westernjournal--2020-05-21--Watch Ron DeSantis Tear Into Media Over ‘Partisan Narrative’ in COVID Coverage

Florida Gov .
Ron DeSantis tore into the media on Wednesday over their “ typical partisan narrative ” about the coronavirus ravaging his state because of his decision to reopen .
“ You ’ ve got a lot of people in your profession who waxed poetically for weeks and weeks about how Florida was going to be just like New York , ” he said to reporters about the partisan coverage of the coronavirus crisis in Florida .
“ ’ Wait two weeks , Florida ’ s going to be next.
’ Just like Italy , wait two weeks .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ eight weeks away from that and it hasn ’ t happened .
Not only do we have a lower death rate — well , we have way lower deaths generally — we have a lower death rate than the Acela corridor , D.C. , everyone up there .
“ We have a lower death rate than the Midwest — Illinois , Michigan , Indiana , Ohio .
But even in our region — Louisiana , Mississippi , Alabama , Georgia — Florida has the lower death rate , ” he said .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spot from tens of thousands of people leaving the number one hot zone in the world to come to my state .
“ So we ’ ve succeeded and I think that people just don ’ t want to recognize it because it challenges their narrative , it challenges their assumption .
So they ’ ve got to try to find a boogeyman .
“ Maybe it is that there are black helicopters circling the Department of Health .
If you believe that , I ’ ve got a bridge in Brooklyn I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” DeSantis continued .
The governor is spot on .
If you look at the media coverage of New York and Florida , the disparity is glaring .
Florida has one of the highest populations of elderly people in the United States and still its coronavirus numbers are low compared to New York , a state with similar demographics .
DeSantis ’ poll numbers have been tanking while Gov .
Andrew Cuomo of New York has enjoyed a tremendous rise in popularity .
That comes in spite of the fact that , as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 46,000 cases and 2,052 deaths with a population of 21 million and 4.4 million seniors .
Contrast that with New York , which , as of this writing , has approximately 195,000 cases and nearly 16,000 deaths with a population of 19 million and an elderly population of 3.2 million .
RELATED : Leftists Will Be Furious with Ron DeSantis After He Said Governors Are Not 'Dictators' Which state looks like a success to you ?
Regardless , the media has praised Cuomo and harshly criticized DeSantis .
“ If you doubt the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Gov .
Ron DeSantis handled covid-19 in Florida in excellent fashion , while Gov .
Andrew Cuomo handled it nearly as badly as humanly possible , yet DeSantis has dropped in polls and Cuomo is at the height of popularity , ” conservative commentator Ben Shapiro tweeted .
Every night on CNN and MSNBC the gloom and doom parade continues .
States like Florida that are reopening successfully are destroying that narrative .
The coronavirus crisis is something to be taken seriously and precautions should be taken , but destroying the economy is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ consistent media assault on the Republican governors who have chosen to reopen their states is designed to do one thing : help Democrats win .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis tore into the media on Wednesday over their “typical partisan narrative” about the coronavirus ravaging his state because of his decision to reopen.
“You’ve got a lot of people in your profession who waxed poetically for weeks and weeks about how Florida was going to be just like New York,” he said to reporters about the partisan coverage of the coronavirus crisis in Florida.
“’Wait two weeks, Florida’s going to be next.’ Just like Italy, wait two weeks. Well, hell, we’re eight weeks away from that and it hasn’t happened. Not only do we have a lower death rate — well, we have way lower deaths generally — we have a lower death rate than the Acela corridor, D.C., everyone up there.
“We have a lower death rate than the Midwest — Illinois, Michigan, Indiana, Ohio. But even in our region — Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia — Florida has the lower death rate,” he said.
DeSantis says any insinuation Florida doesn’t have best data is typical partisan narrative. “You’ve got a lot of people in your profession who waxed poetically for weeks and weeks about how Florida was going to be just like NY.”https://t.co/jTzJmKk8X0 pic.twitter.com/1sGw3Z1P3V — WFLA NEWS (@WFLA) May 20, 2020
“And I was the number one landing spot from tens of thousands of people leaving the number one hot zone in the world to come to my state.
“So we’ve succeeded and I think that people just don’t want to recognize it because it challenges their narrative, it challenges their assumption. So they’ve got to try to find a boogeyman.
“Maybe it is that there are black helicopters circling the Department of Health. If you believe that, I’ve got a bridge in Brooklyn I’d like to sell you,” DeSantis continued.
Do you think DeSantis had the right response to the media's coverage of the coronavirus in Florida? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 99% (535 Votes) No: 1% (4 Votes)
The governor is spot on. If you look at the media coverage of New York and Florida, the disparity is glaring.
Florida has one of the highest populations of elderly people in the United States and still its coronavirus numbers are low compared to New York, a state with similar demographics.
DeSantis’ poll numbers have been tanking while Gov. Andrew Cuomo of New York has enjoyed a tremendous rise in popularity.
That comes in spite of the fact that, as of this writing, Florida has roughly 46,000 cases and 2,052 deaths with a population of 21 million and 4.4 million seniors.
Contrast that with New York, which, as of this writing, has approximately 195,000 cases and nearly 16,000 deaths with a population of 19 million and an elderly population of 3.2 million.
Which state looks like a success to you? Regardless, the media has praised Cuomo and harshly criticized DeSantis.
“If you doubt the power of the press, recognize that Gov. Ron DeSantis handled covid-19 in Florida in excellent fashion, while Gov. Andrew Cuomo handled it nearly as badly as humanly possible, yet DeSantis has dropped in polls and Cuomo is at the height of popularity,” conservative commentator Ben Shapiro tweeted.
If you doubt the power of the press, recognize that Gov. Ron DeSantis handled covid-19 in Florida in excellent fashion, while Gov. Andrew Cuomo handled it nearly as badly as humanly possible, yet DeSantis has dropped in polls and Cuomo is at the height of popularity. — Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro) May 8, 2020
Every night on CNN and MSNBC the gloom and doom parade continues. States like Florida that are reopening successfully are destroying that narrative.
The coronavirus crisis is something to be taken seriously and precautions should be taken, but destroying the economy is not going to help.
And the consistent media assault on the Republican governors who have chosen to reopen their states is designed to do one thing: help Democrats win.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-05-21--Obama Portrait Will Never Hang in Trump’s WH, According to Reports

Former President Barack Obama ’ s portrait will not grace White House walls anytime soon , and the establishment media are blaming President Donald Trump .
Typically , an official commissioned portrait of the last president is unveiled in an East Room ceremony with the current president , who makes glowing remarks about his predecessor before revealing the portrait .
The painting of the last president ’ s countenance is honorably hung in the White House among other portraits of former presidents .
According to NBC News , however , neither Trump nor former President Barack Obama is interested in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ decades .
But these two are not just any presidents : They have had a highly contentious public relationship .
Recently , Obama took the opportunity of video commencement addresses to take shots at Trump ’ s handling of the coronavirus pandemic .
For his part , Trump has been vocal about the Obama administration ’ s role in unmasking the identity of former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn in a scandal dubbed “ Obamagate.
” “ You ’ ve got a president who ’ s talking about putting the previous one in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” presidential historian Michael Beschloss told NBC News .
“ We have not seen a situation like that in history , ” he said .
“ It takes antipathy of a new president for a predecessor to a new level.
” Despite how Beschloss described it , people close to the matter reportedly confirmed that Obama would not be interested in taking part in the ceremony as long as Trump was president , meaning the former president ’ s portrait could remain absent until 2025 if Trump is re-elected .
Trump apparently @ @ @ @ @ @ @ event either , according to those same sources .
Still , liberals are furious at the supposed attack on Obama ’ s honor .
NBC and MSNBC legal analyst Maya Wiley blamed the absence of the ceremony on — you guessed it — Trump ’ s racism .
“ So # Trump , who stoked ‘ birtherism ’ lunacy v the first Black # POTUS , was sued 4 house discrimination & vilified ppl of color won ’ t hang # Obama portrait .
Anyone surprised ?
” she wrote on Twitter .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ for 2019 Terrorist Attack in Rant on Hydroxychloroquine In a move that was as predictable as the sunrise , CNN also implied that Trump ’ s supposed snub was racially motivated , but it seems at the very least to be a mutual decision if not completely one-sided on the part of Obama .
The Obamas had unveiled their Smithsonian portraits in 2018 , which were widely ridiculed at the time for their stylized portrayals of the couple , but the official White House presidential portrait is a completely separate commissioned work of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the former president and first lady secured and signed an artist as per the usual procedure for the official portrait , but the process stopped there as neither Obama has yet to sit for their paintings .
If that report is true , it may indicate the decision was mainly Obama ’ s because , after all , a painting that does not exist can not be unveiled .
“ Finally !
Obama makes a decision that is good for America , ” actor James Woods tweeted .
Regardless of who was responsible @ @ @ @ @ @ @ always concerned about his legacy , often citing the ridiculous myth that his presidency was scandal-free in an attempt to bolster his image , so blaming Trump plays well into their established narrative .
On the other hand , it is fun to imagine Obama , a president who relished being in the company of celebrities , to edge his way into their spotlight , mulling whether it would be better to forgo his portrait ceremony to “ rob ” Trump of that honor if that is , in fact , what happened @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about , it is satisfying to know that Obama ’ s portrait will not have a place in the White House as long as Trump is president .
That must be infuriating to the leftists who treasure Obama as their dear leader , and would make Trump ’ s potential re-election a doubly painful prospect .
And surely , Trump and his supporters wouldn ’ t want it any other way .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

Former President Barack Obama’s portrait will not grace White House walls anytime soon, and the establishment media are blaming President Donald Trump.
Typically, an official commissioned portrait of the last president is unveiled in an East Room ceremony with the current president, who makes glowing remarks about his predecessor before revealing the portrait.
The painting of the last president’s countenance is honorably hung in the White House among other portraits of former presidents.
According to NBC News, however, neither Trump nor former President Barack Obama is interested in participating in this tradition that goes back decades.
But these two are not just any presidents: They have had a highly contentious public relationship.
Recently, Obama took the opportunity of video commencement addresses to take shots at Trump’s handling of the coronavirus pandemic.
For his part, Trump has been vocal about the Obama administration’s role in unmasking the identity of former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn in a scandal dubbed “Obamagate.”
“You’ve got a president who’s talking about putting the previous one in legal jeopardy, to put it nicely,” presidential historian Michael Beschloss told NBC News.
“We have not seen a situation like that in history,” he said. “It takes antipathy of a new president for a predecessor to a new level.”
Are you glad to hear that Obama's portrait won't be hanging in the White House any time soon? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 97% (5895 Votes) No: 3% (162 Votes)
Despite how Beschloss described it, people close to the matter reportedly confirmed that Obama would not be interested in taking part in the ceremony as long as Trump was president, meaning the former president’s portrait could remain absent until 2025 if Trump is re-elected.
Trump apparently wasn’t disappointed to nix the event either, according to those same sources.
Still, liberals are furious at the supposed attack on Obama’s honor.
NBC and MSNBC legal analyst Maya Wiley blamed the absence of the ceremony on — you guessed it — Trump’s racism.
“So #Trump, who stoked ‘birtherism’ lunacy v the first Black #POTUS, was sued 4 house discrimination & vilified ppl of color won’t hang #Obama portrait. Anyone surprised?” she wrote on Twitter.
So #Trump, who stoked “birtherism” lunacy v the first Black #POTUS, was sued 4 house discrimination & vilified ppl of color won’t hang #Obama portrait. Anyone surprised? “White House portrait ceremony may be the latest casualty of the political divide” https://t.co/tVD61hVbLl — Maya Wiley (@mayawiley) May 19, 2020
In a move that was as predictable as the sunrise, CNN also implied that Trump’s supposed snub was racially motivated, but it seems at the very least to be a mutual decision if not completely one-sided on the part of Obama.
The Obamas had unveiled their Smithsonian portraits in 2018, which were widely ridiculed at the time for their stylized portrayals of the couple, but the official White House presidential portrait is a completely separate commissioned work of art.
According to The Hill, the former president and first lady secured and signed an artist as per the usual procedure for the official portrait, but the process stopped there as neither Obama has yet to sit for their paintings.
If that report is true, it may indicate the decision was mainly Obama’s because, after all, a painting that does not exist cannot be unveiled.
“Finally! Obama makes a decision that is good for America,” actor James Woods tweeted.
Finally! Obama makes a decision that is good for America… https://t.co/1u3KFBwGZg — James Woods (@RealJamesWoods) May 19, 2020
Regardless of who was responsible, Obama’s media cronies are always concerned about his legacy, often citing the ridiculous myth that his presidency was scandal-free in an attempt to bolster his image, so blaming Trump plays well into their established narrative.
On the other hand, it is fun to imagine Obama, a president who relished being in the company of celebrities, to edge his way into their spotlight, mulling whether it would be better to forgo his portrait ceremony to “rob” Trump of that honor if that is, in fact, what happened.
Regardless of how this situation came about, it is satisfying to know that Obama’s portrait will not have a place in the White House as long as Trump is president.
That must be infuriating to the leftists who treasure Obama as their dear leader, and would make Trump’s potential re-election a doubly painful prospect.
And surely, Trump and his supporters wouldn’t want it any other way.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-05-22--VA Secretary: Hydroxychloroquine Is Safe – And We’ll Keep Giving It to Veterans

Department of Veterans Affairs Secretary Robert Wilkie pushed back Thursday against critics of the VA ’ s use of the antimalarial drug hydroxychloroquine to treat COVID-19 patients .
During an appearance on the Fox News show “ Fox & Friends First , ” Wilkie was asked about media reports claiming that taking the drug can kill patients instead of effecting a cure .
“ And I ’ ll echo what the president said the other day .
I think it ’ s more aimed at President Trump than it is against the science because as we speak , Dr. Fauci @ @ @ @ @ @ @ clinical trials if this and I would also underline the fact that it is the 128th most-used drug in this country , ” Wilkie said , referring to Dr. Anthony Fauci , director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases .
“ We have seen it work in many settings across America and our goal at VA is to do everything we can to preserve and prolong life , ” he said .
TRENDING : While Celebrities Tell Americans 'We 're All in This Together , ' Pat Sajak Has a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said “ the press has been touting ” as showing that the drug could be dangerous .
“ That was something that researchers took and used VA numbers — didn ’ t even look at underlying medical conditions — and really misrepresented what was going on at VA , ” he said .
Wilkie added that VA hospitals gave the drug to veterans for whom there was no other option .
“ We used it with veterans who were in the last hours of life in the hopes that it would prolong that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that under FDA guidelines , which we have been following religiously , ” he said .
Wilkie also noted that the study the media has been fawning over was not clinically reviewed or peer-reviewed .
“ It was gone over by three ophthalmologists , ” he said .
“ Now , I like ophthalmology , but I ’ m not going to turn to an ophthalmologist to review studies on infectious diseases .
So I think this was more aimed at taking a hit at the president than it was science.
” Wilkie @ @ @ @ @ @ @ drug came after serious review by physicians .
“ We ’ re not going to take risks with the life of the president of the United States , ” he said .
“ We started using this in the military in 1955 , ” Wilkie continued .
“ I ’ ve taken it .
Everyone who ’ s served in the military since the Eisenhower administration has taken this regularly .
We know its side effects , we know what it does and if we can offer hope to people , we ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” RELATED : Nick Cordero 's Wife Shares in Heartbreaking Video That Actor 's Condition Is 'Going Downhill' On Wednesday , White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany also noted that the drug has a long , successful history .
“ Hydroxychloroquine has been a drug that has been in use for 65 years for lupus , arthritis and malaria .
It has a very good safety profile , ” she said , according to a White House media pool report .
“ The FDA has approved this for off-label use .
You know @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in ‘ Right to Try ’ legislation.
” McEnany added that some media coverage of the drug has been over the top .
“ But that being said , I ’ ve seen a lot of apoplectic coverage of hydroxychloroquine .
You had Jimmy Kimmel saying the president is , quote , ‘ trying to kill himself by taking it.
’ You had Joe Scarborough saying , quote , ‘ this will kill you.
’ Neil Cavuto saying , ‘ what have you got to lose ?
One thing you have to lose @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Cuomo saying , ‘ the president knows that hydroxychloroquine is not supported by science .
He knows it has been flagged by his own people and he ’ s using it . '
” “ Well , Cuomo mocked the president for this .
And interestingly , I found this out just before coming here : Hydroxychloroquine , of course , is an FDA-approved medication with a long-proven track record for safety .
And it turns out that Chris Cuomo took a less safe version of it called quinine , which the FDA @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of its serious side effects , including death , ” McEnany went on .
“ So really interesting to have that criticism of the president , ” she said , noting that New York Gov .
Andrew Cuomo , the brother of the CNN journalist , has said he was optimistic that the drug would work .
When asked about studies on the drug , McEnany was ready with a reply .
“ There are several studies that have been brought up that the president has actually mentioned that I ’ d refer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of France — a French study involving more than 1,000 patients that found that the vast majority had , quote , ‘ good clinical outcomes.
’ And by the vast majority , that was more than 90 percent , ” she said .
“ There was an Italian study of more than 65,000 patients that demonstrated only 20 tested positive of those who are taking it prophylactically .
And a South Korea study , as well .
So there are several studies.
” We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .

Department of Veterans Affairs Secretary Robert Wilkie pushed back Thursday against critics of the VA’s use of the antimalarial drug hydroxychloroquine to treat COVID-19 patients.
During an appearance on the Fox News show “Fox & Friends First,” Wilkie was asked about media reports claiming that taking the drug can kill patients instead of effecting a cure.
“Well I think it’s nonsense,” Wilkie said.
“And I’ll echo what the president said the other day. I think it’s more aimed at President Trump than it is against the science because as we speak, Dr. Fauci and his institute are conducting very detailed clinical trials if this and I would also underline the fact that it is the 128th most-used drug in this country,” Wilkie said, referring to Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.
“We have seen it work in many settings across America and our goal at VA is to do everything we can to preserve and prolong life,” he said.
Wilkie slammed a study he said “the press has been touting” as showing that the drug could be dangerous.
“That was something that researchers took and used VA numbers — didn’t even look at underlying medical conditions — and really misrepresented what was going on at VA,” he said.
Wilkie added that VA hospitals gave the drug to veterans for whom there was no other option.
“We used it with veterans who were in the last hours of life in the hopes that it would prolong that life and we will continue to do that under FDA guidelines, which we have been following religiously,” he said.
Are you optimistic about hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for COVID-19? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 96% (2432 Votes) No: 4% (103 Votes)
Wilkie also noted that the study the media has been fawning over was not clinically reviewed or peer-reviewed.
“It was gone over by three ophthalmologists,” he said. “Now, I like ophthalmology, but I’m not going to turn to an ophthalmologist to review studies on infectious diseases. So I think this was more aimed at taking a hit at the president than it was science.”
Wilkie said Trump’s use of the drug came after serious review by physicians.
“We’re not going to take risks with the life of the president of the United States,” he said.
“We started using this in the military in 1955,” Wilkie continued. “I’ve taken it. Everyone who’s served in the military since the Eisenhower administration has taken this regularly. We know its side effects, we know what it does and if we can offer hope to people, we’re going to continue to do that.”
On Wednesday, White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany also noted that the drug has a long, successful history.
“Hydroxychloroquine has been a drug that has been in use for 65 years for lupus, arthritis and malaria. It has a very good safety profile,” she said, according to a White House media pool report.
“The FDA has approved this for off-label use. You know, this president is a big believer in ‘Right to Try’ legislation.”
McEnany added that some media coverage of the drug has been over the top.
“But that being said, I’ve seen a lot of apoplectic coverage of hydroxychloroquine. You had Jimmy Kimmel saying the president is, quote, ‘trying to kill himself by taking it.’ You had Joe Scarborough saying, quote, ‘this will kill you.’ Neil Cavuto saying, ‘what have you got to lose? One thing you have to lose are lives.’ And you had Chris Cuomo saying, ‘the president knows that hydroxychloroquine is not supported by science. He knows it has been flagged by his own people and he’s using it.'”
“Well, Cuomo mocked the president for this. And interestingly, I found this out just before coming here: Hydroxychloroquine, of course, is an FDA-approved medication with a long-proven track record for safety. And it turns out that Chris Cuomo took a less safe version of it called quinine, which the FDA removed from the market in 2006 because of its serious side effects, including death,” McEnany went on.
“So really interesting to have that criticism of the president,” she said, noting that New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, the brother of the CNN journalist, has said he was optimistic that the drug would work.
When asked about studies on the drug, McEnany was ready with a reply.
“There are several studies that have been brought up that the president has actually mentioned that I’d refer you to. There was one out of France — a French study involving more than 1,000 patients that found that the vast majority had, quote, ‘good clinical outcomes.’ And by the vast majority, that was more than 90 percent,” she said.
“There was an Italian study of more than 65,000 patients that demonstrated only 20 tested positive of those who are taking it prophylactically. And a South Korea study, as well. So there are several studies.”
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-05-21--Watch: CNN’s Cuomo Fails To Question Brother on Nursing Home Deaths, Plays with Giant Swabs Instead

CNN host Chris Cuomo and his brother , New York Gov .
Andrew Cuomo , have a lot in common — as brothers often do .
In addition to being the affluent sons of late New York Gov .
Mario Cuomo , the two men are both liberal Democrats , they both criticize President Donald Trump and both have shown themselves to be public health risks amid the coronavirus pandemic .
The younger Cuomo , who we ’ ll refer to as Fredo in order to avoid confusion between the pair , showed little regard for his fellow New Yorkers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ after he was diagnosed with COVID-19 .
Fredo left his self-isolation to check on one of his upscale properties on Long Island with apparently little concern for spreading the disease to those around him .
While there are no confirmed cases linked directly to Fredo ’ s behavior , deciding to parade around his community while sick was without a doubt irresponsible .
TRENDING : While Celebrities Tell Americans 'We 're All in This Together , ' Pat Sajak Has a Different Message Andrew Cuomo , on the other hand , can potentially @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deaths in his state as he ordered nursing homes and long-term care facilities in New York to admit people diagnosed with the coronavirus , as the New York Post reported .
The result saw the disease spread like wildfire , and sadly , many of New York ’ s COVID-19 deaths came from extremely vulnerable people residing in those facilities .
More than 5,600 people have died in New York nursing homes , with nearly 3,000 of those are directly attributed to the coronavirus , while roughly 2,600 are presumed dead from the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , more than 22,000 people have died after contracting the coronavirus , according to Johns Hopkins .
But if you watch CNN and the Cuomos , it would be easy to get the impression that things have gone well for New Yorkers .
CNN has allowed the duo to make a mockery of both journalistic integrity and public health frequently since March by allowing Fredo to interview his governor brother on-air .
The men laugh like boys sharing bunk beds during their interviews , and of course the result is that Gov .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ and not the ineffectual leader he has proven himself to be amid his state ’ s coronavirus disaster .
But it was CNN ’ s latest on-air meet up between the brothers that displayed not only how little the network cares for holding pubic officials accountable , but also just how callous the Cuomos are with regard to how hard the coronavirus has hit New Yorkers .
In the latest installment of Cuomo vs. Cuomo Tuesday , the duo laughed and traded pleasantries as Fredo played with gigantic prop nasal swabs .
RELATED @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2019 Terrorist Attack in Rant on Hydroxychloroquine Fredo did not press his brother on the issues concerning health or reopening the economy and did not demand answers for all those nursing home deaths .
“ Now , you had video come out — before we go to break — where you wanted to encourage people to get tested and some people are afraid it ’ s going to hurt .
So , you had video of it that I want to show the audience of you actually getting tested .
Here it is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were kind of funny , and they were testing you , ” Fredo said .
CNN then aired a clip of Gov .
Cuomo being tested for the coronavirus .
“ First of all , is it true that when you are having the test administered , you inhaled and the doctor ’ s finger went all the way up your nose and got stuck and it had to be released with a tool ?
Is that true ?
Just to deal with the record ?
” Fredo asked in a less than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wanted to comment that I have a little button nose and she was afraid that the swab would actually hurt because it extended my nasal cavity , ” Gov .
Cuomo said .
Introducing a standard nasal swab used to test for the coronavirus , Fredo said : “ This is the normal swab I ’ m holding up here now for everybody at home — a very valuable object .
There ’ s only one company in the entire country that makes these , up in Maine .
All right ?
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as he and the governor could barely contain their laughter .
But Fredo wasn ’ t finished , as he soon introduced an even bigger nasal swab prop .
“ This was the actual swab that was being used to fit up that double-barrel shotgun that you have mounted on the front of your pretty face ?
” he joked .
The pair laughed hysterically , as if more than 22,000 people in the Empire State never died under Cuomo ’ s watch and all of those vulnerable people in long-term care facilities @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the governor ’ s incompetence .
New Yorkers deserve better than to have their governor cut up with his brother on national TV during a statewide emergency that has resulted in thousands of deaths , and frankly , CNN ’ s viewers deserve better than to have the network waste airtime on such a spectacle — especially as CNN continues to play up every negative story regarding the virus and then spin it as Trump ’ s fault .
If CNN is going to continually report on the severity of the coronavirus pandemic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s supposed poor response as a factor , then they don ’ t get to treat it with levity because one of their hosts is interviewing his Democratic brother .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

CNN host Chris Cuomo and his brother, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, have a lot in common — as brothers often do.
In addition to being the affluent sons of late New York Gov. Mario Cuomo, the two men are both liberal Democrats, they both criticize President Donald Trump and both have shown themselves to be public health risks amid the coronavirus pandemic.
The younger Cuomo, who we’ll refer to as Fredo in order to avoid confusion between the pair, showed little regard for his fellow New Yorkers when he broke his quarantine last month after he was diagnosed with COVID-19.
Fredo left his self-isolation to check on one of his upscale properties on Long Island with apparently little concern for spreading the disease to those around him.
While there are no confirmed cases linked directly to Fredo’s behavior, deciding to parade around his community while sick was without a doubt irresponsible.
Andrew Cuomo, on the other hand, can potentially be linked to thousands of cases and deaths in his state as he ordered nursing homes and long-term care facilities in New York to admit people diagnosed with the coronavirus, as the New York Post reported.
The result saw the disease spread like wildfire, and sadly, many of New York’s COVID-19 deaths came from extremely vulnerable people residing in those facilities.
More than 5,600 people have died in New York nursing homes, with nearly 3,000 of those are directly attributed to the coronavirus, while roughly 2,600 are presumed dead from the disease, Fox News reported.
Statewide, more than 22,000 people have died after contracting the coronavirus, according to Johns Hopkins.
Do you think New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo should be investigated for his decision to place COVID-19 patients in nursing homes? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 99% (1138 Votes) No: 1% (8 Votes)
But if you watch CNN and the Cuomos, it would be easy to get the impression that things have gone well for New Yorkers.
CNN has allowed the duo to make a mockery of both journalistic integrity and public health frequently since March by allowing Fredo to interview his governor brother on-air.
The men laugh like boys sharing bunk beds during their interviews, and of course the result is that Gov. Cuomo is portrayed as a likable guy and not the ineffectual leader he has proven himself to be amid his state’s coronavirus disaster.
But it was CNN’s latest on-air meet up between the brothers that displayed not only how little the network cares for holding pubic officials accountable, but also just how callous the Cuomos are with regard to how hard the coronavirus has hit New Yorkers.
In the latest installment of Cuomo vs. Cuomo Tuesday, the duo laughed and traded pleasantries as Fredo played with gigantic prop nasal swabs.
Fredo did not press his brother on the issues concerning health or reopening the economy and did not demand answers for all those nursing home deaths.
“Now, you had video come out — before we go to break — where you wanted to encourage people to get tested and some people are afraid it’s going to hurt. So, you had video of it that I want to show the audience of you actually getting tested. Here it is. There’s you. You were kind of funny, and they were testing you,” Fredo said.
CNN then aired a clip of Gov. Cuomo being tested for the coronavirus.
“First of all, is it true that when you are having the test administered, you inhaled and the doctor’s finger went all the way up your nose and got stuck and it had to be released with a tool? Is that true? Just to deal with the record?” Fredo asked in a less than hard-hitting question.
“No, she wanted to comment that I have a little button nose and she was afraid that the swab would actually hurt because it extended my nasal cavity,” Gov. Cuomo said.
Introducing a standard nasal swab used to test for the coronavirus, Fredo said: “This is the normal swab I’m holding up here now for everybody at home — a very valuable object. There’s only one company in the entire country that makes these, up in Maine. All right?”
Fredo then introduced an oversized cotton swab as he and the governor could barely contain their laughter.
But Fredo wasn’t finished, as he soon introduced an even bigger nasal swab prop.
“This was the actual swab that was being used to fit up that double-barrel shotgun that you have mounted on the front of your pretty face?” he joked.
The pair laughed hysterically, as if more than 22,000 people in the Empire State never died under Cuomo’s watch and all of those vulnerable people in long-term care facilities didn’t die alone due to the governor’s incompetence.
New Yorkers deserve better than to have their governor cut up with his brother on national TV during a statewide emergency that has resulted in thousands of deaths, and frankly, CNN’s viewers deserve better than to have the network waste airtime on such a spectacle — especially as CNN continues to play up every negative story regarding the virus and then spin it as Trump’s fault.
If CNN is going to continually report on the severity of the coronavirus pandemic and then cite the Trump administration’s supposed poor response as a factor, then they don’t get to treat it with levity because one of their hosts is interviewing his Democratic brother.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-05-21--Fire Department: Don’t Leave Hand Sanitizer in Your Vehicle on a Warm Day

Summer is coming — for some of us , the temperatures are already there .
With the onslaught of the heat , there are precautionary measures we know to take .
Don ’ t leave babies in the car .
Don ’ t leave pets in the car .
Don ’ t even leave plants or frozen food in the car — they ’ ll be ruined because nothing can survive the heat that gets magnified inside the car .
Watch out for mirrors , which might catch and focus the light and start a fire .
Don ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , too , might trap and focus the light , starting a fire .
While the conditions for a water-bottle-related fire have to be just right , it is possible — if not prevalent .
“ The conditions must be just right , ” Oklahoma ’ s Midwest City Fire Department spokesperson , David Richardson , told Today .
“ The bottle has to have liquid , the liquid has to be clear , the bottle has to be clear and sunlight has to pass through it at the right angle.
” TRENDING @ @ @ @ @ @ @ All in This Together , ' Pat Sajak Has a Different Message Of course , one easy way to avoid this danger while staying hydrated is to keep water in a container that is not clear and can not focus light into a fire-starting beam .
Now , with increased cleanliness measures , the Western Lakes Fire District in Wisconsin is warning people of a new potential danger : hand sanitizer .
“ Let ’ s start today with a little education !
” the department shared on Thursday .
“ We ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ water bottles being kept in your vehicle when the weather is warm.
” “ That still holds true and so does hand sanitizer !
By its nature , most hand sanitizer is alcohol-based and therefore flammable .
Keeping it in your car during hot weather , exposing it to sun causing magnification of light through the bottle — and particularly being next to open flame while smoking in vehicles or grilling while enjoying this weekend — can lead to disaster.
” “ Please respect the possibilities and be fire safe.
” Many people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ saying that it would be very unlikely for a bottle of hand sanitizer to combust as the temperature would have to be very high inside the car , so the fire district clarified their position .
“ You are correct that the car temperature would not have to reach 300 F , ” the department responded .
“ However , the interior of the container would which is very possible due to focused light through clear plastic .
This is the difference we are talking about.
” Others questioned the photo use , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ result of a window control switch malfunctioning and catching on fire .
When asked what the photo was of , the fire district confirmed that it was from a door panel fire , but that they see similar damage from smoking-related incidents .
It seems that while it would be very unlikely for a container of hand sanitizer to randomly combust , it is possible for it to act like a water bottle and burn the interior of a car , and it ’ s true that it ’ s a flammable substance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a fire or lit cigarette , could pose more of a problem than it ’ s meant to solve .
According to WPLG , there have been several recent incidents of people needing burn treatments on their hands because they used hand sanitizer and then got too close to an open flame — though you don ’ t even have to be that close for the sanitizer to catch on fire .
As always , it ’ s good to be aware of your surroundings and mindful of your actions , especially when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

UPDATE, May 26, 2020: After the publication of this article, the Western Lakes Fire District removed their post from Facebook. In their original post, WLFD linked to the National Fire Protection Association’s video, “Fire safety considerations for hand sanitizer.” The video describes how hand sanitizer is ignitable if met with a “viable ignition source,” but it does not mention the risk of car fires.
“For it to spontaneously combust with no other, external ignition source other than self-heating alone, you’d have to reach over 700 degrees F!” NFPA wrote in the comments section of the video.
This article has been updated to include the Facebook post with WLFD’s statement. The article appears as originally written.
Summer is coming — for some of us, the temperatures are already there. With the onslaught of the heat, there are precautionary measures we know to take.
Don’t leave babies in the car. Don’t leave pets in the car. Don’t even leave plants or frozen food in the car — they’ll be ruined because nothing can survive the heat that gets magnified inside the car.
Watch out for mirrors, which might catch and focus the light and start a fire. Don’t leave water bottles out, because they, too, might trap and focus the light, starting a fire.
While the conditions for a water-bottle-related fire have to be just right, it is possible — if not prevalent.
“The conditions must be just right,” Oklahoma’s Midwest City Fire Department spokesperson, David Richardson, told Today. “The bottle has to have liquid, the liquid has to be clear, the bottle has to be clear and sunlight has to pass through it at the right angle.”
Of course, one easy way to avoid this danger while staying hydrated is to keep water in a container that is not clear and cannot focus light into a fire-starting beam.
Now, with increased cleanliness measures, the Western Lakes Fire District in Wisconsin is warning people of a new potential danger: hand sanitizer.
“Let’s start today with a little education!” the department shared on Thursday. “We’ve chatted in the past about clear water bottles being kept in your vehicle when the weather is warm.”
Do you keep hand sanitizer in your car? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 62% (168 Votes) No: 38% (102 Votes)
“That still holds true and so does hand sanitizer! By its nature, most hand sanitizer is alcohol-based and therefore flammable. Keeping it in your car during hot weather, exposing it to sun causing magnification of light through the bottle — and particularly being next to open flame while smoking in vehicles or grilling while enjoying this weekend — can lead to disaster.”
“Please respect the possibilities and be fire safe.”
Many people in the comments contested the information, saying that it would be very unlikely for a bottle of hand sanitizer to combust as the temperature would have to be very high inside the car, so the fire district clarified their position.
“You are correct that the car temperature would not have to reach 300 F,” the department responded. “However, the interior of the container would which is very possible due to focused light through clear plastic. This is the difference we are talking about.”
Others questioned the photo use, claiming that it looked more like the result of a window control switch malfunctioning and catching on fire. When asked what the photo was of, the fire district confirmed that it was from a door panel fire, but that they see similar damage from smoking-related incidents.
It seems that while it would be very unlikely for a container of hand sanitizer to randomly combust, it is possible for it to act like a water bottle and burn the interior of a car, and it’s true that it’s a flammable substance which, if exposed to flame through a fire or lit cigarette, could pose more of a problem than it’s meant to solve.
According to WPLG, there have been several recent incidents of people needing burn treatments on their hands because they used hand sanitizer and then got too close to an open flame — though you don’t even have to be that close for the sanitizer to catch on fire.
As always, it’s good to be aware of your surroundings and mindful of your actions, especially when using a substance that could ignite.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-05-21--Op-Ed: U.S. Resumes World Leadership on Legal Protection for the Unborn

In a highly commendable initiative to restore prenatal protection for every child , the United States has taken back international leadership from an ideologically corrupted United Nations bureaucracy .
USAID ’ s Monday letter to António Guterres , secretary-general of the U.N. , requested that the organization remove abortion provisions from its global coronavirus emergency plan .
“ The United States stands with nations that have pledged to protect the unborn , ” the letter read .
From the start of the post-World War II human rights movement , it was universally agreed that neither governments nor individuals may derogate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to life that inheres in every human being .
Any exception from a nonderogable right is inadmissible under the provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights .
Article 4 stipulates that no state may derogate from protecting the right to life even in times of “ public emergency.
” TRENDING : While Celebrities Tell Americans 'We 're All in This Together , ' Pat Sajak Has a Different Message Certainly , the U.N. has no authority to facilitate prenatal killing , not even in a coronavirus emergency .
U.N .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Protection , Before as Well as After Birth ” The U.S. remains a party to the foundational universal human rights instruments which formally recognized the right to legal protection for every child “ before as well as after birth.
” ( This recognition is verified through the historical context and analysis of the text of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in “ Human Rights and the Unborn Child.
” ) The application of each principle set out in the Universal Declaration ( 1948 ) was debated thoroughly by U.N. delegations including a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ delegates .
In the Declaration on the Rights of the Child ( 1959 ) , the U.S. went on to reach a formal agreement that “ the child , by reason of his physical and mental immaturity , needs special safeguards and care , including appropriate legal protection , before as well as after birth … the need for such special safeguards has been … recognized in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
” Furthermore , in the drafting of the Right to Life Article 6 of the International Covenant , the only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ exception to the right to life occurred in the Working Group ’ s 2nd Session ( 1947 ) .
It was put to a vote in the Commission on Human Rights and was resoundingly defeated with U.S. leadership .
A principle was adopted in which the only exception to the unlawfulness of deprivation of life was to be in the execution of the sentence of a court following a conviction of a crime for which the penalty is provided by law .
The Travaux Préparatoires ( drafting history ) of the first human @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in modern international human rights law revealed that U.S. delegates were dominantly engaged in negotiating the agreed-upon texts .
RELATED : OB-GYN Who Knew McCorvey Has Very Different Story Than One the Media 's Promoting These were never principles arbitrarily imposed on the U.S. but principles negotiated in good faith , painstakingly drafted and freely agreed upon and adopted by successive U.S. delegations with the full authority of U.S. governments legitimately elected by the U.S. people .
We all understand that under U.S. domestic law , treaties , like statutes , must meet @ @ @ @ @ @ @ treaty provision may have the force of law if it conflicts with the Constitution .
( Reid v. Covert , 1957 ) But logically , we understand too that all the treaty provisions concerning protection for every child must have met U.S. constitutional requirements since no reservation was introduced to exclude a child before birth from legal protection on the grounds that such protection conflicted with the U.S. Constitution .
To Save the Life of “ The Innocent Unborn Child ” After World War II and before the precipitous rise of the sexual @ @ @ @ @ @ @ U.S. honored the principle that every human being without exception is entitled to equal protection of the law .
In the 1947-48 negotiations of the Universal Declaration , one of the first things agreed upon by the U.S. and the other members of the international community was that the “ innocent unborn child ” was to be legally protected .
The ICCPR drafting history recorded repeatedly that protection of the law is to be “ extended to all unborn children.
” One of the chief drafters , René Cassin , articulated the principle @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recognition everywhere as a person before the law ” and urged its incorporation as Article 6 of the Universal Declaration .
Cassin was an eminent French jurist and Zionist who himself had suffered the loss of 39 family members in Nazi concentration camps .
He convinced the drafting committee that they must start with “ the fundamental principle of the unity of the human race ” precisely because Hitler had started his killing programs “ by asserting the inequality ” of selected human beings deemed socially unwanted .
One hundred and thirty years @ @ @ @ @ @ @ laid down that very same principle of inclusion : “ The words ‘ any person or persons ’ … comprehend every human being … the whole human race.
” ( United States v. Palmer , 1818 ) Regrettably , a disconnect emerged between what was promised by the U.S. in reforming international law after the World War II sacrifices made by soldiers , sailors and airmen in the forties and what was reneged on in domestic law by the Supreme Court in the seventies .
The solemnly promised universal protection for all members @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Roe v. Wade in 1973 with its contemptible theory that the unborn child is not a “ whole ” person .
Eleanor Roosevelt and the Concept of Juridical Personality In 1947-48 , Eleanor Roosevelt chaired the drafting committee debate on Article 6 of the Universal Declaration .
In 1949 , she recalled vividly the deliberations leading to universal recognition of the injustice of denying juridical personality to any human being : “ His [ Cassin ’ s ] suggestion was that we have an article that would read in French , ‘ Personne @ @ @ @ @ @ @ juridique , ’ and I , without any legal knowledge , translated it into English as “ No one shall be deprived of their juridical personality.
” “ Well , I didn ’ t know what I had started .
Behind my back , where lawyers sit from the departments in Washington , there was a storm .
They all said , ‘ There is no such expression as “ juridical personality ” in English or American law.
’ And all the United Kingdom gentlemen who were lawyers put their heads together and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ me .
So I knew that I hadn ’ t gotten the right word .
Behind my back they kept arguing , saying what it means is ‘ without due process of law , ’ but how do you say it ?
Well , it took a long while to argue that out and finally one day one of my Department of Justice youngish lawyers handed me a piece of paper and said , ‘ You can accept the translation “ juridical personality ” — it was once used in American law.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was used ?
It was used in the Dred Scott case when Justice Taney said ‘ a slave has no juridical personality.
’ So I accepted it.
” Universal Declaration Borrowed from the American Declaration of Independence The Universal Declaration , borrowing from the American Declaration of Independence , begins : “ [ R ] ecognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom , justice and peace in the world.
” This was recognized at the time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which was independent of the existence of the United Nations and had an intrinsic value of its own.
” The drafters of the Universal Declaration , in fact , drew heavily on the American Founders ’ understanding of self-evident truths and inalienable rights .
Indeed , for a short time , post-World War II and pre-Cold War , in a moment of grace and honesty and goodwill , the nations of our troubled world did unite to recognize human rights protection for “ all without distinction.
” Led by the United States @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the equal and inalienable human rights of every human being without exception .
Well done , United States of America !
Now come on — do it again !
The views expressed in this opinion article are those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by the owners of this website .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

In a highly commendable initiative to restore prenatal protection for every child, the United States has taken back international leadership from an ideologically corrupted United Nations bureaucracy.
USAID’s Monday letter to António Guterres, secretary-general of the U.N., requested that the organization remove abortion provisions from its global coronavirus emergency plan.
“The United States stands with nations that have pledged to protect the unborn,” the letter read.
From the start of the post-World War II human rights movement, it was universally agreed that neither governments nor individuals may derogate from the protection of the inalienable right to life that inheres in every human being. Any exception from a nonderogable right is inadmissible under the provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
Article 4 stipulates that no state may derogate from protecting the right to life even in times of “public emergency.”
Certainly, the U.N. has no authority to facilitate prenatal killing, not even in a coronavirus emergency.
U.N. Member States Promised Every Child “Legal Protection, Before as Well as After Birth”
The U.S. remains a party to the foundational universal human rights instruments which formally recognized the right to legal protection for every child “before as well as after birth.” (This recognition is verified through the historical context and analysis of the text of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in “Human Rights and the Unborn Child.”)
The application of each principle set out in the Universal Declaration (1948) was debated thoroughly by U.N. delegations including a large contingent of capable and intelligent U.S. delegates.
In the Declaration on the Rights of the Child (1959), the U.S. went on to reach a formal agreement that “the child, by reason of his physical and mental immaturity, needs special safeguards and care, including appropriate legal protection, before as well as after birth … the need for such special safeguards has been … recognized in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.”
Furthermore, in the drafting of the Right to Life Article 6 of the International Covenant, the only recorded attempt to introduce abortion as an exception to the right to life occurred in the Working Group’s 2nd Session (1947). It was put to a vote in the Commission on Human Rights and was resoundingly defeated with U.S. leadership.
A principle was adopted in which the only exception to the unlawfulness of deprivation of life was to be in the execution of the sentence of a court following a conviction of a crime for which the penalty is provided by law.
U.S. Leadership in Post-World War II International Human Rights
The Travaux Préparatoires (drafting history) of the first human rights conventions that codified the founding principles in modern international human rights law revealed that U.S. delegates were dominantly engaged in negotiating the agreed-upon texts.
These were never principles arbitrarily imposed on the U.S. but principles negotiated in good faith, painstakingly drafted and freely agreed upon and adopted by successive U.S. delegations with the full authority of U.S. governments legitimately elected by the U.S. people.
We all understand that under U.S. domestic law, treaties, like statutes, must meet the Constitution’s requirements; no treaty provision may have the force of law if it conflicts with the Constitution. (Reid v. Covert, 1957)
But logically, we understand too that all the treaty provisions concerning protection for every child must have met U.S. constitutional requirements since no reservation was introduced to exclude a child before birth from legal protection on the grounds that such protection conflicted with the U.S. Constitution.
To Save the Life of “The Innocent Unborn Child”
After World War II and before the precipitous rise of the sexual revolution’s discordant values, the U.S. honored the principle that every human being without exception is entitled to equal protection of the law.
In the 1947-48 negotiations of the Universal Declaration, one of the first things agreed upon by the U.S. and the other members of the international community was that the “innocent unborn child” was to be legally protected.
The ICCPR drafting history recorded repeatedly that protection of the law is to be “extended to all unborn children.”
One of the chief drafters, René Cassin, articulated the principle that “everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law” and urged its incorporation as Article 6 of the Universal Declaration. Cassin was an eminent French jurist and Zionist who himself had suffered the loss of 39 family members in Nazi concentration camps. He convinced the drafting committee that they must start with “the fundamental principle of the unity of the human race” precisely because Hitler had started his killing programs “by asserting the inequality” of selected human beings deemed socially unwanted.
One hundred and thirty years earlier, the U.S. Supreme Court had laid down that very same principle of inclusion:
“The words ‘any person or persons’ … comprehend every human being … the whole human race.” (United States v. Palmer, 1818)
Regrettably, a disconnect emerged between what was promised by the U.S. in reforming international law after the World War II sacrifices made by soldiers, sailors and airmen in the forties and what was reneged on in domestic law by the Supreme Court in the seventies.
The solemnly promised universal protection for all members of the human family was trashed by Roe v. Wade in 1973 with its contemptible theory that the unborn child is not a “whole” person.
Eleanor Roosevelt and the Concept of Juridical Personality
In 1947-48, Eleanor Roosevelt chaired the drafting committee debate on Article 6 of the Universal Declaration.
In 1949, she recalled vividly the deliberations leading to universal recognition of the injustice of denying juridical personality to any human being:
“His [Cassin’s] suggestion was that we have an article that would read in French, ‘Personne ne doit être privé de sa personalité juridique,’ and I, without any legal knowledge, translated it into English as “No one shall be deprived of their juridical personality.” “Well, I didn’t know what I had started. Behind my back, where lawyers sit from the departments in Washington, there was a storm. They all said, ‘There is no such expression as “juridical personality” in English or American law.’ And all the United Kingdom gentlemen who were lawyers put their heads together and said ‘No’ very firmly at me. So I knew that I hadn’t gotten the right word. Behind my back they kept arguing, saying what it means is ‘without due process of law,’ but how do you say it? Well, it took a long while to argue that out and finally one day one of my Department of Justice youngish lawyers handed me a piece of paper and said, ‘You can accept the translation “juridical personality” — it was once used in American law.” “And when do you think it was used? It was used in the Dred Scott case when Justice Taney said ‘a slave has no juridical personality.’ So I accepted it.”
Universal Declaration Borrowed from the American Declaration of Independence
The Universal Declaration, borrowing from the American Declaration of Independence, begins: “[R]ecognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world.” This was recognized at the time as “a statement of general principle, which was independent of the existence of the United Nations and had an intrinsic value of its own.”
The drafters of the Universal Declaration, in fact, drew heavily on the American Founders’ understanding of self-evident truths and inalienable rights.
Indeed, for a short time, post-World War II and pre-Cold War, in a moment of grace and honesty and goodwill, the nations of our troubled world did unite to recognize human rights protection for “all without distinction.”
Led by the United States, sovereign nations joined together to recognize the equal and inalienable human rights of every human being without exception.
Well done, United States of America! Now come on — do it again!
The views expressed in this opinion article are those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by the owners of this website. If you are interested in contributing an Op-Ed to The Western Journal, you can learn about our submission guidelines and process here.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-05-21--City That Voted for Obama Twice Just Voted 3 Democrats Out of Office

Polls being touted by the establishment media are telling us the presidential race is all but over , and that presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden is destined to sit in the Oval Office .
According to a Quinnipiac poll released Wednesday , President Donald Trump had better be ready to pack it up and head to Mar-a-Lago for an extended vacation .
The poll indicates Biden holds an 11-point advantage over Trump nationally .
Biden leads the president 50 percent to Trump ’ s 39 percent , with fewer than six months until the November election .
An ABC News @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Clinton with a 12-point lead over Trump just weeks before the election .
TRENDING : While Celebrities Tell Americans 'We 're All in This Together , ' Pat Sajak Has a Different Message Clinton led in the poll 50 percent to Trump ’ s 38 percent .
We all know how that turned out , and yet here we find ourselves , four years later , with polls purporting to show a blue wave on the horizon .
But , what is happening on the ground is telling a very different story than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a preview of the coming 2020 election .
Republicans , despite the disastrous polling , are winning races across the country .
Mike Garcia , a Republican endorsed by Trump , flipped California ’ s 25th Congressional District last week , several months after Democratic Rep. Katie Hill resigned in disgrace .
Tom Tiffany , another Trump-backed candidate , won Wisconsin ’ s Seventh Congressional District , fighting back Democrats hoping to take the seat following the resignation of former GOP Rep. Sean Duffy .
And now we turn to Northern Virginia , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the polls this week and sent incumbent Democrats packing in an apparent referendum on far-left Gov .
Ralph Northam and other state and local Democrats .
Republicans showed up in large numbers , and now three Democratic incumbents on the city council are out of a job in the city of Staunton , according to the Daily Caller .
The community , which twice voted for former President Barack Obama , ousted Democrats Erik Curren , Ophie Kier and James Harrington .
Republicans Mark Robertson , Amy Darby and Steve Claffey will replace @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to WHSV , while incumbent Republican Andrea Oakes won re-election — allowing conservative candidates to sweep the city council electoral contests and giving Republicans a majority on the council .
Voters in the neighboring city of Waynesboro also elected two Republicans , Lana Williams and Bruce Allen , which gives that city council a Republican majority as well .
Chris Graham , writing for the area outlet the Augusta Free Press , noted the shocking election results in Staunton , where the three incumbent Democrats nearly doubled their overall vote total from 2016 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
According to Graham , Democrats turned out in unusually large numbers , but Republicans brought on a tidal wave .
“ Staunton City Council incumbents Ophie Kier , James Harrington and Erik Curren all outperformed their 2016 vote totals in their 2020 re-election runs , ” he wrote .
“ Democrats got their voters out better than they have in a May cycle in years , ” Graham wrote .
“ Republicans got turnout more akin to , not quite a presidential year , but approaching gubernatorial.
” “ A city that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voted for Hillary Clinton , voted for Terry McAuliffe and Ralph Northam , even gave a solid majority to Jennifer Lewis in her 2018 congressional run against Ben Cline , is now controlled by Republicans , ” Graham added , “ I ’ m rarely shocked by something that happens in politics , but I have to admit , I didn ’ t see this one happening.
” As lawmakers in Virginia have threatened civil liberties , first with gun-grabbing proposals and now with prolonged draconian lockdowns amid the coronavirus , voters in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ The conservative slates in both cities ran as a unit and highlighted the Second Amendment as a key issue in their campaigns , ” Graham wrote .
“ Bottom line is that the strategies worked , flipping both from D to R , but the change in Staunton is stunning almost beyond words.
” Those in Virginia join Californians and Wisconsinites in sending a similar message to Democrats , and all in the same month .
Voters have stood up for their rights during a time when Democrats have shown us @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
National polls tell us it ’ s time to start writing a eulogy for the Republican Party .
The reality seems to be that Republicans are energized from coast to coast , and they are ready to stand against Democrats and the tyrannical big government overreach that liberals support .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

Polls being touted by the establishment media are telling us the presidential race is all but over, and that presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden is destined to sit in the Oval Office.
According to a Quinnipiac poll released Wednesday, President Donald Trump had better be ready to pack it up and head to Mar-a-Lago for an extended vacation.
The poll indicates Biden holds an 11-point advantage over Trump nationally. Biden leads the president 50 percent to Trump’s 39 percent, with fewer than six months until the November election.
Sound familiar? It should.
An ABC News tracking poll from October 2016 showed Hillary Clinton with a 12-point lead over Trump just weeks before the election.
Clinton led in the poll 50 percent to Trump’s 38 percent.
We all know how that turned out, and yet here we find ourselves, four years later, with polls purporting to show a blue wave on the horizon.
But, what is happening on the ground is telling a very different story than polling, and it could also be a preview of the coming 2020 election.
Republicans, despite the disastrous polling, are winning races across the country.
Do you think President Trump will win re-election in 2020? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 99% (3527 Votes) No: 1% (28 Votes)
Mike Garcia, a Republican endorsed by Trump, flipped California’s 25th Congressional District last week, several months after Democratic Rep. Katie Hill resigned in disgrace.
Tom Tiffany, another Trump-backed candidate, won Wisconsin’s Seventh Congressional District, fighting back Democrats hoping to take the seat following the resignation of former GOP Rep. Sean Duffy.
And now we turn to Western Virginia, where voters in two communities took to the polls this week and sent incumbent Democrats packing in an apparent referendum on far-left Gov. Ralph Northam and other state and local Democrats.
Republicans showed up in large numbers, and now three Democratic incumbents on the city council are out of a job in the city of Staunton, according to the Daily Caller.
The community, which twice voted for former President Barack Obama, ousted Democrats Erik Curren, Ophie Kier and James Harrington.
Republicans Mark Robertson, Amy Darby and Steve Claffey will replace the Democrats on the council, according to WHSV, while incumbent Republican Andrea Oakes won re-election — allowing conservative candidates to sweep the city council electoral contests and giving Republicans a majority on the council.
Voters in the neighboring city of Waynesboro also elected two Republicans, Lana Williams and Bruce Allen, which gives that city council a Republican majority as well.
Chris Graham, writing for the area outlet the Augusta Free Press, noted the shocking election results in Staunton, where the three incumbent Democrats nearly doubled their overall vote total from 2016, yet still all managed to lose.
According to Graham, Democrats turned out in unusually large numbers, but Republicans brought on a tidal wave.
“Staunton City Council incumbents Ophie Kier, James Harrington and Erik Curren all outperformed their 2016 vote totals in their 2020 re-election runs,” he wrote.
“Democrats got their voters out better than they have in a May cycle in years,” Graham wrote. “Republicans got turnout more akin to, not quite a presidential year, but approaching gubernatorial.”
“A city that voted for Barack Obama, twice, voted for Hillary Clinton, voted for Terry McAuliffe and Ralph Northam, even gave a solid majority to Jennifer Lewis in her 2018 congressional run against Ben Cline, is now controlled by Republicans,” Graham added,
“I’m rarely shocked by something that happens in politics, but I have to admit, I didn’t see this one happening.”
As lawmakers in Virginia have threatened civil liberties, first with gun-grabbing proposals and now with prolonged draconian lockdowns amid the coronavirus, voters in a Democratic stronghold sent a strong message.
“The conservative slates in both cities ran as a unit and highlighted the Second Amendment as a key issue in their campaigns,” Graham wrote.
“Bottom line is that the strategies worked, flipping both from D to R, but the change in Staunton is stunning almost beyond words.”
Those in Virginia join Californians and Wisconsinites in sending a similar message to Democrats, and all in the same month.
Voters have stood up for their rights during a time when Democrats have shown us just how vulnerable those rights can be.
National polls tell us it’s time to start writing a eulogy for the Republican Party.
The reality seems to be that Republicans are energized from coast to coast, and they are ready to stand against Democrats and the tyrannical big government overreach that liberals support.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-05-21--Colorado Makes Huge Change in Number of COVID Deaths, Raises Questions About Mortality Rate

Colorado has implemented a critical change to the way it counts COVID-19 deaths , lowering the state ’ s coronavirus death toll from more than 1,000 to 878 as of May 9 .
The state ’ s Department of Public Health and Environment altered the data amid criticism that it had inflated COVID death numbers , KDVR-TV in Denver reported Friday .
“ We have been reporting at the state , deaths among people who had COVID-19 at the time of death and the cause of that death may or may not have been COVID-19 , ” Dr. Eric France @ @ @ @ @ @ @ medical officer , told the station .
There had been an uproar of concern over inconsistent COVID death counts coming from Colorado citizens across the state .
“ We started to hear stories about , ‘ Are these correct or are these incorrect ? '
” France said .
TRENDING : While Celebrities Tell Americans 'We 're All in This Together , ' Pat Sajak Has a Different Message It raises a question : If people were not so adamant in questioning the CDPHE numbers , would the false information have continued to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s Office questioned the state ’ s claims about certain deaths .
In one instance , coroner George Deavers determined a man had died May 4 from acute alcohol poisoning — his blood-alcohol level was almost twice the minimum lethal level at 0.55 .
To Deavers ’ surprise , before he signed the death certificate , the CDPHE had already added the man ’ s death to Colorado ’ s COVID-19 death toll .
“ They should have to be recording the same way I do .
They have to go off @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as such , ” Deavers told KCNC-TV in Denver .
He is just one of many medical professionals who have spoken out against what they said was false medical reporting .
“ The state is reporting that death as a COVID death , but our health department wanted to let people know that even though the person did have the virus , they did not die from it , ” Montezuma County public information officer Vicki Shaffer told The Durango Herald .
“ Having these two systems in place has potentially created some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” said Dr. Rachel Herlihy , Colorado state epidemiologist , only after the disturbing facts were brought to light .
The state also claimed that ” it does not unilaterally change information on death certificates and does not question or try to change a physician ’ s diagnosis or causes-of-death determination.
” RELATED : Watch : CNN 's Cuomo Fails To Question Brother on Nursing Home Deaths , Plays with Giant Swabs Instead Well , Deavers ’ and the state ’ s claims are awfully conflicting .
There has been widespread criticism @ @ @ @ @ @ @ handling of the virus , but some were glad to see his somewhat pointed response to his health leadership .
“ What the people of Colorado want to know is not who died with COVID-19 , but who died of COVID-19 , ” Polis said during a news conference on May 15 .
“ The numbers are very close , of course , ” he said .
“ There ’ s only a few cases that we ’ re aware of where there is some gray area .
But where there is a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — for reporting — the numbers that come from the physician or the coroner that actually addressed the patient or inspected the body.
” Other state politicians , including Republican Rep. Mark Baisley , want an investigation into whether the CDPHE reported false deaths at a Centennial senior living center as coronavirus deaths , along with the mislabeled alcohol poisoning death .
“ Falsely inflating the number of deaths due to COVID-19 adversely impacts the professional reputation of nursing homes , hospitals and healthcare workers while creating undue fear for families , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Judicial District Attorney George Brauchler .
His accused Jill Ryan , executive director of the CDPHE , of possibly “ falsely altering death certificates.
” Polis said the effort to hold the CDPHE accountable was “ completely inappropriate.
” However , when a government agency is found to be deceptive over and over again , whether accidental or otherwise , I find it not only extremely appropriate but also prudent to get to the truth .
If life-altering policies are being created based on these numbers , then having accurate numbers reported is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ being inflated or undercounted , the repercussions could be serious .
Colorado is not alone in lowering COVID-19 death counts .
Other states , including Pennsylvania and New Jersey , also have had to remove deaths from their tallies .
The data should be straightforward , but they have been shown not to be in a growing number of cases .
And why is this ?
That is the multitrillion-dollar question at this point .
What do inflated COVID deaths give politicians and top organizations ?
Power to control the narratives , societal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people ’ s lives .
The establishment media has been filled with leftists claiming the virus would potentially kill us all .
Now that this hype is being tampered down by instances of states lowering numbers , their fear-mongering narrative isn ’ t quite as effective .
This is positive news with our country opening back up .
Colorado ’ s lowered coronavirus tally shows us that if more states follow suit , national mortality rates could be significantly reduced as well .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .

Colorado has implemented a critical change to the way it counts COVID-19 deaths, lowering the state’s coronavirus death toll from more than 1,000 to 878 as of May 9.
The state’s Department of Public Health and Environment altered the data amid criticism that it had inflated COVID death numbers, KDVR-TV in Denver reported Friday.
“We have been reporting at the state, deaths among people who had COVID-19 at the time of death and the cause of that death may or may not have been COVID-19,” Dr. Eric France, the health department’s chief medical officer, told the station.
There had been an uproar of concern over inconsistent COVID death counts coming from Colorado citizens across the state.
“We started to hear stories about, ‘Are these correct or are these incorrect?'” France said.
It raises a question: If people were not so adamant in questioning the CDPHE numbers, would the false information have continued to be pushed?
Medical professionals also raised doubts about Colorado’s mortality count.
The Montezuma County Coroner’s Office questioned the state’s claims about certain deaths. In one instance, coroner George Deavers determined a man had died May 4 from acute alcohol poisoning — his blood-alcohol level was almost twice the minimum lethal level at 0.55.
To Deavers’ surprise, before he signed the death certificate, the CDPHE had already added the man’s death to Colorado’s COVID-19 death toll.
Should other states start to question COVID-19 death numbers? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 100% (628 Votes) No: 0% (2 Votes)
“They should have to be recording the same way I do. They have to go off the truth and facts and list it as such,” Deavers told KCNC-TV in Denver.
He is just one of many medical professionals who have spoken out against what they said was false medical reporting.
“The state is reporting that death as a COVID death, but our health department wanted to let people know that even though the person did have the virus, they did not die from it,” Montezuma County public information officer Vicki Shaffer told The Durango Herald.
“Having these two systems in place has potentially created some confusion, and we apologize for that,” said Dr. Rachel Herlihy, Colorado state epidemiologist, only after the disturbing facts were brought to light.
The state also claimed that ” it does not unilaterally change information on death certificates and does not question or try to change a physician’s diagnosis or causes-of-death determination.”
Well, Deavers’ and the state’s claims are awfully conflicting.
There has been widespread criticism of Democratic Gov. Jared Polis’ handling of the virus, but some were glad to see his somewhat pointed response to his health leadership.
“What the people of Colorado want to know is not who died with COVID-19, but who died of COVID-19,” Polis said during a news conference on May 15.
“The numbers are very close, of course,” he said. “There’s only a few cases that we’re aware of where there is some gray area. But where there is a gray area, we should always use — for reporting — the numbers that come from the physician or the coroner that actually addressed the patient or inspected the body.”
Other state politicians, including Republican Rep. Mark Baisley, want an investigation into whether the CDPHE reported false deaths at a Centennial senior living center as coronavirus deaths, along with the mislabeled alcohol poisoning death.
“Falsely inflating the number of deaths due to COVID-19 adversely impacts the professional reputation of nursing homes, hospitals and healthcare workers while creating undue fear for families,” Baisley wrote in a letter to 18th Judicial District Attorney George Brauchler.
His accused Jill Ryan, executive director of the CDPHE, of possibly “falsely altering death certificates.”
Polis said the effort to hold the CDPHE accountable was “completely inappropriate.”
However, when a government agency is found to be deceptive over and over again, whether accidental or otherwise, I find it not only extremely appropriate but also prudent to get to the truth.
If life-altering policies are being created based on these numbers, then having accurate numbers reported is beyond critical. Whether the figures are being inflated or undercounted, the repercussions could be serious.
Colorado is not alone in lowering COVID-19 death counts. Other states, including Pennsylvania and New Jersey, also have had to remove deaths from their tallies.
The data should be straightforward, but they have been shown not to be in a growing number of cases. And why is this? That is the multitrillion-dollar question at this point.
What do inflated COVID deaths give politicians and top organizations? Power to control the narratives, societal procedures and ultimately almost every aspect of people’s lives.
The establishment media has been filled with leftists claiming the virus would potentially kill us all. Now that this hype is being tampered down by instances of states lowering numbers, their fear-mongering narrative isn’t quite as effective.
This is positive news with our country opening back up.
Colorado’s lowered coronavirus tally shows us that if more states follow suit, national mortality rates could be significantly reduced as well.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-05-21--Watch Biden Get Away with Comparing Trump Taking Prescription to Telling People To Inject Bleach

We ’ ve been told , over and over again , how irresponsible President Trump is for touting hydroxychloroquine as a potential agent to aid in COVID-19 recovery .
That hyperventilating began anew this week when the president announced he was taking the controversial drug to prevent infection by the novel coronavirus .
Last month , the FDA pointed out the potential side effects of the drug .
“ Hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine can cause abnormal heart rhythms such as QT interval prolongation and a dangerously rapid heart rate called ventricular tachycardia , ” a notice from the agency read .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ associated with the use of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine for COVID-19 and communicate publicly when we have more information.
” In a news briefing Monday , Trump said he asked his White House doctor about taking the drug , and the two discussed the potential risks and benefits of doing so .
TRENDING : While Celebrities Tell Americans 'We 're All in This Together , ' Pat Sajak Has a Different Message “ I asked him , ‘ What do you think ?
’ He said , ‘ Well , if you ’ d @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Yeah , I ’ d like it .
I ’ d like to take it , ’ ” he said .
“ After numerous discussions he and I had regarding the evidence for and against the use of hydroxychloroquine , we concluded the potential benefit from treatment outweighed the relevant risks , ” Trump ’ s physician , Sean Conley , confirmed in a statement .
So of course , presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden popped his head out of his Wilmington , Delaware , basement this week for a town hall @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the president ’ s use of hydroxychloroquine .
As is his wont , however , he took a softball question involving something that apparently made the president look bad and somehow made himself look worse .
When asked about his thoughts on the president modeling what some doctors believe to be “ risky medical behavior in front of the American people ” by taking hydroxychloroquine , Biden responded , “ It ’ s like saying maybe if you injected Clorox into your blood , it may cure you.
” “ Come on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ What is he doing ?
What in God ’ s name is he doing ?
” Though somewhat unclear ( no surprise there ) , it seemed as though Biden was trying to reference an obviously sarcastic remark the president made some time ago about injecting disinfectant into one ’ s veins to kill the coronavirus .
Late night has certainly done enough on this one and those are actually trained comedians — as opposed to Biden , who tells jokes and watches them fall like wounded birds .
RELATED : Actor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with Response to 'Morbidly Obese ' Insult The rest of the discussion on the topic seemed to involve Biden talking down the drug as if it were completely untested , with Biden appearing to ignore the fact that Trump obtained a prescription from a doctor to begin doing so .
“ The words of a president matter , ” Biden said .
“ You heard the vice president today or yesterday say ‘ I ’ m not using it .
I ’ m not using it.
’ The vice president of the United @ @ @ @ @ @ @ irresponsible .
There ’ s no serious medical person out there saying to use that drug .
It ’ s counterproductive .
It ’ s not going to help , but the president , he decided that ’ s an answer.
” This is interesting on a number of levels , only one of which I ’ ll go into here : namely , that hydroxychloroquine is the 132nd most prescribed medicine in the United States as of 2018 , according to a study published in Pharmacy : Journal of Pharmacy Education and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there are potential side effects ?
Of course , particularly its potentiality to cause a dangerous arrhythmia known as QT interval prolongation which can cause sudden death .
It ’ s also not the only drug that does this .
That said , the risks can be managed — as evinced by the fact it remains the 132nd-most prescribed drug in America .
But , according to Biden , it ’ s absolutely unsafe : “ Look at the studies that have been done .
It does much more harm than good .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ said .
As most of the rest of this clip was , this wasn ’ t necessarily true .
Studies have been contradictory and , if hydroxychloroquine is to be effective , it ’ s unclear when it needs to be given .
But then again , Biden ’ s a doctor , right ?
He ’ s the voice of reason in the room .
As opposed to the other guy , the one who ’ s not comparing a prescription of hydroxychloroquine to suggesting people inject Clorox .
As Biden says @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of a president matter ” and the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee is making precisely the opposite point he wants to be making — and yet , he needn ’ t worry about this .
After all , did you hear about this one ?
Will anyone else ?
This clip doesn ’ t sound too hot , so it was basically memory-holed once Tuesday was over .
In fact , it ’ ll get far less play in the media than the fact the president decided to take hydroxychloroquine for prophylactic reasons .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ all , I don ’ t know what will .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

We’ve been told, over and over again, how irresponsible President Trump is for touting hydroxychloroquine as a potential agent to aid in COVID-19 recovery. That hyperventilating began anew this week when the president announced he was taking the controversial drug to prevent infection by the novel coronavirus.
Last month, the FDA pointed out the potential side effects of the drug.
“Hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine can cause abnormal heart rhythms such as QT interval prolongation and a dangerously rapid heart rate called ventricular tachycardia,” a notice from the agency read.
“We will continue to investigate risks associated with the use of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine for COVID-19 and communicate publicly when we have more information.”
In a news briefing Monday, Trump said he asked his White House doctor about taking the drug, and the two discussed the potential risks and benefits of doing so.
“I asked him, ‘What do you think?’ He said, ‘Well, if you’d like it.’ I said, ‘Yeah, I’d like it. I’d like to take it,’” he said.
“After numerous discussions he and I had regarding the evidence for and against the use of hydroxychloroquine, we concluded the potential benefit from treatment outweighed the relevant risks,” Trump’s physician, Sean Conley, confirmed in a statement.
So of course, presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden popped his head out of his Wilmington, Delaware, basement this week for a town hall to talk about, among other things, the president’s use of hydroxychloroquine.
As is his wont, however, he took a softball question involving something that apparently made the president look bad and somehow made himself look worse.
Could hydroxychloroquine be a promising treatment for coronavirus? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 98% (2269 Votes) No: 2% (35 Votes)
When asked about his thoughts on the president modeling what some doctors believe to be “risky medical behavior in front of the American people” by taking hydroxychloroquine, Biden responded, “It’s like saying maybe if you injected Clorox into your blood, it may cure you.”
“Come on, man,” he continued. “What is he doing? What in God’s name is he doing?”
Though somewhat unclear (no surprise there), it seemed as though Biden was trying to reference an obviously sarcastic remark the president made some time ago about injecting disinfectant into one’s veins to kill the coronavirus.
Late night has certainly done enough on this one and those are actually trained comedians — as opposed to Biden, who tells jokes and watches them fall like wounded birds.
The rest of the discussion on the topic seemed to involve Biden talking down the drug as if it were completely untested, with Biden appearing to ignore the fact that Trump obtained a prescription from a doctor to begin doing so.
“The words of a president matter,” Biden said. “You heard the vice president today or yesterday say ‘I’m not using it. I’m not using it.’ The vice president of the United States. Look, this is absolutely irresponsible. There’s no serious medical person out there saying to use that drug. It’s counterproductive. It’s not going to help, but the president, he decided that’s an answer.”
This is interesting on a number of levels, only one of which I’ll go into here: namely, that hydroxychloroquine is the 132nd most prescribed medicine in the United States as of 2018, according to a study published in Pharmacy: Journal of Pharmacy Education and Practice.
Now, does it mean there are potential side effects? Of course, particularly its potentiality to cause a dangerous arrhythmia known as QT interval prolongation which can cause sudden death. It’s also not the only drug that does this.
That said, the risks can be managed — as evinced by the fact it remains the 132nd-most prescribed drug in America.
But, according to Biden, it’s absolutely unsafe: “Look at the studies that have been done. It does much more harm than good. This is totally irresponsible,” he said.
As most of the rest of this clip was, this wasn’t necessarily true. Studies have been contradictory and, if hydroxychloroquine is to be effective, it’s unclear when it needs to be given.
But then again, Biden’s a doctor, right? He’s the voice of reason in the room. As opposed to the other guy, the one who’s not comparing a prescription of hydroxychloroquine to suggesting people inject Clorox.
As Biden says, “[t]he words of a president matter” and the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee is making precisely the opposite point he wants to be making — and yet, he needn’t worry about this.
After all, did you hear about this one? Will anyone else? This clip doesn’t sound too hot, so it was basically memory-holed once Tuesday was over. In fact, it’ll get far less play in the media than the fact the president decided to take hydroxychloroquine for prophylactic reasons.
If that doesn’t say it all, I don’t know what will.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.