New Corona Virus thread.

[jcole]

Directly from Donnie's tweet; this is page one. It's in the first bullet point

I can post parts 2 and 3 if you want or you can go to the article that AJ posted and find it yourself like I did. Yeah, do that

[Richard]

^ no I got it now,when I first clicked on the Hills link,I got a congratulations you are winning in the iPhone lottery pop up box,so I Xd it out.

So the crux of it is they are triggered because Trump got some dates mixed up and they are using that as a diversion because of him pulling funding.

When President Trump implemented travel restrictions from Wuhan in order to stop the spread.

The WHOs response was to chastise Trumps decision as reckless and said travel restrictions were not needed in order to prevent the spread.

That is the reason for pulling the funding,the whole date argument is really irrelevant and being used as a distraction.

100% If Trump has not implemented the travel restrictions and did nothing like the WHO recommended,you guys would be crawling up his rear end with demanding to know why he did not implement travel restrictions.

Sorry to break your guys giddy dance of Trump lies,ha ha we busted him,but you got played by the WHO.

Hook ,line and sinker.

WHO claims travel restrictions are not necessary to stop the spread.

Weeks and even days later,airlines shut down all international travel and entire country’s lock down to prevent the spread.

So according to WHOs original claims,there was no need to lock down entire country’s to prevent the spread,so why do it.

Either the WHO was wrong or Trump was wrong.

At the exact same time cases were popping up across the world that were traced directly back to those who had recently traveled to Wuhan China.

[aj3647]

If Trump isn't lying, then prove it by posting the link to the Lancet article from December 2019 that he is referencing in his letter to the WHO.

[Richard]

^ you are the one making the claim of him lying,if you are going to make the accusations then you have to supply the data to prove your case.

Not,I say Trump lied now prove me wrong.

That is the problem when you base your arguments and claims on emotions,you have a tendency to pick the words that suit your agenda and never look at the bigger picture or take it all into context.

Every international agency has been under Trumps microscope of are they really worth spending millions of dollars every year,while we spend millions more in direct aid.

What do we need a Middle man for when it just adds millions more to the tab in administration costs.

The WHO should have never publicly chastised the United States President,I do not care who is president,for doing his job,which is first and foremost doing what he feels is in the best interests of this country.

He does not have to make a case or justify dropping funding to the WHO,what you are seeing is the WHO pandering to the public in order to keep receiving the funding.

Everything else is irrelevant.

While the president was fighting to stop the spread,the WHO was fighting to maintain its existence while playing a stupid game.

Big difference.

It was not until after every other country in the world went in lockdown did the WHO declare it a pandemic.

Trump haters only concern is about trying to catch Trump in a lie,that is your only objective,you could care less if the world had actually taken the early WHO recommendations we would have been in deep dodo and then millions more would have died.

They made the decision to cover for China,they choose the path and now must follow where it leads.

Trump is not the only one that is blasting the WHO and their response,pretty much every other leader is also.

[aj3647]

I presented my proof. The Lancet published a letter denying that they published ANYTHING about the viral pandemic at all in December 2019. Read their letter. What more evidence do you require? Here's the Lancet's archive, if you want to review their issues from December 2019. There's nothing there that Trump could possibly be referring to.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/l...loi_decade_201

I can't believe I even need to argue this. There is no Lancet article from December 2019. There isn't. What part of that is so hard for you to comprehend?

But I'll go ahead and up the ante, if you can link to the December 2019 article that Trump is referring to, I'll delete my DYes account and never post here again.

[Richard]

Maybe read the history of Lancet and their history of retractions and pulled history,it is easy to remove archive materials.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lancet

The Lancet has taken a political stand on several important medical and non-medical issues. Recent examples include criticism of the World Health Organization [[WHO), rejection of the WHO's claims of the efficacy of homoeopathy as a therapeutic option,^[6]disapproval during the time Reed Exhibitions [[a division of Reed Elsevier) hosted arms industryfairs, a call in 2003 for tobacco to be made illegal,^[7] a call for an independent investigation into the American bombing of a hospital in Afghanistan in 2015,^[8] and a call for Americans to put a U.S. president in the White House in 2021 who "will understand that public health should not be guided by partisan politics".<sup>[9]

Who are they to dictate who Americans choose to put in office?

They clearly are not following politics in America if they think public has ever not been guided by partisan politics,let alone 2021.

Notice how many times they have had to do retractions for doing the exact same thing they are claiming the president is doing?

Do not be a tease and say you will delete your account and never post again.

Before you do though you still owe me 2 apologies for calling me a lair in the past and never apologized when you were proven wrong.</sup>

[aj3647]

I called you a "lair?" Like where a super villain lives? Well I do apologize for that! Anyways, glad I get to keep posting, since you couldn't provide the article Trump was referring to.

And since you claimed without evidence the Lancet deleted the article in question from its website, it's odd that you cannot find a single person anywhere who can attest to ever having seen it. Or saved a copy of it. I mean, SOMEONE should have seen or saved a copy of it since the Lancet is literally one of the most-read journals on Earth. What about the authors of the article? Are they in on the conspiracy too?

It's all a conspiracy, everyone's lying except for Trump. Rather than simply admit that Trump lied, concoct a story about the Lancet purging its website of a published article that no one anywhere can attest to having ever seen [[except for Donald J Trump who I'm sure religiously reads the Lancet).

Thankfully the Internet never forgets and there's this thing called the Internet Archive that takes snapshots of websites at various points in time.

https://web.archive.org/web/20190101.../lancet/issues

So you can go back and see an archived image of exactly what the Lancet was displaying on its website in December. Care to try again?

I'll even settle for just the title of the article. Maybe the White House can provide it?

[Richard]

What you are failing to realize is this has nothing to do with anything outside of you being able to say Trump lies,that is your objective.

Did you see today’s announcement where the WHO has decided to launch an investigation into the corona virus and it’s origins,and an internal investigation as to their handling of it.

Mission accomplished in less then the 30 days given to get their act together.

Not that it matters but you can go around the world and every where you go the leaders are being lambasted for the way the whole situation was handled.

The PM in Belgium went to visit a hospital and the staff turned their backs to him in protest.

Everywhere you go it is partisan,and some try and play the games at the level they really do not understand,but I will not mention any names.

[Bigdd]

Can you imagine if we still had Pres Obama in the WH?

It took him NINE MONTHS to restrict flights during the H1N1 epidemic of 2009.

[aj3647]

Can you imagine if we still had Pres Obama in the WH?

It took him NINE MONTHS to restrict flights during the H1N1 epidemic of 2009.

https://www.biospace.com/article/200...irus-pandemic/

The CDC estimated that from April 12, 2009 to April 10, 2010, there were 60.8 million H1N1 cases, with 274,304 hospitalizations and 12,469 deaths in the U.S. alone.

So, if you want to make that comparison then, that would be 12,469 dead over a 12 month span under Obama, versus 93,300 dead in the span of seven weeks under Donald J Trump. Are you entirely positive you want to make that comparison?

[Meddle]

...

Too wordy for this thread. So are posts 51-60.

[Zacha341]

^^^As are others, if your doing a word-count it could be argued.............

[Meddle]

^^ This is the Ray-der's Digest, Fully Abridged version. One sentence will do. Or maybe two.


And it's 'you're'.

[Zacha341]

I know that grammatically [[you're is the contraction of You Are) speaking.

I've always said my typing is terrible. Worse when I'm distracted by what's on the TV. LOL!

[Bigdd]

https://www.biospace.com/article/200...irus-pandemic/

The CDC estimated that from April 12, 2009 to April 10, 2010, there were 60.8 million H1N1 cases, with 274,304 hospitalizations and 12,469 deaths in the U.S. alone.

So, if you want to make that comparison then, that would be 12,469 dead over a 12 month span under Obama, versus 93,300 dead in the span of seven weeks under Donald J Trump. Are you entirely positive you want to make that comparison?

YEP, Positive !

The way one must judge things like this is not on the basis of what these two epidemics ENDED UP looking like,.... but rather on what they looked like at the start,... when the critical decisions needed to be made. The ones that are light on data, have HUGE political consequences, but ultimately have the biggest impact on life.

Early on H1N1 was thought to be a much bigger deal than it ended up being.

And early on in Jan, Feb and even early Mar of this year, the "experts" [[Fauci, the W.H.O. etc) were saying Covid was nothing to worry about, not transmittable between humans, etc, etc.

Monday morning quarterbacking is easy. What's important is having someone in the WH with the cohones and luck/smarts to do the right thing,.. even when "so called" experts are giving bad advice.

If the former president was still in office,... and had was told by some of the same advisors [[Fauci etc) what Pres Trump was told,.... what would the situation be today?

[Richard]

^^ This is the Ray-der's Digest, Fully Abridged version. One sentence will do. Or maybe two.


And it's 'you're'.

Yea,that was like 4 sentences,followed up with horrible structure,followed by improper use of capitalization and improper use of the period,followed up by correcting others,while not setting a very good example of proper what ever they call it.

See that is an example of power drunk,do as I say and not as I do.

How many times can you repeat,if you elect commie progressive socialist leaders,they will do what they do and try and create power over your every breathing moment.

I guess you could post the Jist of it in a thousand different phrases

[Dan Wesson]

Obama/Trump, Obama/Trump, Obama/Trump, Dems/Reps, Dems/Reps, Dems/Reps....

[Dan Wesson]

Well the Ukraine girls really knock me out
They leave the West behind
And Moscow girls make me sing and shout
That Georgia's always on my mind

https://www.rt.com/russia/489144-tul...e-suit-bikini/

[aj3647]

Gov Whitmer's team seemed to get crushed during Friday's hearing [[About whether she is allowed to repeatedly issue State of Emergency orders [[she's not).

Most pundits expected the judge was going to rule right then and there, but she didn't.

Presumably the judge will rule against the governor soon,.. and then it will be appealed to the state Supreme Court. It's being fast-tracked, so the whole process should take a week or so,.. and not years.

LOL!

https://www.mlive.com/public-interes...cy-orders.html

A state Court of Claims judge ruled Tuesday the emergency laws under which Gov. Gretchen Whitmer has issued dozens of executive orders in response to the coronavirus pandemic are likely constitutional.

[GMan]

LOL!

https://www.mlive.com/public-interes...cy-orders.html

FYI that is a ruling on a different hearing. Tue's hearing has not been ruled on yet.

[aj3647]

FYI that is a ruling on a different hearing. Tue's hearing has not been ruled on yet.

Yes, I'm aware of that. Bigdd was referring to the case filed by the Republicans in the Legislature, whereas the case ruled on yesterday was filed by the anti-Whitmer group "Michigan United for Victory." The underlying legal arguments are basically the same in both cases though.

However seeing as both cases are being heard before the state Court of Claims, yesterday's ruling certainly doesn't help the Legislature's case. And the Judge in that case will certainly be aware of the Judge's ruling in this case.

[Bigdd]

The law is a bit vague,.. [[2 laws actually, one from 1947 and the other from the '70's).

But. it's fairly clear that the state of emergency can only be extended once without the legislature,.. and it HAD already been extended once.

My guess is that's why the judge didn't simply rule Friday afternoon like most were expecting. She was embarrassed to render the decision she did.

I've found that over the years, that when the right verdict comes out,.. it's done then and there. When you're gonna get screwed,.. they do it by mail a week later.

Meaningless either way as whatever side lost, it was going to be appealed to the state supremes. It's fast tracked,.. so we'll get the real verdict soon enough.

I just wish Biden would pick Harris or Hillary or whomever soon, so our gov can stop playing these games.

[jcole]

What "games" would those be? She's said that she's only interested in her work in the State of Michigan. Several times, as a matter of fact, on local and national TV

I just wish Biden would pick Harris or Hillary or whomever soon, so our gov can stop playing these games.

[Johnnny5]

What "games" would those be? She's said that she's only interested in her work in the State of Michigan. Several times, as a matter of fact, on local and national TV

And of course we all know politicians always tell the truth! LOL..

I didn't vote for Whitmer, but honestly I think she's doing a pretty good job considering the extreme challenges we've been facing. That said, it's beyond obvious that she's running for the VP spot now. Not that I hold that against her, but it could end up being at Michigan's expense if Biden doesn't end up in the White House next year.

[jcole]

I don't agree that it's obvious that she's angling for the VEEP position. I think she's far too busy right now to have really considered it.

And of course we all know politicians always tell the truth! LOL..

I didn't vote for Whitmer, but honestly I think she's doing a pretty good job considering the extreme challenges we've been facing. That said, it's beyond obvious that she's running for the VP spot now. Not that I hold that against her, but it could end up being at Michigan's expense if Biden doesn't end up in the White House next year.