.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
6.1.16  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @6.1.15    3 months ago

The Daily Kos????

Instead of posing far left propaganda, perhaps you should just explain to us what you don't like about the President's policy.

 
 
 
Tessylo
6.1.17  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @6.1.16    3 months ago

No propaganda, FACTS.  

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
6.1.19  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @6.1.17    3 months ago

At a loss for words?

 
 
 
Larry Hampton
6.1.20  Larry Hampton  replied to  Vic Eldred @6.1.19    3 months ago

I notice how there is no repudiation of facts presented. 

 
 
 
Split Personality
6.1.21  Split Personality  replied to  Vic Eldred @6.1.5    3 months ago

Yet the military budget can balloon to $740.5 Billion and no one blinks when it's a GOP deficit or the national debt.

 
 
 
Texan1211
6.1.22  Texan1211  replied to  Split Personality @6.1.21    3 months ago
Yet the military budget can balloon to $740.5 Billion and no one blinks when it's a GOP deficit or the national debt.

The only time politicians seem to care bout debt and deficits is when the other side is in power.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
6.1.23  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Tessylo @6.1.11    3 months ago
"California made the startling announcement that a resident of Solano County had tested positive for novel coronavirus without having traveled abroad or coming in contact with somebody known to be infected."

The incubation period is about two weeks and during that time there are no symptoms but the virus is still infectious and is passed by means of mini droplets from sneezing and coughing.  That could make it difficult to find the source.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
6.1.24  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @6.1.23    3 months ago

There is currently no vaccine to prevent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The best way to prevent illness is to avoid being exposed to this virus. However, as a reminder, CDC always recommends everyday preventive actions to help prevent the spread of respiratory diseases, including:

  • Avoid close contact with people who are sick.
  • Avoid touching your eyes, nose, and mouth.
  • Stay home when you are sick.
  • Cover your cough or sneeze with a tissue, then throw the tissue in the trash.
  • Clean and disinfect frequently touched objects and surfaces using a regular household cleaning spray or wipe.
  • Follow CDC’s recommendations for using a facemask.
    • CDC does not recommend that people who are well wear a facemask to protect themselves from respiratory diseases, including COVID-19.
    • Facemasks should be used by people who show symptoms of COVID-19 to help prevent the spread of the disease to  others. The use of facemasks is also crucial for   health workers   and   people who are taking care of someone in close settings  (at home or in a health care facility).
  • Wash your hands often with soap and water for at least 20 seconds, especially after going to the bathroom; before eating; and after blowing your nose, coughing, or sneezing.
    • If soap and water are not readily available, use an alcohol-based hand sanitizer with at least 60% alcohol. Always wash hands with soap and water if hands are visibly dirty.

For information about handwashing, see   CDC’s Handwashing  website

For information specific to healthcare, see   CDC’s Hand Hygiene in Healthcare Settings

These are everyday habits that can help prevent the spread of several viruses. CDC does have   specific guidance for travelers .

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/about/prevention-treatment.html

 
 
 
Kavika
6.1.26  Kavika   replied to  Buzz of the Orient @6.1.23    3 months ago

Three more cases were confirmed today. CA. OR and WN. none had travel abroad or had come into contact with somebody who was known to be infected.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
6.1.27  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Kavika @6.1.26    3 months ago

President Trump   will address the nation Saturday afternoon from the White House briefing room on coronavirus, amid news of the first American death tied to the outbreak.

Trump announced his 1:30 p.m. ET press conference on Twitter on Saturday as Vice President Pence led a coronavirus task force meeting in the White House situation room.

foxnews.com/politics/trump-holds-press-conference-after-first-american-dies-from-coronavirus

 
 
 
pat wilson
6.1.28  pat wilson  replied to  Vic Eldred @6.1.24    3 months ago

That's a good post.

 
 
 
Split Personality
6.1.29  Split Personality  replied to  Texan1211 @6.1.22    3 months ago

We the people are all on the same side, aren't we?

 
 
 
Split Personality
6.1.30  Split Personality  replied to    3 months ago

A:  Who unknowingly took it there Wally?

B:  You know it's already here, right?

C:  Why go off topic?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
6.1.31  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Split Personality @6.1.30    3 months ago
Why go off topic?

I get to decide that here.

 
 
 
MUVA
6.1.32  MUVA  replied to  Split Personality @6.1.29    3 months ago

I'm not sure anymore.

 
 
 
Ronin2
6.1.33  Ronin2  replied to  Split Personality @6.1.21    3 months ago

It has to when we are fighting how many different wars, and expanding to protect Saudi oil fields. In case some missed it- Russia and China are upgrading/modernizing their military. Being the world's policeman, and NATO's pit bull, is damn expensive.

When Trump tries to get the US out of any of the conflicts he is blasted by the neocons in his own party, and the newly minted chicken hawks on the left.

Two choices, either spend the damn money to make sure we maintain dominance; or STFU when Trump tries to get the troops out.

 
 
 
Split Personality
6.1.34  Split Personality  replied to  Ronin2 @6.1.33    3 months ago

Third choice, probably more.

Let Trump do what he promised and end all of the conflicts...get out of NATO, SALT etc.

Oh, but he also promised to make the greatest country/military in the world again, because the political chatter says the army was under paid, underfed and demoralized by the last Administration

which is an insult to anyone who has served, ever.

 
 
 
Kathleen
7  Kathleen    3 months ago

Of course the idiots will blame Trump for the virus... why not? If someone stubbed their toe, he would get blamed for that...

This does not surprise me. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
7.1  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Kathleen @7    3 months ago

Their only priority seems to be to damage the President.

 
 
 
Tessylo
7.1.1  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @7.1    3 months ago

The 'president' is doing that just fine all by his lonesome.  

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
7.1.2  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @7.1.1    3 months ago

Nothing but hot air.

I'll ask for the third time - What is he doing on the Coronavirus that you disagree with?

To quote someone famous "be specific"

 
 
 
Kathleen
7.1.3  Kathleen  replied to  Vic Eldred @7.1    3 months ago

It sure seems that way..

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
7.1.4  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Kathleen @7.1.3    3 months ago

Funny how the democrats want to throw enormous amounts out there now. The same people who wanted to deny the President money on so many other occasions. Of course, all they have to do is submit a bill.

 
 
 
Kathleen
7.1.5  Kathleen  replied to  Vic Eldred @7.1.4    3 months ago

I am still waiting for an answer to the question you asked above. : )

 
 
 
Texan1211
7.1.7  Texan1211  replied to  Kathleen @7.1.5    3 months ago

Based on past experience, it will be a cold day in hell before you get an answer that is actually related to the question.

 
 
 
Kathleen
7.1.8  Kathleen  replied to  Texan1211 @7.1.7    3 months ago

[Deleted]

[You and Tessy are on a no-contact restriction.  Do not attempt to work around this by discussing her with others in a thread in which she is participating.]

 
 
 
Tessylo
7.1.9  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @7.1.2    3 months ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
7.1.10  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @7.1.9    3 months ago

Posting it twice doesn't make it so.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
7.1.11  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Vic Eldred @7.1.10    3 months ago

SPAM. It's what's for breakfast...............jrSmiley_13_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
7.1.12  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @7.1.11    3 months ago

They say it goes good with scrambled eggs!

 
 
 
Tessylo
7.1.13  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @7.1.12    3 months ago

87493392_10221261223301796_2419697768982

 
 
 
Ronin2
7.1.15  Ronin2  replied to  Tessylo @7.1.13    3 months ago

Were any of them in China?

If not, then it is wasted money in this situation.

 
 
 
Split Personality
7.1.16  Split Personality  replied to  Ronin2 @7.1.15    3 months ago

hard to prove,

whether it is 37 out of 47

or 39 out of 49, as one story quoted a government source as saying that the CDC ran out of money...

I looked pretty extensively and one promising string of links led to this very official WH page.

512

The link for archived web pages has a handful of Administration websites for the last three Administrations.

It's almost as if the information was deliberately removed.

 
 
 
lib50
7.2  lib50  replied to  Kathleen @7    3 months ago

Who has blamed Trump for the virus?  I see issues with the response to the virus, that is what he gets blamed for.  The fact he's cut so many experts and staff from the very departments that deal with pandemics is a real concern.  He put Pence in charge, FFS.  Take a look at his history when he was gov of Indiana and was faced with an HIV health crisis. 

Trump cuts.  And he thinks he can just bring it all up to speed with a snap of his fingers. 

https://fortune.com/2020/02/26/coronavirus-covid-19-cdc-budget-cuts-us-trump/

The cuts started in 2018, as the White House focused on eliminating funding to Obama-era disease security programs. In March of that year, Rear Adm. Timothy Ziemer, whose job it was to lead the U.S. response in the event of a pandemic, abruptly left the administration and his global health security team was disbanded.

That same year, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) was forced to slash its efforts to prevent global disease outbreak by 80% as its funding for the program began to run out. The agency, at the time, opted to focus on 10 priority countries and scale back in others, including China.

Also cut was the Complex Crises Fund , a $30 million emergency response pool that was at the secretary of state’s disposal to deploy disease experts and others in the event of a crisis. (The fund was created by former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.)

Overall in 2018, Trump called for $15 billion in reduced health spending that had previously been approved, as he looked at increasing budget deficits, cutting the global disease-fighting budgets of the CDC, National Security Council (NSC), Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and Health and Human Services (HHS) in the process.

The effects of those cuts are being felt today. While the CDC announced plans to test people with flu-like symptoms for COVID-19, those have been delayed and only three of the country’s 100 public-health labs have been able to test for coronavirus. The administration’s request for additional funding came roughly two weeks after officials said HHS was almost out of funding for its response to the virus.

https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/trump-defends-cuts-cdc-budget-federal-government-hire-doctors-coronavirus-2020-2-1028946602

  • Trump defended his huge CDC budget cuts during a press conference on the federal government's response to the coronavirus.
  • "I'm a businessperson, I don't like having thousands of people around when you don't need them," Trump said. "When we need them, we can get them back very quickly."
  • Experts noted that restoring funding to a government agency could be a cumbersome process, which requires an act from Congress that's signed into law.
  • The White House has spent two years cutting the CDC's budget.
 
 
 
lady in black
7.2.1  lady in black  replied to  lib50 @7.2    3 months ago
  • Trump defended his huge CDC budget cuts during a press conference on the federal government's response to the coronavirus.
  • "I'm a businessperson, I don't like having thousands of people around when you don't need them," Trump said. "When we need them, we can get them back very quickly."
  • Experts noted that restoring funding to a government agency could be a cumbersome process, which requires an act from Congress that's signed into law.
  • The White House has spent two years cutting the CDC's budget.

I want someone, anyone to DEFEND the above.  There is no defending this incompetent president and administration. 

He's a businessman that has had 5 bankruptcies and how many businesses fail (and fucked over how many Americans)....yeah that's who should be leading this country s/

 
 
 
MUVA
7.2.3  MUVA  replied to    3 months ago

You know Chuck you Schumer  is just waiting to pay some cronies let’s just see how much money ends up in NY.

 
 
 
Ender
7.2.4  Ender  replied to  lib50 @7.2    3 months ago

Ack. I just posted that. Didn't read down far enough.

 
 
 
Nerm_L
8  Nerm_L    3 months ago

What is most amazing is that politicians believe every problem can be solved by throwing public money.  Apparently public money is the political hammer of choice and everything is a nail.

The threat of pandemic has revealed many cracks in political policies that cannot be solved by throwing public money.  Open borders allows a disease to spread rapidly and become a pandemic.  Dependence on foreign supply chains threatens the economy with major disruptions.  Restrictions on travel rapidly affects tourism and tourist related service businesses.  News organizations deliberately heighten fears by how they report the news.

Covid-19 has revealed just how vulnerable the United States has allowed itself to become.  Those vulnerabilities can be directly attributed to political Washington.  And throwing public money isn't going to solve anything.  

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
8.1  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Nerm_L @8    3 months ago

I think you've touched on the 4 major problems we are facing in trying to deal with this. I can only add the problem of American citizens who want to come home from a place like China or even Italy. We have to quarantine then somewhere else IMO. I think a total travel ban is necessary at this point.

 
 
 
Jasper2529
8.1.1  Jasper2529  replied to  Vic Eldred @8.1    3 months ago
I think a total travel ban is necessary at this point.

Well, the only people we could allow in are those who take a direct flight from Antarctica, because it's the only unaffected continent.

 
 
 
Nerm_L
8.1.2  Nerm_L  replied to  Vic Eldred @8.1    3 months ago
I think you've touched on the 4 major problems we are facing in trying to deal with this. I can only add the problem of American citizens who want to come home from a place like China or even Italy. We have to quarantine then somewhere else IMO. I think a total travel ban is necessary at this point.

The problem is people wanting to avoid the inconvenience of quarantine.  Where people are quarantined is less important than establishing and enforcing quarantine.  Four walls look the same in China as they do in the United States.  I don't understand why those who have been infected are not required to wear a bio-containment suit when they are transported.  That would seem to be a simple, cheap, and effective means of controlling spread of the disease.  If it works for medical staff, it should work for patients, too.  And it's easier to stock bio-containment suits than self contained gurneys.  Spending money is one thing.  Wasting money is another.

The threat to supply chains indicate how little manufacturing has become automated.  The problem isn't availability of toasters or T-shirts.  The problem is the availability of mechanical fasteners (bolts, screws, nails, rivets), welding rods, hand tools, etc.  It's the smallest, seemingly insignificant items that will bring down the economy.

 
 
 
Nerm_L
8.1.3  Nerm_L  replied to  Jasper2529 @8.1.1    3 months ago
Well, the only people we could allow in are those who take a direct flight from Antarctica, because it's the only unaffected continent.

Travel bans avoid overwhelming logistical capabilities.  What we really need are stringent requirements and enforcement of quarantine.  Surely the military has warehouses full of bio-suits and respirators.  Those bio-suits are just as effective keeping the contagion inside as they at keeping a contagion out.

The United States has spent a lot of defense dollars on protecting against bio-warfare.  So, what did we get for that expenditure of public money?  Waste is waste.  And apparently defense spending has been a waste.

 
 
 
Tessylo
9  Tessylo    3 months ago

[Deleted]

 
 
 
JohnRussell
10  JohnRussell    3 months ago

When you have a known liar, crook, bigot, moron and cheat in the oval office, as Trump is, people will always question everything he does. 

If you dont want that, dont elect such a person president of the United States. 

 
 
 
Texan1211
10.1  Texan1211  replied to  JohnRussell @10    3 months ago

After 4 years of listening to left-wing whining, it no longer bothers us what some may think or say about the President.

Consider the sources and you can see why.

 
 
 
lady in black
11  lady in black    3 months ago

https://wben.radio.com/articles/coronavirus-101-what-you-need-to-know

Coronavirus 101: What You Need to Know

Dr. Segal: "COVID-19 is a lot more aggressive than the Flu"

Dr Brahm Segal, Chief of Infectious Diseases at Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, to share his knowledge of the virus.

I trust this doctor from Roswell over anything this disgusting administration has uttered regarding this virus.

 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
12.1  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Larry Hampton @12    3 months ago

WASHINGTON (AP) — Democratic presidential contenders are describing the federal infectious-disease bureaucracy as rudderless and ill-prepared for the coronavirus threat because of budget cuts and ham-handed leadership by President Donald Trump. That’s a distorted picture. For starters, Trump hasn’t succeeded in cutting the budget.

He’s proposed cuts but Congress ignored him and increased financing instead. The National Institutes of Health and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention aren’t suffering from budget cuts that never took effect.

apnews.com/d36d6c4de29f4d04beda3db00cb46104

 
 
 
MUVA
12.1.1  MUVA  replied to  Vic Eldred @12.1    3 months ago

Oops.

 
 
 
Larry Hampton
12.1.2  Larry Hampton  replied to  Vic Eldred @12.1    3 months ago

So the fact that he wants these cut's (done or not) means he has a meaningful handle on the situation.

Right.....

I notice you didn't tackle his firing the pandemic response team.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
12.1.3  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Larry Hampton @12.1.2    3 months ago
So the fact that he wants these cut's (done or not) means he has a meaningful handle on the situation.

It means that democrats have been misleading the American people about NIH & CDC budget cuts.

 
 
 
devangelical
12.1.5  devangelical  replied to    3 months ago

maybe trumpski should build a wall for that too...

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
12.1.6  author  Vic Eldred  replied to    3 months ago

Have you seen MSNBC today? They are trying to panic the entire country!

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
12.1.7  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Vic Eldred @12.1.6    3 months ago

Vic,

A disease that they can't figure out how it's being spread and has a 2% mortality rate is reason to be concerned. The flu of 1918 had a 5% mortality rate and killed over half a billion people, and there were a lot fewer people then.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
12.1.8  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to    3 months ago
Hypocritical left wingers laugh off border security, but are having panic attacks about the corona virus.

Please explain to me what one has to do with the other... keeping in mind that I am for border control.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
12.1.9  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @12.1.7    3 months ago
A disease that they can't figure out how it's being spread and has a 2% mortality rate is reason to be concerned.

Of course, but that's not concern coming from Pelosi and Schumer - It's blame!  And what about the media?  Did you see the New York Times story that called it the "Trumpvirus?"  John had it seeded here!

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
12.1.10  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  devangelical @12.1.5    3 months ago
maybe trumpski should build a wall for that too...

The progressive love for open borders is a factor here, don't you think?  Maybe we should that Bill Clinton for getting China into the WTO, which they have used so well?

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
12.1.12  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to    3 months ago

Wally, 

Mexico was one of the last countries to get it and they are not streaming over the border. That is an exaggeration. Frankly, given the number of cases here, I would stay in Mexico.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
12.1.13  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Vic Eldred @12.1.9    3 months ago
Of course, but that's not concern coming from Pelosi and Schumer - It's blame!  And what about the media? 

How is it blame?

Did you see the New York Times story that called it the "Trumpvirus?"  John had it seeded here!

I didn't notice it. I will have to check it out.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
12.1.14  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @12.1.13    3 months ago
I will have to check it out.

Please do.

 
 
 
Jasper2529
12.1.15  Jasper2529  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @12.1.12    3 months ago
Mexico was one of the last countries to get it and they are not streaming over the border. That is an exaggeration. Frankly, given the number of cases here, I would stay in Mexico.

Please read about the thousands of Chinese and other Asian nationals who have illegally entered the USA via our southern border since at least 2016.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
12.1.16  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Jasper2529 @12.1.15    3 months ago

Jasper,

The Chinese don't need to enter illegally through the southern border. They come through the airports and our northern border, too. They have been doing this for a very long time, along with the Irish. 

 
 
 
Jasper2529
12.1.17  Jasper2529  replied to  Vic Eldred @12.1.9    3 months ago
Did you see the New York Times story that called it the "Trumpvirus?"  John had it seeded here!

I read it online and was going to seed it, because it was one of the most ridiculous articles I've read in a long time. Even left-wing folks mocked it.

I didn't know that John seeded it. I guess it never made it to the Front Page?

 
 
 
Jasper2529
12.1.18  Jasper2529  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @12.1.16    3 months ago
The Chinese don't need to enter illegally through the southern border.

That hasn't stopped thousands from doing so. I don't know their reasons, and I'll assume that you don't either ... but it's TRUE.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
12.1.19  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Jasper2529 @12.1.17    3 months ago

Oh, ya it's right out on NT as if it was news or an honest opinion. We've had many such false divisive stories featured here.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
13  author  Vic Eldred    3 months ago

"The entire country should have found it reassuring when the president appointed Vice President Mike Pence  on Wednesday to coordinate the Trump administration's coronavirus response efforts.
Pence has direct experience with this type of work, having overseen Indiana’s public health system as governor in 2014 when the first U.S. case of the MERS (Middle East Respiratory Syndrome) virus emerged in that state. He’s also a proven leader who knows how to get people with different perspectives working together effectively.

MERS is also a form of coronavirus, but far deadlier than the one we’re currently battling, which is called COVID-19. Fortunately, the MERS virus was effectively contained, just as COVID-19 will be.

Instead of calling for bipartisan cooperation in this life-or-death effort, liberals reacted with collective outrage, even going so far as to ridicule the vice president’s Christian faith as a way of suggesting that he’s not qualified for the role of coordinating America’s response to the new coronavirus."

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/mike-huckabee-pence-is-right-choice-to-lead-coronavirus-response-democrats-wrong-to-launch-political-attack

 
 
 
Jasper2529
13.1  Jasper2529  replied to  Vic Eldred @13    3 months ago
Instead of calling for bipartisan cooperation in this life-or-death effort, liberals reacted with collective outrage, even going so far as to ridicule the vice president’s Christian faith as a way of suggesting that he’s not qualified for the role of coordinating America’s response to the new coronavirus.

Identity politics, plain, simple, and very ugly.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
13.1.1  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Jasper2529 @13.1    3 months ago

While I agree that Mr. Pence's faith has nothing to do with anything here, his qualifications do and that is not identity politics. 

 
 
 
Jasper2529
13.1.2  Jasper2529  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @13.1.1    3 months ago

The left's mockery of Pence's capabilities has centered on his identity as a Christian and has even gone as far as to claim that he doesn't believe in science.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
13.1.3  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @13.1.1    3 months ago
his qualifications do

You may want to recall whom Obama put in charge of the dangerous Ebola crisis:

https://www.omaha.com/news/national/ex-biden-chief-of-staff-to-lead-ebola-response/article_b7e22ad4-55df-11e4-9978-001a4bcf6878.html


You may also recall that the media coverage of that ranged from glowing to non-existent.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
13.1.4  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Jasper2529 @13.1.2    3 months ago
The left's mockery of Pence's capabilities has centered on his identity as a Christian and has even gone as far as to claim that he doesn't believe in science.

I have read plenty of articles that never mentions his faith. What I also have read, is that Mr. Trump tweeted in 2014 mocking Obama for not placing a doctor as the lead in the same situation. That his hypocritical. 

512

 
 
 
Jasper2529
13.1.5  Jasper2529  replied to  Vic Eldred @13.1.3    3 months ago
You may want to recall whom Obama put in charge of the dangerous Ebola crisis:

According to the NYT, Ron Klain had absolutely no experience with Ebola or public health. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
13.1.6  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Jasper2529 @13.1.5    3 months ago

The Tmes got that one right.

 
 
 
Jasper2529
13.1.7  Jasper2529  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @13.1.4    3 months ago
I have read plenty of articles that never mentions his [Pence's] faith.

That's nice. It's clear that you missed the articles that specifically targeted Pence's Christianity as the reason he would be incapable of coordinating a designated medical/pharm/research team. 

What I also have read, is that Mr. Trump tweeted in 2014 mocking Obama for not placing a doctor as the lead in the same situation. That his hypocritical. 

Wow ... All the way back to 2014 to find a Tweet when US private citizen Trump gave his personal opinion!

BTW ... Private citizen Trump made no mention of a "doctor" in the tweet you posted. Also, Ebola and Coronavirus epidemics aren't  "the same situation".

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
13.1.8  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Jasper2529 @13.1.5    3 months ago

That is not what Trump is saying... and you know what, he was right in 2014. But now it's do as I say, not as I said. 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
13.1.9  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Vic Eldred @13.1.6    3 months ago

Vic,

Will you defend the fact that Trump said one thing one time and is doing a totally different thing this time?

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
13.1.10  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Jasper2529 @13.1.7    3 months ago
That's nice. It's clear that you missed the articles that specifically targeted Pence's Christianity as the reason he would be incapable of coordinating a designated medical/pharm/research team. 

Maybe that is because I don't read junk news. He is unqualified for the job because he has no background in this field. 

Wow ... All the way back to 2014 to find a Tweet when US private citizen Trump gave his personal opinion!

What his opinions changed when he became the president? How convenient. 

Also, Ebola and Coronavirus epidemics aren't  "the same situation".

Well, one we understand how to contain (ebola) and the other we don't. Any more excuses?

 
 
 
Jasper2529
13.1.11  Jasper2529  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @13.1.10    3 months ago
Any more excuses?

I do not make excuses for anyone, Perrie, and it's highly unflattering to you that you accuse me of doing so when you have no proof. 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
13.1.12  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Jasper2529 @13.1.11    3 months ago

Jasper,

Proof of what? I am reading your words. That is all we all have to go on. And saying that something is unflattering is personal to me, while all I did was ask you a question.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
13.1.13  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @13.1.9    3 months ago
Will you defend the fact that Trump said one thing one time and is doing a totally different thing this time?

No, I'm not in the habit of defending everything the President says or has ever said. I only know that he turned this country around despite an onslaught of attacks, lies and a failed coups. As for the media I DO HOLD THEM TO A HIGHER STANDARD! And it is they who are guilty of hypocrisy in addition to deliberately misleading the public.

 
 
 
Ender
13.1.14  Ender  replied to  Vic Eldred @13.1.13    3 months ago

I have to ask...turned it around from what? What was so bad that needed to be, or was turned around?

If you ask me, he is going backwards on a lot of things.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
13.1.15  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Ender @13.1.14    3 months ago
..turned it around from what?

From the Orwellian state that Obama and progressives were diligently working on. You know where people can't say or think certain things or where certain people were allowed to resist arrest or where certain people were denied due process protections - you know, that society!

 
 
 
Ender
13.1.16  Ender  replied to  Vic Eldred @13.1.15    3 months ago

Ah. So you mean some fake made up society that was automatically disbanded when donald took office.

Talk about conspiracy theory....

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
13.1.17  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Ender @13.1.16    3 months ago

Are you denying that students due process rights were violated under Obama?

 
 
 
Ender
13.1.18  Ender  replied to  Vic Eldred @13.1.17    3 months ago

Sorry but I don't take DeVos word for it.

The woman that has been trying to privatize public schools.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
13.1.19  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Ender @13.1.18    3 months ago
Sorry but I don't take DeVos word for it.

It had nothing to do with DeVos word! Long before Trump came to office there was concern for the way Obama corrupted Title IX.  You don't get convicted or punished for anything in this country just beause somebody accused you of something!

How about the way he divided this country?  Any thoughts on that?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
13.1.20  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Vic Eldred @13.1.19    3 months ago

I guess maybe he left. The radical Obama really thought highly of himself. He entered office in 2009 with a democratic majority in the House and a super democratic majority in the Senate. He treated the minority party with disdain while walking around telling us all about "teachable moments." Do those days ring a bell with anyone? Those were grand times for the left!

 
 
 
Ender
13.1.21  Ender  replied to  Vic Eldred @13.1.19    3 months ago

Sexual harassment and assault has been extended to title IX since the nineties. It didn't start with Obama. And he is certainly not the only one trying to tweak it to his views donald is doing the same.

Obama also tried to make trans-gendered people have protections under the title yet donald would not let them go into effect.

Funny though that this is your one and only thing that was terrible and had to be turned around.

 
 
 
Ender
13.1.22  Ender  replied to  Vic Eldred @13.1.20    3 months ago

Funny that you don't seem to remember the rise of the tea party people and all the hatred that was spewed at him on a daily basis.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
13.1.23  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Ender @13.1.21    3 months ago
Sexual harassment and assault has been extended to title IX since the nineties. It didn't start with Obama.

True, but Obama had a different interpretation of title IX - right?

"Beginning in 2011, the Obama administration's U.S. Education Department began pressing colleges to more aggressively police sexual assaults. The department currently has some 216 schools under investigation, while other schools have expelled accused students on scant evidence, often with no legal recourse or due process."

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-could-reverse-obamas-actions-on-college-sexual-assault

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
13.1.24  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Ender @13.1.21    3 months ago
Funny though that this is your one and only thing that was terrible and had to be turned around.

Oh no, we could be here for a while, I simply picked one and you have denied it took place.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
13.1.25  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Ender @13.1.22    3 months ago
Funny that you don't seem to remember the rise of the tea party people and all the hatred that was spewed at him on a daily basis.

That's a strange view of the Tea Party - a progressive one.

 
 
 
devangelical
13.1.26  devangelical  replied to  Ender @13.1.22    3 months ago

selective amnesia

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
13.1.27  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  devangelical @13.1.26    3 months ago

Prove the claim!

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
13.1.28  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Vic Eldred @13.1.13    3 months ago
As for the media I DO HOLD THEM TO A HIGHER STANDARD! And it is they who are guilty of hypocrisy in addition to deliberately misleading the public.

While I don't disagree with that, then you have to hold all media to a higher standard and not just the ones you disagree with. I am very picky about the sources I read, and if I am not sure, I look for more. I think no one should take one source as their only source. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
13.1.29  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @13.1.28    3 months ago

I agree. I think most Americans now have many places to go for information. The old structure of the media is gone. It died via the internet. Now we have options. Tragically, it is the old, once highly valued news organizations who have lost all credibility over the past 11 years.

 
 
 
Ender
13.1.30  Ender  replied to  Vic Eldred @13.1.23    3 months ago

And some schools were covering up sexual assaults and not protecting students as they should. There had been an epidemic of sexual assaults on campus and you are upset at the one that tried to do something about it.

Funny some conservatives believe anyone can be fired at will, kicked out of a business at will, all with no recourse, yet have an institution of learning kick out a student over sexual assault claims and all the sudden, oh hell no.

And again, isn't donald just interpreting it himself with his new edits? Is he not doing the same thing?

Odd to me that the Obama interpretation bad yet the donald interpretation good.

From what I gather the Obama administration went after schools that would try to bury incidents or try to sweep them under the rug.

 
 
 
Ender
13.1.31  Ender  replied to  devangelical @13.1.26    3 months ago

Amazes me the claims that Obama divided the country when it was the people with hatred of Obama dividing the country. The same ones that worship trump. I have even seen some claim donald is trying to bring the country together.

I can only laugh at that one.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
13.1.32  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Ender @13.1.30    3 months ago
And some schools were covering up sexual assaults and not protecting students as they should.

That could be a valid point, but the solution should never be to deny the accused their right to due process, wouldn't you agree?

and you are upset at the one that tried to do something about it.

I'm very upset that an American president would ignore Constitutional rights.

Funny some conservatives believe anyone can be fired at will, kicked out of a business at will, all with no recourse, yet have an institution of learning kick out a student over sexual assault claims and all the sudden, oh hell no.

I'm on the side of the Constitution.

And again, isn't donald just interpreting it himself with his new edits? Is he not doing the same thing?

Correcting a wrong?  That's the turning I mentioned in the beginning. Do you understand now?

Odd to me that the Obama interpretation bad yet the donald interpretation good.

I'm sorry to hear that.

From what I gather the Obama administration went after schools that would try to bury incidents or try to sweep them under the rug.

Nope, it was universal pressure applied to all institutions of higher learning. I suspect you know it.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
13.1.33  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Ender @13.1.31    3 months ago
hatred of Obama

Are you about ready to deploy the race card?

 
 
 
JohnRussell
13.1.34  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @13.1.29    3 months ago
The old structure of the media is gone. It died via the internet. Now we have options. Tragically, it is the old, once highly valued news organizations who have lost all credibility over the past 11 years.

This is just nonsense.  The most untrustworthy news sources are on the right, particularly Fox News, Breitbart, Limbaugh, OAN, etc. 

Why do you think Trump is consistently wrong so much? He gets his information from right wing media. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
13.1.35  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @13.1.34    3 months ago

As far as I know it was the New York Times, Washington Post, MSNBC, CNN and Buzzfeed that lied to the American people for over 3 years about a Russia/collusion bull shit story.

 
 
 
Ender
13.1.36  Ender  replied to  Vic Eldred @13.1.32    3 months ago

When the administration has to send a letter to universities to remind them of their obligation to investigate reports of sexual assault, something is wrong.

Though not binding, the office pressed schools to lower the bar of proof, from "clear and convincing" to "preponderance of evidence," set a 60-day deadline for responses to allegations and discouraged cross-examinations. Link

Notice the not binding part. The lowering of the bar I do not mind as we both know there is not always absolute proof. In a lot of cases it is always he said she said. The lowering of the bar says those cases cannot be ignored. Setting a sixty day response to me just means they can't ignore it and hope it goes away.

The discourage cross examination is the only thing I would have a problem with. It still said discourage not practice.

I still see nothing unconstitutional about it.

 
 
 
Ender
13.1.37  Ender  replied to  Vic Eldred @13.1.33    3 months ago

Are you about ready to deny that played a factor for some people?

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
13.1.38  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @13.1.4    3 months ago

As if his new corona virus czar (Pence) has experience in either the medical area or infectious disease control.  That is THE TOTAL JOKE!

 
 
 
JohnRussell
13.1.39  JohnRussell  replied to  Vic Eldred @13.1.35    3 months ago

Vic, you support a guy who is a pathological liar. You know what? , he was a pathological liar in 2016, and the FBI, the CIA, the New York Times , the Washington Post , etc, all knew it.  No one unjustifiably reported on the possibility that Trump was involved with Russia. We still dont know for sure, and his attempt to collude with Ukraine gives us no confidence that he was completely innocent with Russia either. 

To my knowledge no one in the media created allegations about Trump out of thin air, what may have happened in some cases is that the media reported unproven allegations. 

Your attempts to paint Trump as a heroic, put upon martyr are silly.  He is the most dishonest and unfit president in the country's history, and the media has made some of that information available to the population. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
13.1.40  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Ender @13.1.36    3 months ago
The lowering of the bar I do not mind

The guidance all but assured accused students would be found responsible. Do you know why the Obama people didn't want cross-examination? They thought it might re-traumatize victims. Radical progressives think like that. And of course, I think most of us know that cross-examination is the best tool in determining whether someone actually is a victim.

I still see nothing unconstitutional about it.

Maybe this story from 2015 would help you to see it:

"At the University of San Diego, a student was accused of raping a young girl who attended the same University. These two young students were friends they had a strong friendship that turned into something else quickly. They would text and go out sometimes. They were both at a party. Everyone was having a good time and enjoying themselves. Everyone dancing, two guys including the young girls friend went into a room with her and started trying to touch her. Eventually 5 minutes passed and someone came into the room, both of the guys left running.

The young girls friend denies everything and says he never touched her, and it was all the other guys fault. The other guy supposedly planned it. The two guys were expelled from the University and never allowed to go back. At the court the guy had evidence that the young girl actually wanted to have sexual intercourse with him, and it wasn’t rape. The school didn’t allow him to show his evidence, so therefore he had absolutely nothing to show he was innocent. Eventually, they found them innocent and they were required to go back to the University. This story shows that under law we are innocent until proven guilty."

https://mtviewmirror.com/innocent-student-accused-of-rape/

 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
13.1.41  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Vic Eldred @13.1.33    3 months ago

Vic,

No one brought race into this. Hating Obama can be for any reason and ender is right. The major rift happened right after Obama was elected and became worse when Hillary didn't get elected. It's reactionary. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
13.1.42  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Ender @13.1.37    3 months ago
Are you about ready to deny that played a factor for some people?

How would it fit into a conversation of Obama's policies?

Be very careful

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
13.1.43  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @13.1.41    3 months ago
No one brought race into this

He is bringing race into it right now and I have a very low tolerance for that

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
13.1.44  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  JohnRussell @13.1.39    3 months ago
what may have happened in some cases is that the media reported unproven allegations. 

How long does it take to figure out the sources (within government) are feeding misinformation? No, the msm has been part of the anti-Trump operation from the beginning. You know it too.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
13.1.45  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @13.1.41    3 months ago
ender is right

ender is having a very hard time defending Obama's school rape policy. Ender should have conceded that Obama was wrong on that from the beginning.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
13.1.46  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @13.1.41    3 months ago
The major rift happened

The major rift happened when certain people couldn't accept Trump's election in 2016, but Obama divided us long before that. How about when he linked Republicans to Iranian militants:

"It's those hardliners chanting Death to America who have been most opposed to the deal." "They're making common cause with the Republican caucus."

 
 
 
Ender
13.1.47  Ender  replied to  Vic Eldred @13.1.43    3 months ago

Actually you are the one that did.

 
 
 
Ender
13.1.48  Ender  replied to  Vic Eldred @13.1.45    3 months ago

I am not having a hard time on anything. I am not actually defending it just showing a viewpoint. And I do not think he was wrong, his approach may have been.

Actually your story shows very little. It shows one girl saying the one guy planned it.

Contrary to beliefs of some a woman can want to have sex, then if she decides no, it means no and stop.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
13.1.49  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Ender @13.1.47    3 months ago

First you failed to defend Obama's school rape policy, then you said:

mazes me the claims that Obama divided the country when it was the people with hatred of Obama dividing the country. 


From out of nowhere you raised that!

 
 
 
Ender
13.1.50  Ender  replied to  Ender @13.1.48    3 months ago
I think most of us know that cross-examination is the best tool in determining whether someone actually is a victim.

Actually I don't think that at all. It can lead to victim blaming.

 
 
 
Ender
13.1.51  Ender  replied to  Vic Eldred @13.1.49    3 months ago

Again, fail is only in your mind.

I did't ask anything with that, I was responding to another.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
13.1.52  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Ender @13.1.50    3 months ago

Really?   Nobody gets asked a question?

Do you realize how you sound?

 
 
 
Ender
13.1.53  Ender  replied to  Vic Eldred @13.1.52    3 months ago

So you go from saying I asked a question, which I did not, to saying, well I don't even know what you are trying to say now....

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
13.1.54  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Ender @13.1.48    3 months ago
Actually your story shows very little.

How about this one:

The Obama administration’s disdain for the rule of law continues to reverberate. One way is its Title IX madness, which has caught numerous colleges and universities in its web. Among them is Amherst College, which now faces a lawsuit brought by a student who makes a compelling case that he was wrongfully expelled.

The facts revolve around a drunken hookup between two students and the woman’s subsequent efforts at covering up her more than willing participation by blaming the male student and accusing him of assault. Amherst’s administration was equally complicit, however, pronouncing the man guilty on flimsy and incomplete evidence, then refusing to reconsider once evidence that the woman had fabricated her story came to light.

And the dark force driving the school to make an example of the student was the Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR).

On the night of February 4-5, 2012, John Doe (as he is called in the court documents) was so drunk that he “blacked out” and couldn’t remember much about the night, including even his interaction with Sandra Jones (again a pseudonym). The two were making out in a dormitory common area when another student said that they ought to go somewhere private. Jones led Doe to her room, where she performed oral sex on him. Her room was available because her roommate—Doe’s girlfriend—was away.

Doe thought little more about that drunken night with Jones until he was dumbfounded to receive a notice from Amherst in December of 2013 that he had been charged with rape. He would have to appear at a hearing in ten days.

For that hearing, he was allowed to choose an “advisor” from a list given to him by the school, but that individual could only suggest questions for the examiner, not speak for the accused or cross-examine witnesses. That list didn’t include anyone with the slightest legal training. (The person Doe chose was an Amherst administrator with a degree in Social Justice Education, who was of no help.)

Unknown to Doe, Amherst had decided to follow the Obama administration's preferred system for adjudicating sexual assault complaints, namely hiring an investigator who would look into the case, question some witnesses, and then make a presentation to a panel. That panel would then decide on disciplinary action, if any.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/georgeleef/2017/04/09/wrongfully-expelled-student-hauls-elite-college-into-court/#662e3e3f1929

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
13.1.55  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Ender @13.1.53    3 months ago

Don't you believe cross-examination is an effective tool at getting to the truth?

 
 
 
Ender
13.1.56  Ender  replied to  Vic Eldred @13.1.55    3 months ago

In all actuality I don't think it should be handled by the school at all. I think all info should be gathered then handed over to local law enforcement agencies.

 
 
 
Ender
13.1.57  Ender  replied to  Vic Eldred @13.1.54    3 months ago

I hate to say it but cases like that happen not only in schools.

For a long time the deck was stacked against women. For a long time a man could just laugh it off and say well deep down she wanted it. No matter what, the good ol boys club is no longer. Things like the Obama era guidelines came into being for a reason. They did not arbitrarily decide to target people.

There have always been people that abuse the system, both ways.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
13.1.58  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Ender @13.1.56    3 months ago

Yes. But what Obama had the schools doing denied due process and there is no escaping that fact.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
13.1.59  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Ender @13.1.57    3 months ago
For a long time the deck was stacked against women.

I am well aware of that, but two wrongs don't make a right. Obama was wrong.


 They did not arbitrarily decide to target people.

They were totally arbitrary. They in effect said the accuser was automatically right. The accused was automatically guilty. It was a national disgrace.

 
 
 
Ender
13.1.60  Ender  replied to  Vic Eldred @13.1.59    3 months ago

I didn't read that into it. I saw it as the victim was to be believed. As we all know that, especially people with money and donated to a school, could get their kids out of a lot of things. Including misrepresenting facts, brushing things aside and putting the blame on a victim.

It said all cases had to be taken seriously.

Can people abuse that? Yes, but more than likely not.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
13.1.61  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Ender @13.1.60    3 months ago

You have an interesting way of seeing it.

Perhaps this might help:

Zerlina Maxwell wrote that we should " automatically " (see the URL for the original headline) believe rape victims.  That goes against everything our system of justice stands for, as we base cases on the presumption of innocence until proven guilty. I’m not going down that rabbit hole–and neither should any American who believes in law and order. Dates, names, and physical evidence, need to be analyzed, cross-examined, and pieced together to build a case against the alleged perpetrator.

Again, you probably already know this, but some liberals seem to think otherwise. Why is that? Why is it that for other crimes they believe in the process, but when it comes to rape, it’s an automatic guilty verdict for the accused.

This might the dumbest thing ever published in a mainstream newspaper   http://t.co/jORAcDlRqU — Michael C Moynihan (@mcmoynihan)   December 6, 2014

Right now, there seems to be this hysteria over sexual assault on campus. I’m not saying rape isn’t a serious issue, but its frequency may be overblown. We’ll get to that a little bit later.

Currently, the reforms and statues aimed at keeping campuses safe from sexual predators seem to be infringing on the civil rights of men. Emily Yoffe at   Slate  wrote   a great long-from piece about the sexual assault epidemic that’s allegedly running rampant in higher education. She used the 2012 story of Drew Sterrett, an engineering student who used to attend the University of Michigan, as her foundation to delve into how college campuses have devolved into a clown circus when it comes to investigating sexual assaults.

Sterrett was a victim of this process; he engaged in what he says was a consensual sexual encounter with a female colleague at school. His roommate noted in a sworn affidavit that it was consensual, even mentioning his frustration that they were being too loud during the act, which was keeping him from sleeping.

Yoffe had a concise description of the legal fiasco that’s unfolding in American higher education:

Unfortunately, under the worthy mandate of protecting victims of sexual assault, procedures are being put in place at colleges that presume the guilt of the accused. Colleges, encouraged by federal officials, are instituting solutions to sexual violence against women that   abrogate   the civil rights of men. Schools that hold hearings to adjudicate claims of sexual misconduct allow the accuser and the accused to be accompanied by legal counsel. But as Judith Shulevitz   noted   in the   New Republic   in October, many schools ban lawyers from speaking to their clients (only notes can be passed). During these proceedings, the two parties are not supposed to question or cross examine each other, a prohibition recommended by the federal government in order to protect the accuser. And by   federal   requirement, students can be found guilty under the lowest standard of proof: preponderance of the evidence, meaning just a 51 percent certainty is all that’s needed for a finding that can permanently alter the life of the accused.

More than two dozen   Harvard Law School   professors recently wrote a statement protesting the university’s new rules for handling sexual assault claims. “Harvard has adopted procedures for deciding cases of alleged sexual misconduct which lack the most basic elements of fairness and due process,” they wrote. The professors note that the new rules call for a Title IX compliance officer who will be in charge of “investigation, prosecution, fact-finding, and appellate review.” Under the new system, there will be no hearing for the accused, and thus no opportunity to question witnesses and mount a defense. Harvard University, the professors wrote, is “jettisoning balance and fairness in the rush to appease certain federal administrative officials.” But to push back against Department of Education edicts means potentially putting a school’s federal funding in jeopardy, and no college, not even Harvard, the country’s richest, is willing to do that.

As for Sterrett, the school found him guilty of sexual intercourse without the Complainant’s consent and was suspended until 2016; the year his alleged accuser graduates. All of this after Sterrett gave a thorough rebuttal, which didn’t suggest any sexual assault had occurred. His accuser’s roommate didn’t notice any behavioral shifts until her mother discovered her diary that “contained descriptions of romantic and sexual experiences, drug use, and drinking.” Obviously, this didn’t set well with the mother, who drove Sterrett’s accuser to campus to meet with the university’s conflict resolution official. Even Sterrett’s accuser’s roommate believes that a rape story could have been “manufactured” in response to the discovery of her diary and the alleged confrontation Sterrett’s accuser had with her mother over the summer of 2012. Oh, and the accuser’s roommate also mentioned in an affidavit that the mother called her repeatedly, told her not to talk to Sterrett, and take her daughter’s side in the proceedings.

Right now, Sterrett hopes to finish his education…someday. His lawsuit is pending.

Yoffe documents this tragic story in more detail, which also includes a lengthy deep-dive into the statistics as well. Spoiler alert: they’re not accurate.

Despite what feminists and liberal Democrats have been espousing for years regarding the rates of sexual assault, it’s a little dubious to say there’s a rape epidemic. The figures they give on rape and sexual assault rival that of the Congo in Africa, where it’s being used as a vehicle of war.

Additionally, there is a very wide range for actions that are considered sexual assault. In a study of over 5,000 female college students, they defined sexual assault as anything from non-consensual intercourse to “rubbing up against you in a sexual way, even if it is over your clothes.” Most importantly, Yoffe notes that we’re experiencing a great trend in this country: violent crime is down, including sexual assaults; they’re down by more than 60 percent since the mid-1990s:

The Sexual Victimization of College Women , a 2000 study commissioned by the U.S. Department of Justice, is the basis for   another   widely cited   statistic, even grimmer than the finding of CSA: that one in four college women will be raped. (An activist organization,   One in Four , takes its name from the finding.) The study itself, however, found a completed rape rate among its respondents of 1.7 percent. How does a study that finds less than 2 percent of college women in a given year are raped become a 25 percent likelihood? In addition to the 1.7 percent of victims of completed rape, the survey found that another 1.1 percent experienced attempted rape. As the authors wrote, “[O]ne might conclude that the risk of rape victimization for college women is not high; ‘only’ about 1 in 36 college women (2.8 percent) experience a completed rape or attempted rape in an academic year.”...

In a footnote, the authors acknowledge that asserting that one-quarter of college students “might” be raped is not based on actual evidence: “These projections are suggestive. To assess accurately the victimization risk for women throughout a college career, longitudinal research following a cohort of female students across time is needed.” The one-fifth to one-quarter assertion would mean that young American college women are raped at a rate similar to women in   Congo , where rape has been used as a weapon of war.

No one disputes that only a percentage of sexual assaults get reported, but the studies that have tried to capture the incidence of unreported rape are miles apart.

Yoffe also mentions David Lisak, who’s acted as a consultant in the military, colleges, and other institutions regarding sexual assault, and his 2002 study that’s become the foundation for curbing the frequency of such brutal attacks in our society. In essence, those who commit rapes on campuses fit the profile of a sexual predator. They’re a small group–and they’re repeat offenders. He noted in an article for   Sexual Assault Report   that “decent” young men do not (although he admits sometimes they do) engage in this barbarism against women since serial offenders are responsible for 90 percent of attacks of attacks. They’re “multi-faceted,” and their attacks are pre-planned and premeditated.

It’s pretty sick stuff. Lisak found in his 2002 that 6.4 percent of men “met criteria for rape or attempted rape;” Yoffe mentioned that 80 percent admitted to taking advantaged of an intoxicated partner.

Yet, while Yoffe credits Lisak for profiling these predators who are adept at evading capture, she’s quick to note that it isn’t representative of all college men. She also mentioned that his sample included more than just this demographic:

To start, though the study was of college men, it was not of   college-age   men (who are traditionally ages   18 to 24 ). Lisak’s participants ranged in age from 18 to 71. The average age of his respondents was 26.5, and more than 20 percent were older than 30. How does a study of men in college include so many older men? Lisak recruited people from where he taught, the University of Massachusetts Boston, an urban commuter school with no campus housing. Many students are older working people returning to or just starting college. Currently, 30 percent of its students attend part time and the school’s four-year graduation rate is 15 percent. By comparison, at the state’s flagship university in Amherst, seven percent of students are enrolled part time and its four-year graduation rate is 60 percent.

I spoke with James J. Cochran, professor of applied statistics at the University of Alabama. He said that because the population of male students at UMass Boston may differ in important ways from the population of male college students across all universities, we must be careful in generalizing results from the UMass Boston sample to the population of male college students across all universities.* People tend to think that a single study is definitive, Cochran told me. But generally what a single study tells you, he said, is that we have “evidence of something interesting, let’s study it more.”

Lisak conducted the study between 1991 to 1998, at several year intervals, setting up tables on campus, where he offered men $3 or $4 to complete a study on “childhood experiences and adult functioning.” In all, Lisak and his co-author recruited 1,882 participants (the school had a total of about 5,800 male students during this period). Lisak and his co-author wrote: “Because of the non-random nature of the sampling procedures, the reported data cannot be interpreted as estimates of the prevalence of sexual and other acts of violence.” I asked Lisak about this caveat in an interview and he said, “That’s a standard disclaimer for any study.”

Hence, we come back to the issue of having healthy criticism when rape claims come forward. The mantra of the feminist left is to believe alleged rape victims because women don’t lie, or something.

After the Duke lacrosse fiasco, where the three young men were allegedly involved in sexually assaulting a stripper, they were declared more than just not guilty, but  innocent  by North Carolina’s Attorney General Roy Cooper. 

To automatically believe one person’s account and disregard others when a serious crime is committed goes against everything codified in our system of justice. At the same time, it’s doubly irresponsible to suggest college is a dystopia for women when the facts and figures on sexual assault are questionable at best. In fact, DOJ reports show that college students  are less likely   to be victims of sexual assault. 

It does appear that institutions in higher learning are not equipped for the arduous, tedious process that our system of justice takes to make sure nothing falls through the cracks, to prevent innocent people’s lives from being ruined by frivolous allegations, to get the facts straight, and allow due process.

It’s hard to do that when raw emotion and a disregard for our system of justice sets in when it comes to  investigating such heinous allegations.   Feminists trust women. So do I, but investigations into allegations of sexual assault need to include–and respect– due process of law, especially at the college level.


 
 
 
Ender
13.1.62  Ender  replied to  Vic Eldred @13.1.61    3 months ago

That only sounds like trying to explain things away and diminish actual crimes.

For every story you tell, I can tell another where a man does not even spend any prison time.

And like I said before, I have no idea why schools should be handling any of this at all.

 
 
 
Raven Wing
13.1.63  Raven Wing  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @13.1.38    3 months ago
That is THE TOTAL JOKE!

Indeed it is. While I am by no means a fan of Pence, in a way I feel sorry for him, as he has been placed in charge of a medical outbreak with no experience and/or background whatsoever to aid him in his newly assigned duty. He has nothing going for him other than to say "I am the one in charge." And that may come to be worst things he is known for.

It's as if Trump wants him to fail, and do so at the expense of American lives. I can't think of any other reason why Trump would put such a serious world wide illness in the leadership of someone who is so totally unfit for the job.

I have to wonder if Trump would have such a "No big deal" attitude toward the disease if he or one of his own family was stricken with the disease. I don't think so. But, as long as it is other people he obviously does not care that much, and makes it clear by putting an totally unqualified person in charge of the control of the disease. The only thing Pence might be good at is saying prayers over the dead in his charge.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
13.1.64  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Ender @13.1.62    3 months ago
That only sounds like trying to explain things away and diminish actual crimes.

Then you don't believe in due process or the concept of innocence until proven guilty, which is a cornerstone of the Constitution.


For every story you tell, I can tell another where a man does not even spend any prison time.

Then your theory is better that a few innocent go to jail than one guilty man escapes?


And like I said before, I have no idea why schools should be handling any of this at all.

And like I said before -it would be better if they hadn't, but that has little to do with the Obama policy.

 
 
 
Ender
13.1.65  Ender  replied to  Vic Eldred @13.1.64    3 months ago

And just rescinding the Obama policy will not help anything.

When a school decides it has enough evidence that a rape occurred, assailants don't go to jail. Schools don't have that power. Plus, they use a lower standard of proof than criminal courts. Their rulings hold no weight except on their own campuses.

Instead, accused students might get kicked off campus for a couple of semesters. Occasionally, they're expelled. Many who are deemed to have committed wrongdoing against fellow students are allowed back on campus, graduate, and join the workforce.

A Business Insider  investigation into Yale University's process  found that more than 60 students in the past seven years filed formal complaints of sexual misconduct to the school.

In 15 cases, Yale found that "penetration without consent," "nonconsensual sex," or "intercourse without consent" occurred.

Only five of the Yale-deemed assailants were expelled. The 10 others were suspended, put on probation, or given a written reprimand.

That's right: Yale issued a mere written reprimand after corroborating allegations that a Yale student had nonconsensual sex with a female student .

In the face of mounting pressure to fix sexual-assault proceedings, schools seem to take the path of least resistance to protect themselves from scrutiny rather than to genuinely work to improve their processes.

The problem is far worse than the Obama guidelines.

They issue middling rulings that seem to say, We kind of believe the victim but don't want to get sued, so let's split the difference.

Another issue: Colleges conduct their proceedings largely in secret. It leaves everyone except a small circle of university appointees with virtually no understanding of how the process works and what rulings truly mean.

At their worst, the shortcomings in schools' sexual-assault procedures can actually allow the abuse to fester.

Michigan State University's bungling of a sexual-assault investigation against the doctor Larry Nassar is a prime example. In 2014, the school received a complaint from a student that Nassar massaged her breasts and vagina during medical treatment. Still, the university's investigation determined that Nassar's behavior was " medically appropriate ."

When the true scope of Nassar's abuse came to light, it became one of the biggest sexual-abuse cases in the history of sports.

His nightmarish abuse ended four years later, only after a legal process began outside the school's jurisdiction. Nassar was sentenced up to 175 years in prison after pleading guilty to multiple counts of sexual assault.

Even with the Obama era procedures, it is still not as one sided as some are trying to make it out. Making it sound like only the accused get a bad deal is false in itself.

And its puzzling why, if a school finds evidence of a rape, the case isn't always escalated to legal authorities to investigate.

A common frustration among both victims and the accused is that they don't know how to navigate convoluted university hearings. Colleges must invite greater transparency in their sexual-assault processes and findings.

American universities are revered organizations and thought leaders that produce Nobel laureates, business innovators, and world leaders. Yet sexual assailants are often slipping through the cracks.

Link

I will reiterate that universities should not even be in the business of investigating any crimes or wrong doing. They should not be trying any criminal cases.

Imo letting them have their own rules and justice system is the problem. Instead of giving them any guidelines or taking any away, what should be taken away is their ability to have their own justice system.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
13.1.66  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Ender @13.1.65    3 months ago
And just rescinding the Obama policy will not help anything.

It will restore justice for the accused. Everyone has the right to an assumption of innocence until proven guilty.


I will reiterate that universities should not even be in the business of investigating any crimes or wrong doing. 

We've covered that, due process rights were violated under Obama and now they've been restored.

 
 
 
Tessylo
13.1.67  Tessylo  replied to  Vic Eldred @13.1.66    3 months ago
'We've covered that, due process rights were violated under Obama and now they've been restored.'

No, he did not.  

 
 
 
Ender
13.1.68  Ender  replied to  Vic Eldred @13.1.66    3 months ago

Actually if you think about it, none of them are having any due process as none of it is going through an actual court of law.

 
 
 
Sparty On
13.1.69  Sparty On  replied to  Vic Eldred @13.1.66    3 months ago
Everyone has the right to an assumption of innocence until proven guilty.

Not today for some on the left.   If they don't agree with them or simple don't like them, the accused is guilty first, even if proven innocent later.

It's pretty messed up to be sure.

 
 
 
katrix
13.1.70  katrix  replied to  Sparty On @13.1.69    3 months ago
Not today for some on the left. 

Seems you're conveniently forgetting "LOCK HER UP" - for right wingers, anyone on the left is guilty first.

It sure is messed up,  you've got that right.

But apparently it only bothers you when the left does it; when the right does it, I hear no complaints from you.

 
 
 
Sparty On
13.1.71  Sparty On  replied to  katrix @13.1.70    3 months ago
Seems you're conveniently forgetting "LOCK HER UP"

I'm not forgetting anything or excluding anyone who does stuff like that but i'm not sure Hillary is the best example for you to use in that regard.   If you think she did it all righteous, you are not as smart as i thought you were.

That said, when i hear you pointing out those on the left who have been doing just that, nonstop for the last three plus years, i'll yield some high ground to you on your accusation.   I don't think you have any high ground on the matter from what i recall but hey, my memory isn't always the best, i could be wrong.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
13.1.72  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Ender @13.1.68    3 months ago
Actually if you think about it, none of them are having any due process

The accusers had been given the ability to do serious damage to whoever they wanted. It was a very unjust system. I'm sure it played well with Obama's feminist supporters.

 
 
 
Tessylo
14  Tessylo    3 months ago

I don't find that reassuring at all.  

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
15  author  Vic Eldred    3 months ago

Israeli scientists: 'In a few weeks, we will have coronavirus vaccine'

Once the vaccine is developed, it will take at least 90 days to complete the regulatory process and potentially more to enter the marketplace.

https://www.jpost.com/HEALTH-SCIENCE/Israeli-scientists-In-three-weeks-we-will-have-coronavirus-vaccine-619101

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
15.1  Buzz of the Orient  replied to  Vic Eldred @15    3 months ago

I was going to post that as an article.  With all the medical breakthroughs and developments from Israel it would not surprise me if they were the first to come up with a vaccine.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
15.1.1  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Buzz of the Orient @15.1    3 months ago

Also here on Long Island, a lab says they are close to having a vaccine, but there are still too many unknown variables with this virus to know how safe it will be.

 
 
 
Tessylo
16  Tessylo    3 months ago

I heard it could take up to a year.  Hmmmmm

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
16.1  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @16    3 months ago

A year and a half would be standard for developing a new vaccine

 
 
 
Larry Hampton
16.2  Larry Hampton  replied to  Tessylo @16    3 months ago

Funny how many think that a vaccine is a cure. 

 
 
 
Jasper2529
16.2.1  Jasper2529  replied to  Larry Hampton @16.2    3 months ago
Funny how many think that a vaccine is a cure. 

I haven't come across any evidence of this. Please post links to your assertion, because I'd be very interested in reading them. Thanks!

 
 
 
Jasper2529
16.2.3  Jasper2529  replied to  Larry Hampton @16.2    3 months ago
Funny how many think that a vaccine is a cure. 

Funnier is that many people are afraid to drink Corona beer, because they think it's the source of coronavirus!

 
 
 
The Magic Eight Ball
16.2.4  The Magic Eight Ball  replied to  Jasper2529 @16.2.3    3 months ago
to drink Corona beer

when the corona virus seeks lime disease.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
16.3  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Tessylo @16    3 months ago

"Back in January, President Trump put together a Coronavirus task force— CNN headline: “Coronavirus task force another example of Trump admin’s lack of diversity.” The first thing CNN noticed was race & skin color...not the fact Trump chose a qualified team to solve the problem".....LORI HENDRY

ER0acWIWoAISaIc?format=jpg&name=small

 
 
 
MUVA
16.3.1  MUVA  replied to  Vic Eldred @16.3    3 months ago

The one thing I noticed some people complaining about the cost of the vaccine before a single dose has been produced.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
16.3.2  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  MUVA @16.3.1    3 months ago

You will be amazed at what people are willing to pay when it comes to their health.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
16.3.3  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Vic Eldred @16.3.2    3 months ago

What about if you cant pay?

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
16.3.4  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @16.3.3    3 months ago

With this? The Coronavirus?  It should be a mandatory, free vaccine. 

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
16.3.5  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Vic Eldred @16.3.4    3 months ago

OK then we agree.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
16.3.6  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @16.3.5    3 months ago

And the pharmaceutical company that produces it should be forced to sell it at cost to the government, as a sort of a patriotic gesture!

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
16.3.7  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Vic Eldred @16.3.6    3 months ago

That will only happen if we develop it. Not if some other country develops it. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
16.3.8  author  Vic Eldred  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @16.3.7    3 months ago

Iv'e only heard of two companies working on it. One here in the US - Inovio Pharmaceuticals and the other in Israel. (both are racing to develop it)

BTW for those with money to invest it's (NASDAQ: INO )

 
 
 
Jasper2529
16.4  Jasper2529  replied to  Tessylo @16    3 months ago
I heard it could take up to a year.  Hmmmmm

This isn't a "Hmmmmm" moment at all. Efficacy and safety are paramount. What I've read about a safe, efficient coronavirus vaccine in approximately two years is fast-tracking what would normally happen. For your reading pleasure ...

https://www.historyofvaccines.org/index.php/content/articles/vaccine-development-testing-and-regulation

https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/basics/test-approve.html

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5518734/

 

 
 
 
Kathleen
17  Kathleen    3 months ago

I think they just want to keep everyone calm. There is nothing worse then putting everyone in a panic and they do stupid things. 

 
 
 
katrix
17.1  katrix  replied to  Kathleen @17    3 months ago
There is nothing worse then putting everyone in a panic and they do stupid things

Appointing an anti-science guy like Pence to be in charge is not exactly going to make people calmer. This is a time when Trump's disdain for people with actual knowledge is going to bite us in the ass. All he cares about is politicizing this, because his massive ego is convinced it's a plot to harm his chances for re-election. Just as he had a fit when NOAA told the truth about that hurricane.

 
 
 
Sparty On
17.1.1  Sparty On  replied to  katrix @17.1    3 months ago
Appointing an anti-science guy like Pence

Just because someone has faith doesn't automatically make them an "anti science" person.   I'm proof of that.  

I've managed to muddle my way through a very successful Engineering career while maintaining a very strong faith.

Talking about Pence in this way is simply just another way to bag on Trump.   Nothing more, nothing less.

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
17.1.2  igknorantzrulz  replied to  katrix @17.1    3 months ago

This is one thing that his BULLSHIT can't fake news and Hoax it all away.

.

And if he attempts to, those pussies in the Senate will FINALLY be forced to call the LYING mental midget out, cause when constituents begin to drop over, Trumps tweety threats ain't gonna be able to override actual legitimate fears and concerns of his free base.

I truly hope it doesn't have to come down to that, but i suspect it just may. 

The 'man' cannot control his feeble mind.

 
 
 
r.t..b...
17.1.3  r.t..b...  replied to  katrix @17.1    3 months ago
All he cares about is politicizing this

The vitriol aimed at his detractors has come to be expected. Mexico has (4) confirmed cases to date and he is floating the idea of closing the southern border. Canada has (24). He is not immune to politicizing...

 
 
 
katrix
17.1.4  katrix  replied to  Sparty On @17.1.1    3 months ago
Just because someone has faith doesn't automatically make them an "anti science" person.   I'm proof of that.  

True. My mom is also proof of that. However, Pence is not one of those people. He is anti-science.

 
 
 
Sparty On
17.1.5  Sparty On  replied to  katrix @17.1.4    3 months ago
He is anti-science.

Not by my definition.   I know the rhetoric that says he is and don't agree with most of it.  

He's got some different views than the currently approved leftist manifesto on those topics but that's about it.

And that in an of itself does not make him "anti science" and certainly not for what it takes to contain this virus which is what this discussion was about.

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
17.1.6  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Sparty On @17.1.5    3 months ago
He is anti-science.

he's out to lunch, and far more anti-science than uncle, as either way he can't relate to it.

 
 
 
katrix
17.1.7  katrix  replied to  Sparty On @17.1.5    3 months ago

Claiming that smoking doesn't kill - when we know it does? Supporting gay conversion therapy? His need to pray over the needle exchange program contributed to unnecessary HIV infections ...

The man is a joke when it comes to public health.

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
17.1.8  igknorantzrulz  replied to  katrix @17.1.7    3 months ago

maybe he's on the fence about it, 

or, ah

he's a science denier plain and simple.

 
 
 
Sparty On
17.1.9  Sparty On  replied to  katrix @17.1.7    3 months ago

Like i said, i understand the carefully crafted left wing talking points on the matter and still don't agree that it automatically makes him "anti science" and certainly don't agree that it is going to negatively affect his ability to properly handle this corona virus situation.   Which is the point really cogent to this article.

Any concerns of that nature are over-blow for partisan and/or preferred narrative reasons.

 
 
 
katrix
17.1.10  katrix  replied to  Sparty On @17.1.9    3 months ago
Any concerns of that nature are over-blow for partisan and/or preferred narrative reasons.

Nope. It's simple logic. A man who doesn't even accept the theory of evolution isn't likely to understand how viruses work and what the best course of action is.

 
 
 
Sparty On
17.1.11  Sparty On  replied to  katrix @17.1.10    3 months ago

I disagree.  

You have no idea what he does or doesn't understand on this virus topic   You don't like him simply because some of his views which are controversial to a few of your preferred narratives.   It has nothing to do with the current situation.

It's that simple.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
18  author  Vic Eldred    3 months ago

Virus spreading globally

Coronaviruses are a large family of viruses, some of which cause the common cold. Others have evolved into more severe illnesses, such as SARS and MERS.

Locations   in bold   have reported a first case within last 7 days

Page 1 of 5  
LOCATION FIRST REPORTED CONFIRMED CASES   DEATHS
China December 31, 2019
80,026
80,026
2,912
South Korea January 20, 2020
4,335
4,335
26
Italy January 31, 2020
1,694
1,694
34
Iran February 19, 2020
1,501
1,501
66
Japan January 15, 2020
961
961
12
Germany January 28, 2020
130
130
0
France January 24, 2020
130
130
2
Singapore January 23, 2020
106
106
0
Hong Kong January 23, 2020
98
98
2
United States January 21, 2020
80
80
2
Spain February 2, 2020
71
71
0
Kuwait February 24, 2020
56
56
0
Bahrain February 24, 2020
47
47
0
Thailand January 13, 2020
43
43
1
Taiwan January 21, 2020
41
41
1
Data as of March 2 at 6:06 a.m. Eastern; *705 of Japan's reported cases were from a cruise ship docked in Yokohama.
Source:   AP reports   Graphic   Phil Holm
 
 
 
r.t..b...
18.1  r.t..b...  replied to  Vic Eldred @18    3 months ago

Good data. Thanks for the link.

 
 
 
Sparty On
18.2  Sparty On  replied to  Vic Eldred @18    3 months ago

Cruise ships.   I've never understood the fascination with those floating petri dishes.  

Flying in pressurized germ tubes is bad enough but your exposure time there is usually much less.

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
18.2.1  igknorantzrulz  replied to  Sparty On @18.2    3 months ago

I'd prefer a Cruise Missile over one of those germination stations.

Never been on a cruise, and definitely have not the desire to start. 

Once those sicknesses get rolling on the high seas, they tend to build momentum, as exampled there in Japan.

.

I really do not wish to hear from Pence on this pandemic, give me a damn doctor or scientist any day, not some religious zealot who is afraid to upset the naked and afraid emperor of nothing doom and gloom about 'my' economical garden that Obama didn't cultivate, 'this economy is mine all mine', cause i claimed it, and i would never lie to any of my peasants that must bow at my feet and tie bows in my shoelaced Kool aid.

4 the broken record, I do not

believe Trump is in any way fully responsible for the economy, good or bad.

.

But it certainly has been His big mouth that has claimed it.  

 
 
 
r.t..b...
18.2.2  r.t..b...  replied to  Sparty On @18.2    3 months ago
Cruise ships

Bill Burr has the perfect solution. 

 
 
 
Sparty On
18.2.3  Sparty On  replied to  r.t..b... @18.2.2    3 months ago

lol

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
19  author  Vic Eldred    3 months ago

Health officials in Washington state announced three additional deaths among  coronavirus  patients on Monday, bring the total number of fatalities to five. Two of the patients were considered "new" cases of COVID-19, while the third death involved a patient who was previously confirmed to have the virus.

In a press conference, King County health officials announced four new cases, bringing the total number of COVID-19 patients in the state to 14, including the five deaths.

Several of the patients were described to be older in age, with underlying health issues. Three of fatalities involved female patients, including two who died on March 1, while the other two involved men, including one in his 50s with no known exposure.

Officials cautioned that the number of cases is expected to rise in the coming days and that the risk to the public would be increasing.

https://www.foxnews.com/health/washington-state-announces-3-new-coronavirus-deaths

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online


Dean Moriarty
Just Jim NC TttH
Wishful_thinkin
Vic Eldred
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
The Magic Eight Ball


33 visitors