Dr. Deborah Birx Admitted in her New Book to Falsifying Covid Data in Order to Push Trump into Covid Lockdown Measures
- Thread starter Archetype XLIV
- Start date
I’m not seeing anything in that article about altering data. I may have missed it so if you can quote where she altered data I’d appreciate it, but it looks like she just ignored them wanting her to remove recommendations.
^^^^^^based on extreme right-wing bias, promotion of propaganda and conspiracy theories, affiliation with a known questionable group, and several failed fact checks.
^^^^^^based on extreme right-wing bias, promotion of propaganda and conspiracy theories, affiliation with a known questionable group, and several failed fact checks.
So since I’m sure you’d have loved to dunk on me if she actually had falsified anything I’m going to go ahead and assume it wasn’t actually in the article, and that you linked it without reading it.
Our Saturday and Sunday report-writing routine soon became: write, submit, revise, hide, resubmit. Fortunately, this strategic sleight-of-hand worked. That they never seemed to catch this subterfuge left me to conclude that, either they read the finished reports too quickly or they neglected to do the word search that would have revealed the language to which they objected.”
How anyone would think this isn’t extremely troubling after seeing how the CDC and govt continued to fvck this up is even more mind boggling. She’s admitting to deception and lying. All to get the govt to shut down the country.
How anyone would think this isn’t extremely troubling after seeing how the CDC and govt continued to fvck this up is even more mind boggling. She’s admitting to deception and lying. All to get the govt to shut down the country.
Clearly, you're simply arguing semantics at this point.
You don't see anything wrong with that passage because you don't want to, and without a full out confession using those exact words, you're going to keep arguing she didn't do anything wrong.
There is much more than a semantical difference between falsifying data and sneaking things the administration didn’t want in a report into the report.
Should we? You have no issues with a former president lying 30,000 times in 4 years, and continuing to lie since leaving office. Furthermore, you have no issues lying personally.
^^^liar has no issues with a former president lying 30,000 times in 4 years, and continuing to lie since leaving office.
No it’s a bad practice. She should’ve quit and whistleblown that she was being asked to cover up what she believed to be right.
How do we know that for sure? She’s admitted to lying and misrepresentation for her benefit.
I said that she believed to be right. I don’t think the article has what she was inserting so I don’t know if it’s beneficial. I do think she’s more likely a better person to listen to than the administration official who was censoring the reports, but I’d have to see what it was.
