One side of any story is a story NOT!

I find it interesting that all of these sorts of stories, no matter which side of the political spectrum they emerge from follow the same pattern of bias. In this case, as in so many others, this timeline serves only to highlight all of the things Trump has done or is accused of doing that fits the predetermined criteria of the writer as being bad. It fails to give perspective that allows the reader to make a decision because it does not provide material evidence from which to choose. It only presents an already intended conclusion. It does not ask you, or even allow you to think, it only expects you to accept what it says without question. More like propaganda than comprehensive information from which the reader can draw a personal conclusion. An opinion piece at best.

Rising above such a quagmire would seem a better choice than just contributing more to it.

What’s needed are parallel time lines that show not only what’s perceived (by the writer) about Trump’s (sometime flawed) decisions, but also those of the other “leaders” during the same period, against a background of events. If we look at the first three months of this years Covid 19 outbreak — epidemic — pandemic evolution and then fill in the time line that represents with the words / actions / decisions / guidance of others a totally different story emerges.

For example; run parallel time lines to Trump for China, WHO, CDC, Fauci, Pelosi, Cuomo, BiBlasio, MSNBS, CNN, Fox News. Besides the fact that it will tell you that no one really knew what was going on with this first ever situation or how to manage it, it will give the reader an idea of who made the fewest mistakes, miscalls, messages of misguidance. It would provide all with the opportunity to choose for ourselves who we think made the best choices among a list with only varying degrees of horrible choices on it.

So, did Trump make some missteps? Yes. Did Fauci? Yes. But look at what the Cuomo, de Blasio timelines would tell you. They would say that decisions they made leading up to this pandemic, guidance and direction given during the first 3 months of this year as it emerged and the horrific outcome for the citizens of the city and state of New York would seem to say that a bigger portion of the spotlight of questionable leadership might be better focused somewhere other than just on Trump.

Sadly, that would have ruined the whole purpose of this article, which obviously was to hammer on Trump yet again; and possibly assuring the ongoing income for the writer. But how exactly does that help???

PS: When stating things you want accepted as fact you should make sure that what you state is truly fact and not just a personal view you want the reader to accept. I reference your statement about Trump “dismantling the health security and biodefense team.” You know, or should know that is not true. Rather the two were consolidated at the recommendation of the National Security Adviser, John Bolton.