U.S. Rep. Lisa McClain (R-MI) speaks at a rally hosted by former President Donald Trump on April 02, 2022 near Washington, Michigan. Scott Olson/Getty Images
Rep. Lisa McClain wrongly claimed Osama bin Laden was caught during the Trump administration.
Bin Laden was killed during a 2011 raid under the Obama administration.
McClain also falsely claimed unemployment is at a 40 year high, calling the Biden administration “weak.”
“Well, President Trump was in office. We didn’t have a war and I think he made three peace treaties,” McClain said during her speech. “Caught Osama – Osama bin Laden and Soleimani, Al Baghdadi. And this President is weak. And I’ll tell you weakness breeds aggression. We need strength.”
Qasem Soleimani, an Iranian general, and Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, a leader of ISIS, were both killed during military operations completed during the Trump administration.
The 2011 raid that killed bin Laden, however, was conducted during President Barack Obama’s first term in office. Joe Biden was serving as vice president at the time. Trump was hosting “The Apprentice” – a reality/game show on NBC.
During her remarks, McClain also said unemployment is at a “40-year high” while there is “a labor shortage.”
McClain falsely claimed Osama bin Laden was caught during the Trump administration. Bin Laden was killed during a 2011 raid under the Obama administration. McClain also falsely claimed unemployment is at a 40 year high. It is actually at a 40 year low. McClain is running on lies https://t.co/goILRfm5v9
A Chippewa Falls attorney who is a key player in a movement to take the impossible step of decertifying the 2020 election is running for attorney general on a platform of using the office to prosecute doctors who did not administer the anti-parasite drug ivermectin to dying COVID-19 patients and instead gave them other treatments.
Mueller said in an interview she is launching a campaign in order to investigate six Wisconsin hospitals for their doctors’ decisions to not administer ivermectin to COVID-19 patients. She would not disclose the names of the hospitals or reveal details of her allegations.
Mueller said the CDC and FDA are “liars” and that families have called her “begging for help, trying to figure out what to do because their loved ones were in hospitals and the families believed that those loved ones were basically being murdered. And they had the drugs withheld from them.”
“I am running for attorney general because of potential homicides in hospitals, because of vaccines — so-called vaccines,” she said.
Mueller, who said she took ivermectin last year while infected with COVID-19, said she did not consult a doctor or scientist to analyze whether the deaths or illnesses could have been prevented by the drug that doctors and researchers say has not been proven to be effective against the coronavirus. She said a trial would root out the facts of the situation.
Patrick Remington, director of the University of Wisconsin-Madison’s Preventive Medicine Residency Program, said doctors who do not prescribe ivermectin to COVID-19 patients are upholding the Hippocratic oath to do no harm to patients by making decisions according to the consensus of available credible medical research.
“We strive to get it right. We do the best job we can to do no harm, and this is an example that would be unthinkable to me to ask a physician to prescribe a medicine that is at best ineffective and at worst harmful,” Remington said.
“There are valid debates about the best ways to treat serious illnesses and science is iterative, that as we go along we learn by experimentation, we learn by carefully conducted research,” he said.
“Ivermectin has undergone that scrutiny from early anecdotal evidence that it might be effective to well-conducted scientific studies that show that not only is it not effective but it can be harmful, and no credible medical organization or professional organization recommends it,” Remington said.
A large clinical trial published Wednesday involving about 3,500 people infected with COVID-19 showed ivermectin did not lower the incidence of medical admission to a hospital due to progression of COVID-19 or of prolonged emergency department observation among outpatients with an early diagnosis.
The study compared about 1,300 people in Brazil who received either ivermectin or a placebo. The rest received a different treatment.
Retail prescriptions for ivermectin surged in late 2020 before vaccines were widely available and after a catastrophic surge of COVID-19 cases. In December 2020, U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson held a Senate hearing in which physician witnesses touted the drug as a COVID treatment and claimed positive research about ivermectin was being ignored.
Pierre Kory, a Wisconsin physician and one of ivermectin’s most vociferous promoters, testified at Johnson’s hearing that if people took the drug they would not get sick. Eight months later, despite taking ivermectin weekly, Kory came down with COVID-19.
Mueller cites Kory’s opinion in her effort to pursue civil penalties, and if elected, criminal charges against doctors who have refused to prescribe the drug in cases where patients died.
“What I would do if I became attorney general is I would open investigations into those deaths and if the facts were substantiated, I would probably bring charges against the people that were responsible for this,” Mueller said.
She said she is working on a civil lawsuit against multiple health care systems with multiple plaintiffs but declined to disclose details.
In October, Mueller represented the family of a Waukesha County man who was infected with COVID-19 in their pursuit of an order forcing Aurora Health Care officials to honor a prescription for ivermectin written by a doctor not authorized to practice medicine at the Aurora hospital where the man was in a drug-induced coma and breathing with a ventilator.
Asked Supreme Court to invalidate the 2020 election
In November 2020, Mueller asked the state Supreme Court to throw out the results of the presidential election because the use of ballot drop boxes were illegal, in her view.
The court rejected the petition from Mueller but in a recent ruling barred the use of drop boxes in the April 5 and subsequent elections because state law is silent on whether they are allowed. A final ruling is pending.
Mueller said she is running because she has not seen enough interest from the other Republican candidates — former state Rep. Adam Jarchow and Fond du Lac County District Attorney Eric Toney — in COVID-19 and election issues. She said Attorney General Josh Kaul, the Democratic incumbent, should investigate doctors’ decisions surrounding COVID-19 infections.
Kaul and Toney declined to comment. Jarchow did not respond to a request for comment.
Republican lawmaker tweeted about repealing Reedy Creek act after company denounced ‘Don’t Say Gay’ bill
Republican lawmaker tweeted about repealing Reedy Creek act after company denounced ‘Don’t Say Gay’ bill
ORANGE COUNTY, Fla. – The Reedy Creek Improvement District—created by state lawmakers in 1967—acts as Walt Disney World’s own government with two cities and land in Orange and Osceola counties.
“In effect, they’re their own city out there. They can zone the way they want. They can do things the way they want. They can even build a nuclear power plant if they want,” News 6 political analyst Jim Clark said.
Those rights are now being discussed among some Florida lawmakers who are thinking about repealing the Reedy Creek Improvement Act of 1967.
“I think that this is a feud that is escalating into a war between Florida Republicans and the Disney corporation which is the largest single-site employer in Florida,” Clark said.
The law — which has been the subject of controversy, sparking protests around Walt Disney World after the company did not initially publicly condemn it — bans discussions on sexual identity in Florida classrooms in kindergarten through third grade and requires such conversations to be “age-appropriate” in successive grades, though the law does not define “age-appropriate.”
“For Disney to come out and put a statement and say that the bill should have never passed and that they are going to actively work to repeal it, I think, one was fundamentally dishonest but, two I think that crossed the line,” DeSantis said Tuesday.
This response came a day before Florida House Rep. Spencer Roach tweeted that legislators held two meetings in the past week to discuss repealing the 1967 Reedy Creek Improvement Act.
“Disney has been extremely generous with Republican politicians in Florida. They give about $200,000 a year, including $12,000 to the state representative who is stirring this up,” Clark told News 6. “It would be a disaster for Disney. One of the reasons they came here in the mid-60s was the legislature’s promise that they could have self-government.”
Richard Foglesong, a retired Rollins College political science professor and the author of Married to the Mouse, said he believes talks of revoking the act is just a way of the Republican party showing what they stand for, but no real change will come out of those discussions.
“If you ask me whether it’s politically possible to take these privileges away from the Disney company, I don’t think so,” Foglesong said. “I think that cooler minds will prevail and that this is really a shot across the bow to try to bring the Disney company, Mickey Mouse if you will, into line with Governor DeSantis. I thought it was more of March Madness of the political kind, the thought that the Republican Party, which used to be the party of business, would want to take on of their biggest donors.”
News 6 reached out to Reedy Creek Improvement District and its spokesperson responded they have no comment at this time. A request for an interview with Rep. Spencer Roach was forwarded to his office but they have not yet replied.
Is this part of the cancel culture of the libs that the right wing keeps claiming exists. Because it seems to me the ones doing all the canceling of people is the right / Republican thugs.
So if a doctor doesn’t want to treat colored folk that would be OK. What about the people with red hair because they are icky folk? When does the right of quality healthcare take a back seat to bigotry? Oh yes when it is Christians needed to discriminate so they demand the right to refuse to help / treat a patient in medical need. God before helping the sick and caring for the needy, was that what old Jesus said? See if they are of the right political party and follow your church doctrines before you give medical aid was a verse I never learned was in the bible.
South Carolina lawmakers on Friday passed a bill allowing medical professionals and insurance companies to deny care based on personal belief. Some say the legislation, which now heads to the state Senate for consideration, would disproportionately impact LGBTQ+ people, women, and people of color.
Under the bill, titled the “Medical Ethics and Diversity Act,” South Carolina law would be altered to excuse medical practitioners, health care institutions and health care payers from providing care that violates their “conscience.”
Dozens of state residents in February testified against the bill, calling it vague and overbroad. They also shared concerns that the legislation would disproportionately impact marginalized communities.
HB 4776 allows healthcare institutions to refuse to provide care, even when it is medically necessary and in the best interest of the patient. Under this legislation, healthcare institutions will be able to refuse to refer, teach, and research any items they deem to be against their beliefs.
These bills will impact access to gender-affirming care, contraceptives, HIV medications, fertility care, end of life care, and mental health services, as well as allow insurance companies and employers to refuse to reimburse, pay, or contract for medically necessary services.
Religious freedom is a fundamental American value that is entirely compatible with providing quality, non-discriminatory healthcare. It is not a license to deprive others of their rights simply because of personal beliefs.
This bill sends the message that those seeking medical care in conflict with their doctor’s non-medical values are not equal members of society entitled to dignity and respect.
The South Carolina House passed a bill that would allow medical professionals, healthcare institutions, and insurers to deny access to gender-affirming care, contraceptives, HIV medications and more.
