Battle Royale Forums

Welcome to Battle Royale Forums. Join us today and become part of the growing group of survivors.

Time for Trump to go

Discussion in 'Debaters' started by Morgotha, Jul 20, 2015.

  1. Sharpie61

    Sharpie61 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2013
    Messages:
    19,437
    Likes Received:
    1,764
    • Funny Funny x 1
  2. DeadZedHead

    DeadZedHead Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2018
    Messages:
    3,302
    Likes Received:
    492
  3. DeadZedHead

    DeadZedHead Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2018
    Messages:
    3,302
    Likes Received:
    492
    https://apple.news/APYbxnAbPR3ub3k-Pb6b0tg

    Trump claims among other things, that he just won the Arizona audit “on a level you wouldn’t believe!”. Right. I wouldn’t believe it.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  4. Sharpie61

    Sharpie61 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2013
    Messages:
    19,437
    Likes Received:
    1,764
  5. Morgotha

    Morgotha Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2012
    Messages:
    17,934
    Likes Received:
    1,141
    Trump tasked 3 people with reforming the VA - an organization that needs reform. That means he was trying to protect the vets, IMO.

    They came up with a plan that included selling vets' data (bad), but there's no indication Trump knew about it as your article states:

    "The emails do not show whether Trump was aware of the specific plan to sell veterans' patient data"

    So... Trump wanted to reform the VA and protect the vets, and the plan his people proposed but didn't implement was bad. How does that make Trump bad?
     
  6. Sharpie61

    Sharpie61 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2013
    Messages:
    19,437
    Likes Received:
    1,764
    Sounded like he wanted to privatize the VA to me. And selling patients health info should be illegal.


    The truth is out there
     
  7. purriwinkle

    purriwinkle Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2014
    Messages:
    7,774
    Likes Received:
    1,365
  8. purriwinkle

    purriwinkle Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2014
    Messages:
    7,774
    Likes Received:
    1,365
    I believe according to that article you posted, it was determined to indeed be illegal.

    “The House Oversight Committee and the House Committee on Veterans' Affairs began an investigation into the trio's conduct in February 2020, and said in their final report released Monday that they had broken the law.”

    Both my father and husband have received care through the VA and I would be pissed as hell if any of their medical data was sold. Leave it to Ivanka and Jared to have been knee deep in this shit.
     
  9. Morgotha

    Morgotha Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2012
    Messages:
    17,934
    Likes Received:
    1,141
  10. Morgotha

    Morgotha Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2012
    Messages:
    17,934
    Likes Received:
    1,141
    Privatizing the VA would likely be bad in some ways, but good in others, remembering that "privatizing" is not synonymous with "for profit". I think that studying the concept is a good idea, without signing on to saying, "let's do it".

    I doubt if a private company would put in the effort into orthopaedic appliances, etc., that the VA does, and that would be very bad. OTOH, private companies have done better than the red cross at providing lifeguard services at pools, so who knows? Selling someone's health info without their consent (or even giving it away)? That would be illegal in a private setting, but at the VA? Who knows? It surely won't fly politically.

    What bothers me about the VA is their licensing requirements for professionals. For example, you need a valid state medical license wherever your are practicing in a private facility, but at the VA, you just need a valid license *somewhere*, and do not need a license in the state you are actually practicing in. It makes sense in a way in that a national medical license makes more sense than a state by state system, but practically under the current system what it means is that for people multiple state licenses, if they have their state license revoked, they can still go and work at a VA using a valid license from a different state - IOW although it wasn't their intent, the VA system allows people who would not be allowed to practice somewhere else to keep practicing at a VA, and when they do so they are shielded by the resources of the .gov.
     
  11. purriwinkle

    purriwinkle Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2014
    Messages:
    7,774
    Likes Received:
    1,365
    You might be interested in reading the following:

    https://www.va.gov/vhapublications/ViewPublication.asp?pub_ID=8309

    From the section entitled Background:


    a. The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), Public Law (Pub. L.) 104-191, required the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) develop regulations to ensure that covered entities make secure the electronic protected health information (e-PHI) of individuals. These regulations, referred to as the HIPAA Security Rule, are located at 45 CFR part 160 and subparts A and C of part 164. As the covered entity (CE) within VA responsible for ensuring the security of e-PHI of Veterans, dependents, and beneficiaries, VHA is required to comply with, and implement, the provisions of the HIPAA Security Rule. VHA’s Health Care Information Security program, implemented through this VHA directive, serves as VHA’s compliance with the HIPAA Security Rule provisions. Additionally, this program complies with the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act (HITECH), Pub. L. 111-5, which requires business associates of covered entities comply with the HIPAA Security Rule.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. DeadZedHead

    DeadZedHead Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2018
    Messages:
    3,302
    Likes Received:
    492
  13. Sharpie61

    Sharpie61 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2013
    Messages:
    19,437
    Likes Received:
    1,764
    It’s free, but you have to give money
    [​IMG]
    Grifters going to grift
    [​IMG]


    The truth is out there
     
  14. DeadZedHead

    DeadZedHead Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2018
    Messages:
    3,302
    Likes Received:
    492
    Also if its the first ever, shouldn’t it say they win THE trump football not A trump football. I guess you can’t expect trump supporters to care about truth or accuracy.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  15. Morgotha

    Morgotha Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2012
    Messages:
    17,934
    Likes Received:
    1,141
    If he signs 100 footballs, the first he signs is still the first. Perhaps it's like a lithograph and they will be numbered, like "12 of 100".
     
  16. DeadZedHead

    DeadZedHead Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2018
    Messages:
    3,302
    Likes Received:
    492
    It doesn’t say they CAN win the first or one of the first. It told multiple people that they Did win the first. Then tried to get all of them to pay as if it was the first. Just a run of the mill scam. Nothing new or egregious. Lets just see how long before he is calling someone else out for doing this scam that he engages in on a regular basis.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  17. Sharpie61

    Sharpie61 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2013
    Messages:
    19,437
    Likes Received:
    1,764
    Also, they didn’t win anything, if they don’t donate to a campaign that has not officially been declared.


    The truth is out there
     
  18. Morgotha

    Morgotha Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2012
    Messages:
    17,934
    Likes Received:
    1,141
    If that's the case then it's a run of the mill scam, as you say. Do you have the actual ad? I can't help wondering if there wasn't some weasel-words to allow them to just skate the edge of the truth.
     
  19. Sharpie61

    Sharpie61 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2013
    Messages:
    19,437
    Likes Received:
    1,764


    It’s not ads. People are receiving emails and text messages, telling them that they won, and are the 1st to receive a signed football.
    A link then takes them to where they have to donate, before getting the ball.
    So yes, a scam

    The truth is out there
     
  20. Morgotha

    Morgotha Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2012
    Messages:
    17,934
    Likes Received:
    1,141
    Ah, so it's not really fraud as far as the "you are first", then. If the ad said they would receive THE first football Trump ever signed, that would be one thing, but saying that they are the first (which can be interpreted as them as a *group* and not as if he was talking to one individual) to receive A football then it is true - assuming Trump never signed footballs before.

    Some marketing stuff is pretty cheesy and probably should be illegal, but isn't necessarily. If someone has to "donate" a certain amount to a charity in order to receive a "free" gift for doing so, is that fraud? Trump's ad probably falls in to the same category.
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice