We got news for you, Washington Post, the American public is entitled to know if Clinton is medically qualified to be commander in chief of this nation. Our suspicion is they want to get her elected and then have her medically retire to put the Vice President in office.
There is a cover up going on and the Washington Post in its shameless attack on those who question Clinton's health is part and parcel of it. There are plenty of people in this nation qualified to interpret her medical records. If there is nothing to hide, appoint an independent panel of physicians to review her records. If the journalist who wrote the Post article is qualified to make any medical judgments, bring him forward we want to interrogate him. We want to know what his fund of medical knowledge is. And the same holds for the Post editorial staff.
This is far too important to let the Post and their fellow MSM travelers bury. There is more than circumstantial evidence that she has a serious health issue. No election should be held until this matter is settled. The American people deserve no less. They should accept no less. Here is part of what the Post reporter wrote.
The clip wasn't from July 21, and (as the scrum of media should have indicated) it wasn't rescued from pro-Clinton censors. It was from June 10, when Clinton, fresh off a series of wins that effectively locked up the Democratic nomination, held a few events ahead of the District of Columbia's primary. Beat reporters followed Clinton to a coffee shop in the Shaw neighborhood; CNN's Dan Merica, to her left, asked her about the breaking news of President Obama's official endorsement. Then, to her right, the Associated Press's Lisa Lerer asked a question about Elizabeth Warren, whom Clinton had met with as vice presidential speculation swirled.
The reporters, who had covered Clinton for a year, interpreted her exaggerated head-bobbing as a joke at how she'd been suddenly surrounded — and as a successful attempt at ending the scrum. It did not occur to them that it would become seen as evidence of a "seizure," as people suffering from seizures do not typically laugh and continue to hold cups of coffee.
You will note the reporter who wrote this story conveniently slipped in: "It did not occur to them that it would become seen as evidence of a 'seizure' as people suffering from seizures do not typically laugh and continue to hold cups of coffee." That's is a statement that he is not qualified to make and is most certain one that would not stand up in a court of law. He is not only defining typically here but what constitutes a seizure.
That's hearsay. We want to know immediately how many seizures has he witnessed or treated and what are his qualification for such a judgment. We are calling for the Post to retract that statement from this article and print such. There is no attribution here, a point we suspect the editor either failed to notice or conveniently let slide.
This is the hatchet job of the first order. The two reporters mentioned are neither qualified to pass off as a joke what could clearly be a neurological problem in someone with a positive, well-document history of such. We repeat this is a hatchet job.
washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/08/08/armed-with-junk-science-and-old-photos-critics-question-hillaryshealth/
No comments:
Post a Comment