Trump berates Peter Alexander

[Kemosabe]

Trump's vituperative exchange with NBC News reporter Peter Alexander at a press briefing today:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qw0T9RK0GrA

And Mr. Alexander's reaction afterward:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5hJQ2ubohg

 

[TheBigA]

The ultimate contradiction: White House press conference. If they don't like the press, why hold a press conference?

They invite these people there, and then attack & insult them. Why bother? Who needs it? It's not helping.

Way to solve the problem is don't do one in the first place. Just talk to the people you like, and ignore the rest. Problem solved.

 

[PTBoardOp94]

Trump also had a terse exchange with the PBS Newshour's Yamiche Alcindor today. She asked about the continued delay in Coronavirus testing, and Trump insulted her and said "I'm not hearing that". Dr. Anthony Fauci contradicted that less than 5 minutes later, confirming that people who want tests but cannot be tested "is a reality that is happening right now".

Clip of the question from Alcindor and response by Trump: https://twitter.com/Yamiche/status/1241056026872426496
And Dr. Fauci's contradiction: https://twitter.com/ABC/status/1241056065858535425

 

[TheBigA]

Fauci is looking to get fired. DT doesn't like to get upstaged. He's fired people for doing that.

 

[davideduardo]

The ultimate contradiction: White House press conference. If they don't like the press, why hold a press conference?

I could ask the same question, but in reverse: why do reporters inject partisan politics into questions about the pandemic we are trying to make our way through.

I'd like to be optimistic about alternative treatments for the pandemic, and existing approved medications may be able to reduce the severity of some cases. I find that encouraging and showing that all the alternatives are being explored makes me pleased and hopeful.

Peter Alexander, as I heard it, wanted to dismiss any alternative treatments as sort of pie-in-the-sky promises when, in fact, it is good to know that lots of work is being done. Alexander's question certainly put a pop in that balloon.

 

[TheBigA]

I could ask the same question, but in reverse: why do reporters inject partisan politics into questions about the pandemic we are trying to make our way through.

Reporters are just reporters. The people on the podium are the ones in charge. They should have been able to see past the question, seize the opportunity to speak to the public. Moments later, Mike Pence answered the question correctly. This is not about reporters. They're just asking questions. The people giving answers need to know what to say and who they should be talking to. That's why they hold a press conference. Otherwise, stop wasting our time with these things, and we'll get answers from someone else. Save the berating the press for Twitter.

 

[PTBoardOp94]

I could ask the same question, but in reverse: why do reporters inject partisan politics into questions about the pandemic we are trying to make our way through.

I don't see anything partisan about Mr. Alexander's question. It could have been phrased in a partisan way, something like this:

"Mr. President, the Governor of State X has said your leadership failures makes her fear for the lives of her citizens. Have you spoken with her and is there anything you wish to say to reassure the public who may have heard the governor's comments?"

I won't say there aren't leading/gotcha questions asked at these events, because there are. But Alexander's question was fine in my estimation.

 

[CTListener]

I think you guys are not on the same wavelength here. What David seems to be talking about is Alexander's question about the malaria drug. What others seem to be talking about was his follow-up "softball" (his word) question looking to draw some sympathetic, calming words from Trump, who instead unloaded on Alexander and his network. I thought both questions were fine and Trump's answer on the possibility that the malaria drug could work on COVID-19, while delivered in the usual Trumpian style, complete with "What the hell do you have to lose?", wasn't the most outrageous thing he could have said. But to explode as he did on a question based on the fact that Americans ARE scared right now was incomprehensible.

 

[davideduardo]

I don't see anything partisan about Mr. Alexander's question.

I did not say it was partisan. I indicated that it was negative. Instead of encouraging alternatives to just a total cure for the virus... ones that might reduce the impact of the disease on the more susceptible people... the reporter seemed to belittle the possibility of the particular alternative being a valuable and immediate partial solution.

But Alexander's question was fine in my estimation.

It made the possibility of an impact-reducing and immediately available seem like a hoax and was discouraging to those of us who remain hopeful for some kind of cure, treatment or way to reduce the danger of the Coronavirus.

 

[TheBigA]

I think you guys are not on the same wavelength here. What David seems to be talking about is Alexander's question about the malaria drug.

I see what you're saying. In listening to that question, I think he was trying to resolve the mixed messages the public is getting from the people on that stage. The experts are saying point blank that there is no cure. They're also saying it will take time to scientifically study if this drug can work. That's the end of the discussion. The president needn't insert himself into the discussion, because he isn't an expert, no matter what he thinks. That's the problem with this entire thing: Mixed messaging, and it's been getting discussed all over the place. People expect their government to speak in one voice, and that's not what they're getting. Is this the Corona Virus or the Chinese Virus. Same kind of thing.

It's nice to be optimistic about this, but let's also be correct and accurate. If the president wants to venture into his own personal opinion (and he did couch everything that way), he should do it on his own time. It was the wrong place. He should walk out, make any announcements he wants to make, and then turn it over to Pence and the experts.

 

[davideduardo]

It's nice to be optimistic about this, but let's also be correct and accurate. If the president wants to venture into his own personal opinion (and he did couch everything that way), he should do it on his own time. It was the wrong place. He should walk out, make any announcements he wants to make, and then turn it over to Pence and the experts.

I think that what the media has not made clear is that there are at least three different kinds of medical "solutions".

1. A vaccination that will prevent catching the disease.
2. A medicine that will reduce the effects of the disease by reducing its "impact".
3. A treatment that will cure the disease if the person is already infected.

The one the President was discussing appears to be part of #2 and it seems that it can help the survival of those who get the virus.

For those of us who have been labeled as members of the "high risk" group, something that improves our chances of survival is marvelous news and I hope, despite Mr Alexander's skepticism, that it is successful.

Optimism motivates and encourages: pessimism paralyzes efforts.

 

[TheBigA]

I think that what the media has not made clear is that there are at least three different kinds of medical "solutions".

In my view, that's not up to the media. It's up to the people on the podium.

All three of those things have been covered by the media. That's how we know about them. We had no clue about the malaria drug until it was reported.

Here's a link from early reporting from over a month ago. Apparently it had been tried in China.

https://nypost.com/2020/02/14/docto...s-with-medications-for-hiv-ebola-and-malaria/

The president is muddying the waters by trying to be an expert. He's an expert on his opinion, and that's where it should stop. Where the media is wrong is in asking the president at all.

 

[PTBoardOp94]

Oh, yeah on the Hydroxychloroquine (the malaria drug in question) front I agree with BigA about officials trying hard to speak with a single voice.

There are very few physicians in the media. And it must be frustrating to hear Trump say during Thursday's Coronavirus presser that hydroxychloroquine is "very effective", only to be told within hours by actual physicians at the FDA, plus Dr. Fauci and others outside of government that there is limited evidence (some still say no evidence) of hydroxychloroquine's effectiveness against COVID-19.

Like you, David, I think there is reason for hope with this drug. Even if it only improves the outcome for a 20% of patients, that's a big deal, because that's 20% fewer patients occupying hospital facilities.

However, a politician who calls something that is very experimental "very effective" deserves to be questioned on that once reporters have some time to gather outside opinions.

 

[TheBigA]

However, a politician who calls something that is very experimental "very effective" deserves to be questioned on that once reporters have some time to gather outside opinions.

That's why he's better off getting out of the way. What makes this "partisan" is he's running for re-election. So any bad news hurts him. The way to insulate himself from the bad news is give it to someone else. He's designated Pence as that guy, and he seems capable. So step out of the way, and let the team handle it.

 

[davideduardo]

Oh, yeah on the Hydroxychloroquine (the malaria drug in question) front I agree with BigA about officials trying hard to speak with a single voice.

I was given Hydroxychloroquine in 1963 when I caught malaria in Nicaragua. I was treated in Costa Rica where I was when the symptoms appeared and it was effective then. No side effects, so if it is useful in the current epidemic that would be great news.
[h=1][/h]

 

[landtuna]

If I were a reporter why would I ask the Liar-in-Charge a question about anything?

 

[TheBigA]

No side effects, so if it is useful in the current epidemic that would be great news.

I'm assuming it's not over the counter, and would require a prescription. So operationally, practically, how does that work? Would your doctor prescribe a drug that hasn't been approved, but has the support of the president? Would this be one of those black market things that you'd pay for out of your own pocket rather than insurance? Keep in mind that people who've had the virus say it moves very quickly, where one minute you have a runny nose and a cough, and 6 hours later you can't breathe.

 

[davideduardo]

I'm assuming it's not over the counter, and would require a prescription. So operationally, practically, how does that work? Would your doctor prescribe a drug that hasn't been approved, but has the support of the president? Would this be one of those black market things that you'd pay for out of your own pocket rather than insurance? Keep in mind that people who've had the virus say it moves very quickly, where one minute you have a runny nose and a cough, and 6 hours later you can't breathe.

I'm assuming the idea is for on-prescription treatment at the very first suspected symptoms. It's listed as having no side effects, and if the potential benefits are there, the only question would be whether it can sometimes cause the Coronavirus to get worse.

The idea would be to administer it immediately upon the showing of symptoms. I don't think it has been shown to be a prophalactic, only a mitigator.

 

[davideduardo]

If I were a reporter why would I ask the Liar-in-Charge a question about anything?

Reporters, save a few that are free-lance, are assigned stories.

New reporters often get the morgue and things like that... it is not their choice.

 

[Y2kTheNewOldies]

I'm assuming it's not over the counter, and would require a prescription. So operationally, practically, how does that work? Would your doctor prescribe a drug that hasn't been approved, but has the support of the president? Would this be one of those black market things that you'd pay for out of your own pocket rather than insurance? Keep in mind that people who've had the virus say it moves very quickly, where one minute you have a runny nose and a cough, and 6 hours later you can't breathe.

https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2...aiser-begins-first-round-of-tests-on-vaccine/

Clinical trials?? I know there have been vaccine candidates that are being tested for safety and effectiveness as of this posting for COVID-19. But the data is to be reviewed before FDA approval.