|
|
Post by 00hmh on Sept 26, 2021 16:30:51 GMT -6
Again, all this is not what is important. Then why the lies and cover-up ? Whether there are any "lies and cover-up" by Fauci and his agency at all is debatable, and maybe quite a bit speculative conspiracy theory.
I added a link above to my original post that is a fair and accurate critique:
"The DARPA proposal doesn’t “mean that much for our understanding of the origins of the pandemic,” ... “but it does diminish the trustworthiness of the research groups involved.”
The documents if authentic especially hurt the credibility of Peter Daszak, but those documents say little about Fauci as a "liar."
The good thing about looking back at the grants is to long term make more funding available for US based research and more money for assessing safety. The process no doubt can be improved, although the grant in question was not funded. Scott Gottlieb is addressing that exact point about research spending in his new book and is talking about that issue at this moment on CNN, as I post. He's stressing this as less immediate a problem, but rather that we learn from this pandemic about much better testing, mitigation like masking, and much less political control of pandemic response, returning the process to public health professionals with more funding provided. |
|
|
|
Post by sweep on Sept 27, 2021 6:54:48 GMT -6
Then why the lies and cover-up ?
I think Joe is trying to do that. It seems to me causation is just as important, and I am certain the Biden Administration has adequate resources to deal with both issues should they choose to. Nice try, Human Garbage. |
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Sept 27, 2021 7:55:50 GMT -6
What is important is dealing with the virus, now. I think Joe is trying to do that. It seems to me causation is just as important, and I am certain the Biden Administration has adequate resources to deal with both issues should they choose to. I support post mortem as a second priority. But, already we know that science funding has been drastically cut for 10-15 years. That has consequences. Better procedures in the future can solve problems, blame games and politics will not. The issue most easily solved is to reverse Trump SOP of mistrusting expert advice, and the second issue is just providing money earmarked for safety issues and US based research facilities. The Trump management issues were mostly politically motivated. To respond to a problem he had to acknowledge it. Trying to second guess the agency head who in 2015 trusted his experts and process is not solving the root cause unless you look at why the funding decisions had to involve some risk, and evaluating that has to look at why the balance of risk return failed, if it did. It was maybe sending money to Wuhan, but why was that the best choice? If in 2004 we'd funded US facilities... Almost all research has some risks. Risk management costs money. Neglecting funding research has downside. Have to find the balance. |
|
|
|
Post by Lurkin McGurkin on Sept 27, 2021 7:59:08 GMT -6
Something initiated in 2015: Still Trump's fault.
Good to know.
|
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Sept 27, 2021 10:08:53 GMT -6
Something initiated in 2015: Still Trump's fault. No, probably nobody particular can be "blamed" for anything in 2015. After all is said, we don't know if any of the decisions in 2004 or 2015 really was serious error.
Unless you want to blame the Congress collectively for neglecting science funding.
Science funding and public health planning are two different issues. Trump can only be blamed for not managing the pandemic as chief executive, and for actually impeding the plans in place to respond. He ignored expert advice and put reelection ahead of public safety.
Whether we had robust enough funding for pandemic response was partly a problem of past political decisions, but choosing NOT to do what was possible was a serious mistake and a political one. Political motive should not enter in.
No doubt we need better preparation for future pandemic. We are going to see another one, and it won't be 100 years from now. Getting funding for that planning and setting up a national agency with adequate authority to respond is the first lesson, and then getting public health out of politics.
Improving the safety measures in science funding is independent, but that's also important. Assuming whatever happened in 2004, 2015 was a mistake, it would not happen if we funded science research better. We created a necessity to take more risks or neglect science research that was needed.
|
|
|
|
Post by sweep on Sept 27, 2021 10:59:37 GMT -6
Something initiated in 2015: Still Trump's fault. Trump can only be blamed for not managing the pandemic as chief executive........... Really ? How so ? What did he not do you think was vital ? Give us some specific examples, especially some that don't rely on the prism of perfect hindsight. |
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Sept 27, 2021 13:14:16 GMT -6
Trump can only be blamed for not managing the pandemic as chief executive........... Really ? How so ? What did he not do you think was vital ? Give us some specific examples, especially some that don't rely on the prism of perfect hindsight. We've been over that. But if you really want it, just read the bold print so it won't wear you out.
It was mostly delay, also denial which made other action by anyone difficult. Deciding to let the states handle things without coordination was a horrible idea. But worst ultimately it was conscious decision that if he reacted as if it were a crisis it meant he had to admit he had been wrong. AND that things were not all good, hurting his poll numbers and election prospects. That is dereliction of duty.
Gottlieb who was part of the operation has his book out where he makes the case that they had a plan but the wrong plan. OK even if you blame others for the plan, he admits we didn't follow the plan we had very well, or make a new one. And, he points to several places where there was delay where they needed to take action, notably in the weeks Trump pulled the operation into the WH task force. If you want a Trump administration viewpoint it is as kind as it can be. But not a pretty picture as he admits.
Testing was and is now critical and that the CDC bungled the testing kit was bad, it was delay at least, but when we knew that we never really put money into testing and tracing either in preparation or afterwards when it was obvious we "needed better information.
Trump did NOT want testing. That "ruined his statistics" and proved we had a problem. Even when he (rarely) admitted we had a problem he never used the ability he had to mobilize the public since he was saying everything was OK when he knew it wasn't.
Whether it was tests or masks or ventilators, or whatever, we had no stockpile and had counted on just in time inventories coming on line when we needed supplies. That supply chain was killed by it being a global problem. But we could have utilized executive power to order companies to produce here instead of just waiting and hoping it the virus went away. Fortunately we did that with vaccine.
"Just let the states handle it" meant the coming disaster wouldn't be as clearly on his hands.
We were forced in shutdowns partly because of lack of information about a new virus, but also because we didn't have any real idea where and how bad we were in trouble, and because we didn't really have any other mitigation. And in some cases hospitals were in crisis.
As the November election became even more the focus Trump would not take other action and even made the belief the virus was not dangerous a campaign cornerstone. Which ultimately helped create the difficulty we have now with vaccine hesitancy.
Governors in red states had committed to premature reopening in some cases and where it was reasonable to reopen doing it without continuing mitigation.
Indiana didn't do badly on that count, but look what it cost politically, we now have a governor who couldn't stop the recent surge since he either has no power or fears the legislature will overrule him.
Everything now says we needed to have coordinated public response on a national level and the idea of letting each state operate it's own response was not a good plan. Trump's declaration of war was a bad joke, he quickly decided it wasn't his job, and/or we had already won.
|
|
|
|
Post by sweep on Sept 27, 2021 14:37:22 GMT -6
Really ? How so ? What did he not do you think was vital ? Give us some specific examples, especially some that don't rely on the prism of perfect hindsight. We've been over that. But if you really want it, just read the bold print so it won't wear you out.
It was mostly delay, also denial which made other action by anyone difficult. Deciding to let the states handle things without coordination was a horrible idea. But worst ultimately it was conscious decision that if he reacted as if it were a crisis it meant he had to admit he had been wrong. AND that things were not all good, hurting his poll numbers and election prospects. That is dereliction of duty.
Gottlieb who was part of the operation has his book out where he makes the case that they had a plan but the wrong plan. OK even if you blame others for the plan, he admits we didn't follow the plan we had very well, or make a new one. And, he points to several places where there was delay where they needed to take action, notably in the weeks Trump pulled the operation into the WH task force. If you want a Trump administration viewpoint it is as kind as it can be. But not a pretty picture as he admits.
Testing was and is now critical and that the CDC bungled the testing kit was bad, it was delay at least, but when we knew that we never really put money into testing and tracing either in preparation or afterwards when it was obvious we "needed better information.
Trump did NOT want testing. That "ruined his statistics" and proved we had a problem. Even when he (rarely) admitted we had a problem he never used the ability he had to mobilize the public since he was saying everything was OK when he knew it wasn't.
Whether it was tests or masks or ventilators, or whatever, we had no stockpile and had counted on just in time inventories coming on line when we needed supplies. That supply chain was killed by it being a global problem. But we could have utilized executive power to order companies to produce here instead of just waiting and hoping it the virus went away. Fortunately we did that with vaccine.
"Just let the states handle it" meant the coming disaster wouldn't be as clearly on his hands.
We were forced in shutdowns partly because of lack of information about a new virus, but also because we didn't have any real idea where and how bad we were in trouble, and because we didn't really have any other mitigation. And in some cases hospitals were in crisis.
Governors in red states had committed to premature reopening in some cases and where it was reasonable to reopen doing it without continuing mitigation.
Indiana didn't do badly on that count, but look what it cost politically, we now have a governor who couldn't stop the recent surge since he either has no power or fears the legislature will overrule him.
Everything now says we needed to have coordinated public response on a national level and the idea of letting each state operate it's own response was not a good plan. Trump's declaration of war was a bad joke, he quickly decided it wasn't his job, and/or we had already won.
So that's all you have, some vague inferences about the division of responsibilities between state and federal. You really are an idiot. Just go away, Human Garbage. I won't even bother to get into the information we were getting from the left when this thing blew-up. God Lord do you have two sets of standards. |
|
|
|
Post by sweep on Sept 27, 2021 14:41:50 GMT -6
We've been over that. But if you really want it, just read the bold print so it won't wear you out.
It was mostly delay, also denial which made other action by anyone difficult. Deciding to let the states handle things without coordination was a horrible idea. But worst ultimately it was conscious decision that if he reacted as if it were a crisis it meant he had to admit he had been wrong. AND that things were not all good, hurting his poll numbers and election prospects. That is dereliction of duty.
Gottlieb who was part of the operation has his book out where he makes the case that they had a plan but the wrong plan. OK even if you blame others for the plan, he admits we didn't follow the plan we had very well, or make a new one. And, he points to several places where there was delay where they needed to take action, notably in the weeks Trump pulled the operation into the WH task force. If you want a Trump administration viewpoint it is as kind as it can be. But not a pretty picture as he admits.
Testing was and is now critical and that the CDC bungled the testing kit was bad, it was delay at least, but when we knew that we never really put money into testing and tracing either in preparation or afterwards when it was obvious we "needed better information.
Trump did NOT want testing. That "ruined his statistics" and proved we had a problem. Even when he (rarely) admitted we had a problem he never used the ability he had to mobilize the public since he was saying everything was OK when he knew it wasn't.
Whether it was tests or masks or ventilators, or whatever, we had no stockpile and had counted on just in time inventories coming on line when we needed supplies. That supply chain was killed by it being a global problem. But we could have utilized executive power to order companies to produce here instead of just waiting and hoping it the virus went away. Fortunately we did that with vaccine.
"Just let the states handle it" meant the coming disaster wouldn't be as clearly on his hands.
We were forced in shutdowns partly because of lack of information about a new virus, but also because we didn't have any real idea where and how bad we were in trouble, and because we didn't really have any other mitigation. And in some cases hospitals were in crisis.
Governors in red states had committed to premature reopening in some cases and where it was reasonable to reopen doing it without continuing mitigation.
Indiana didn't do badly on that count, but look what it cost politically, we now have a governor who couldn't stop the recent surge since he either has no power or fears the legislature will overrule him.
Everything now says we needed to have coordinated public response on a national level and the idea of letting each state operate it's own response was not a good plan. Trump's declaration of war was a bad joke, he quickly decided it wasn't his job, and/or we had already won.
So that's all you have, some vague inferences about the division of responsibilities between state and federal. You really are an idiot. Just go away, Human Garbage. I won't even bother to get into the information we were getting from the left when this thing blew-up. God Lord, you have two sets of standards. Republicans are always judged using hindsight, Democrats are never judged at all. "Trump did not want testing".....................That is so ridiculous, do you believe every dumb conspiracy they try and sell you on CNN ? I remember that whole thing, he said something slightly confusing in a speech, the left went ape-shit, and Trump clarified his position the next day. Grow-up. |
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Sept 27, 2021 14:57:58 GMT -6
We've been over that. But if you really want it
It was mostly delay, also denial which made other action by anyone difficult. Deciding to let the states handle things without coordination was a horrible idea. But worst ultimately it was conscious decision that if he reacted as if it were a crisis it meant he had to admit he had been wrong. That is dereliction of duty.
they had a plan but the wrong plan.
Testing Trump did NOT want testing. belief the virus was not dangerous a campaign cornerstone. Which ultimately helped create the difficulty we have now with vaccine hesitancy.
Governors in red states had committed to premature reopening in some cases and where it was reasonable to reopen doing it without continuing mitigation.
needed to have coordinated public response on a national level So that's all you have, some vague inferences about the division of responsibilities between state and federal. I did not expect much except name calling, but it doesn't look like you could even read the highlighted material...it isn't vague at all...it was failure to act and active misleading the public...perhaps you need an eye test on top of memory care.
|
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Sept 27, 2021 15:22:57 GMT -6
"Trump did not want testing".....................That is so ridiculous, do you believe every dumb conspiracy they try and sell you on CNN ? I remember that whole thing, he said something slightly confusing in a speech, the left went ape-shit, and Trump clarified his position the next day. Grow-up. NO. Not conspiracy theory to say he opposed testing.
He was consistent in saying in multiple public venues and in meetings in the WH which are public record that he did not want testing. Officials in his administration have published numerous accounts in their books and other accounts.
Many are on video or widely reported in the press.
In his "kung flu" speech
(https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/22/politics/donald-trump-testing-slow-down-response/index.html)
Trump alleged the virus was fake news, misrepresented that we tested more than any nation, missing the point we needed MORE testing. In fact saying we needed less. Trump's staff back tracked and said he was just kidding. Shortly, he tweeted out "I don't kid"
Perhaps you call that "clarification?"
His administration took active steps to reduce widespread testing. A few easy to find with google here:
|
|
|
|
Post by sweep on Sept 27, 2021 20:25:13 GMT -6
No where in any of your linked deranged left-wing nonsense is Trump quoted saying he is against testing. Nice try, Human Garbage.
Oh and by the way, as usual most of your links don't work.
|
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Sept 27, 2021 21:08:57 GMT -6
No where in any of your linked deranged left-wing nonsense is Trump quoted saying he is against testing.
Actually most of the links do work. I'll fix all links, especially if you will read them...
You could just google something like "Trump statements on covid testing" and get an eye full if you were serious about arguing these points.
Test Trump dubious logic (https://www.statnews.com/2020/07/20/trump-said-more-covid19-testing-creates-more-cases-we-did-the-math/)
And how exactly are news reports of Trump statements "left wing nonsense?" The press and all those staffers he hired are all deranged?
You actually think those statements and actions didn't amount to being against sound testing protocol? You can explain that opinion?
|
|
|
|
Post by sweep on Sept 27, 2021 23:21:37 GMT -6
No where in any of your linked deranged left-wing nonsense is Trump quoted saying he is against testing.
Actually most of the links do work. I'll fix all links, especially if you will read them...
You could just google something like "Trump statements on covid testing" and get an eye full if you were serious about arguing these points.
Test Trump dubious logic (https://www.statnews.com/2020/07/20/trump-said-more-covid19-testing-creates-more-cases-we-did-the-math/)
And how exactly are news reports of Trump statements "left wing nonsense?" The press and all those staffers he hired are all deranged?
You actually think those statements and actions didn't amount to being against sound testing protocol? You can explain that opinion?
Saying fewer tests leads to fewer confirmed cases isn't the same as "we should not be testing". He was talking about the US appearing to have a larger outbreak, than other countries, and pointing out we have a far more vigorous testing program. How dumb are you ? The left seems to have invented an entire phony conspiracy around that statement, nice job falling for it. |
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Sept 28, 2021 6:54:10 GMT -6
Actually most of the links do work. I'll fix all links, especially if you will read them...You actually think those statements and actions didn't amount to being against sound testing protocol? You can explain that opinion?
Saying fewer tests leads to fewer confirmed cases isn't the same as "we should not be testing". He was talking about the US appearing to have a larger outbreak, than other countries, and pointing out we have a far more vigorous testing program. That's why the statnews cite is there. He was downplaying the cases we had in the US. And that analysis was wrong. But, also, he DID want to reduce testing. He actually did it... Persistently. He took action, the lies were cover up of that as well as coverup of the severity of the pandemic. He failed to expand testing when we needed it. You are in denial about this as much as he was in denial a out the pandemic. The multiple links in my post above and every other source prove my point. Sadly, the evidence is he KNEW he was making false statements and did so. THAT is a lie. False knowing statements motivated by his political strategy. Not mistake and ignorance, but duplicity. Not about some single decision he made made in the past but about an ongoing policy. I wish it weren't true but it is. |
|
