Woman Who Ingested the Fish Tank Cleaner Is a Democratic Donor

Models of viruses are seen during President Donald J. Trump’s tour of the viral pathogenesis laboratory Tuesday, March 3, 2020, at the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Md. (Official White House Photo by Shealah Craighead)

Remember the story of the Arizona woman and her husband who took fish tank cleaner allegedly because they thought it would be a cure or preventative against the Wuhan coronavirus? The wife alleged that they got the idea from President Donald Trump talking about the potential for the drugs hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine. Of course, Trump didn’t say to take fish cleaner, but was only talking about the possibility with the actual drug properly prescribed a doctor.

Turns out there’s a little bit more to the story than we were led to believe.

While the woman’s name was, interestingly, not mentioned in national media when the story ran on March 23, the Free Beacon figured out who they were from local reports on the matter. But they’re still withholding the last name at the request of the wife, who’s name is Wanda, 61. Her husband’s name was Gary, 68.

The media stories played up her remarks about Trump suggesting that it was because of him that they took the fish cleaner. The stories seemed to want to leave you with the impression that she was a Trump supporter, misled by the President.

In fact, Wanda was a Democratic donor who was a Trump critic, according to the Free Beacon:

The woman’s most recent donations, in late February, were to a Democratic PAC, the 314 Action Fund, that bills itself as the “pro-science resistance” and has vocally criticized the Trump administration’s response to the coronavirus pandemic and held up her case to slam the White House. [….]

Federal Election Commission records show that Wanda has donated thousands of dollars to Democratic electoral groups and candidates over the past two years, including Hillary Clinton, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, and EMILY’s List, a group that aims to elect pro-choice female candidates.

Wanda told the Free Beacon that she and her husband were both Democrats, not Trump supporters.

Wanda said that she decided to take it on the “spur of the moment” and that it was “stupid” and a “horrible, tragic mistake.” “We thought if anything it would help us ‘cus that’s what we’ve been hearing on the news,” she said.

Wanda’s most recent contributions to Democratic causes came on Feb. 26 and 28. They went to the 314 Action Fund, a Democratic political action committee that describes itself as “the largest pro-science advocacy organization committed to electing scientists” and aims to “promote the responsible use of data driven fact based approaches in public policy.”

The group has been highly critical of Trump’s coronavirus policies in recent weeks. In fact, on its Facebook page, the group slammed the Trump administration for the couple’s actions, writing, “There are real consequences to the White House throwing its approval behind an experimental drug trial before it’s time.”

Free Beacon says her first recorded donation was $150 to Hillary Clinton in 2016, the following year she donated $550 to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and she’s also contributed about $6,000 to Democratic electoral groups in the last two years.

Wanda said that people shouldn’t take Trump’s words at face value.

“Oh my God, don’t take anything. Don’t believe anything that the president says and his people,” she said. She told a local news outlet that she was still “pretty much in shock” over her husband’s death.

“We were just having the best day before this happened. I made him his favorite lunch, grilled steak and asparagus and red potatoes, and we were just having the best Sunday,” she said.

Obviously no one should be ingesting something that isn’t for human consumption. And Trump never suggested that anyone should take fish tank cleaner.

You have someone donating to a ‘pro-science’ resistance PAC and then you have this story. Is it fair to say I have more questions here?