Trump Connection to Hydroxychloroquine (split from Corona virus general questions mega thread)

[MigL]

Only in America...

Every other country in the world has their various political parties working together with, and for, the people, during this pandemic.
The US is more divided than ever.
I thought this was supposed to be about saving lives, not political posturing, the blame game, and further polarization.
You guys need  a better quality of politicians.

I bet George W Bush is looking at the mess President D Trump is making of the pandemic response, and saying
"Wow; and they said I was stupid ?"

[Phi for All]

7 minutes ago, MigL said:

I bet George W Bush is looking at the mess President D Trump is making of the pandemic response, and saying
"Wow; and they said I was stupid ?"

I read something about Bush's surgeon general being considered a laughingstock because he had the proper reaction to an outbreak back in 2005. He reacted correctly, but got the Chicken Little treatment.

[StringJunky]

18 minutes ago, MigL said:

Only in America...

Every other country in the world has their various political parties working together with, and for, the people, during this pandemic.
The US is more divided than ever.
I thought this was supposed to be about saving lives, not political posturing, the blame game, and further polarization.
You guys need  a better quality of politicians.

I bet George W Bush is looking at the mess President D Trump is making of the pandemic response, and saying
"Wow; and they said I was stupid ?"

They need a new constitution because this administration is showing just how fragile and full of holes it is that they can exploit. It seems to me that a dedicated autocrat could corrupt this system. Trump's not doing a bad job.

[swansont]

1 hour ago, StringJunky said:

They need a new constitution because this administration is showing just how fragile and full of holes it is that they can exploit. It seems to me that a dedicated autocrat could corrupt this system. Trump's not doing a bad job.

Wrong.

The issue is that some people aren’t upholding the constitution. Trump would be ineffective without the rest of the GOP being co-conspirators. And Trump is doing a horrible job.

[StringJunky]

1 minute ago, swansont said:

Wrong.

The issue is that some people aren’t upholding the constitution. Trump would be ineffective without the rest of the GOP being co-conspirators. And Trump is doing a horrible job.

Trump's not doing a bad job (of corrupting the system). Where are the people policing the system?

[J.C.MacSwell]

7 hours ago, zapatos said:

We do take him with a bucket of salt, and suggesting that we are cognitively challenged simply because we dislike him is rather insulting. With that salt though does not come acceptance of his behavior. I won't accept him lying just because that's simply 'Trump being Trump', anymore than I will accept the behavior of a murderer by saying 'well, murdering is just what he does!'

Not everyone has the ability to easily discern which words of his can be dismissed. Some people might even be motivated by his words to ingest fish tank cleaner.

Sorry Zap. There's a lot of pretty smart people on this forum that have proven time and again that they can think logically and base it on solid assumptions. Even in the political threads.

And then they go off the rails. I'm not talking about the odd bit of hyperbole. I know it's not just here on this Forum, or even just in the States. Maybe you can explain it?

Having said that...I realize we all suck when emotions get involved...at least to some extent. Some just recognize it more than others.

Edited April 13, 2020 by J.C.MacSwell

[CharonY]

2 hours ago, StringJunky said:

Trump's not doing a bad job (of corrupting the system). Where are the people policing the system?

There are several mechanisms, including the courts, senate and house. You have seen what happened during the impeachment trial, for example, which would be the ultimate policing action against the president. 

 

[swansont]

3 hours ago, StringJunky said:

Trump's not doing a bad job (of corrupting the system). Where are the people policing the system?

53 of them are in the senate, not doing the job they swore an oath to do

[iNow]

2 hours ago, swansont said:

53 of them are in the senate, not doing the job they swore an oath to do

I’d say 52½ since Romney at least voted for 1 of the 2 articles of impeachment 

4 hours ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Having said that...I realize we all suck when emotions get involved...at least to some extent. Some just recognize it more than others.

I appreciate you acknowledging we’re all sometimes faulty, even you.

TBH, however, I’m not even remotely convinced that a few folks on “the left” going off the rails or saying less than perfect things about Trump on the internet or on news shows or pushing too hard for impeachment are ultimately going to matter very much in this election.

Trump has a solid 40% electoral base. What people on “the left” do doesn’t really matter in the least.

What will matter, you ask?

Money. 

Massive. Pallets upon pallets on trucks and in bank accounts. Of money. 

That matters far more than a few disparaging comments in the Twittersphere.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/13/us/politics/trump-fundraising-2020.html
 

Quote

President Trump’s re-election campaign and the Republican National Committee said Monday they had raised $212 million in the first three months of 2020, a signal that despite a global pandemic that has put a halt on high-dollar fund-raising events, Mr. Trump’s operation has continued to raise money at a brisk clip.

<...>

The two groups also said they had raised more than $677 million in total over the re-election cycle, noting that was $270 million more than President Barack Obama’s re-election campaign had raised at the same point in the 2012 campaign cycle.

“Trump and the R.N.C. are on track to have $400 million cash on hand by July 4, an incredibly strong financial position in this political environment,”

<...>
Mr. Biden, who had planned to begin consolidating the party’s big donors behind his campaign just as the virus shut down much of the economy, has not yet released his first quarter fund-raising numbers. But a spokesman said he raised $33 million in the first half of March.

 

[MigL]

Huuge ( say it like Trump ) problem with American politics; it's all about the money and the influence.
Certainly not about the people, or their well being.

It is big business, with their paid for influence, that are pushing D Trump to re-open the country, and get the economy moving again.
If it kills a hundred thousand people, no big deal, at least big business will have gotten a return on their investment.

I really can't believe D Trump is that stupid to push for early return to 'normality'.
If the death toll gets too high he can kiss his chances for re-election goodbye

[CharonY]

1 hour ago, MigL said:

If the death toll gets too high he can kiss his chances for re-election goodbye

Oh I am sure he just needs to blame it on Obama and he is golden.

[iNow]

8 hours ago, CharonY said:

Oh I am sure he just needs to blame it on Obama and he is golden.

That's sort of the point of his daily 90+ minute press briefings on the virus (aka: infomercials). Not necessarily about Obama, but it's a way for him to set the narrative he wants... to introduce storylines and topics into the ether. He spews enough nonsense... floods the zone with shit... and people can no longer remain tethered to the thread of fact and reality. Then, at election time, the people predisposed to supporting him can point to his comments... "best response ever"... "not possible to do better"... "governors getting everything they need." etc.

He rightly understands that it's hard to track an individual raindrop during a tornado. 

[MigL]

So, it is not the Constitution ( as JC suggested ), nor the checks and balances ( as CharonY and Swansont suggest ), that are to blame.
Rather, as many of us have suggested for some time, the campaign financing, and lobbying, that are out of control.
Will any American politician ever have the ba*ls ( or popularity ) to suggest reform ?

[Phi for All]

6 minutes ago, MigL said:

So, it is not the Constitution ( as JC suggested ), nor the checks and balances ( as CharonY and Swansont suggest ), that are to blame.
Rather, as many of us have suggested for some time, the campaign financing, and lobbying, that are out of control.
Will any American politician ever have the ba*ls ( or popularity ) to suggest reform ?

It's abuse in interpreting the Constitution, plus a lack of checks on presidential power to balance the conventions Trump has flouted (not putting his business in a trust, blatant nepotism, ignoring the emoluments clause, etc), in addition to the corruption you suggest. What the ballsy politician needs to suggest is that we've forgotten there are things money shouldn't be able to buy, like honor, scholastic merit, and votes. That's really the definition of corruption here, where money becomes "the root of all evil". It's not evil to buy the right things, it's evil when you use money to stifle the process for your competitors, or make it favor you above others. It's evil to use your money to change public opinion through misinformation and misrepresentation, which is exactly what so many lobbyists have become so good at. The average American has little intellectual defense against the PhDs of Spin. 

[iNow]

1 hour ago, MigL said:

Will any American politician ever have the ba*ls ( or popularity ) to suggest reform ?

One did, but lost in the primary. Her name was Elizabeth Warren

[swansont]

2 hours ago, MigL said:

So, it is not the Constitution ( as JC suggested ), nor the checks and balances ( as CharonY and Swansont suggest ), that are to blame.

If congress were willing to do its job enforcing the checks and balances, Trump would be far less effective at gumming up the works. I don't know how you conclude this isn't an actual issue.

 

Quote

Rather, as many of us have suggested for some time, the campaign financing, and lobbying, that are out of control.

It can be more than one thing. Campaign finance is one of the issues. It has allowed the election of people whose goal is to seize power, rather than to be a public servant. But people had to be in power to enact the laws and get the right people on the supreme court to not be a heck or balance, and strike down existing laws.

Kind of a chicken vs egg issue. Which came first?

[John Cuthber]

17 hours ago, iNow said:

I’d say 52½ since Romney at least voted for 1 of the 2 articles of impeachment 

When Romney's the good guy, you know things are bad.

 

1 hour ago, swansont said:

If congress were willing to do its job enforcing the checks and balances, Trump would be far less effective at gumming up the works.

Because he'd be in jail.

[swansont]

1 hour ago, John Cuthber said:

Because he'd be in jail.

Not until after he’s out of the presidency.

[John Cuthber]

43 minutes ago, swansont said:

Not until after he’s out of the presidency.

Unless they realised he was unfit for office and kicked him out.

[swansont]

2 hours ago, John Cuthber said:

Unless they realised he was unfit for office and kicked him out.

Then he’d be out of office, at which point he could be arrested and tried.

[J.C.MacSwell]

10 minutes ago, swansont said:

Then he’d be out of office, at which point he could be arrested and tried.

Obviously that's consistent with your original statement. But is that what you'd prefer to see happen?

I don't question the "out of office" part 

Edited April 14, 2020 by J.C.MacSwell

[MigL]

Hypothetical question...
Lets assume D Trump really ( I mean really ) messes up the Covid-19 response and mitigation efforts ( by delaying response to the crisis, standing down too soon, pushing for dangerously wrong medications, etc. ), and a very large number of people die, as a result, say several hundred thousand.
Could he be charged, by Americans, at the World Court, for crimes against humanity ?
Maybe after he's out of office ?

Or is that a dangerous precedent to set ?

[iNow]

26 minutes ago, MigL said:

Could he be charged, by Americans, at the World Court, for crimes against humanity ?
Maybe after he's out of office ?

Or is that a dangerous precedent to set ?

While there may be practical / social reasons not to do this, I don’t believe there are any technical or legal limitations to prevent it.

It’d probably be a weak case, too. It’s hard prosecuting crimes against humanity, even against those who by the millions had their people sliced up with machetes, raped, and worse.

Trump is a despicable shit stain of a human being and I’d sooner vote for a forced lifetime diet of gas station sushi than vote for him, but gross incompetence, grift, and corruption isn’t enough for him to be found guilty of such things on the world stage. 

Edited April 15, 2020 by iNow

[J.C.MacSwell]

23 hours ago, iNow said:

One did, but lost in the primary. Her name was Elizabeth Warren

Don't listen to Trump. She still goes by that...

[dimreepr]

10 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Don't listen to Trump. She still goes by that...

Don't look back in anger...

1 minute ago, dimreepr said:

Don't look back in anger...

I heard you say...