Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

COVID-19

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • BlueNGold
    replied
    Conley, Trump's physician, is now being blamed for not being forthright with Trump's condition. He didn't want to bring up the fact Trump took some oxygen prior to arriving at Walter Reed.

    Some will say he should be open about everything. There is one problem with that. MSM will take that and twist it into something worse than what he says. That's almost certainly why he held back.

    That's where we are in this society. All because MSM cannot stop attacking Trump.

    No, Trump did not create this virus. Really. His actions have not been the cause for the spread of it. Culturally and demographically and health-wise, the US was bound to have these problems.

    Trump also didn't create the form of government in the US. We are a republic, not a dictatorship or even a pure democracy. That's why the governors were given the power to determine how they would handle things in their state. The issue is, Democrats think the federal government should do and control everything. Republicans know this is a republic and the states are to have power.

    Funny thing is, the liberal states who supposed have the "right politics" are worse-off death-rate wise. New Jersey, New York, Massachusetts are at the very top. Just looking at the midwest, Illinois is by far the most liberal state and they have the highest death rate in the region.

    So what liberals will tell you, if only OUR ideas were implemented it wouldn't be that way. Fact is, New York and Illinois are great examples of the fact it would be bad whether or not Trump was president.

    But go on. Keep the narrative going.
    Last edited by BlueNGold; 10-05-2020, 07:28 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • BlueNGold
    replied
    Originally posted by dal9 View Post

    well then the only logical thing for you to do is to take action to catch covid asap before it gets cold...maybe go to nj and volunteer at the hospital to wash chris christie's balls and taint.
    I don't think so. I might die...

    You guys really need to lighten up. We will all be fitted into a casket not that long from now.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bball
    replied
    https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-d...ay-11601844813

    A bit more clarity with the timeline. It at least makes a bit more sense. It didn't calculate that Trump could have an advisor with symptoms on Wed night. That aide, a person that allegedly tested positive on or by Thurs morning... yet Trump being awaiting his own test results late Thurs. evening. Not when you know the WH has the 15 min tests inhouse. It also didn't make sense if that first test had came back negative, Trump would've said that when he talked to Hannity that evening.

    There's still the question of exactly when the president was tested in the first place, and when the last negative test he had was. It's questionable he didn't have a 15 min test that morning knowing he was around a symptomatic person. Was that test negative... or is that the 15 min test that came back positive? And if so... why did he continue with his schedule that day? Plus, he'd already been around a positive coronavirus case. There's a breach of protocol going on here... it's just a question of how badly it was breached and what was known and when.


    ----
    WASHINGTON—President Trump didn’t disclose a positive result from a rapid test for Covid-19 on Thursday while awaiting the findings from a more thorough coronavirus screening, according to people familiar with the matter.

    Mr. Trump received a positive result on Thursday evening before making an appearance on Fox News in which he didn’t reveal those results. Instead, he confirmed earlier reports that one of his top aides had tested positive for coronavirus and mentioned the second test he had taken that night for which he was awaiting results.

    “I’ll get my test back either tonight or tomorrow morning,” Mr. Trump said during the interview. At 1 a.m. on Friday, the president tweeted that he indeed had tested positive.

    Under White House protocols, the more reliable test that screens a specimen from deeper in the nasal passage is administered only after a rapid test shows a positive reading. Based on people familiar with the matter, the president’s tests followed that protocol.

    As the virus spread among the people closest to him, Mr. Trump also asked one adviser not to disclose results of their own positive test. “Don’t tell anyone,” Mr. Trump said, according to a person familiar with the conversation.

    Leave a comment:


  • dal9
    replied
    Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
    By the way, you hoping you don't get it is fine. I think most people are going to get exposed over the next 6 months. We could see a massive, horrendous spike of cases where people locked down had never encountered this sucker. Now the virus has the upper hand and is going to kick some A.

    Edit: I do hope you all know there is seasonality to the flu and this disease may well be similar and the difference between infection rates in the winter and summer are incredibly large.
    well then the only logical thing for you to do is to take action to catch covid asap before it gets cold...maybe go to nj and volunteer at the hospital to wash chris christie's balls and taint.

    Leave a comment:


  • BlueNGold
    replied
    By the way, you hoping you don't get it is fine. I think most people are going to get exposed over the next 6 months. We could see a massive, horrendous spike of cases where people locked down had never encountered this sucker. Now the virus has the upper hand and is going to kick some A.

    Edit: I do hope you all know there is seasonality to the flu and this disease may well be similar and the difference between infection rates in the winter and summer are incredibly large.

    Leave a comment:


  • BlueNGold
    replied
    Originally posted by Bball View Post
    "The virus is not dangerous"
    "The numbers of deaths in the US are overhyped and a lie"
    "The virus was very deadly in China. They are downplaying their numbers"

    And we can add:
    "You should've gotten it this summer because the virus that is not dangerous will be very dangerous this winter"

    I've lost count, how many people died with it in the US this summer? I'm thinking it's like 130,000 people since June... I'm kinda glad I didn't get it this summer and hope I don't get it now either.
    The US lost 625,000 people 100 years ago when the nation was a fraction of the size that it is now. 200,000 under these circumstances in 2020 isn't that big of a deal in comparison.

    The truth is, we will not know if attempting herd immunity this summer would have been a good thing...probably for another 6-9 months. By that time, more data will be available.

    I realize that doesn't fit the narrative but the supposed experts thought we'd have 60000 deaths this year and they were wrong about that too.

    Leave a comment:


  • BlueNGold
    replied
    So what does an Instructional Designer know? Those are people not smart enough to handle the hard sciences.

    In any event, there is a clear cause and effect. We know the virus degrades as temperatures and humidities increase. This is proven. So the severity of the infections, due to infectious dose, will naturally be worse in the winter...at least normally for viruses. Even Gamble1 will tell you that. You might claim Covid is different but if it's like most viruses it will be worse in the winter and there are indeed scientific reasons that Ms. Madhavan has no clue about.

    If we avoid a major spike in the coming weeks and months it will be a near miracle. I am hoping for that.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bball
    replied
    "The virus is not dangerous"
    "The numbers of deaths in the US are overhyped and a lie"
    "The virus was very deadly in China. They are downplaying their numbers"

    And we can add:
    "You should've gotten it this summer because the virus that is not dangerous will be very dangerous this winter"

    I've lost count, how many people died with it in the US this summer? I'm thinking it's like 130,000 people since June... I'm kinda glad I didn't get it this summer and hope I don't get it now either.

    (Edit: Point being- It was pretty deadly this summer. Maybe the main reason for concern in fall will be the closer confines people will find themselves in due to being outside less and colder weather not as inviting outside. Social distancing will be more difficult in some circumstances. And add in holiday gatherings. And add in some mitigation fatigue. And add in some anti-maskers/anti-mitigation people that we're all going to be forced to be around more. Add in some state and city excitement to continue reopenings. Financial and fan pressure to restart sports... and with fans. Add in all of that means more virus hosts making for more virus spread. Add in these anti-mitigation people non longer able to avoid the virus (their luck runs out (see: Donald J. Trump)) and mixing with the rest of us as much as ever, without any concern about that on their part).

    (Edit: Secondary Point- Even if the entire concern is the virus is more deadly and dangerous in winter than summer (cooler weather vs warmer), it was pretty darned dangerous in the summer and not exactly something that I'd think we should want to be throwing "Coronavirus Parties" for everyone to get it out of the way "in the summer". Deadly is deadly... And the numbers say, even with mitigation, it was deadly this summer. And it's not just about being deadly- Just being really sick, straining the medical system, long term ailments, etc. are dangerous issues as well)
    Last edited by Bball; 10-03-2020, 11:36 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bball
    replied
    Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post
    Check out this map: https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/c...151117051.html

    It is extremely obvious from this map of the US, that virus is spiking in the northern states. It's getting colder. Point is, we are headed into the colder months when the Spanish flu really started spreading and killing the most people.

    Don't tell me you weren't warned. I realize people wanted masks to protect themselves. I get that. It's not that simple. Now that it's getting colder people are going to die more than we have ever seen. If you have yet to get the virus, you might want to do a little shopping to prepare for your next stop: https://www.amazon.com/caskets/s?k=caskets
    https://amplitude.com/blog/2017/01/1...on-correlation

    Leave a comment:


  • BlueNGold
    replied
    Check out this map: https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/c...151117051.html

    It is extremely obvious from this map of the US, that virus is spiking in the northern states. It's getting colder. Point is, we are headed into the colder months when the Spanish flu really started spreading and killing the most people.

    Don't tell me you weren't warned. I realize people wanted masks to protect themselves. I get that. It's not that simple. Now that it's getting colder people are going to die more than we have ever seen. If you have yet to get the virus, you might want to do a little shopping to prepare for your next stop: https://www.amazon.com/caskets/s?k=caskets

    Leave a comment:


  • BlueNGold
    replied
    Y'all going to wish you had a small taste of the virus now rather than in the colder months when it knocks you out...

    Leave a comment:


  • dal9
    replied
    Originally posted by BlueNGold View Post

    Colder temps. I have been preaching this for months now. People should have gotten exposed over the summer with a lighter dose but they too F smart.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bball
    replied
    https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/03/polit...rus/index.html

    Former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie told CNN he checked himself into a hospital Saturday afternoon as a precautionary measure after announcing earlier in the day that he had tested positive for Covid-19.

    Christie, who suffers from asthma, said in consultation with his doctor he decided it was best to be monitored in the hospital. He said he has a slight fever and is achy but felt well enough to drive himself to the hospital, Christie told CNN by phone from the hospital.
    Though he said his breathing is fine, he started a course of the Covid-19 treatment remdesivir after being admitted, Christie said.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bball
    replied
    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...IzV?li=BBnb7Kz

    A White House Long in Denial Confronts Reality
    WASHINGTON — As America locked down this spring during the worst pandemic in a century, inside the Trump White House there was the usual defiance.
    ? Oliver Contreras for The New York Times When the nation went into lockdown in March, President Trump was determined to play down the virus.

    The tight quarters of the West Wing were packed and busy. Almost no one wore masks. The rare officials who did, like Matthew Pottinger, the deputy national security adviser, were ridiculed by colleagues as alarmist.

    President Trump at times told staff wearing masks in meetings to “get that thing off,” an administration official said. Everyone knew that Mr. Trump viewed masks as a sign of weakness, officials said, and that his message was clear. “You were looked down upon when you would walk by with a mask,” said Olivia Troye, a top aide on the coronavirus task force who resigned in August and has endorsed former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr.

    In public, some of the president’s favorite targets were mask-wearing White House correspondents. “Would you take it off, I can hardly hear you,” Mr. Trump told Jeff Mason of Reuters in May, then mocked Mr. Mason for wanting “to be politically correct” when he refused.

    This past week, a White House long in denial confronted reality after Mr. Trump and the first lady both tested positive for the virus, along with Hope Hicks, a top White House aide, and Bill Stepien, the Trump campaign manager, among others. The outcome appeared shocking but also inevitable in a West Wing that assumed that rapid virus tests for everyone who entered each morning were substitutes for other safety measures, like social distancing and wearing masks.

    But the outcome was also a byproduct, former aides said, of the recklessness and top-down culture of fear that Mr. Trump created at the White House and throughout his administration. If you wanted to make the boss happy, they said, you left the mask at home.

    When the nation went into lockdown in March, Mr. Trump was determined to play down the virus. He talked of reopening as soon as Easter, April 12, pushed states to lift restrictions early and pressured schools, churches and businesses to go back to normal, all in the hope of saving his campaign.

    But behind the White House gates, Mr. Trump and his aides relied heavily on the daily rapid testing available to them. At times Mr. Trump took numerous rapid tests throughout the day.

    Aides were divided on the risks. Jared Kushner, Mr. Trump’s son-in-law and senior adviser, and Dan Scavino, the White House social media director, were among the least concerned, colleagues said. They viewed themselves as protected because of the testing available to them and maintained that getting the virus was not a death sentence.

    Ms. Hicks, a longtime aide who is one of the president’s closest advisers, was more concerned, colleagues said. She took more precautions than most others and sometimes wore a mask in meetings.

    Colleagues said that newcomers to Mr. Trump’s orbit, like Kayleigh McEnany, the White House press secretary, never wore a mask in his presence, in what was interpreted by other staff members as an attempt to please the new boss.

    As the months progressed, a small number of people in the White House tested positive, including a valet to the president, a top aide to the vice president and Robert C. O’Brien, the national security adviser. But when few others did, aides to the president grew even less concerned.

    By June, the month before Mr. O’Brien tested positive, the White House had already stopped conducting temperature checks for people entering the complex. Only those aides who were interacting directly with the president received daily tests. Masks remained rare sightings.

    The attitude was widespread in the administration. At the Justice Department in May, Attorney General William P. Barr told a New York Times Magazine reporter who arrived in a mask for an interview that “I’m not going to infect you,” and then sat by as an aide suggested, twice, that the reporter take the mask off. The reporter did.

    Even on Friday, only hours after the president had announced at 1 a.m. on Twitter that he and the first lady had tested positive, the White House was trying to project that it was business as usual. “We had a great jobs report this morning,” Mark Meadows, the president’s chief of staff, told reporters at the White House. “Unfortunately, that’s not what everybody is focused on this morning.”

    Nonetheless, they made every effort to carry on with a nothing-to-see-here-folks mentality.

    Mr. Meadows, who had been in close contact with the president in recent days, arrived at work without a mask, and continued to claim that a mask was not necessary because he had tested negative. (Mr. Meadows wore a mask when he accompanied Mr. Trump, also in a mask, to Walter Reed National Military Medical Center on Friday evening.)

    And although more aides wore masks in the West Wing on Friday, masks remained optional at the White House, a spokesman said.

    Mr. Meadows also told reporters on Friday that “I fully expect that as this virus continues to go on, other people in the White House will certainly have a positive test result.” So far Mr. Meadows has tested negative.

    Late Friday, Kellyanne Conway, a former top presidential adviser who was at the White House in recent days, announced that she had tested positive. Others testing positive who had been at the White House in recent days included Senator Mike Lee, Republican of Utah; Senator Thom Tillis, Republican of North Carolina; Chris Christie, the former governor of New Jersey; and the Rev. John I. Jenkins, the president of the University of Notre Dame.

    On a policy level, the White House for months has been pressuring the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to play down the risk of the virus so the president could forge ahead with his desire to reopen schools, reinvigorate the economy and continue to act as if the country had “rounded the final turn” when it came to the virus.

    Kevin Hassett was a top economic adviser to the president in May when he became one of the few to break the unwritten White House rules. In a television interview, he said that he found it “scary to go to work” and that “I think that I’d be a lot safer if I was sitting at home than I would be going to the West Wing.”

    Mr. Hassett, who left the administration over the summer, told CNN on Friday that he was criticized at the time for publicly expressing concern.

    “When I was in the White House, you know, I got a little bit of a flak for saying, ‘Hey, I understand the risks,’” he said.

    Leave a comment:


  • shags
    replied
    Good information in this article. Or maybe just an example of "TDS" by the author (haha).

    https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020...house-deflects

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X