Navarro was challenged on this in a Monday morning CNN interview. “What are your qualifications to weigh in on medicines more than Dr. Anthony Fauci?” anchor John Berman asked. “Why should we listen to you and not Dr. Fauci?”

Navarro first advocated that CNN talk to a specific doctor who would agree with him, but as for his own qualifications, “My qualifications in terms of looking at the science is that I'm a social scientist. I have a PhD, and I understand how to read statistical studies whether it’s in medicine, law, economics, or whatever.”

Um. Sounds like Harvard should be calling Navarro back for some remedial work on reading statistical studies and the general concept of not cherry-picking studies to find the ones you like the best. Because, dude, I too am a social scientist with a PhD and an understanding of how to read statistical studies and … as Fauci said on Sunday, “the data are really just at best suggestive,” with no large controlled studies and the existing small studies not in agreement on what, if any, effects hydroxychloroquine has on COVID-19. And if Navarro can’t see that, it’s because he’s either forgotten how to read a statistical study or because he’s too committed to sucking up to Trump to be able to read a set of them honestly on this subject. But it’s obvious that Trump has chosen his path—hoping for a magic cure to emerge, magically—and that Navarro has chosen the winning argument.