In response to criticism that CNN is continuously praising mass gatherings when they are BLM organised, but condemning Trump campaign rallies for breaking COVID restrictions, the network seriously attempted to argue that the Trump rallies are scientifically more likely to spread the virus than BLM gatherings.
On Wednesday, Trump campaign communications director Tim Murtaugh called out CNN's hypocrisy on this matter, noting that "if people can protest in the streets by the tens of thousands, if people can riot, if people can gamble in casinos, then certainly they can gather peaceably under the First Amendment to hear from the president of the United States."
Butthurt from this exchange, CNN Newsroom drafted in "medical analyst" Leana Wen, who happens to be a former Planned Parenthood president, to explain why science means COVID doesn't affect BLM protests as much as Trump rallies.
"It does not care why it is that people are gathering but it does care about the conditions under which they're gathering," Wen argued, adding "outdoors much safer than indoors and wearing masks obviously much safer than not wearing masks."
"I would also in this case would distinguish between the behavior of the participants while at protests versus rallies," she continued, arguing that BLM protesters are more "aware" of the risks than Trump supporters.
"At protests many people are aware of the risks and doing everything they can to reduce that risk versus at many of the rallies we are seeing people going in defiance," Wen claimed.
"It's their behavior during those events. I also worry about what they do after the events. They may not be self-quarantining and testing as then getting tested as they should be," Wen baselessly conjectured.
She even cited a study carried out in June that found "[T]here have not been surges of infections that have been tied" to protests.
Of course, there is no evidence that Trump rallies are tied to any surges of infections either, but that doesn't seem to matter because the orange man is bad.
Host Jim Sciutto thanked Wen for "breaking through the fog of confusion and disinformation to lead us back to the facts."
Diligent viewers were left wondering exactly what facts they'd been ‘led back to' and questioningwhy the ‘fog of confusion bullshit' appeared thicker than ever at the end of this segment.