Candace Owens Is Taking Legal Action After Being Denied Covid Test For Political Views

originally posted by: marg6043
a reply to: Klassified

Wow, this the way fascism works in a nation, people making their own rules and laws even if they are under federal funding.

I hope this fascist facility gets shot down.

Or freedom.

a reply to: ThatDamnDuckAgain

I have not checked for evidence about the funding either. Is it not discrimination when it's complete private? Honest question, could be different laws than here.

Depends on the context, but private companies are certainly shielded more from such liabilities.

It also depends on the state. Virginia for example is a right to work and right to serve state. You can fire anyone at anytime for no reason (though if it was proven to be because of discrimination you can be liable). You can also refuse service to any customer for any reason, though you'll probably get in trouble if you discriminate.

But, Candice would have to argue and compel a court to see this as discrimination. They didn't say it was because she is republican/conservative/not liberal... They said it was because (they perceived) she is counter productive to their business model. The articles allege she gets the tests regularly (good on her for being proactive), so if they can argue they're backlogged and have to prioritize, I'm not sure how a court would see it.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

Ah I see now! Thank you for explaining

a reply to: ThatDamnDuckAgain

I still think it's wrong what they did. And it certainly doesn't help their cause of "keeping the community safe" if that's really their aim.

But she is being quite the twat about this too IMO.

Here is a fun quote I found when trying to see if this place actually is state/federally funded.

Calling the email "literally the biggest heap of virtue-signaling cr-p I have ever seen in my life," Owens added, "The last time a white person refused a Black person services because, 'I don't like your thoughts and ideas,' we were in the Jim Crow era."

Link (never heard of the outlet, they appear to be regional, so grain of salt and all that)

So, again, she's playing identity politics while she cried foul on people in the past for it.

But, she's a pundit, so big surprise. This just goes back to my first comment that I think both sides are just assholes in this situation. They both made it political for personal reasons, but nothing of substance will come of this for everyday people. Just publicity and virtue signalling for these clowns.

originally posted by: Klassified
The hits just keep on coming. Looks like the Aspen Colorado testing facility that rejected Candace request for a Covid-19 test may have bitten off more than they can chew...

Conservative author and commentator, Candace Owens is currently feuding with a testing facility in Aspen, Colorado after denying her a Covid-19 test over her political views.

Owens — who is also a host at The Daily Wire — has been sharing the developments on her social media and most recently said she is escalating the matter to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

Link

Seems the owners of the facility denied receiving any tax payer funding, which looks to be a lie. Candace is a bulldog and takes matters like these seriously, as factcheck.org found out.

LOL....I hope the owner learns a valuable lesson. I know of 3 people in my life that have had a similar lesson....only 1 learned from it....the other 2 still cling to their narrative and have lost every "friend" they had.

originally posted by: GravitySucks
Business owner had every right to refuse her service.

""...we cannot support anyone who has pro-actively worked to make this pandemic worse by spreading misinformation."

We're big on rights around here, right?

That's the irony of the situation, having the right to stay open and do business with dozens of people during a pandemic, then refusing service to a customer for being irresponsible about pandemic health policies, while they are trying to do responsible pandemic exposure testing, which is already weird in the first place because she shouldn't believe in that junk or be concerned about getting sick.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

Have not looked into their personalities yet but I take your word for it (pundit). I agree making it a racial thing is low stomping, just the same as the initial email that spawned this. The response, mostly tit for tat. Who uses "lol" in a business email though.

I think this Suzanna has hurt her business more than it helped her. She got publicity though but IDK how much that impacts such a lab, when there is a state mandate on testing anyways.

It doesn't feel like she feels truly discriminated after reading the response. Publicity and virtue signalling indeed.

a reply to: TzarChasm

Meh. The truth will come out eventually.

Turns out she requested concierge service at her hotel and the staff didn't want to go there.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

Just insane to see how many people are being grifted by influences and politicians.

As if most people have the resources to pursue this legally? The gripe is that she is an "influencer" and happened to get denied a service right? But if I had been denied service for the same reason I'd not have the option to do anything but suck it up and go somewhere else. Personally I am happy she is taking a legal course of action over this. The little guys get crushed on stuff like this all the time and now they denied service to somebody that can challenge this on a large scale. Sounds like a win to me.

Good for Candace, she'll win this issue of course.

originally posted by: GravitySucks
Business owner had every right to refuse her service.

""...we cannot support anyone who has pro-actively worked to make this pandemic worse by spreading misinformation."

We're big on rights around here, right?

Not if a portion of their funding comes from the taxpayer.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

LOL....I hope the owner learns a valuable lesson. I know of 3 people in my life that have had a similar lesson....only 1 learned from it....the other 2 still cling to their narrative and have lost every "friend" they had.

I hope so, but with people like them, it's always someone else's fault. They can't be wrong.

a reply to: Klassified

That's not yet determined. She claims it does and they claim it doesn't.

Guess the judge will figure that out.

a reply to: Klassified

Go for it, Candace!

originally posted by: GravitySucks
a reply to: Klassified

That's not yet determined. She claims it does and they claim it doesn't.

Guess the judge will figure that out.

As was pointed out earlier, don't Medicaid payments equal accepting government funds?

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: GravitySucks
a reply to: Klassified

That's not yet determined. She claims it does and they claim it doesn't.

Guess the judge will figure that out.

As was pointed out earlier, don't Medicaid payments equal accepting government funds?

To me its kind of like a food bank vs grocery store.

Food bank needs government or charity to operate.

Grocery store accepts food stamps.

a reply to: Arnie123

On what grounds? Political affiliation is not a protected class.

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: Arnie123

On what grounds? Political affiliation is not a protected class.

Though veteran status is.

Let's strap her with an M16 and send her to Afghanistan.

So forced draft on a single individual because why?

originally posted by: AaarghZombies

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: Arnie123

On what grounds? Political affiliation is not a protected class.

Though veteran status is.

Let's strap her with an M16 and send her to Afghanistan.