LEFT WING LOONS
See other LEFT WING LOONS Articles
Title: Psych QUACK: Yale Psychiatry Professor Who Attacked Donald Trump Doesn’t Even Have A Licenses To Practice Psychiatry In Her Home State
Source:
Daily Sheeple
URL Source: http://www.thedailysheeple.com/psyc ... iatry-in-her-home-state_012018
Published: Jan 13, 2018
Author: Jayson Veley
Post Date: 2018-01-15 08:46:25 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 929
Comments: 9
Yale University psychology professor Brandy Lee has been in the news lately for calling President Trump “mentally impaired,” and arguing that this diagnosis disqualifies him from being the leader of the free world. However, as it turns out, this professor appears to not even have a valid license to practice psychiatry in the state of Connecticut, which begs the question: What exactly qualifies her to say that Trump should be removed from office on the basis that he’s not mentally stable enough to serve as commander-in-chief? As if this wasn’t embarrassing enough for Professor Lee, following her comments, the American Psychiatric Association released a statement urging members of its profession to stop diagnosing public figures like President Trump without first giving them a full and thorough medical exam. “We at the APA call for an end to psychiatrists providing professional opinions in the media about public figures whom they have not examined, whether it be on cable news appearances, books, or in social media,” the American Psychiatric Association wrote, even though they didn’t specifically mention Professor Brandy Lee by name. “Arm-chair psychiatry or the use of psychiatry as a political tool is the misuse of psychiatry and is unacceptable and unethical.” Poor Professor Lee. All she wanted to do was attack President Trump and argue that he isn’t mentally fit enough to be president of the United States. Instead, she embarrassed herself in front of the entire country, first when it was revealed that she doesn’t even have a Connecticut license to practice psychiatry, and again when the American Psychiatric Association urged members of its profession to refrain from diagnoses public figures without a proper examination. The campus news website Campus Reform provided more details on Professor Lee and her lack of a license to practice psychiatry in the state of Connecticut, explaining that, according to state records, Lee’s “physician/surgeon” license expired almost three years ago on May 31, 2015. Lee’s application for reinstatement has been pending ever since. Campus Reform also noted that the professor’s “controlled substance registration for practitioner” license is also expired as of last February, which means that Lee is legally prohibited from prescribing medication as a medical practitioner. When Campus Reform reached out to Professor Lee for a comment on the matter, she simply stated: “I only need one license.” At this point, it is still unclear what Lee meant by this. (Related: Democrats are now planning a full-scale “medical kidnapping” of President Trump.) But even though Professor Lee was humiliated in front of the entire country and sent down in flames after the truth was revealed, the comments she made about Donald Trump are part of a larger movement to impeach the President on the grounds that he is mentally unstable. In order to accomplish this goal, many Democrats within the mainstream media and in Congress are citing the 25th Amendment, which states in part that the President may be removed from office if he is “unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office.” But where exactly is the evidence that suggests that President Trump is not mentally stable enough to “discharge the powers and duties of his office?” Truthfully, it’s likely that even the Democrats themselves don’t know. Some point to the fact that he tweets on a regular basis, and claim that this is a sign of immaturity and mental instability. Others cite the way in which he speaks, which is perhaps more casual and down-to-earth than the way previous presidents have addressed the American people. But none of these are signs that Trump is mentally unstable, and they are definitely not reasons to remove him from the White House. Sources include: Delivered by The Daily Sheeple
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Deckard (#0)
Impeachment is political. We all know this from the Clinton impeachment. If the opposition party hates you, and controls the House, you get impeached, but impeachment has always died in the Senate, because no party in modern times has the 67 votes needed to get the conviction. If the Democrats win the House, Trump will be impeached. But he will not be removed. Which makes impeachment itself a yawn. Clinton was impeached, and the impeachment was an utter irrelevancy. He still had all of the power, he won in the Senate, and then he wielded that power even more vindictively afterwards to individually destroy the people who impeached him. The problem with impeachment is that it sounds big and bad, but really, it means that the majority of politicians in the House are of the opposite party. They WOULD have impeached Obama, but they did not dare to. They saw what happened when they impeached Clinton and then failed to remove him. And that is what impeachment means. Once one party gets 67 votes in the Senate - THEN you can expect an impeachment and removal of a President, and perhaps serial impeachment of his successors, until the next election sorts it out, or the Army gets fed up and stages a coup.
What did Clinton achieve after impeachment. Clinton wasn't impeached before he broke the law. if what you said was true Clinton would have been impeached in 95.
There was plenty of other bad s**t that Clinton did that deserved impeachment - yet they went after him for a the Monica incident. Good point.
Clinton, as political head of his party, achieved something remarkable. In the mid-term election after his impeachment his party GAINED seats in the House and Senate, the first time that a seated President's party had done so since the 1800s. Impeaching Clinton made a lame duck President more popular, and allowed him to lead his party in gaining many seats in Congress a month afterwards, something that would never had happened had he not been impeached. With the Clinton impeachment, the Republicans pulled a pin out of a grenade and then threw the pin: the grenade blew up in their own hands. A whole litany of Republican politicians were marked for destruction after that, and one leader after another fell. The people did not support the impeachment, and Congress is there to represent the People, not themselves. The Democrats did not learn that lesson from the Clinton impeachment, so if they gain the House, they will impeach Trump. And they will fail to remove him, and the impeachment will further empower the Republicans, just as impeaching Clinton empowered the Democrats. How? By making the party doing the impeachment look like dangerous partisan fanatics. The People elected a President. They don't take kindly to the notion that the notoriously corrupt and sleazy Congress should try to override their will.
No it didnt. It caused gore to lose and hillary too. His corruption is established fact because of his crimes he was impeached for. I l ow you kond of like the clintons because they are with you on stealing from the fruitful to give to the idle
No,what she wanted to do was build up her own image with the media/entertainment world so she could be invited to appear on tv shows,and maybe even write a book and do a book tour. Had nothing to do with Trump,and everything to do with "Me,me,ME,DAMMIT!" People don't become shrinks because they are well-balanced mentally. They do it to try to heal themselves to the point where they don't end up being committed. In the entire history of the world,the only nations that had to build walls to keep their own citizens from leaving were those with leftist governments.
stealing from the fruitful to give to the idle Enter Screen Names of recipients separated by commas or semicolons. Like God did when he imposed the tithe.
No for many reasons. First the tithe was only ten percent and not up to fifty percent. Secondly because today's welfare state where you reward immoral behavior and punish honest moral people by taking their money has nothing to do with what the tithe was. And a lot of other reasons.
#2. To: Vicomte13 (#1)
They WOULD have impeached Obama, but they did not dare to. They saw what happened when they impeached Clinton and then failed to remove him.
#3. To: A K A Stone (#2)
What did Clinton achieve after impeachment. Clinton wasn't impeached before he broke the law.
“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul
Those who most loudly denounce Fake News are typically those most aggressively disseminating it.
#4. To: Deckard (#3)
#5. To: A K A Stone (#2)
What did Clinton achieve after impeachment. Clinton wasn't impeached before he broke the law. if what you said was true Clinton would have been impeached in 95.
#6. To: Vicomte13 (#5)
With the Clinton impeachment, the Republicans pulled a pin out of a grenade and then threw the pin: the grenade blew up in their own hands. A whole litany of Republican politicians were marked for destruction after that, and one leader after another fell.
#7. To: Deckard (#0)
All she wanted to do was attack President Trump and argue that he isn’t mentally fit enough to be president of the United States.
#8. To: A K A Stone (#6)
#9. To: Vicomte13 (#8)
Like God did when he imposed the tithe.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]