10 ms·

>She refused to bend the knee to a conservative administration while people were dying, and the political machine decided to lash out. Nope, that isn't what ha

>She refused to bend the knee to a conservative administration while people were dying, and the political machine decided to lash out. Nope, that isn't what happened at all. The facts [1] show that she got the wrong end of the stick when the state epidemiologist asked to temporary remove one data field in order to validate the data (according to the emails seen). She didn't have all the facts, and she then incorrectly assumed that the data was being censored. [1] https://www.tampabay.com/news/health/2020/05/19/florida-health-department-officials-told-manager-to-delete-coronavirus-data-before-reassigning-her-emails-show/ https://www.tampabay.com/news/health/2020/05/19/florida-heal...

gruez 6y ago
>She didn't have all the facts, and she then incorrectly assumed that the data was being censored. So the solution is to raid her house? How about we raid the people that allege that biden fraudulently won the election?
- cpncrunch 6y ago
  That's a ridiculous illogical comment. I was not commenting on the raid at all.
  - aaomidi 6y ago
    And so is your comment. Why does why she was fired relevant? Also your article goes literally against what you said.
    - cpncrunch 6y ago
      >Why does why she was fired relevant? It's not. I never even mentioned that. The article was supporting my comment above by showing the emails between the state epidemiologist and her dept. I havent found any better source for those emails. >Also your article goes literally against what you said. No, it doesn't, if you read the article you will see it supports the facts I gave (see my other comment in this thread).
jeremysalwen 6y ago
Your claims are not supported by the article linked.
- cpncrunch 6y ago
  If you look at the first article, you will see that it does in fact support the facts I presented: [1] The state epidemiologist asked her supervisor to temporily remove the data: "“Per Dr. Blackmore, disable the ability to export the data to files from the dashboard immediately. We need to ensure that dates (date fields) in all objects match their counterpart on the PDF line list published,”" [2] Rebekah assumed this was censorship: “This is the wrong call,” [3] Her supervisor asked her to re-instate the data one hour later: "Then, just after 6 p.m., the I.T. director emailed both Jones and Dr. Blackmore. “Re-enable for now please.”"
  - watwut 6y ago
    And the raid? Supervisor sent the raid you claim?
    - cpncrunch 6y ago
      No
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - gamblor956 6y ago
    Your facts support the claim of censorship. As noted in the article you cite, the reason the state epidemilogist wanted the data removed was to stop journalists from asking about covid confirmation dates, which were earlier than the state was claiming. Rebekah pushed back with her supervisor, who agreed that the request was censorship. The state (not her supervisor), acting at the behest of the governor, then removed Rebekah the following morning, alleging a "pattern" of insubordination though they could only ever document the 1 instance. (The governor's involvement was confirmed by the governor's press office giving the press release informing the public of her termination.)

gruez 6y ago

>She didn't have all the facts, and she then incorrectly assumed that the data was being censored. So the solution is to raid her house? How about we raid the people that allege that biden fraudulently won the election?

cpncrunch 6y ago
That's a ridiculous illogical comment. I was not commenting on the raid at all.
- aaomidi 6y ago
  And so is your comment. Why does why she was fired relevant? Also your article goes literally against what you said.
  - cpncrunch 6y ago
    >Why does why she was fired relevant? It's not. I never even mentioned that. The article was supporting my comment above by showing the emails between the state epidemiologist and her dept. I havent found any better source for those emails. >Also your article goes literally against what you said. No, it doesn't, if you read the article you will see it supports the facts I gave (see my other comment in this thread).

jeremysalwen 6y ago

Your claims are not supported by the article linked.

cpncrunch 6y ago
If you look at the first article, you will see that it does in fact support the facts I presented: [1] The state epidemiologist asked her supervisor to temporily remove the data: "“Per Dr. Blackmore, disable the ability to export the data to files from the dashboard immediately. We need to ensure that dates (date fields) in all objects match their counterpart on the PDF line list published,”" [2] Rebekah assumed this was censorship: “This is the wrong call,” [3] Her supervisor asked her to re-instate the data one hour later: "Then, just after 6 p.m., the I.T. director emailed both Jones and Dr. Blackmore. “Re-enable for now please.”"
- watwut 6y ago
  And the raid? Supervisor sent the raid you claim?
  - cpncrunch 6y ago
    No
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- gamblor956 6y ago
  Your facts support the claim of censorship. As noted in the article you cite, the reason the state epidemilogist wanted the data removed was to stop journalists from asking about covid confirmation dates, which were earlier than the state was claiming. Rebekah pushed back with her supervisor, who agreed that the request was censorship. The state (not her supervisor), acting at the behest of the governor, then removed Rebekah the following morning, alleging a "pattern" of insubordination though they could only ever document the 1 instance. (The governor's involvement was confirmed by the governor's press office giving the press release informing the public of her termination.)