Here are the trial results for using light as a disinfectant inside the body. It worked. Conclusion: Trump asked a well-informed question on a topic his own "experts" did not yet know about.
Here's the full transcript of Trump's comments about "injecting a disinfectant" inside the body. Note his references to light at the start and the end are typically edited out for the Fake News clips you have seen. Removing them changes the meaning.
So why did Trump say he was just being "sarcastic" when challenged about his disinfectant comments?
I assume he was trying to make the topic go away because the alternative would sound like, "I vaguely remember seeing something about it on Twitter." Not a great option.
Why do I assume the White House was aware of the Heal Light trial that would "inject" UV light via catheter into patients' tracheas to "disinfect" them? A number of accounts followed by Trump's White House, including mine, were tweeting about it prior to his comments.
The LA Times gives you the timeline of when Trump (probably) saw it, his mention of it, and the full context as light (not chemical disinfectant). latimes.com/business/story…
So why haven't more people heard this debunk of the #DrinkingBleachHoax? One reason might be that Google removed the company's video on it. I assume it is being suppressed on search as well.
If you are a Democrat, you probably never heard the full debunk of the #DrinkingBleachHoax. Look into it and you will find it is like a Rosetta Stone that lets you see the other hoaxes, such as the #FinePeopleHoax the #RussianCollusionHoax and more.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Trump’s seemingly unhinged pounding on election “fraud” looks to most people like bad strategy for getting re-elected. But is it?
Imagine a world in which substantial fraud is someday verified in at least one precinct that flipped from Trump to Biden. Suddenly Jan 6th looks different even if it shouldn’t.
Now ask yourself how likely it is that a vast and sometimes chaotic process such as a national election could have at least one discoverable example of confirmed fraud in one precinct. Maybe 100% odds?
- Science says masks don’t work
- Masks only make a tiny difference
- Masks harm people (physically)
- Masks don't block virus
- Masks allow lots of leakage around edges
- People wear/touch masks improperly
- Only N95 masks are good enough
Debunked doesn't mean untrue. For example, science could be wrong about any of these items. I'm just presenting the current scientific opinion so you know if you side with science or not.
In this context, it can be true people wear masks suboptimally and also fuss with them too much. The debunk is that it doesn't make them useless.
The topic of slavery reparations makes everyone run to their political team and get into battle mode. But just for fun, what if we looked at it like a puzzle to solve instead of a fight?
The puzzle is how to make everyone happy at the same time. Seems impossible on the surface. But maybe we are just limiting ourselves in our thinking. Let me see if I can fix that.
Let’s stipulate that any solution that makes one group happy and another group unhappy is not a good enough solution. It has to make everyone happy with both its scale and structure. Impossible?
Here’s a reframe that will change some people’s lives forever: Your mind is the outcome of genetics, traumas and hacks.
If you don’t learn to hack (program) your own brain, the default is that you are little more than genes and traumas.
An example of a brain hack is education. It is a conscious choice to physically alter your brain via learning. Another hack is intelligent skill stacking.