What's new

Donald is about to go through some things...

People having a right is the opposite of the federal government having power.
The Federal government not having a power is the opposite of the Federal government having a power, and the People not having a right is the opposite of the People having a right. Having apples is not the opposite of not having oranges. The decision to strike down RvW took away a power from the Federal government that they should have never had in the first place. It put the issue back in the purview of democracy, demokratia, powers of the people.
 
The Federal government not having a power is the opposite of the Federal government having a power, and the People not having a right is the opposite of the People having a right.
So, you have trouble with the concept of subsets. Interesting.
 
many many countries are recommending against Covid vaccination for people under 50years of age. Any thoughts on the Cleveland Clinic study showing the more Covid vaccine doses you have the more times you'll get Covid ?
Seems to me that the people most likely to keep themselves up to date are also those at the most risk, such as health care workers. If you don't have a ton of contact with people and have less chance of exposure you are less likely to be fully up to date. I manage people and have regular contact with a lot of people (as many as 300 in my facilities during 2020), so I got every shot I could, and I had COVID once. My wife doesn't work outside the home, but she also stayed up to date with me. She got COVID...exactly once. But several of our supervisors, with daily contact with groups of between 30-50 people, also stayed mostly up to date, but many of them came down with COVID several times. The more times you roll the dice...

Of course one thing that throws water on this whole thing is unidentified COVID whether someone just didn't get tested or didn't test positive (mine was a false negative twice, they found out I had COVID through an antibody test), or it wasn't severe enough to get them to get tested one way or the other, or it was asymptomatic. How do you know you didn't have it 3 times, asymptomatically, spreading it around everywhere you went like a clueless COVID-douchebag?


Then there is this from the article in question:

One reason why being “up-to-date,” based on the CDC definition, was not associated with a lower risk of COVID-19 was that the bivalent vaccine was less effective against the XBB lineages of the Omicron variant. Another reason could be that the CDC definition ignores the protective effect of immunity acquired from prior infection.

One big issue with studies like this is the fact that an unknown number of these people already had had covid in the past and hence had some level, of natural immunity. No way to control for that.
 
Last edited:
One big issue with studies like this is the fact that an unknown number of these people already had had covid in the past and hence had some level, of natural immunity. No way to control for that.
That was the point of this study. They weren't controlling for it because it was the question they wanted answered. This study compared the immunity from natural immunity to the immunity derived from Pfizer. The conclusion was that natural immunity has a statistical edge over Pfizer-brand immunity.
 
Last edited:
That was the point of this study. They weren't controlling for it because it was the question they wanted answered. This study compared the immunity from natural immunity to the immunity derived from Pfizer. The conclusion was that natural immunity has a statistical edge over Pfizer-brand immunity.
But they didn't know who had previously had it. That's the problem. Some could have been asymptomatic. Others just didn't know. It didn't say they did antibody tests on everyone to see if they had had it before. It's a rough study at best.
 
Just personally, I have had 5 covid shots (2 for the first installation and 3 boosters) and I have never tested positive for covid. (probably had about 8 covid tests or so)
Being pretty healthy prob means you’ve had Covid and been asymptomatic. Either way good result for you but you’d be an outlier according to statistics
 
Being pretty healthy prob means you’ve had Covid and been asymptomatic. Either way good result for you but you’d be an outlier according to statistics
I am not at all healthy and have not tested positive, and I've been tested a lot. The ones in my family who have had Covid more than once are those who had the original booster but nothing since. And they are as angry about the vaccine as you are.
 
I am not at all healthy and have not tested positive, and I've been tested a lot. The ones in my family who have had Covid more than once are those who had the original booster but nothing since. And they are as angry about the vaccine as you are.

i'm not so much angry at the vaccine per se moreso the lies and misrepresentations that have been perpetuated by the drug companies and governments without clearly established evidence around it's merits or risks or considered application and use. As i have stated many times before i've encouraged my mum to get hers and many others who i would deem at risk, but that's all been covered to death.

I'm genuinely happy for you that you haven't had Covid and i surely hope that streak continues. Statistically speaking people such as Fish and yourself are outliers though. Large amounts of data show the average to be different, although as many people point out there is so much noise and so many variables in all these studies. Most of the points i bring up are to poke and prod and hopefully get people to ask questions because in all of this without placebo controlled double blind trials there are very few things that can be absolute certainties.
 
I just read that trumps legal team wont take a plea deal in this documents case. Will be interesting to see if that holds true.
 
“Even as he pledges to retaliate if elected, Trump and his supporters claim he is being targeted in a way that is similar to authoritarian regimes — such as in Russia, where opponents of President Vladimir Putin have been jailed, or Venezuela, where President Nicolas Maduro’s chief rival was prosecuted. There is no evidence that Biden made the sort of pledge to target Trump that the former president has now made, and the president said he has never tried to influence the Justice Department on any case.

Trump’s attacks on the justice system are the latest step in a now eight-year campaign by the former president and his allies against the traditions and institutions that have helped maintain American democracy….

…..Stephen Saltzburg, a former top official in the criminal division of the Justice Department who is now a George Washington University law professor, said Trump was signaling that he would use the department to settle scores — just the thing he is claiming led to his indictment.

“This is typical of what Donald Trump does,” Saltzburg said. “He essentially accuses people of doing what he would do if he were in the position.”

…..The former president’s complaints about being persecuted, if not his vow of retribution, have been taken up by a wide swath of Republicans, from longtime supporters in Congress to governors who position themselves as moderates. That includes Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin, who bemoaned on Twitter what he called “a two-tiered justice system where some are selectively prosecuted, and others are not.”

Another sign of how the right has absorbed Trump’s world view came Tuesday night, hours after his court appearance, when Fox News briefly captioned images of Biden and Trump with the words “wannabe dictator speaks at the White House after having his political rival arrested.” The network took down the chyron and said in a statement the matter was “addressed” without providing further details.

……Former U.S. Attorney Roscoe Howard said he has faith that the public will see past those protestations in the current case just by looking at the indictment.

“You can read it and make a determination of whether he’s violating the law. And anybody who does the same thing, we treat them the same way,” Howard said. “When you peel back some of the arguments we’re hearing, it is a bit like, ‘Oh I don’t have to follow these rules.’”

That’s the point when it comes to Trump, said Ruth Ben-Ghiat, a historian at New York University who studies authoritarians.

“It’s an old situation he’s in, but now because this is extremely serious, of course he’s going to ramp up that narrative,” Ben-Ghiat said. “What strongmen do is, if you are corrupt, you need to get back into power to shut down all the institutions that can harm you.”

 
Dude narcissists never back down, never admit wrong. Zero chance

But he has taken plea deals in the past. In multiple cases.

He is a narcissist but also a coward. If he sees the writing on the wall that he will be convicted and do real time then i bet he take a plea deal.
 
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Even when he was president, Donald Trump lacked the legal authority to declassify a U.S. nuclear weapons-related document that he is charged with illegally possessing, security experts said, contrary to the former U.S. president’s claim.

The secret document, listed as No. 19 in the indictment charging Trump with endangering national security, can under the Atomic Energy Act only be declassified through a process that by the statute involves the Department of Energy and the Department of Defense.

 
Interesting….” You couldn’t use the T word”.
Washington Post investigation. No paywall at link.

“A Washington Post investigation found that more than a year would pass before prosecutors and FBI agents jointly embarked on a formal probe of actions directed from the White House to try to steal the election. Even then, the FBI stopped short of identifying the former president as a focus of that investigation.

A wariness about appearing partisan, institutional caution, and clashes over how much evidence was sufficient to investigate the actions of Trump and those around him all contributed to the slow pace. Garland and the deputy attorney general, Lisa Monaco, charted a cautious course aimed at restoring public trust in the department while some prosecutors below them chafed, feeling top officials were shying away from looking at evidence of potential crimes by Trump and those close to him, The Post found.

…..The Justice Department’s painstaking approach to investigating Trump can be traced to Garland’s desire to turn the page from missteps, bruising attacks and allegations of partisanship in the department’s recent investigations of both Russia’s interference in the 2016 presidential election and Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server.

Inside Justice, however, some lawyers have complained that the attorney general’s determination to steer clear of any claims of political motive has chilled efforts to investigate the former president. “You couldn’t use the T word,” said one former Justice official briefed on prosecutors’ discussions”.

 
Interesting….” You couldn’t use the T word”.
Washington Post investigation. No paywall at link.

“A Washington Post investigation found that more than a year would pass before prosecutors and FBI agents jointly embarked on a formal probe of actions directed from the White House to try to steal the election. Even then, the FBI stopped short of identifying the former president as a focus of that investigation.

A wariness about appearing partisan, institutional caution, and clashes over how much evidence was sufficient to investigate the actions of Trump and those around him all contributed to the slow pace. Garland and the deputy attorney general, Lisa Monaco, charted a cautious course aimed at restoring public trust in the department while some prosecutors below them chafed, feeling top officials were shying away from looking at evidence of potential crimes by Trump and those close to him, The Post found.

…..The Justice Department’s painstaking approach to investigating Trump can be traced to Garland’s desire to turn the page from missteps, bruising attacks and allegations of partisanship in the department’s recent investigations of both Russia’s interference in the 2016 presidential election and Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server.

Inside Justice, however, some lawyers have complained that the attorney general’s determination to steer clear of any claims of political motive has chilled efforts to investigate the former president. “You couldn’t use the T word,” said one former Justice official briefed on prosecutors’ discussions”.

Awww, poor trump. Attorney general was taking it easy on him and holding back on investigations. He does get treated differently by our justice department. Just not in the way that Trumpers think he does
 
So awesome. Sums up trump perfectly
But he is a 10 to 1 winner! For every failure at meaningless roles, like Secretary of State, he had 10 porn stars on retainer, you know, the important stuff. Lots of janitors and cooks or something that he hired the best, top cooks and janitors in the world, knew how to janitor better than anyone, except Donald of course. He hired 10 of those critical Whitehouse employees for every failure at jobs that just didn't matter, like Chief of Staff. And don't get him started on his awesome lawyers!
 
Top