|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
Wh press pool put out a statement that is in total contradiction to the Dr's statements. CNN is reporting it. Says he's been doing really badly last 24 hours and there's no clear path to a full recovery.
Sometimes there are weeks where decades happen.
Story says white house statement, but i don't think it is an official one, to be clear.
The White House press pool has received a statement saying that President Donald Trump’s vitals are “very concerning,” and that he’s “not on a clear path to a full recovery.”
In an official statement from the White House, filed by pool reporter Cheryl Bolen, “a source familiar with the president’s health” who was not identified gave a dire assessment of Trump’s condition.
“The president’s vitals over the last 24 hours were very concerning,” the source said. “And the next 48 hours will be critical in terms of his care. We are still not on a clear path to a full recovery.”
The comments stand in stark contrast to those made moments earlier by Trump’s personal physician, Dr. Sean Conley, who said at a news conference that the president is “doing great.”
https://www.mediaite.com/trump/breaking-trump-vitals-very-concerning-according-to-white-house-president-not-on-a-clear-path-to-full-recovery/
|
Yes, they've already disputed the timeline put out by the doctor to place Trump in the theoretical clear of being not knowingly sick during his fundraiser.
Which is the whole fucking problem with this whole administration. People want to blame the media for this but if you can't even get important facts straight and obviously obfuscate information, people are going to resort to Kremlinology and reading tea leaves.
Edit:
This seems more and more likely based on the doctor's timeline and Wallace's account of Trump's team being late to the debates and getting in without doing any tests because of some stupid honor system.
Can only hope everyone else at the debates is fine in any case.
|
On October 04 2020 00:59 LegalLord wrote:
There's no smoking gun for saying that things are going very poorly, but the impressive list of supplements, antivirals, and experimental treatments he's being pumped up with do not sound like preventative, "abundance of caution" type measures. Transferring to a military hospital is also no preventative measure no matter how it can be spun. It all sounds more like a desperate attempt to handle worsening conditions.
In addition to being a high risk group for all the obvious reasons, he'd also have done the exact wrong thing for a presymptomatic patient from the time of the expected infection last Saturday up until the positive test result early Friday. Traveling, speaking frequently, having an erratic sleep schedule, working through any level of fatigue, and so on. High respiratory exertion has been linked to poor outcomes with this virus, and the question would be how bad the infection got before testing positive.
I guess we'll soon get to see if the antibody plasma "miracle cure" is everything it's been hyped up to be, or just another big steaming flop. The data is insufficient to be particularly conclusive, although there are certainly those around who think it to be a surefire win.
Just read an article when they interviewed an expert in Sweden (who can be considered to be impartial).
His take was that it could be worse than what they are saying but it likely isn't. In his opinion just the fact that you are giving the president a new drug that is still in early testing that you have no idea on how he will react to is probably enough to transfer him to a hospital.
Also most many older patients (Boris Johnson for example) go from mild symptoms to drastically worse after 5-6 days so it could be that they are waiting out that period.
From Trumps perspective just getting regular flue likely symptoms for 2-3 weeks is a disaster right now. I have no problem believing that he and his team asks for a golden bullet cure and Regeneron is the best they can find. Give him that, wait 5-6 days, if it looks good proclaim victory over covid and go back out on the campaign trail. If it doesn't work and you get enough symptoms the campaign is fucked anyway so you don't lose anything more by getting admitted to a hospital.
|
On October 04 2020 01:41 StalkerTL wrote:Yes, they've already disputed the timeline put out by the doctor to place Trump in the theoretical clear of being not knowingly sick during his fundraiser. Which is the whole fucking problem with this whole administration. People want to blame the media for this but if you can't even get important facts straight and obviously obfuscate information, people are going to resort to Kremlinology and reading tea leaves. Edit: https://twitter.com/DanRather/status/1312429950809464837This seems more and more likely based on the doctor's timeline and Wallace's account of Trump's team being late to the debates and getting in without doing any tests because of some stupid honor system.
It's what happens if you lie. Lying with multiple people gets really hard to coordinate, because everyone has to tell the same lie, or it doesn't work.
Meanwhile, telling the truth is easy. There will probably still be some minor inconsistencies because people remember stuff incorrectly, but you don't get multiple very clearly incompatible stories about basic facts.
|
If trumps doctor says he’s recovering, it is entirely possible he’s already dead
|
Day 3 and Day 2 cannot be both Thursday night simultaneously. The hours provided are also nowhere near Thursday night, that would be ~36 hours ago. Who says 72 hours when talking about 36 hours. That's a huge error in timeline recollection, that's like saying I went to work in Saturday when my workplace is only open M-F.
This is really easy to get right if you're being honest about the timeline. If the original timeline put out by the doctor is wrong, I don't want that doctor anywhere near anyone because who is going to trust a doctor who is getting this timeline this wrong.
Edit:
So we got this report from some "source".
Ryan Lizza is claiming this source is Mark Meadows, who was caught on camera talking to reporters about something off the record.
Peak clown shoes situation right now.
|
|
|
I get the sentiment, this administration's relationship with the truth is closer to hate-f*cking than anything else. Let's wait how things turn out.
Tangible things will eventually leak or come out, the chaotic nature of how these people work makes it inevitable. It is the thing you can kind of count on lol.
|
AP is reporting that Trump was administered oxygen before going to the hospital. So his personal Dr's statements should probably just be thrown out (as he explicitly said no oxygen was given).
Also, I got these uh, perfectly timed mailers from the GOP yesterday.
+ Show Spoiler +
|
On October 04 2020 01:41 CuddlyCuteKitten wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2020 00:59 LegalLord wrote:
There's no smoking gun for saying that things are going very poorly, but the impressive list of supplements, antivirals, and experimental treatments he's being pumped up with do not sound like preventative, "abundance of caution" type measures. Transferring to a military hospital is also no preventative measure no matter how it can be spun. It all sounds more like a desperate attempt to handle worsening conditions.
In addition to being a high risk group for all the obvious reasons, he'd also have done the exact wrong thing for a presymptomatic patient from the time of the expected infection last Saturday up until the positive test result early Friday. Traveling, speaking frequently, having an erratic sleep schedule, working through any level of fatigue, and so on. High respiratory exertion has been linked to poor outcomes with this virus, and the question would be how bad the infection got before testing positive.
I guess we'll soon get to see if the antibody plasma "miracle cure" is everything it's been hyped up to be, or just another big steaming flop. The data is insufficient to be particularly conclusive, although there are certainly those around who think it to be a surefire win. Just read an article when they interviewed an expert in Sweden (who can be considered to be impartial). His take was that it could be worse than what they are saying but it likely isn't. In his opinion just the fact that you are giving the president a new drug that is still in early testing that you have no idea on how he will react to is probably enough to transfer him to a hospital. Also most many older patients (Boris Johnson for example) go from mild symptoms to drastically worse after 5-6 days so it could be that they are waiting out that period. From Trumps perspective just getting regular flue likely symptoms for 2-3 weeks is a disaster right now. I have no problem believing that he and his team asks for a golden bullet cure and Regeneron is the best they can find. Give him that, wait 5-6 days, if it looks good proclaim victory over covid and go back out on the campaign trail. If it doesn't work and you get enough symptoms the campaign is fucked anyway so you don't lose anything more by getting admitted to a hospital.
I'm more than a little skeptical about this take for several reasons. The White House is reasonably well-equipped medically in its own right, so it's not obviously the case that transfer to a military hospital would be necessary. And more importantly, I don't see the "Trump demanded a miracle cure" story as more likely than "an experimental drug was deemed to be worth the risk due to a dangerous infection."
Add that to the historical precedent of the US government lying about the president's health, and the conflicting reports that potentially suggest a worsening condition, and I find it harder to believe the optimistic case than the alternative at this point.
|
On a human level the reassurence efforts are absolutely understandable - and frankly necessary for a nation worried sick about the future. Too bad the reputation credit card has been hopelessly overcharged.
Looking at pictures of the rose garden event, it's mind blowing. That's hybris and high stakes gambling in picture form.
Team Trump/Republicans at the debate not giving a damn about the mask rules is just icing on the cake.
//typo
|
DNI Ratcliffe declassified a potentially damaging document indicating that in 2016 the US intercepted a Russian intelligence analysis concluding that Hillary Clinton had launched a plot to link trump to the dnc hacking. The ibtelligence community was apparently concerned enough about the documents to refer them to the FBI for investigation.
The liberal media talking point in response to this is that it was russian diainformation. That's an interesting claim, because disinformatjon is by definition false. This information, on the other hand, turned out to be true. And even if it is disinformation, that raises questions about why the fbi would disregard it when the FBI put so much trust in the obvious disinformation in the steele dossier.
At the very least we need more declassification on this, and I suspect its coming.
|
With 3 senators infected with covid does that mean that they can't pass any financial relief bill?
|
First headline I see on the information.
Did America’s top spy release Russian disinformation to help Trump?
Definitely maybe.
Points out that this wasn't even part of the info the senate intel committee (RUN BY REPUBLICANS) made declassified.
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2020/10/1/21497176/john-ratcliffe-russia-intelligence-hillary-clinton-donald-trump
Snopes points out that even Ratcliffe is admitting it might be a total hoax.
https://www.snopes.com/ap/2020/10/01/trump-intel-chief-unveils-unverified-russian-info-about-dems/
NYT Subheadline:
The disclosure appeared to be aimed at helping President Trump benefit politically, and intelligence agencies were said to object to its release.
NYT points out that intelligence agencies objected to its release
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/29/us/politics/john-ratcliffe-russian-disinformation.html
Politico also points out that the senate committee rejected this info as useful or credible
The hastily assembled briefing, led by Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe, caught staffers off-guard and exacerbated concerns about what Democrats said was the deployment of Russian disinformation to support President Donald Trump’s effort to discredit the investigation into his 2016 campaign’s contacts with the Russian government.
The episode also revived allegations from Democrats that Ratcliffe, a former Republican congressman and a longtime ally of the president, is abusing his position to aid Trump politically by selectively declassifying documents intended to denigrate Trump’s political opponents. Much of that information has been revealed through Republican senators who are conducting investigations targeting those opponents.
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/09/30/john-ratcliffe-russia-briefing-424125
Literally no one outside of conservative media is taking the bait. If it's not credible enough to be believed by any of the non-partisan people bothering to report it, it's useless.
|
On October 04 2020 03:22 Starlightsun wrote:
With 3 senators infected with covid does that mean that they can't pass any financial relief bill?
That's fallen so far off the radar that it's barely even in the news at this point.
On top of that, if they really wanted to pass one, chances are they would've done it already. It really doesn't seem to be very high on anyone's priority list.
|
Good analysis, beat me to it.
|
On October 04 2020 03:27 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2020 03:22 Starlightsun wrote:
With 3 senators infected with covid does that mean that they can't pass any financial relief bill? That's fallen so far off the radar that it's barely even in the news at this point. On top of that, if they really wanted to pass one, chances are they would've done it already. It really doesn't seem to be very high on anyone's priority list.
I mean it kind of should be... didn't the big airlines just pass a deadline for a huge amount of layoffs? Small businesses in my state are dropping like flies and the lines for food handouts are consistently long. Can the senate still vote with 3 members unable to attend?
|
Couple of days ago the House passed a release bill, so that's not quite true that it was not on some people's priority list.
But Trump being sick changed just about everything. And a tweet directly from the GOP dood?
|
Thanks for repeating the liberal media talking point. If you fail to see their bias on the issue, and you ignore the documents, you're simply not going to be getting accurate info on this issue. As for the senate intel committee, its run by Rubio, who was the initial party to be paying fusion GPS before Hillary took over. Rubio has a vested interest in legitimizing the collusion investigation.
|
On October 04 2020 03:33 Starlightsun wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2020 03:27 LegalLord wrote:On October 04 2020 03:22 Starlightsun wrote:
With 3 senators infected with covid does that mean that they can't pass any financial relief bill? That's fallen so far off the radar that it's barely even in the news at this point. On top of that, if they really wanted to pass one, chances are they would've done it already. It really doesn't seem to be very high on anyone's priority list. I mean it kind of should be... didn't the big airlines just pass a deadline for a huge amount of layoffs? Small businesses in my state are dropping like flies and the lines for food handouts are consistently long. Can the senate still vote with 3 members unable to attend?
Maybe it should be, but it’s not likely that it will be. Every meaningful piece of aid is stuck in negotiations, the House bill just passed is little more than a token gesture, and since corporations and the stock market have already been bailed out there’s not much incentive to do much more to help the more vulnerable people and businesses. Yes, it’s obvious to anyone that there’s a crisis boiling beneath the surface of a strangely rosy picture of the economy, but that’s been true for months. If they wanted to pass more aid, August was the time to do it.
Three Republicans incapacitated due to coronavirus either forces them to compromise to get the votes they need, or to shelve any plan to get that legislation through. The Supreme Court nomination clearly looks like a bigger priority for the Senate than a stimulus that the wealthy don’t need.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/3DNjK1z.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://i.imgur.com/2lPjwKM.jpg)
