At least in this case, Trump didn’t appoint him. More baffling, Trump always does this, with the people he personally appoints. Over and over again, with a long, long list of former administration officials we get Trump saying, “Yeah, I knew he was a loser, totally crazy and stupid but I decided to give him a chance anyways, and it turned out he was a crazy, stupid loser just like I thought.” And somehow Trump thinks this makes him look good.
(More insanely, this approach actually works for some percentage of Trump supporters, because Trump’s ability to bully someone is their idea of what “strength” is. The cruelty outweighs the fact that Trump admits to hiring completely unsuitable people, i.e. being incompetent himself. People keep saying that “the cruelty is the point” and it’s true on multiple levels.)
Most of these aren’t even mistakes, but the onward march of science to figure out what the hell to do about this pandemic. Science always has some back and forth about the facts of something new. Unfortunately, a lot of people don’t understand the process, or deliberately misuse the uncertainties.
Without bendable metal around the nose and good fit, cloth masks release more exhalation than an N95 with flapper valve. And I have seen many people wearing N95 style masks without flappers. Once production is sufficient to cover medical need with lots to spare, flapperless N95 should be the gold standard for people who want the best protection for everyone.
Memo, written exclusively for reporters, “leaked” to reporters.
From that article:
The document, obtained by ABC News from sources who confirmed the effort to discredit Fauci, says in part that “several White House officials are concerned about the number of times Dr. Fauci has been wrong on things.”
This paragraph is garbage. “Obtained” sounds like ABC was engaged in the work of journalism. The white house gave them a $hit list on Fauci. There’s no difference between ABC saying “several white house officials…” and Trump saying “many people…”. It’s only about the perspective of that one person in that one moment. Everyone else is standing around and nodding, or offering an informed perspective and getting fired.
Unnamed sources suck. They should only be used when absolutely necessary. Here they are only offering insight the world already knows, so reporters should only quote sources who will go on record or do the story as BB has done here - call it a smear campaign and say a memo was provided but no one will go on record to confirm it.
Ah yes, when things don’t work out the way you wanted, just shoot the messenger! It’s cheap and looks like action even if it doesn’t at all fix the problem. I dearly miss irony.
