All things political. Coronavirus Edition. (7 Viewers)

[Maxp]

I fear we are really going to be in a bad place due to the obvious cuts to the federal agencies that deal with infectious disease, but also the negative effect the Affordable Care act has had on non urban hospitals. Our front line defenses are ineffectual and our ability to treat the populous is probably at an all time low. Factor in the cost of healthcare and I can see our system crashing. What do you think about the politics of this virus?

 

[dtc]

As a lifelong Republican, I can totally agree with this. Throughout my life, I have listened to my party's lip service to fiscal responsibility, but when they have been in office (congressional majorities as well as presidency), they have spent just as unwisely as the Democrats. I was enlightened during Nixon's first term when he embraced economic policies that were absolutely not conservative and not even traditionally Republican. Each presidency and congress that followed has proven that none of them cared about spending less or taxing less unless it benefitted them politically.

George HW Bush did not do what you're saying and as a former life-long Republican, I would argue that your characterization of "unwise" spending by Democrats is unfair. At least in my humble opinion, the unwise spending by Republicans is far worse. Without much detail to further derail, tax cuts for millionaires and hedge fund managers are not equivalent to schools and healthcare.

 

[bdb13]

I've said previously that Trump deserved criticism for his how he initially downplayed COVID and his inconsistent messaging. The Woodard audio goes into more detail, but talk of impeachment seems extreme.

We have video of Trump talking about wanting to keep the public calm not wanting to create a panic from March 30th.


Anthony Fauci, the nation’s top infectious disease expert, defended President Donald Trump on Wednesday after audio recordings revealed that the president wanted to downplay the severity of the coronavirus early in the pandemic.

Speaking with Fox News’ John Roberts, Fauci denied that he ever heard the president “distort” the threat of the coronavirus and maintained that Trump’s presentations to the public were largely in line with discussions he’d had with medical experts. When asked whether he ever felt Trump was downplaying the severity of the coronavirus, Fauci said no.

“I didn’t get any sense that he was distorting anything,” Fauci said. “In my discussions with him, they were always straightforward about the concerns that we had. We related that to him. When he would go out, I’d hear him discussing the same sort of things.”

Fauci denies hearing Trump distort facts on coronavirus

The nation’s top infectious disease expert defended the president after recordings revealed that Trump wanted to downplay the severity of the pandemic.

www.politico.com

I think the downplaying it combined with him saying stuff like it's five times worse than the flu is the new element to this.. prior to this coming out Trump basically played it like he didn't have enough info because of China. It makes his misleading statements that much more egregious.

 

[MT15]

Exactly, brandon13, there’s a big difference between downplaying it because you’re ignorant or don’t get the science, and knowing what was coming and saying the crap he said.

 

[Optimus Prime]

for what it's worth
=============================

.......Without question, this seemingly objective evidence indicating that Trump intentionally and egregiously downplayed the seriousness of COVID-19 is alarming. As the presidential election approaches and Americans grapple with life amid a pandemic, there is likely to be some serious fallout. Some, though, such as California Senator Ted Lieu, a Democrat, have even suggested that Trump’s misconduct constitutes reckless homicide.

In times of crisis, hyperbole rarely helps, and now is no exception. While Trump’s conduct could fairly be deemed extreme mismanagement, it doesn’t rise to the level of criminal homicide. Here’s why.

Reckless homicide requires the killing of another person by recklessness. Trump’s actions, however egregious, just don’t fit that definition.

First, let’s talk about “killing.” As goes the general rule of crimes, some actus reus is required to prosecute a person for reckless homicide. That can mean an affirmative act, or an act of omission; but if we’re talking omission, the person who failed to do something must have had some kind of legal obligation to do that thing.

Presidents, despite their many obligations, do not have a duty to protect people from coronavirus. Sure, it would be great if they effectively managed things like pandemics – but that’s not quite the same thing as a legally-enforceable duty. There’s no statute, no case law, no condition of the job that mandates that Donald Trump to protect us all from coronavirus or anything else.

Some have opined that Trump (among others) had a duty to warn the public about the threat of the virus. In some loose way, that might be true—but any defense lawyer with a functioning mouth would argue that Trump did warn people. He held press conferences at which coronavirus was a daily talking point. And again, Trump has no legal duty to provide effective warnings about coronavirus any more than he has a legal duty to warn people about other illnesses..............

MSN

www.msn.com

 

[coldseat]

We've seen enough of these moments to know that at least 40% of the country is fine just turning the game off and switching to a new game on a different console before the right button combo can be pressed. While we'll get at least one defender here who will sit down at the computer, pound some energy drinks, and praise the infallibility of MAGA for pages and pages on end, the rest will just ignore it and switch to the next topic as the reason why this doesn't matter.

For 4 years, that segment of the population has been receiving the propaganda news of Fox News and the conservative media. Ever since they made the decision to align behind Trump after the 2016 primary, they've done everything possible to elevate the clarion call or Trump's "Fake News" label of the traditional media. They suspended any idea of independent journalism and have done everything possible to elevate every voice in support of the President, no matter how ridiculous or nonsensical that person was. All in an effort to prop up this president and the right in this country.

It's lead to this dystopian reality where nothing can really penetrate that bubble. No matter how damming it is to Trump. The story of Trump's presidency is as much about Fox News and conservative medias ability to hijack 40% of this country and untether them from reality in support of this demagogue as it is about Trump's outrageous malfeasance and corruption.

It's something I would have never thought possible in America precisely because we have a free press and not state owned news services like in China or North Korea. But when a portion of the free press becomes fully complicit in functioning of as a state propaganda news service to advance the cause and expand the power of a political party and a demagogue president, it becomes not only possible but a reality.

 

[B4YOU]

Trump downplaying Covid-19 is no different than if the NHC told people that there was nothing to worry about with Hurricane Laura and that the storm would magically disappear.

People deserve the truth. When you lie or shade the truth and people die as a result, those deaths are on you.

 

[MT15]

Not to mention his “I didn’t want people to panic” rings very false when he fearmongers all day long about socialism and the suburbs disappearing.

 

[CoolBrees]

as I said earlier, you don’t instill calm or stop panic from saying it’s a hoax and will disappear in a few months.

you calm people with reassurance that your government is taking it seriously and we will get through it together.

i mean looks at the public comments he was making at the time. Straight up lies.

and I wonder how fast those fireFauci hashtags will disappear

 

[bdb13]

Not to mention his “I didn’t want people to panic” rings very false when he fearmongers all day long about socialism and the suburbs disappearing.

Right, if it's like one of those flowchart things:

Will creating a panic help me: ---> yes ---> then create a panic; ---> no ---> then don't create a panic.

 

[EmBeeFiveOhFour]

Come onnnnnnn

 

[MT15]

Lol. Complete denial.

 

[GrandAdmiral]

Come onnnnnnn

Terrible

 

[efil4]

I think it was efil who sort of set me straight about it in mid-Frebruary.

I think it wasn't just myself. We had several posters that all were seeing the reports and the actions taken, while understanding that this part of the world produces some pretty gnarly novel viruses.

Funny thing is his claim about not panicking. A true leader knows that if you are upfront and forthright from square 1, everything after that is easy.
He had no intent on uniting the nation thinking he could bluff his way to November.
We know reap what he sowed.

And I don't know how anyone defends this. At all. (I'm saying this yet again after his remarks on military).

The POTUS.

Just so very sad.

 

[samiam5211]

If the president had told us what he told Bob Woodward, Mardi Gras would have been cancelled.

Trump is a mass murderer.

 

[Ayo]

He's so incredibly dense, blinded by his own ego.

He just neutered his primary defense on the "hoax" of COVID. His explanation for what he meant by "democratic hoax" is utterly toothless. I mean, it wasn't strong to begin with but it's totally invalid now.

 

[LA - L.A.]

In one sense, an impeachable offense is anything the House decides is an impeachable offense.
On the textual basis, though, I don't think what Trump did, or is accused of doing, qualifies as "treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors."
In your example, I am not sure - I guess if the purpose of inaction was to aid a foreign enemy then that would qualify as treason. If the inaction was due to some strategic goal, then I am not so sure.

[EDIT] I guess you could ake some sort of dereliction of duty claim, that would fall under a "high crime or misdemeanor": and that claim would be stronger the more you could tie it to a lack of furtherance of an actual policy. But to the extent Trump truly was trying to keep the country calm and perhaps even denying the virus' danger in order to keep the economy rolling - that would put it more on the side of a political question.
But I guess there could be some prima facie basis to say he violated his oath of office.

Depraved indifference and/or gross negligence that leads to the death of an individual is a high crime everywhere in this country.

Trumps downplaying of the virus directly lead to death of at least one person who believed him. We have countless anecdotal stories that there were very many people expressing their regret for believing the people that told them the virus was not serious.

Trump was the most vocal and high profile member of the group of people downplaying the virus and we now know that he knew he how deadly the virus was when he was telling those people it was no big deal.

If that isn't depraved indifference and/or gross negligence that lead to people dying, then I don't know what is.

If that isn't a "high crime," then I don't know what is.

If I were Speaker of the House, I would start the impeachment procedures immediately, election cycle or not be damned.

In fact, I would also do it to force the Republicans in the Senate to demonstrate exactly where they stand and who they are just weeks before many of them are up for re-election.

I'd give them one last chance to put the good of the country above their party and Trump.

 

[dtc]

for what it's worth
=============================

.......Without question, this seemingly objective evidence indicating that Trump intentionally and egregiously downplayed the seriousness of COVID-19 is alarming. As the presidential election approaches and Americans grapple with life amid a pandemic, there is likely to be some serious fallout. Some, though, such as California Senator Ted Lieu, a Democrat, have even suggested that Trump’s misconduct constitutes reckless homicide.

In times of crisis, hyperbole rarely helps, and now is no exception. While Trump’s conduct could fairly be deemed extreme mismanagement, it doesn’t rise to the level of criminal homicide. Here’s why.

Reckless homicide requires the killing of another person by recklessness. Trump’s actions, however egregious, just don’t fit that definition.

First, let’s talk about “killing.” As goes the general rule of crimes, some actus reus is required to prosecute a person for reckless homicide. That can mean an affirmative act, or an act of omission; but if we’re talking omission, the person who failed to do something must have had some kind of legal obligation to do that thing.

Presidents, despite their many obligations, do not have a duty to protect people from coronavirus. Sure, it would be great if they effectively managed things like pandemics – but that’s not quite the same thing as a legally-enforceable duty. There’s no statute, no case law, no condition of the job that mandates that Donald Trump to protect us all from coronavirus or anything else.

Some have opined that Trump (among others) had a duty to warn the public about the threat of the virus. In some loose way, that might be true—but any defense lawyer with a functioning mouth would argue that Trump did warn people. He held press conferences at which coronavirus was a daily talking point. And again, Trump has no legal duty to provide effective warnings about coronavirus any more than he has a legal duty to warn people about other illnesses..............

MSN

www.msn.com

What a stupid article.

I mean, really.

I've not heard a single person mentione "reckless homocide" and the reason is that what he's done is negligent homicide.


"no legal duty to provide effective warnings...." what a load of crap.


How about this:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

The author of that article is lost in space.

 

[LA - L.A.]

I've said previously that Trump deserved criticism for his how he initially downplayed COVID and his inconsistent messaging. The Woodard audio goes into more detail, but talk of impeachment seems extreme.

We have video of Trump talking about wanting to keep the public calm not wanting to create a panic from March 30th.

Trump says a lot of things he doesn't mean. We now have irrefutable proof that he lied multiple times about the virus.

For every time he said "don't want to cause a panic," he said "the Democrats are exaggerating the virus to hurt me in the election" several times.

The totally of Trump's life proves the only interests he serves are his own.

The totality of his life tells us that he was not looking out for us by lying to us.

How many documented times in his life has he told us winning is everything and he will do anything he has to to win?

He had plenty of knowledgeable advisors that gave him advice on how to prepare us without striking panic into us. He ignored and silenced them.

He had a choice to make, be honest with us and prepare us while reassuring us we'd get through it or just lie to us and tell us it's no big deal.

He chose to lie to us and hope for a miracle that would save his election chances. That's why he also lied to us and continues to lie to us about treatments and vaccines that are going to soon going to make the pandemic go away.

Those are lies too. And those lies are leading to avoidable deaths too.