Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Has that, in fact, happened, or are you making things up?
If we’re just making up scenarios to fit our personal narrative, I can get far more creative than your lame story.
I've read the WSJ article.
I've provided most of the salient details.
I speculated on what he might have told Fox News if he DID disclose that he was between the rapid test results (positive) and the thorough/longer/more accurate test.
For overall context, I've also criticized him as much as any R on this board.
Trump and his staff chose to travel to an event knowing they had been in close contact for long periods of time with someone who was positive.
That was a careless risk.
Any one of those patrons could be an at risk individual -- either knowingly or not. They would have felt sure that this administration would not risk their lives (seeing as they are so happy to take their money) or that of the President's.
It was careless.
It was insensitive.
It was totally contradicting every single guideline in every single country in the world that has been managing COVID.
during a pandemic social gatherings like the Rose Garden event are not necessary and have inherent risks ---
So make the announcement -- let off fireworks --- whatever -- just don't gather a bunch of folks together and mock those who abide by the guidelines.
Mark Meadows admitted they knew Hicks was positive when they took off for the event.
AND -- forget that they knew she was sick Wednesday and 'quarantined' her on Air Force One. Until she was diagnosed as positive or negative the White House should not have held a press briefing, should have made proper restrictions to minimize everyone's exposure.
Trump and his staff chose to travel to an event knowing they had been in close contact for long periods of time with someone who was positive.
That was a careless risk.
Any one of those patrons could be an at risk individual -- either knowingly or not. They would have felt sure that this administration would not risk their lives (seeing as they are so happy to take their money) or that of the President's.
It was careless.
It was insensitive.
It was totally contradicting every single guideline in every single country in the world that has been managing COVID.
Boy , are you brainwashed to death.. who told you that whopper. Hillary's campaign was after Obama and went after Obama stating he was not born in America. Hillary was also the one who created the dirty dossier that was fake and planned to take down Trump before he was president and continued with the witchhunt for years and Trump is still president. The hate and the Clinton machine went after Obama as well. Face it.
Wrongamundo. Hillary personally had nothing to do with it.
I think you misread my post. I was agreeing he should not have made an announcement until he knew for sure/ What I was trying to explain (and perhaps I could have been clearer) is that he should have avoided contact with others (like at the fundraiser) until he had the more sensitive/reliable test.
at last there's one reasonable debater amongst the left.
He tested negative before going to Bedminster. Then they heard about Hope Hicks. They went, without her and without McEnany, anyway.
IOW, he didn't quick-test positive and go see people anyway.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.