Donald Trump

[idahoblues]

Sounds fun^^^

 

[johnnytapia]

I’ve almost finished the Hillary documentary on Sky, it’s brilliant. It’s also pretty emotional and depressing as I know how it ends I.e Trump winning

I didn’t know half this stuff about her. She’s a very impressive past and CV. What happened??

This has to be the election of anyone but Trump, surely?

What happened? She happened.

 

[johnnytapia]

Bolton is such a liar according to Trump and Barr they want to block his book being released.


Trump says something heartfelt and full of truth would be the zinger.

I used to love watching John Bolton on Newsnight. He gave Paxman the absolute runaround, a right wing hawk who was brilliant at defending his and US foreign policy - he had Paxman in knots. Very few have done that.

 

[bluethrunthru]

An AIDS vaccine?? He is fucking deranged

 

[SWP's back]

 

[Blue Hefner]

What happened? She happened.

She is very impressive on the documentary. Well worth watching

 

[MillionMilesAway]

I've been disappointed in tweets like this before . . . honestly, what can they reveal that isn't something we already suspected?

It was an ad about Trumps health, on Fox News,, I think

 

[west didsblue]

Not sure whether this should be on here or on the Biden thread so I’ve put it on both.

 

[SWP's back]

Not sure whether this should be on here or on the Biden thread so I’ve put it on both.

“He can run and drink water”

Great tag line at the end.

 

[Dax777]

Paging @Dax777, again, what are your views now?

Same as in the post you quoted. I'm struggling to understand why folks seem to have a hard time grasping a reasonable point.

- health crisis with people dying
- existing drug with potential benefits
- State request test trial and off label use.
- Test is done. Drug provided benefits with some risk.
- Health crisis subsides and more effective drugs with lesser side effects developed. Thus, Drug Administration withdraws off label use authorization.

What part of that sequence doesn't make sense to you?

Let me put it in football terms see if that will help your understanding: S
C
Suppose City had a big match coming up we had to win, but Aguero wasn't fully fit, but we know his potential to score in a must win game, Pep starts him anyway. 45 minutes in we are up 5-0. At that point the value of a not fully fit Aguero playing, is outweighed by the scoreline. So Pep pulls Aguero.



Hope that clears it up for you and your friends. :)

 

[SWP's back]

Drug provided benefits with some risk.

That’s not true though. First trial showed more died having been given it.

Trump and his apologists still called that bollocks even then.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

That’s not true though. First trial showed more died having been given it.

Trump and his apologists still called that bollocks even then.

Quite.
It was trumpeted by an ignoramus without proper basis for claims - whether there was any ulterior reason beyond trying to look like he knew something is the interesting question on this.

 

[SWP's back]

Quite.
It was trumpeted by an ignoramus without proper basis for claims - whether there was any ulterior reason beyond trying to look like he knew something is the interesting question on this.

Trump or Dax?

 

[MillionMilesAway]

Trump or Dax?

meow.

 

[TonyM]

Same as in the post you quoted. I'm struggling to understand why folks seem to have a hard time grasping a reasonable point.

- health crisis with people dying
- existing drug with potential benefits
- State request test trial and off label use.
- Test is done. Drug provided benefits with some risk.
- Health crisis subsides and more effective drugs with lesser side effects developed. Thus, Drug Administration withdraws off label use authorization.

What part of that sequence doesn't make sense to you?

Let me put it in football terms see if that will help your understanding: S
C
Suppose City had a big match coming up we had to win, but Aguero wasn't fully fit, but we know his potential to score in a must win game, Pep starts him anyway. 45 minutes in we are up 5-0. At that point the value of a not fully fit Aguero playing, is outweighed by the scoreline. So Pep pulls Aguero.



Hope that clears it up for you and your friends. :)

Cept he's a lunitic and was grasping for any nonesense.

 

[Gareth Barry Conlon]

Same as in the post you quoted. I'm struggling to understand why folks seem to have a hard time grasping a reasonable point.

- health crisis with people dying
- existing drug with potential benefits
- State request test trial and off label use.
- Test is done. Drug provided benefits with some risk.
- Health crisis subsides and more effective drugs with lesser side effects developed. Thus, Drug Administration withdraws off label use authorization.

What part of that sequence doesn't make sense to you?

Let me put it in football terms see if that will help your understanding: S
C
Suppose City had a big match coming up we had to win, but Aguero wasn't fully fit, but we know his potential to score in a must win game, Pep starts him anyway. 45 minutes in we are up 5-0. At that point the value of a not fully fit Aguero playing, is outweighed by the scoreline. So Pep pulls Aguero.



Hope that clears it up for you and your friends. :)

One of the most embarrassing posts i have ever read on here. The promotion of an unproven and potentially dangerous drug by a politician for political gain was/is a disgrace. He sacked the medical experts who tried to stop him and applied pressure on the medical profession to adopt it. People probably died although I doubt we will ever get the full story as its so politicised. The whole concept of politicising a drug treatment is a disgrace. It is indefensible.

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

The Lincoln Project strikes again - Aired prime time last night on Fox News.

 

[pudge]

Same as in the post you quoted. I'm struggling to understand why folks seem to have a hard time grasping a reasonable point.

- health crisis with people dying
- existing drug with potential benefits
- State request test trial and off label use.
- Test is done. Drug provided benefits with some risk.
- Health crisis subsides and more effective drugs with lesser side effects developed. Thus, Drug Administration withdraws off label use authorization.

What part of that sequence doesn't make sense to you?

Let me put it in football terms see if that will help your understanding: S
C
Suppose City had a big match coming up we had to win, but Aguero wasn't fully fit, but we know his potential to score in a must win game, Pep starts him anyway. 45 minutes in we are up 5-0. At that point the value of a not fully fit Aguero playing, is outweighed by the scoreline. So Pep pulls Aguero.



Hope that clears it up for you and your friends. :)

Are you unwell?

 

[Trevor Morley's Tache]

One of the most embarrassing posts i have ever read on here. The promotion of an unproven and potentially dangerous drug by a politician for political gain was/is a disgrace. He sacked the medical experts who tried to stop him and applied pressure on the medical profession to adopt it. People probably died although I doubt we will ever get the full story as its so politicised. The whole concept of politicising a drug treatment is a disgrace. It is indefensible.

I just clicked on 'view blocked content' to see what that was all about. You are indeed correct. Utterly embarrassing and delusional.

I also think there is an element of personal financial interest in the promotion of this drug, which is worse than political gain in my opinion. Having said that, there is not much difference with personal and political gain with Trump. Any political gain goes some way to keeping him out of prison, so technically it's all personal gain.

 

[mancity2012_eamo]

“He can run and drink water”

Great tag line at the end.

I actually laughed out loud at that.