Trump’s follies

[SectionC3]

8 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:

How far do I have to get to see anything that has to do with race.  Sounds more like GA is run my the Keystone Cops not Racists.

 

Let me know the ruling.  👍🏻 

Start on page 56.  Enjoy, Chef Jim Crow.  

14 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

Who?  The idiots who lied about HCQ being dangerous and that Trump only chose it because he once owned stock in it, duh!  Simps like you just bought it because you deferred to fealty and refused to speak against their obvious lies.

 Simp, huh?   Gargle some more HCQ.  While you’re at it, do recall that the issue wasn’t safety, it was efficacy.  As in, HCQ is not and was not an effective treatment for COVID.  

[Orlando Tim]

9 hours ago, SectionC3 said:

Start on page 56.  Enjoy, Chef Jim Crow.  

 Simp, huh?   Gargle some more HCQ.  While you’re at it, do recall that the issue wasn’t safety, it was efficacy.  As in, HCQ is not and was not an effective treatment for COVID.  

HCQ is generally harmless and is a medicine given to fight malaria. But I know you say gargle because you still believe that women in Arizona used the fish tank cleaner for a reason other than murdering her husband. The woman is a liberal who knew other liberals are so dumb they would believe her 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/news.yahoo.com/amphtml/woman-blamed-trump-giving-her-133613382.html

Edited June 17, 2021 by Buffalo Timmy
Forgot link

[Unforgiven]

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2021/06/16/poll-joe-bidens-approval-rating-drops-to-48-percent/

 

A Wednesday poll indicates President Joe Biden’s approval rating continues downward in June from 49 percent to 48 percent.

 

Who the hell are these 48% 

[BillStime]

 

[Doc]

10 hours ago, SectionC3 said:

 Simp, huh?   Gargle some more HCQ.  While you’re at it, do recall that the issue wasn’t safety, it was efficacy.  As in, HCQ is not and was not an effective treatment for COVID.  

 

Oh, it was efficacious and they knew it.  Sure it wasn't a cure-all, but it wasn't purported to be and in those early stages of the pandemic, there was nothing else with which to treat the Chinese virus and wouldn't be for months.  And time was of the essence.  It was perfectly safe (safe enough for tens of millions of people to be on it daily and for it to be around for decades) and even if a few lives were saved, it would have been worth it.  So they tried to demonize it by lying and saying it was dangerous, trumpeting stories like the idiots who took fish cleaner and those who OD'd on CQ in Africa.  Then they said we need to do controlled studies, again when time was of the essence.  And they still did the studies (and did them poorly, like I was telling you all last year) and published results in a joke of a medical journal in Britain.  It's amazing what politics (see: lab leak theory) and big money (see: Big Pharma) can do.

 

And to those who think us doctors only cared about validating Trump and not saving lives, I say GFY.  You're not even worth spitting on.

[SectionC3]

1 hour ago, Doc said:

 

Oh, it was efficacious and they knew it.  Sure it wasn't a cure-all, but it wasn't purported to be and in those early stages of the pandemic, there was nothing else with which to treat the Chinese virus and wouldn't be for months.  And time was of the essence.  It was perfectly safe (safe enough for tens of millions of people to be on it daily and for it to be around for decades) and even if a few lives were saved, it would have been worth it.  So they tried to demonize it by lying and saying it was dangerous, trumpeting stories like the idiots who took fish cleaner and those who OD'd on CQ in Africa.  Then they said we need to do controlled studies, again when time was of the essence.  And they still did the studies (and did them poorly, like I was telling you all last year) and published results in a joke of a medical journal in Britain.  It's amazing what politics (see: lab leak theory) and big money (see: Big Pharma) can do.

 

And to those who think us doctors only cared about validating Trump and not saving lives, I say GFY.  You're not even worth spitting on.

 

And today, we know that the drug doesn’t improve COVID-19 outcomes but still carries side effects.  It’s a loser in this context.  You can try to rewrite history all you want, but the fact is that you (and others, to be sure) were blinded by fealty and continued to advocate for the use of that drug in this context for political, not medical or scientific, reasons. 

[BillStime]

2 hours ago, Doc said:

 

Oh, it was efficacious and they knew it.  Sure it wasn't a cure-all, but it wasn't purported to be and in those early stages of the pandemic, there was nothing else with which to treat the Chinese virus and wouldn't be for months.  And time was of the essence.  It was perfectly safe (safe enough for tens of millions of people to be on it daily and for it to be around for decades) and even if a few lives were saved, it would have been worth it.  So they tried to demonize it by lying and saying it was dangerous, trumpeting stories like the idiots who took fish cleaner and those who OD'd on CQ in Africa.  Then they said we need to do controlled studies, again when time was of the essence.  And they still did the studies (and did them poorly, like I was telling you all last year) and published results in a joke of a medical journal in Britain.  It's amazing what politics (see: lab leak theory) and big money (see: Big Pharma) can do.

 

And to those who think us doctors only cared about validating Trump and not saving lives, I say GFY.  You're not even worth spitting on.

 

I wonder where all this is coming from..

 

I really do wonder where...

 

And this is why @Doc and the other nut jobs will go to their grave defending Trump

 

 

.

 

Edited June 17, 2021 by BillStime

[Doc]

20 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

And today, we know that the drug doesn’t improve COVID-19 outcomes but still carries side effects.  It’s a loser in this context.  You can try to rewrite history all you want, but the fact is that you (and others, to be sure) were blinded by fealty and continued to advocate for the use of that drug in this context for political, not medical or scientific, reasons. 

 

Yeah, no we don't.  Actually there is a study that was done, correctly I might add, which says otherwise.  And the side effects are still as minimal as they were prior to Trump mentioning HCQ, which allowed for its use for 70 years and by hundreds of millions of people over that time, without a concern for its safety.  But there you go, mentioning them again ("it wasn't about side effects...").  Again you got duped because of your blind fealty to political scumbags.  Own it.

[Doc]

54 minutes ago, BillStime said:

I wonder where all this is coming from..

 

I really do wonder where...

 

And this is why @Doc and the other nut jobs will go to their grave defending Trump

 

LOL!  Defend Trump from...what?  The Left got HCQ shut down (and Ivermectin as well, which was even better) and more people died than needed to.  You and your ilk "protected" the world from a safe drug against a pandemic which killed people.  Congrats!

[BillStime]

1 minute ago, Doc said:

 

LOL!  Defend Trump from...what?  The Left got HCQ shut down (and Ivermectin as well, which was even better) and more people died than needed to.  You and your ilk "protected" the world from a safe drug against a pandemic which killed people.  Congrats!

Wait - your ilk called the virus a flu and a hoax - and Trump told us it would just go away.

 

 

 

 

[Doc]

8 minutes ago, BillStime said:

Wait - your ilk called the virus a flu and a hoax - and Trump told us it would just go away.

 

Yes some idiots called it a hoax.  And despite what Trump said about it going away, it's not like they did nothing.  Again the lack of PPE and mask confusion, and people still wanting to congregate did the most damage.

[SectionC3]

1 hour ago, Doc said:

 

Yeah, no we don't.  Actually there is a study that was done, correctly I might add, which says otherwise.  And the side effects are still as minimal as they were prior to Trump mentioning HCQ, which allowed for its use for 70 years and by hundreds of millions of people over that time, without a concern for its safety.  But there you go, mentioning them again ("it wasn't about side effects...").  Again you got duped because of your blind fealty to political scumbags.  Own it.

 

1.  You’ve conceded that HCQ has side effects.  That’s a good start. 

 

2.  Let’s see this single study on which you — but not the relevant scientific community, I note — rely. 

 

3.  At bottom you advocate for taking a drug with known adverse effects but, in the COVID context, no demonstrable benefit — save, allegedly, for this single, isolated study to which you refer.  That is, although there literally is no benefit to the ingestion of the drug in this context, and still a concomitant threat of risk, you say it should be taken for this purpose.  It’s a ludicrous position explained only by stubbornness, ignorance, fealty, or recalcitrance.  Take your pick.  

Edited June 17, 2021 by SectionC3

[ALF]

Trump Calls McConnell a ‘Dumb Son of a B word’ and ‘Stone Cold Loser’ at Donor Event

 

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/trump-mcconnell-dumb-son-of-a-B word-1154201/

[Chef Jim]

17 hours ago, SectionC3 said:

Start on page 56.  Enjoy, Chef Jim Crow.  

 

 

Ummmmm I did.  Some tidbits from the Complaint:

 

Quote

248. S.B. 202 violates the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, because it was purposefully enacted and operates to deny, abridge, or suppress the right to vote of otherwise eligible voter on account of race or color.

 

I didn't see the proof of this.  

 

Quote

249. The facts alleged herein reveals that S.B. 202 was enacted, at least in part, with a racially discriminatory intent to discriminate against Black voters and other voters of color in violation of the United States Constitution.

 

Nor here.  

 

Quote

253. S.B. 202 violates the Fifteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, because Defendants intentionally enacted and operate the law to deny, abridge, or suppress the right to vote on account of race or color.

 

Just a document full of unproven allegations like we've heard from many here on the left.  A lot of allegations but no proof. 

 

Get back to me after the ruling mmmkay.  

[BillStime]

2 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:

 

Ummmmm I did.  Some tidbits from the Complaint:

 

 

I didn't see the proof of this.  

 

 

Nor here.  

 

 

Just a document full of unproven allegations like we've heard from many here on the left.  A lot of allegations but no proof. 

 

Get back to me after the ruling mmmkay.  

Unproven allegations and no proof?

 

Are you talking about CRT again?
 

 

[Chef Jim]

1 hour ago, BillStime said:

Unproven allegations and no proof?

 

Are you talking about CRT again?
 

 

 

You know what I'm talking about and I'm surprised you even interjected here seeing I've handed you your lunch in this debate.  Proof of actual racism in the GA Bill?  Zero and counting.  

 

EDIT:  I originally had this line in my post but deleted it.  So ***** predicable.  

 

@BillStime laughing emoticon in 3.....2.....1......

Edited June 17, 2021 by Chef Jim

[BillStime]

 

[Chef Jim]

9 minutes ago, BillStime said:

 

 

NO!!  We need the old man to hold on for 1,277 (plus or minus) more days.  

[BillStime]

 

 

[Doc]

5 hours ago, SectionC3 said:

1.  You’ve conceded that HCQ has side effects.  That’s a good start. 

 

2.  Let’s see this single study on which you — but not the relevant scientific community, I note — rely. 

 

3.  At bottom you advocate for taking a drug with known adverse effects but, in the COVID context, no demonstrable benefit — save, allegedly, for this single, isolated study to which you refer.  That is, although there literally is no benefit to the ingestion of the drug in this context, and still a concomitant threat of risk, you say it should be taken for this purpose.  It’s a ludicrous position explained only by stubbornness, ignorance, fealty, or recalcitrance.  Take your pick.  

 

1.  Every drug have side effects, chief.  Your profession has made billions off of this well-known fact.  But HCQ's are very rare, hence the reasons tens of millions of people are on it daily and no one ever talked about its side effects before.  It's as safe as the vaccines Joey is taking credit for.  That you keep harping on it tells me your handlers did a great job pounding this lie into you.

 

2.  The study was linked above. 

 

3.  There was a demonstrable benefit observed by doctors who were using it well before Trump ever mentioned it...hence the reason he mentioned it.  Your masters just told you to believe that it was dangerous when it wasn't and then used bogus stories to back it up, as a pretext for not using it to help prevent people from getting sick and dying.  Then they had bogus "studies" conducted.  Did you ever stop to ask why?  No of course not.  Which is how they want you.

Edited June 17, 2021 by Doc

[BillStime]

Oldie but a goodie 

 

 

[Doc]

Be afraid (of DeSantis, libs).  Be very afraid.

[BillStime]

2 minutes ago, Doc said:

Be afraid (of DeSantis, libs).  Be very afraid.

Here we go again - lmao 

That’s what you said about Trump 

[Doc]

13 minutes ago, BillStime said:

Here we go again - lmao 

That’s what you said about Trump 

 

You still haven't learned.  So yes, here we go again.

[SectionC3]

4 hours ago, Chef Jim said:

 

Ummmmm I did.  Some tidbits from the Complaint:

 

 

I didn't see the proof of this.  

 

 

Nor here.  

 

 

Just a document full of unproven allegations like we've heard from many here on the left.  A lot of allegations but no proof. 

 

Get back to me after the ruling mmmkay.  

Good thing you quoted from paragraph 250.  Did you bother to read the preceding 249 paragraphs? 

[BillStime]

 

PS: Ron Johnson celebrated the 4th of July in Moscow.

[SectionC3]

3 hours ago, Doc said:

 

1.  Every drug have side effects, chief.  Your profession has made billions off of this well-known fact.  But HCQ's are very rare, hence the reasons tens of millions of people are on it daily and no one ever talked about its side effects before.  It's as safe as the vaccines Joey is taking credit for.  That you keep harping on it tells me your handlers did a great job pounding this lie into you.

 

2.  The study was linked above. 

 

3.  There was a demonstrable benefit observed by doctors who were using it well before Trump ever mentioned it...hence the reason he mentioned it.  Your masters just told you to believe that it was dangerous when it wasn't and then used bogus stories to back it up, as a pretext for not using it to help prevent people from getting sick and dying.  Then they had bogus "studies" conducted.  Did you ever stop to ask why?  No of course not.  Which is how they want you.

You keep on conflating danger with efficacy.  The drug is useless with respect to COVID.  Everyone knows it. Most people accept it.  But not you.  Instead, when your dear leader touted it as a silver bullet approach to the pandemic, you doubled down.  And then doubled down again.  And then doubled down some more.  
 

So today we’re in a spot where you cling to junk science and deflect to conceal the fact that you were dead wrong in this issue.  The scientific community doesn’t support you, boss.  
 

You can name call and belittle, but you can’t win on the science.  Maybe on fake science that you and your hoaxy pals like.  But not on the facts.  So have fun skin popping HCQ and trying to convince yourself that you and your crew of fake scientists didn’t blow the biggest medical issue in a generation. 

[Chef Jim]

32 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

Good thing you quoted from paragraph 250.  Did you bother to read the preceding 249 paragraphs? 

No you told me to start on page 56.  I searched race and came up with nothing that showed concrete evidence of racism. Just lots and lots of accusations. Care to point out that actual evidence of racism?  
 

Should be easy. You’ve got a lot to choose form that. 
 

Wake me when it goes before a judge. 

[Doc]

44 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

You keep on conflating danger with efficacy.  The drug is useless with respect to COVID.  Everyone knows it. Most people accept it.  But not you.  Instead, when your dear leader touted it as a silver bullet approach to the pandemic, you doubled down.  And then doubled down again.  And then doubled down some more.  
 

So today we’re in a spot where you cling to junk science and deflect to conceal the fact that you were dead wrong in this issue.  The scientific community doesn’t support you, boss.  
 

You can name call and belittle, but you can’t win on the science.  Maybe on fake science that you and your hoaxy pals like.  But not on the facts.  So have fun skin popping HCQ and trying to convince yourself that you and your crew of fake scientists didn’t blow the biggest medical issue in a generation. 

 

You obviously didn't read (well, of course you didn't, not that you would understand it anyway) the latest study that came out.  I won on science.  It's just another Trump-era lie that's been exposed...many months too late, of course.  And with other therapies and the vaccines, too late and now moot.

 

But continue to retreat into your echo chamber.  I would expect the thought of coming to the realization that those you followed in lock-step helped lead to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people by claiming it was "junk science" would be too much to bear.  Or does the ends justify the means? 

 

At the least I can say that if I was duped (and I wasn't), it was so that people would he helped.  What did you do: "save" people from a safe drug?  Congrats.

[BillStime]

 

[SectionC3]

7 hours ago, Doc said:

 

You obviously didn't read (well, of course you didn't, not that you would understand it anyway) the latest study that came out.  I won on science.  It's just another Trump-era lie that's been exposed...many months too late, of course.  And with other therapies and the vaccines, too late and now moot.

 

But continue to retreat into your echo chamber.  I would expect the thought of coming to the realization that those you followed in lock-step helped lead to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people by claiming it was "junk science" would be too much to bear.  Or does the ends justify the means? 

 

At the least I can say that if I was duped (and I wasn't), it was so that people would he helped.  What did you do: "save" people from a safe drug?  Congrats.

 

And yet you can't show your cards and specify the (again, single and isolated) study to which you refer. 

 

Here's the bottom line.  I didn't waste time on junk science, I didn't waste money on junk science, and I didn't support doing things like wantonly distributing this stuff to at-risk populations (such as aged veterans and veterans who may have been injured in the line of duty) and needlessly exposing them to harmful side effects.  You did.  

8 hours ago, Chef Jim said:

No you told me to start on page 56.  I searched race and came up with nothing that showed concrete evidence of racism. Just lots and lots of accusations. Care to point out that actual evidence of racism?  
 

Should be easy. You’ve got a lot to choose form that. 
 

Wake me when it goes before a judge. 

 

Page 56 coalesces the allegations.  The preceding pages explain the summary.  Enjoy your read, Chef Jim Crow. 

[Doc]

46 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

And yet you can't show your cards and specify the (again, single and isolated) study to which you refer. 

 

Here's the bottom line.  I didn't waste time on junk science, I didn't waste money on junk science, and I didn't support doing things like wantonly distributing this stuff to at-risk populations (such as aged veterans and veterans who may have been injured in the line of duty) and needlessly exposing them to harmful side effects.  You did.  

 

I pointed you to the study.  You didn't want to look at it, for obvious reasons.

 

No, you don't listen to "junk science."  You just listen to junk people who don't know science and only care about politics.  Again pat yourself on the back for "saving" at-risk people from a safe drug against a virus which could kill them.  You are exactly who they want you to be and who I know you are.

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

8 hours ago, Doc said:

 

You obviously didn't read (well, of course you didn't, not that you would understand it anyway) the latest study that came out.  I won on science.  It's just another Trump-era lie that's been exposed...many months too late, of course.  And with other therapies and the vaccines, too late and now moot.

 

But continue to retreat into your echo chamber.  I would expect the thought of coming to the realization that those you followed in lock-step helped lead to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people by claiming it was "junk science" would be too much to bear.  Or does the ends justify the means? 

 

At the least I can say that if I was duped (and I wasn't), it was so that people would he helped.  What did you do: "save" people from a safe drug?  Congrats.

This is the key to the entire dem strategy w/r to COVID. 

 

Death, disease and dying were good politics for the democratic party in 2020.  COVID patients in nursing homes. Mass protests encouraged for some while business owners were targeted for shutdown for trying to survive.    Vaccine disinformation during the development phase.  Dismissal of the lab leak reality.  Complaints over xenophobia.  
 

As for COVID management, there was a marked change in dem strategy once Biden took office.  One example—the oddly timed change in NY travel rules in February as the virus raged.  This allowed non-residents to come and go freely after travel to, say, Florida, while NY residents were required to test/quarantine/test/submit to contract tracing.  
 

I’d take it one step further and say the ends were anticipated as part of the strategy to retake the WH.  
 

 

Edited June 18, 2021 by leh-nerd skin-erd

[Chef Jim]

2 hours ago, SectionC3 said:

Page 56 coalesces the allegations.  The preceding pages explain the summary.  Enjoy your read, Chef Jim Crow. 

 

 

Correct. Allegations. That’s all any of you have. Wake me when it makes it to a judge. Then wake me again when there is a ruling. 
 

So now in your own words (which you have, for obvious reasons, not provided) what makes this Jim Crowe on steroids?  Not racists but Jim Crowe on steroids.   I wonder why no one had been able to articulate that. 🤔

[Doc]

14 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

This is the key to the entire dem strategy w/r to COVID. 

 

Death, disease and dying were good politics for the democratic party in 2020.  COVID patients in nursing homes. Mass protests encouraged for some while business owners were targeted for shutdown for trying to survive.    Vaccine disinformation during the development phase.  Dismissal of the lab leak reality.  Complaints over xenophobia.  
 

As for COVID management, there was a marked change in dem strategy once Biden took office.  One example—the oddly timed change in NY travel rules in February as the virus raged.  This allowed non-residents to come and go freely after travel to, say, Florida, while NY residents were required to test/quarantine/test/submit to contract tracing.  
 

I’d take it one step further and say the ends were anticipated as part of the strategy to retake the WH.  

 

Yup, they wanted deaths to make Trump look bad and get him out of office, like they'd been trying to do the previous 3 years.  There's no other conclusion that can be drawn by their bald-faced lies about a perfectly safe drug in the face of a virus that could kill when we had nothing else to treat it. 

 

And I have no doubt that Big Pharma played a huge role in demonizing HCQ and conducting bogus studies, considering it was dirt cheap and they stood to lose billions.  And releasing the news just days after the election that the vaccines would be coming out before the end of the year only proved that point.

 

What's saddest of all is that the "scientific community" went along with this criminality, as the lab leak theory suppression proves.  Whether it was because they wanted the same or out of fear, or both, I don't know but neither is a good look.  

[Chef Jim]

15 hours ago, BillStime said:

Here we go again - lmao 

That’s what you said about Trump 

 

Trump has really ***** you up so yeah, I'd be afraid. 

[Unforgiven]

https://www.breitbart.com/asia/2021/06/18/ukraine-claims-have-suffered-50000-cyberattacks-last-week/

    President Joe Biden’s administration allegedly suspended $100 million in “lethal” aid to Ukraine ahead of his summit this week with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Without denying that allegation directly, White House Press Secretary said Friday that the administration gave $150 million in aid — including “lethal” aid — to Ukraine last week, and had spent the amount appropriated by Congress.

    But the allegation concerned a separate package, said to be shelved by Biden aides.

If the allegation — reported by the Washington Post and confirmed by Politico — is true, then what Biden did is far worse than what Trump did in 2019, when he was accused of withholding military aid from Ukraine until it investigated Joe Biden for corruption. In fact, Trump had already provided crucial Javelin anti-tank missiles months before the hold on additional “security assistance” to Ukraine Moreover, the aid that was withheld was future funding, not ongoing funding.

 

   Biden gave Putin a five-year extension of the notoriously one-sided New START nonproliferation treaty, though Putin had only asked for one. (Trump had hoped to include China in a new round of nonproliferation talks; Biden threw that possibility away.) Biden also gave a green light to Russia’s Nord Stream 2 pipeline, which Trump had opposed — and which will result in massive financial losses to Ukraine. Moreover, Trump met with Putin — in a grandiose “summit” —  before meeting Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, despite the latter’s impassioned pleas to meet with him first.

 

 

No doubt compromised

After all the screaming and titty twisting about russia for the last four years...

 

 

chirp chirp chirp from all the leftist collaborators.

[Doc]

Interesting.  Joey didn't wait for his election, when he'd have more flexibility, to bend over for Russia...

[BillStime]

 

[Unforgiven]

On 6/17/2021 at 7:52 PM, Doc said:

Be afraid (of DeSantis, libs).  Be very afraid.

They're afraid, but they feel they got cheating in their pocket again.