May 2, 2018

Meade monitors "Morning Mika"...

... and calls me over to see this...


The chattering and overtalking on TV is so annoying, I say, and then Meade is watching on mute with close captioning. He declares it to be very amusing because he's focusing on the facial expressions.

"They're so self-satisfied. You really see it. You see them overacting and over-emoting for each other, for themselves. It's big jerk circle. It's a circle of jerks. ♪♫♬In the ciiiiiircle of jerks♪♫♬."

Meade's musical reference:


«Oldest   ‹Older   201 – 204 of 204
PWS said...

It seems like you and Meade may have recreated your own little happy group observing the observers and then posting about it. And now I've done it here by watching you and commenting. ON it goes--to what end? We all just want to be smugly clucking and tsking.

Big Mike said...

So let’s look at the progress that we’ve made here. Chuck has ceased to call the turnover of Trump’s medical records a “raid” and conceded that the turnover might have been voluntary. He has not yet publicly conceded the obvious: that such is the only interpretation fitting all the facts, but he seems to be getting there. Nor has he admitted that the purpose of bringing a couple big, strong men to Bronstein’s office might have been to carry out voluminous files that prior to Obamacare would have been largely, almost entirely, paper. But he really can’t avoid that, can he?

Perhaps someday he will realize that he blows his cover story as a Michigan attorney when he quotes California law, and then (deliberately?) overlooks the legal jeopardy Bronstein put himself in revealing information about a patient (Trump) without that patient’s written consent.

Chuck said...

Big Mike, I must tell you that I hate having to defend myself against stupid comments like yours. But here goes:

I wasn't the first, or even the most relevant person, to have called it a "raid" on Dr. Bornstein's office. That is what Dr. Bornstein called it. You can call it whatever you wish. It does not matter to me one bit, what anybody calls it. What is important to me is that the taking of Dr. Bornstein's medical records for Donald Trump was, by every measure I know, an illegal act.

I do not care what the size of the men were, who came to the office. What matters is that they came without a court order, without other authorizing paperwork, without cover of law enforcement or the Secret Service, and were operating under nothing like the usual standards for transferring medical records. If this was essentially a presidential security operation, no one has said so. Sarah Sanders claims it was a kind of standard operating procedure, but it wasn't.

The reason that I linked to a California web page was because I understood commenter Michael K -- to whom I originally addressed my comments -- had been a general surgeon and a medical expert witness in that state. And, the page was not a legal citation but rather was a plain-English "FAQ" kind of page. Such that even the Althouse commentariat might understand it if they really paid attention.

I additionally made it clear to anyone with a brain, that the laws concerning the maintenance of medical records are largely identical in all 50 states, to wit: the doctor has a legal duty to keep and maintain medical records on all patients; and as such those records belong to the doctor; but the patient always has rights to copies of the records; nevertheless the patient does not have a right to take the only original copies, absent a very rare type of record (such as old analog imaging studies, etc., where copies might not suffice. It is standard law, all across the nation.

And I also made it very clear, that even if Dr. Bornstein himself triggered the controversy by violating certain patient-privacies in an interview with a reporter, there are other legal remedies for that civil/criminal wrongdoing by the doctor; unilaterally taking the records in a vigilante operation is not a valid legal remedy.

We got into the business of why Dr. Bornstein didn't simple call the police, as I would have advised. And maybe, Dr. Bornstein knew that he had no chance fighting with the newly-elected president and his personal security staff with the Trump Organization. Maybe, Bornstein knew that he had screwed up by talking about Trump's Propecia prescription. Those things might all be true. (Although I doubt it.) The bottom line is that there needs to be a legal proceeding before those kinds of records can be taken away from a doctor.

Finally, I made it clear that I was not defending anything that Dr. Bornstein did. I think the guy is a nutjob. I didn't choose him to be my personal physician, and I doubt that I ever would. It was Donald Trump, who chose Bornstein to be his personal physician for 35 years. Bornstein doesn't seem to have much to qualify him as a personal physician, apart from being conveniently located on Park Avenue, and apparently being the kind of doctor who caters to celebrities with prescriptions, tests, etc., sometimes being conducted under assumed names.

You have a history of asking dumb questions about legal stuff, and jumping to really rotten, unwarranted conclusions about legal issues. Stop it. If you have some questions, ask them. If you want to argue legal issues with no professional background in them yourself, find somebody else to play with.

Bad Lieutenant said...

You have a history of vile attacks on the President and anyone around him, and all the other crap you pull here, which I can't be bothered to recapitulate. Stop it. ...Did that work?

And President Trump's people did not *take* the records from Dr Bornstein. Obviously, he gave them to them.

«Oldest ‹Older   201 – 204 of 204   Newer› Newest»