Your article compares last year’ poison center calls to this year’s as it relates to people calling in with disinfectant exposures. 13 last year and 30 this year.
You are a well educated man, Chris. Can you offer me any thoughts as to what is different from last year to this year? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller?
Oh that’s right! The Corona virus epidemic with massive fear mongering in the msm. So, would you suppose the amount of potential exposure to disinfectants would be many times greater this year and thus many more calls would be likely independent of anything Trump jokes so obviously about?
Also, did you notice in this msm hit piece THAT NONE OF THE PEOPLE GOT SICK, NONE WERE HOSPITALIZED, AND OF COURSE NONE DIED? So, even according to the hit piece you link, there were no consequences.
It turns out that the general public is smarter than the msm and liberals in that they didn’t take it seriously but rather recognized it for the sarcasm that it was.
The 18 hour period that they chose after the presser to monitor the calls is a bit odd, now. Don’t you think? One would think that the reporter would want to compare other days preceding the press conference to the same time last year in order to better show that it was Trump’s comments that caused the spike rather than just the corona epidemic causing tHe spike in general. The “journalist “ makes the claim and has the chance to prove it, but doesn’t do so. Was he too stupid to think of this, or did he actually do it and find it didn’t support his desired finding? ( and this msm hack does have an agenda since he/she/it refers to Trump’s comment as “bogus” even though Trump explained that he was joking).
Could not this rigorous piece of hard hitting research journalism have been created by a group of liberal Democrats who want to defeat Trump simply calling in to the poison center themselves to create their own story? Why yes, it quite easily could, and it very well may be the case.
Your “journalist” conveniently used anonymous sources - this is a continued blind spot in your ability to discern actual news, Chris.
Now, shall we talk about Joe Biden’s unwanted digital sexual penetration of a Dem staffer and the fact that the incident has a corrabitive phone call on national TV back from the early 90’s? Seems a bit more substantive than the Blasey Ford witnesses that refuted her and her lack of any evidence that you bought into so fully. Weird, huh?