Cuomo Should Look in Mirror for Blame Over NY Ventilator Shortage

Contributing Writer
-
0

‘Let’s not sugarcoat it. It won’t be up to your own doctor…’

NY Gov. Cuomo Signs Bill Granting Driver’s Licenses to Illegal Immigrants
Andrew Cuomo/Photo by zrs_one (CC)

(Michael Barnes, Liberty Headlines) As the Wuhan virus grips New York City, government leaders and top health officials are grappling with rationing access to a limited supply of lifesaving breathing ventilators—although the tragic scenario could have been prevented had Democrat Gov. Andrew Cuomo exercised a little foresight and rejiggered his priorities.

New York City is now the epicenter of the disease in the United States, with more than 30,000 confirmed infections as of 2 p.m. on Wednesday.

The coronavirus attacks the lungs to the extent that it makes breathing difficult, if not impossible, without the aid of the artificial breathing device. The number of patients could soon overwhelm hospitals, and there are 16,000 fewer ventilators in the entire state than needed to keep with current patient projections.

That much was known as far back as 2015, when the state government conducted a review of ventilator resources as a precaution for an influenza pandemic and established guidelines for rationing care if the state’s ventilator supply remained insufficient.

Cuomo — who is being praised by many Democrats for alleged great leadership during the crisis and has been suggested as a unifying candidate at a potentially brokered Democrat convention — could have initiated the purchase of the ventilators any time over the past four to five years, but he didn’t.

“Cuomo could have purchased the additional 16,000 needed ventilators for $36,000 apiece or a total of $576 million in 2015,” wrote Betsy McCaughey, the former Lieutenant Governor of New York, in a syndicated commentary. “It’s a lot of money but less than the $750 million he threw away on a boondoggle ‘Buffalo Billion’ solar panel factory.”

The New York Times and ABC News are also reporting that “ethics” committees and officers will be tasked with deciding who will be granted access to one of the emergency breathing devices and who will not—effectively deciding who lives and who dies.

Patients assigned a red code will be given immediate access, while patients assigned a green, yellow or blue code would receive ventilator treatments in descending order.

“Let’s not sugarcoat it,” wrote McCaughey. “It won’t be up to your own doctor.”

Sam Gorovitz, a professor of philosophy at Syracuse University and member of the 2015 New York ventilator taskforce, told the Guardian newspaper that he is “100 percent certain” that new coronavirus-related death panel revisions to the state’s ventilator allocation guidelines will be used soon, if not already.

“Consider a patient, 85 years old, on a ventilator, out of hospice care. Along comes a 45-year-old, with a family, and in fundamentally good health and a good prospect of full recovery from Coronavirus if treated with the best available treatment,” said Gorovitz.

“Is it not only acceptable but ethically necessary to take grandpa off the ventilator and switch him to palliative care, wipe away the tears, and switch the ventilator to the younger patient?” he continued.

Gorowitz added that “everyone knows it’s coming and those decisions are likely being made right now.”

The shocking acceptance of the so-called “utilitarian approach” to medicine is an unseemly hallmark of socialized health care like Britain’s National Health Service and Italy’s universal national health care system where coronavirus infections have reached a staggering 7 percent fatality rate.

Although hospitals in affected areas of the U.S. are expected to face severe shortages of equipment, supplies and medical personnel in the coming weeks, New York’s ventilator crisis appears to be borne from massive incompetence.

Loeffler Defends ‘Blind’ Stock Sell-Offs as GOP Critics Rebuke Alleged Insider Trading

Ben Sellers
-
0

‘Is it worth it to have the American people distrust you so you can make some extra side money by insider trading on the market?’

1
Kelly Loeffler / IMAGE: Fox Business via Youtube

(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) The Senate’s newest member, Sen. Kelly Loeffler, R-Ga., sought to defend herself amid recent allegations of insider trading prior to the economic collapse due to the Wuhan virus pandemic.

Loeffler was one of four senators discovered to have sold off stock in January and early February—after several Senate committees had been briefed on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention‘s fears of an outbreak but about a month before the World Health Organization designated it a pandemic.

Due to their November re-election campaigns, Loeffler and Sen. Richard Burr, R-NC, have faced the lion’s share of criticism in the scandal, much of it coming from their own conservative base.

Loeffler said her stock portfolio was managed by a third-party broker without her direct knowledge or input.

“The actions are blind to me until they put it in front of me at the end of the reporting period,” she told Fox Business host Neil Cavuto.

However, Loeffler did not specifically say that her investments were placed in a blind trust, as anti-corruption watchdogs including conservative investigative journalist Peter Schweizer have proposed in the wake of the scandal.

“Members of Congress, is it worth it to have the American people distrust you so you can make some extra side money by insider trading on the market?” Schweizer asked during a podcast Monday of SiriusXM’s Breitbart News Daily.

“Because that’s really ultimately what this is about,” Schweizer continued. “There’s no legitimate explanation or reason that they can give for them not to be required to put their assets in a blind trust.”

Initial reporting based on financial disclosures, from left-wing media outlets including ProPublica and NPR, indicated Loeffler had unloaded more than $3 million on the same day as the Senate Health Committee’s CDC briefing.

She disputed the accusations, saying that the moves were not even sell offs so much as an effort to tap into the then-booming economy with more high-yield investments.

“I will just tell you, in that portfolio, it’s absolutely false that we sold millions,” Loeffler said. “Actually, it was a more bullish bet. We ended up owning companies like Delta, like Goldman Sachs, like Prudential, companies that have been hard-hit and ended up losing money.”

But Schweizer noted that Loeffler’s claims to have invested in those companies was far from reassuring, particularly in light of the current economic crisis, since those major companies would be beholden to Congress for possible stimulus funding.

“Here’s the problem,” he said. “Members of Congress can trade stock in Delta Airlines or Boeing while they’re working on this bailout—while they’re voting on it—and it just throws the integrity of the whole process into question.”

Loeffler is facing a challenge on the right from Rep. Doug Collins, R-Ga., who criticized Loeffler in several cable appearances and tweets.

On Monday, his campaign Twitter said that the Securities and Exchange commission had rebuked the senator and her husband, New York Stock Exchange Chairman Jeff Sprecher.

The statement from the two co-directors of the SEC’s Division of Enforcement did not specifically name Loeffler, but seemed clearly directed at her, noted CNBC.

“We wish to emphasize the importance of maintaining market integrity and following corporate controls and procedures,” said the SEC statement.

“For example, in these dynamic circumstances, corporate insiders are regularly learning new material nonpublic information that may hold an even greater value than under normal circumstances,” it continued. “… Those with such access … should be mindful of their obligations to keep this information confidential and to comply with the prohibitions on illegal securities trading.”

Although a political newcomer, Loeffler said her years of field experience as a financial analyst had made her well-versed in the need to meet ethics requirements and other SEC regulations.

“I have been around much more substantial material, non-public information than probably any of my peers in the Senate,” she said. “I know exactly how to manage through this.”

She denounced what she saw as unfair and imbalanced reporting after the story broke, the timing of which seemed designed to channel the frustration and outrage that many were feeling over the drastic reversal of fortune wrought by the health crisis.

Loeffler said the scapegoating of her stock trades was misdirected.

“This is fake news,” she said. “It’s preying on the emotions of the American people and trying to create a narrative that’s absolutely false, and no one’s bothered to fact-check it.”

Far-Left NC Sheriff Moves to Suspend Gun Rights Under Virus Pretense

Ben Sellers
-
0

‘It’s reckless to illegally suspend their Second Amendment rights just when they need assurance that they can trust government…’

NC Sheriff Resists ICE, Releases Alleged Wife-Beater, Gets More ICE
Gerald Baker/IMAGE: CBS 17 via Youtube

(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) Nearly every right in the U.S. Bill of Rights has come under threat during the coronavirus panic, and the Left’s long targeted prize, the curtailment of 2nd Amendment gun rights, is no exception.

Gerald Baker, the radical sheriff in Wake County, North Carolina, set the plan into action by announcing that he would suspend pistol-purchase permits through April 30.

U.S. Rep. Dan Bishop, R-NC, clashed with Baker over his “sanctuary” policies during Bishop’s previous stint in the state Senate.

Bishop derided the latest move in a fundraising e-mail to supporters, calling on Baker to reverse the decision and resign.

“I thought I’d seen the most disgusting political act of the coronavirus health emergency when Nancy Pelosi cravenly killed the Senate’s relief bill to force her liberal political agenda on to the country,” Bishop said in the email.

“But one of North Carolina’s liberal sanctuary sheriffs—Gerald Baker—topped Pelosi earlier today when he used the coronavirus as an excuse to BAN law-abiding North Carolinians from purchasing handguns,” he added.

Deflecting Lawlessness

Anticipating the wave of backlash, Baker pre-emptively sought to deflect criticism, according to WBTV.

“Over the past several weeks, our staff has been inundated with high volumes of permit applications that has made it impossible to process by law,” he claimed.

“This decision is not a violation of anyone’s Second Amendment Rights,” he added, without further substantiation. “Most importantly, this action will limit persons encountering one another during this time of State of Emergency…”

He further claimed that the statute requiring the sheriff to approve permits had authorized the move by establishing no specific time frame for accepting the permits, despite setting a two-week window for issuing them once accepted.

Baker claimed the county was understaffed to meet the increased demand for firearms during the health crisis, with a backlog of 755 applications already pending as of Tuesday, said WBTV.

“With 290 people coming into the permits office per day, the Sheriff’s Office would not be able to meet the 14-day requirement,” Baker complained.

The state’s GOP-led General Assembly has, in the past, sought to check the creative legal interpretations of partisan sheriffs in five urban regions who demagogued their way into office on a platform of refusing to cooperate with federal immigration authorities.

After Charlotte-area sheriff Garry McFadden, a political ally of Baker’s, twice permitted the release last year of a dangerous illegal immigrant who had forced a nine-hour standoff with law enforcement, the legislature passed a bill to hold sheriffs accountable for failing to do their jobs. However, the bill was vetoed by Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper.

Rights Under Assault

Two of North Carolina’s GOP legislators responded to Baker’s latest decree by promising further action.

“Sheriff Baker must immediately rescind his illegal decision to halt sale of pistols in Wake County,” said state Sens. Warren Daniel (R-Burke) and Danny Britt (R-Robeson) in a joint statement.

“People are already suspicious and on edge,” they continued. “It’s reckless to illegally suspend their Second Amendment rights just when they need assurance that they can trust government.”

Ironically, their criticism sounded remarkably like that which far-left U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio–Cortez, D-NY, used to dismiss a recent Justice Department effort to suspend Fifth- and Sixth-Amendment rights to due process.

The DOJ had requested the ability to detain people indefinitely during emergencies, using a rationale similar to Baker’s that it may lack the bandwidth to comply.

That request was panned by legislators on both sides of the aisle.

“There is a long history in this country and in other countries of using emergencies as times to really start to encroach upon people’s civil rights and, in fact, this is the time when we need them the absolute most,” Ocasio–Cortez said Sunday during an appearance on CNN’s State of the Union.

“We have to keep an eye out for these kind of authoritarian and frankly, for this expansion of—and rather, suspension of rule of law,” she added.

Along with Baker, other “sanctuary” cities were also attempting to enact martial law under the auspices of the health crisis.

Los Angeles’s sheriff came under attack after attempting to re-interpret the law by deeming gun shops were not an essential business and would need to be closed per order of California Gov. Gavin Newsom. However, the county’s top attorney said otherwise.

Meanwhile, despite already being overrun by crime, law enforcement and prosecutors in Baltimore and Philadelphia indicated that during the pandemic they would cease to enforce certain laws by refusing to arrest and prosecute nonviolent criminals for things such as drug possession, trespassing, prostitution, attempted distribution and violating open-container laws.

Federalist Calls for Coronavirus ‘Chickenpox Parties’ as Panic Cripples U.S.

Ben Sellers
-
0

‘Does the virus fund the federalist?’

(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) As Americans still reel from the unprecedented response to the coronavirus pandemic—with alarming implications for the U.S. economy and government overreach to suppress civil liberties—The Federalist offered up a novel solution: controlled, voluntary infection.

Author Douglas A. Perednia said that the attempts to implement nationwide quarantines and closures to slow the virus would do nothing toward actually containing it.

“[S]hutting down the economy is like asking society to hold its breath to keep from inhaling a toxin,” Perednia said. “It can’t keep up forever, and when it does breathe, all that gasping for air is going to undo much of the benefit we’d hoped to derive.”

Rather, he wrote, the only way to overcome it would be allowing people to build immunity, much as occurs with chickenpox and other highly contagious childhood diseases.

Exposure to small, controlled doses of the virus is also the fundamental science behind vaccinations such as annual flu shots.

But the necessity of clinical trials, the severe impacts of the pandemic and the fast spread of the coronavirus all make the eventual development of a vaccine impractical in the short term.

1
Travelers wear masks to protect against the coronavirus. / IMAGE: CBS News via Youtube

In the meantime, the current response of bringing commerce and social interactions to a screeching halt threatens an enduring fallout that would exacerbate—if not eclipse—the havoc wrought by the disease itself.

“Neither mitigation nor waiting for a vaccine is acceptable given the magnitude of the problem we are facing,” Perednia said. “Economies are like a living organism—as soon as their normal functions are shut down, they begin to die.”

He warned that even the salvo of a $2 trillion economic stimulus would only go so far after months of social isolation.

“Savings, capital, income, and taxes all evaporate,” he said. “Companies begin to close, and many will not have the resources to begin again. Massive deficits will become a huge burden for future generations. Meanwhile, the regular health care system is all but shut down.”

Many unhinged radicals, however, have leaned into the idea of curtailing freedoms indefinitely, whether in the hopes of dooming President Donald Trump’s re-election or exploiting the crisis to advance their far-left agenda.

The reaction to the Perednia’s proposal from the Left was quick and predictably vicious as Twitter trolls rejected the scientific reasoning in favor of ad-hominem name-calling and conspiracy theories.

Efforts to shame and suppress anyone who dares to question the dogma surrounding virus containment have mirrored those of other leftist causes such as political correctness and the #MeToo movement.

Even Twitter, which has received frequent criticism for its censorship of conservative speech, put up a firewall by declaring the Federalist piece an “unsafe” link lest anyone accidentally click on it and be subjected involuntarily to a dangerous opinion.

Similarly, left-wing media have attacked Trump for suggesting a possible pharmaceutical treatment using anti-malarial drugs such as hydrochloroquine—under medical supervision.

Preliminary trials have produced positive results—albeit anecdotal, since no clinical trials have yet proven the drugs’ effectiveness.

Still, Trump noted during a press briefing on Friday that the drugs have been on the market for decades and posed little downside.

“It’s not a drug that you have a huge amount of danger with,” Trump said. “It’s not a drug that may have an unbelievable effect, like kill you … I’m not being overly optimistic or pessimistic. I sure as hell think we oughta give it a try.”

But after a report that an Arizona couple had poisoned themselves by ingesting a similarly-named substance used for fish-tank cleaning, some media reports misleadingly sought to link the two in order to bludgeon the president’s message of hope.

“Trump kept saying it was basically pretty much a cure,” said the Arizona woman—who had not tested positive for the virus when she ingested the poison—in an interview with NBC News.

“Don’t take anything,” she continued. “Don’t believe anything. Don’t believe anything that the president says and his people … call your doctor.”

Joe Biden Fails to Provide Democratic Leadership Amid Coronavirus Outbreak

Contributing Author
-
0

‘I know a lot of us expect more from him in this moment…’

Biden Lies about C'ville, Promises Obama SCOTUS Nod on 'Colbert' Show
Joe Biden / IMAGE: Late Show with Stephen Colbert via Youtube

(Claire Russel, Liberty Headlines) Former Vice President Joe Biden is now the likely Democratic nominee, but he has all but disappeared from the public amid the coronavirus outbreak, and some Democratic strategists worry his low profile could hurt his chances in November.

Biden should be offering a counter-message to President Donald Trump, said one former Obama administration official.

Instead, the former vice president is allowing other Democratic politicians to do the talking (and the leading) for him.

“You’re constantly hearing about [Andrew] Cuomo, and I know he’s the governor of New York, but Joe Biden is going to be the Democratic nominee,” the former official told The Hill.

“He needs to show his leadership,” the source continued. “Here’s a guy who has deep relationships on the Hill, who understands how we govern, and he’s largely been on the sidelines. I know a lot of us expect more from him in this moment.”

Biden is quarantined within his house like most Americans, but perhaps Biden’s distant messaging is also an attempt to limit the gaffes he inevitably makes every time he speaks.

In one of his first television interviews since the beginning of the outbreak, Biden struggled to put together a coherent thought.

“We have to take care of the cure, that will make the problem worse no matter what. We know what has to be done,” Biden said in what appeared to be an attempt to reference President Trump’s vow to not allow the “cure” to become worse than “the problem.”

Some Democratic strategists, however, think Biden’s team is wary of appearing overtly political in the midst of a national crisis.

“This is bigger than Joe, and at a certain point there’s only so much good you can do with your words,” said Howard Gutman, a former Obama administration ambassador.

“You begin to look small if you’re just on the sidelines criticizing,” Gutman continued. “Every one of us supports the president right now, and politics is a luxury none of us can afford. There will be plenty of time for it. Voters will decide who leads the country in November. It’s not a time for rhetoric right now.”

Bloomberg Sued By Former Staffers For Failing to Keep Year-Long Pay Promise

Contributing Author
-
0

‘He’s terminating, we believe, over 1,000 people at a time when we believe unemployment is likely going to be 20 or 30 percent, and they’re going to lose their health care…’

Bloomberg's Move Reveals Distaste for Biden, 2020 Democrats
Michael Bloomberg/Photo by Gage Skidmore (CC)

(Claire Russel, Liberty Headlines) A former field organizer for billionaire Michael Bloomberg’s failed presidential campaign sued on behalf of herself and several other former staffers who were allegedly promised year-long salaries.

The staffer, Donna Wood, says the former New York City mayor guaranteed “income and health care benefits” through November, but instead they found themselves out of jobs, “leaving them and their families potentially uninsured in the face of a global pandemic,” the lawsuit states, according to Politico.

Bloomberg initially planned to fund his campaign efforts through November regardless of whether he won the Democratic nomination. But he decided to drop out and endorse former Vice President Joe Biden, laying off all of his staff while he was at it.

“The Bloomberg campaign had represented to folks they were going to keep people on through November, regardless of his candidacy, which is one of the reasons we think he attracted such talent,” said Sally Abrahamson, one of the attorneys representing Wood and the other former staffers.

“He’s terminating, we believe, over 1,000 people at a time when we believe unemployment is likely going to be 20 or 30 percent, and they’re going to lose their health care.”

Copies of the original job applications filled out by the former staffers confirm that Bloomberg’s team did promise “employment through November 2020.” Because this promise was not kept, Wood and the other staffers are alleging fraudulent inducement and breach of contract, as well as unpaid overtime compensation.

“Thousands of people relied on that promise. They moved to other cities. They gave up school, jobs, and job opportunities. They uprooted their lives,” the lawsuit stated.

“But the promise was false,” it continued. “After Bloomberg lost the Democratic nomination, his campaign unceremoniously dumped thousands of staffers, leaving them with no employment, no income, and no health insurance.”

Adding insult to injury was the timing, said the plaintiffs.

“Bloomberg campaign did this during the worst global pandemic since 1918, in the face of a looming economic crisis,” it said. “Now thousands of people who relied on the Bloomberg campaign’s promise are left to fend for themselves.”

Bloomberg’s campaign said that it is working to create a “fund” to make sure all staff receive healthcare through April, “which no other campaign has done.”

“This campaign paid its staff wages and benefits that were much more generous than any other campaign this year,” a Bloomberg campaign spokesperson said.

ANALYSIS: Foreign Student Programs Cost Billions, Debunking Myth of Economic Boost

Contributing Writer
-
0

‘Foreign students do indeed bring in billions of dollars, but those billions are outbalanced by hidden billions in … funds spent by educational institutions subsidizing those…’

Trump Follows Obama, Supports Limitless Foreign Graduates to Take American Jobs
Photo by Austin Community College (CC)

(Michael Barnes, Liberty Headlines) For years, proponents of foreign-student programs have argued that hosting large foreign-student populations at American educational institutions, often in place of domestic students, provides a huge economic benefit due to student spending.

But a new analysis by the pro-legal immigration groups Center for Immigration Studies debunks that widely held claim by looking at the other side of the ledger.

“The idea that the foreign student population provides an economic boost for the U.S. is a myth,” said David North, a CIS fellow and author of the study, “Foreign Students, Despite Blather to the Contrary, Do Not Help the Economy.”

The analysis shows that while foreign-student programs do lead to billions of dollars in spending, the net cost is many billions more in the red—and it’s not even close.

“Foreign students do indeed bring in billions of dollars, but those billions are outbalanced by hidden billions in U.S. tax, endowment, and other funds spent by educational institutions subsidizing those, and other, students,” he said.

According to the Institute of International Education, a leading advocacy group for such programs, foreign students provide roughly $45 billion a year in economic benefits to the American economy. That figure is upheld as an overwhelming justification to both promote and increase the flow of foreign students to American schools, colleges and universities.

However, when accounting for the associated costs borne by American taxpayers and educational institutions, the economic argument looks far less compelling. According to the study, foreign students consume an estimated $119 billion in U.S. assets when providing only $45 billion in benefits, for a net economic loss of $74 billion every year.

The analysis concedes that there are non-economic reasons for hosting foreign students, but the touted economic windfall simply does not exist. As such, North contends that the programs should be scaled back.

“Given the massive (if hidden) subsidies that foreign students receive while in school, and the even more hidden ones that many of them and their post-degree employers get through the Optional Practical Training (OPT) program, the time has come to cut back on some parts of the foreign student programs,” he concluded.

WaPo Gives Biden Campaign SECOND 'Four Pinocchio' Fact-Check on Coronavirus

Joshua Paladino
-
0

‘There are signs he is tired of warnings from scientists and doctors as the economy implodes…’

(Joshua Paladino, Liberty Headlines) The Washington Post fact checked former Vice President Joe Biden‘s presidential campaign and awarded it “Four Pinocchios” for the false claim that the Trump administration “silenced” an health official from raising coronavirus concerns.
This is Biden’s second “Four Pinocchio” statement since the health crisis began.
Biden tweeted a video on March 21 that contained the false statement made by Ron Klain, a Biden aide who formerly served the Obama administration by leading efforts to curb the Ebola virus, the Washington Post reported.


Klain claimed that the administration refused to let Nancy Messonnier, a physician with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, speak about the coronavirus after she made alarmist statements in her initial warning to reporters.
“It’s not so much a question of if this will happen anymore but rather more a question of exactly when this will happen and how many people in this country will have severe illness,” she said, fueling hysterical speculation.
Messonnier’s remarks irritated and shocked the president, especially as the economic fallout began.
“Starting the next day, Dr. Messonnier no longer appeared at public briefings of the White House coronavirus task force,” Klain said. “The president and the White House sent a clear message to scientists in the government—there would be a price for speaking out and speaking up.”
Klain lied.
“We concede that news reports indicate Trump was upset by her remarks—and that there are signs he is tired of warnings from scientists and doctors as the economy implodes,” the Washington Post reported.
“But that’s no excuse for this video to claim Messonnier was silenced when, in fact, she kept briefing reporters,” it continued. “Klain would have been on more solid ground to refer to the reporting that Messonnier’s message annoyed Trump.”
However, Messonnier’s boss, Anne Schuchat, the CDC’s principal deputy director, has continued to stand by the president during press briefings.
Messonnier herself continued telephone briefings with the press on Feb. 28, Feb. 29, March 3 and March 9 as well as on social media posts.

Obama Admin Depleted N95 Mask Stockpile, Failed to Replenish It

Contributing Author
-
0

Two organizations warned White House to replenish supply after 2009 swine-flu outbreak…

Obama to Deliver 'Pointed' Speech About Trump
Barack Obama/IMAGE: theleeoverstreet via Youtube

(Claire Russel, Liberty Headlines) As hospitals struggle to obtain N95 respirator masks amid the coronavirus outbreak, Democrats have been quick to lay the blame at President Donald Trump’s feet. But a new report reveals that the Obama administration is responsible for the medical mask shortage.

The stockpile was deleted in 2009 when the H1N1 swine flue broke out. The Obama administration pulled roughly three-fourths of the masks from the federal government’s supply, but never replenished it, according to Bloomberg News.

Even after two separate organizations urged the Obama department of Health and Human Services to restock N95 masks, the administration failed to act, according to the Los Angeles Times.

According to Charles Johnson, president of the International Safety Equipment Association,  about 100 million N95 respirator masks were used up during the swine flu pandemic.

His association warned the Obama administration that failure to replenish the 100 million masks used could result in a catastrophe, but Johnson maintained that he is unaware of any “major effort to restore the stockpile to cover that drawdown.”

As a result, the Trump administration inherited a stockpile of only 12 million N95 masks—a tiny fraction of the 300 million the nation’s healthcare system might need, according to HHS Secretary Alex Azar.

To increase the supply, Trump is encouraging private businesses to manufacture masks or donate protective masks they already have in supply to local hospitals. He is also reportedly considering enacting the Defense Production Act of 1950, which would give him the authority to force businesses to manufacturer war-time materials. This would be a last resort option only, though, Trump said.

Media Lies About Trump ‘Cure’ After Couple Drinks Aquarium Cleaner

Ben Sellers
-
0

‘Trump kept saying it was basically pretty much a cure…’

(Ben Sellers, Liberty Headlines) A drug that President Donald Trump has publicly touted a possible coronavirus remedy came under attack from misleading media reports after an Arizona couple that attempted to “self-medicate” with a similarly-named substance fell critically ill.

The pair ingested chloroquine phosphate, a chemical used in both anti-malarial pharmaceuticals and in fish-tank cleaning solutions.

Trump had previously tweeted about the former, which has been on the market as a prescription for decades and could be a “game changer” in the ongoing global struggle to contain the pandemic.

But according to a report by the Washington Post, the couple ingested the aquarium cleaner, assuming it to be the same.

“After hearing the name ‘chloroquine’ spoken frequently on the news, the wife noticed that the chemical solvent used to keep their koi pond clean included the same ingredient, with the purpose of killing aquatic parasites that may gather in the fish tank over time,” said American Greatness. “The couple decided to pour some of it into their sodas and drank it.”

Although the two, both in their 60s, had not tested positive for coronavirus, the woman claimed, “We were afraid of getting sick,” according to NBC News.

The man ultimately died, and his wife remains critically ill. Even so, NBC News managed to interview her and then to spin the blame back at the president.

“Trump kept saying it was basically pretty much a cure,” said the woman, who also advised others: “Don’t take anything. Don’t believe anything. Don’t believe anything that the president says and his people … call your doctor.”

While some sources noted that the couple had ignored conventional, common-sense wisdom not to mistake household cleaning solutions for prescription medications, others conveniently left off that part.

A story in The Hill confusingly conflated the two substances as if they were the same. It cited an equally vague statement from Banner Health, the company that had treated the couple.

“Given the uncertainty around COVID-19, we understand that people are trying to find new ways to prevent or treat this virus, but self-medicating is not the way to do so,” said Daniel Brooks, Banner Poison and Drug Information Center medical director, in the statement.

Trump-Endorsed Coronavirus Cure Gets Smeared by Fake News Attack
Chloroquine phosphate / IMAGE: Reefahholic via Youtube

While failing to note that the specific case was more akin to poisoning than “self-medicating,” the Banner Health statement went even farther, discouraging other hospitals from prescribing the prospective cure.

“The last thing that we want right now is to inundate our emergency departments with patients who believe they found a vague and risky solution that could potentially jeopardize their health,” Brooks continued.

Brooks also bashed the use of any treatments described as ‘anti-COVID-19,’ including chloroquine, since none have been formally approved by the Food and Drug Administration.

“We are strongly urging the medical community to not prescribe this medication to any non-hospitalized patients,” Brooks said.

During a press briefing on Friday, Trump and his leading coronavirus taskforce advisor, Anthony Fauci, head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases at the National Institutes of Health, expressed disagreement about the treatment.

Fauci cautioned that the stories of positive results were anecdotal and that it had not undergone clinical trials, which could take months, before it is officially cleared to treat the new virus.

But Trump took a more hopeful stance after a reporter questioned him about the experimental treatment.

“It’s not a drug that you have a huge amount of danger with,” Trump said. “It’s not a drug that may have an unbelievable effect, like kill you … I’m not being overly optimistic or pessimistic. I sure as hell think we oughta give it a try.”

Although many in the media hyped the rift between the president and his medical expert, Fauci said the two fundamentally agreed on matters of substance (i.e. that the treatment could be a potential cure) but differed in matters of style (i.e. how quickly to promote and distribute it without further testing).

“The President was trying to bring hope to the people,” Fauci told Face the Nation on Sunday. “I think there’s this issue of [the media] trying to separate the two of us. There isn’t fundamentally a difference there.”

1...3,7113,7123,713...3,814Page 3,712 of 3,814