Remember Dr. Bandy Lee, the reportedly unlicensed Yale School of Medicine psychiatrist who’s repeatedly been trotted out by congressional Democrats and their media allies to speak publicly about President Donald Trump’s allegedly “visibly deteriorating” mental health?
Well, on Tuesday renowned conservative radio show host Mark Levin confronted her live on his nationally syndicated program, and it was incredibly brutal. The host literally began interrogating her like a medieval inquisitor from the onset of the interview.
“Are you a Democrat?” he asked.
“No,” she replied.
“Did you vote for Hillary Clinton?” he then pressed.
“I did,” she replied.
And Levin was just warming up …
Fast-forward to the 39-minute mark in the podcast below to hear the whole interview for yourself:
It was when the discussion broached the topic of Trump that things really got interesting.
When Levin asked Lee whether she’s ever even met the president, she replied, “No.”
And so the question becomes, how exactly did she reach a diagnosis of him?
“The alarm for myself, early 2016 I believe … his interactions I saw between the presidential candidate Donald Trump and his rally attendees,” Lee explained. “And so it was real-time interaction and response in real life, as recorded of course, but it was an observation of real interaction.”
This answer didn’t please the host.
“And so you looked at the president and his rally, and you saw the people who were applauding him, and the things that were said and done upset you … or was it all clinical?” he asked.
But he already knew the answer.
“You did know, obviously, scientific diagnosis, that’s not possible from a distance,” he noted.
Fact-check: True.
Flash back to 2016, around the time that Lee began unethically diagnosing the president. At the time, the American Psychiatric Association issued a statement warning real psychiatrists — i.e., ones with active licenses — from participating in armchair analysis.
“Every four years, the United States goes through a protracted elections process for the highest office in the land. This year, the election seems like anything but a normal contest, that has at times devolved into outright vitriol,” then-APA president Maria A. Oquendo wrote.
“The unique atmosphere of this year’s election cycle may lead some to want to psychoanalyze the candidates, but to do so would not only be unethical, it would be irresponsible.”
If only there was a rule set by the American Psychiatric Association that clearly states that armchair analysis of public figures is irresponsible and unethical, oh wait the Goldwater Rule has been around for decades that says just that… https://t.co/iY6XDDYUnW https://t.co/DjzCgDInQK
— Paul Sacca (@Paul_Sacca) June 5, 2019
Unbeknownst to most non-medical professionals — and Lee, apparently, though as an alleged medical professional, she should know this — there’s even a rule pertaining to this.
“Since 1973, the American Psychiatric Association and its members have abided by a principle commonly known as ‘the Goldwater Rule,’ which prohibits psychiatrists from offering opinions on someone they have not personally evaluated,” Oquendo statement continued.
“The rule is so named because of its association with an incident that took place during the 1964 presidential election. During that election, Fact magazine published a survey in which they queried some 12,356 psychiatrists on whether candidate Sen. Barry Goldwater, the GOP nominee, was psychologically fit to be president. A total of 2,417 of those queried responded, with 1,189 saying that Goldwater was unfit to assume the presidency.”
But not only was Lee apparently unaware of this rule, she outright disputed it Tuesday …
“That’s untrue … it’s been scientifically proven that for certain conditions, a diagnosis is more accurate from a distance, without a personal interview,” she said to Levin.
“Nowadays diagnoses are based on… outside observations — just observing the person… in a personal interview the person… can sometimes mislead you.”
Fact-check: POINTS TO THE APA, I.E., THE WORLD’S LEADING AUTHORITY ON PSYCHIATRY.
Stunningly, after Levin pushed her further, she backtracked by falsely claiming that she’d never made an official diagnosis of Trump.
“I have never diagnosed,” she said. “I’m not interested in diagnosing, I’m not interested in the personal mental health of Donald Trump. I am only interested in the public health effects.”
Fact-check: FALSE.
Saying that someone has a “mental impairment” IS a diagnosis:
“This is double-speak,” Levin replied to her on his show Tuesday. “You don’t have a single scientific diagnosis from which you can analyze the mental health of the President of the United States.”
She also tried to claim that her clear-cut diagnosis of the president wasn’t politically motivated.
“It does not have to do with one’s political party,” she said. “In political discourse, you give both sides equal say. But in medicine, medical neutrality means you bring the same standards, no matter what political party — and if the person meets the standards, you make the assessment.”
Levin didn’t buy that either.
“But you don’t [act neutral]. I went through your book, doctor, show me the list of your standards… No offense, you sound like a palm reader. I’m asking you where are the standards?” he said.
It appears she has no standards at all. According to some Twitter users, including some of whom are themselves actual psychiatrists, Lee is nothing but a “disgrace”:
And once again you reveal yourself to be a lying political hack abusing your role as a physician. You claimed to be apolitical and only worried about Trump, but you attack all conservatives and Republicans. You and @YaleMed should be ashamed
— Liberty Doc (@libertydoc82) August 29, 2019
Just watched Mark Levin call you out on being COMPLETELY INCOMPETENT in regards to YOUR President! ?
What a disgrace you are to your profession, you should be ashamed, but after diagnosing you from afar, I know you’re not… https://t.co/EKXL2mGk4v— Juggernaut80 (@4thD_Raelism) August 29, 2019
You make blanket statements with NO proof. You use double talk and lies. You answer all questions with the same pat lingo. You do not know or understand the constitution. You are a disgrace to the medical profession
— jnarcus. ⭐️⭐️⭐️ (@jnarcus) August 28, 2019
@BandyXLee1 I worked for many years in your profession. I can say after hearing your interview on the radio today that you are a disgrace. A disgrace to your profession and to society in general. Please retire.
— Jeffrey P (@jeffpsd1) August 28, 2019
@BandyXLee1 was just on the @marklevinshow show, what a disgrace to the medical profession. No diagnosis, she’s not political, never met the President or interviewed his supporters who trigger her “alarm” but he’s a danger. And she claims to be above politics; BS
— Liberty Doc (@libertydoc82) August 28, 2019
DONATE TO BIZPAC REVIEW
Please help us! If you are fed up with letting radical big tech execs, phony fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals and a lying mainstream media have unprecedented power over your news please consider making a donation to BPR to help us fight them. Now is the time. Truth has never been more critical!
Vivek@bizpacreview.com
V. Saxena is a staff writer for BizPac Review with a decade of experience as a professional writer, and a lifetime of experience as an avid news junkie. He holds a degree in computer technology from Purdue University.
- ‘It must be an insurrection’: Pro-Palestine protestors fill California State Capitol, force lawmakers to adjourn early - January 5, 2024
- ‘I enjoy making men uncomfortable’: Critics predict ‘Disney’s biggest flop yet’ as feminist director’s past comments resurface - January 5, 2024
- Musk SCORCHES Mark Cuban with one line in DEI debate: ‘Cool, so when should we expect …’ - January 5, 2024
Comment
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.
