Anybody who has followed coronavirus misinformation over the past two years, as we have, would know what this was about: the idea that it’s just a coincidence that people who are dying of other things happened to have died shortly after contracting the virus. This has been a mainstay on the right, particularly with the likes of Tucker Carlson, who raised the issue as early as April 2020. Back then, it was about suggesting the official death toll during Donald Trump’s presidency was inflated. (Trump himself notably disagreed with that.) Today, it’s about suggesting maybe we don’t need so much mitigation.

But Walensky didn’t seem to recognize it as such. Instead, her response indicated she viewed the question as being about that difference between dying with comorbidities and without them.

Baier didn’t pitch the issue as deceptively as others have, but his phrasing certainly suggested that people dying “with covid” was distinct from those dying “from covid.”

“How many of the 836,000 deaths in the U.S. linked to covid are from covid or how many are with covid but they had other comorbidities? Do you have that breakdown?” he asked before eliciting Walensky’s “data will be forthcoming” response.

Walensky’s response granting the premise has led to some predictable headlines on the right.