10
GavinJones 10 points ago +10 / -0

"the most extensive and inclusive voter fraud organization in the history of politics. -Joe Biden

2
GavinJones 2 points ago +2 / -0

They got it right. If the POTUS makes a new executive branch policy, the next POTUS can throw it out and make a new one. And making a new policy isn't hampered by technicalities. If the POTUS tells his people to do it, they're supposed to do it.

5
GavinJones 5 points ago +6 / -1

All it takes is for people to nut up and sue (if they have a valid case).

@Jack's chief legal officer went on Joe Rogan and expressly said that they're not a platform. He kept pushing her... ~"Aren't you really a publisher? Aren't these posts things that Twitter is saying?" And she was like "Yes, absolutely. We're not a neutral publisher. We try to do out best curating content, but we definitely aren't perfect at what we publish." Naturally, it all went through Rogan's ears without computing.

Facebook and Twitter HATE Section 230, and they're clear about it. They sent that "whistleblower" to go testify to congress. They want it repealed, because it EXPOSES them to liability... it doesn't actually protect them.

However, there's a huge turf campaign say the opposite... and that's convinced a few people that repealing 230 - which is literally what FB is openly campaigning for - would somehow hurt them.

9
GavinJones 9 points ago +9 / -0

This is a good hearing. We've got very liberal democrat senators asking straightforward questions like, "What should a vaccinated person do if they catch covid?" Then not getting a straight answer, and getting mad that they're not getting a straight answer.

1
GavinJones 1 point ago +1 / -0

It probably is in the record. He's just phrasing it casually.

You can very easily look at a graph of fatalities by age and extrapolate that if a 22 has a 99.99 percent of survival and a 70 y/o has a 10% chance of dying reduced by 93% for the effectiveness of the shot... the 70 y/o has a 99.7% chance of survival if vaxxxed... which is worse. But that's a lot of words. So, he says "I've heard.... (from my clerk who read the record and did the math)."

(caution fake numbers, just an example).

by gamepwn
1
GavinJones 1 point ago +1 / -0

Why is this dude's face blurrier than his tie, etc.?

4
GavinJones 4 points ago +4 / -0

If they allow people to test at home / at the office, then they can't fuck with the results at the lab.

9
GavinJones 9 points ago +9 / -0

Not even. They get people's identity (name, address, etc.) when they administer the shot, and keep a database of everyone who's gotten it.

4
GavinJones 4 points ago +4 / -0

I suspect there have been "vaccine" variants competing with (multiple) "weapon" variants from very early on. China being a bad actor doesn't mean that they released it, or that they exaggerated the virus's severity. If China did release it and wanted to maximize deaths, then it would behoove them to minimize the virus (as they initially did). (Meaning the real, initial lethality was worse than 20%)

A "vaccine" strain would explain why the virus was mild when it got to the US (because we've always been dealing with a "vaccine"). Rushing a "mild" variant - and one that would spread faster than the weapon - certainly wouldn't be 100% mild, it would still have to cause some coughing.

It also explains the hugely different symptoms that some people experience... *because they're not all catching the same virus."

In addition to a "Tier 1: Background" weapon, it'd be very strategic to have a "Tier 2: Extra Lethal" variant. Black hat agents could expose certain targets, politicians, CEOs, etc. to both variants under the cover of "community spread." As long as the variants are pretty darn similar, they'd test positive for the same old virus as usual.

8
GavinJones 8 points ago +8 / -0

Notice how he never actually says that these people are wrong.

Also, fucking "misinformation."

Information is knowledge that is conveyed or obtained.

They are both beliefs that are true. If a belief is not true, then it is not knowledge. If purported information is not true, then it "is not" information.

The prefix "mis" means something is done badly or wrongly. Misinformation means information that is true (because information / knowledge must be true), but which is contrary to the speakers' desires, immoral, unacceptable / bad, etc.

The prefix "dis" means "not" or the "opposite of" information... aka information that is "not true." They're not calling it disinformation... because they're acknowledging that the information is true. It's just information they don't like.

Fucking grammar.

by BQnita
4
GavinJones 4 points ago +4 / -0

They had great questions about the foundation of the supposed "right to abortion." It's very clear to me that they'll rule there is no right to abortion per-se. Indeed, they've never rule that women have a "right to abortion."

Just like the old "gay sex" case. A guy was charged with sodomy and claimed he had a right to have gay sex. He lost. Later another guy was charged with sodomy and he claimed he had a right to privacy. He said that the government can't come busting into people's bedrooms, snooping around their drawers, etc. He won.

Everyone has rights to privacy and I would also say reproductive autonomy. No one has a right to stop me from having kids. However, the court hasn't dealt with this "how do we handle substantive privacy rights" issue very well.

I would say the government should be able to ban sodomy and abortion, etc. but should also be barred from prosecuting it unless people voluntarily admit to doing it, or post pictures online, etc. Maybe states should be allowed to ban direct-to-consumer advertisements for dildos, porn, contraceptives, etc. However, how not authority to prevent stores from selling these products, or to prevent manufacturers from advertising to retailers. Doctors should be allowed to conduct abortions is a safe environment, but shouldn't be allowed to advertise it... because then they're admitting to conspiring to commit abortion.

Which... is how homosexuality and abortion have always been treated. It's private. It shouldn't be socially approved, etc. However, it's also not something the government should have the power to get too involved with.

3
GavinJones 3 points ago +3 / -0

A fact cannot can "remain fact" any more than a fact can be proved false. The truth does not come and go, it is or is not. If a claim has been proved false, then it was was never a fact, merely a false claim. If Mr. Frum's claims do "remain" then those claims are false.

1
GavinJones 1 point ago +1 / -0

However, it is an interesting case about fixing LIBOR.

1
GavinJones 1 point ago +1 / -0

And.... it's not the case.

It's oral argument in some unrelated appeal.

1
GavinJones 1 point ago +1 / -0

Those inside the USA can call the following to access live audio as it's a federal court. That's all they allow for In USA call 844-721-7237 Access code 9991787

Doesn't work for me.

2
GavinJones 2 points ago +2 / -0

The one I saw floating around was old, for a prior hearing. I haven't called it myself but a twitch streamer tried and the PIN was rejected.

2
GavinJones 2 points ago +2 / -0

Well, that looks like that is the right building:

The trial will take place in Courtroom 318 of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, Thurgood Marshall U.S. Courthouse at 40 Foley Square, New York, New York.

https://nysd.uscourts.gov/usa-vs-ghislaine-maxwell-20-cr-330-ajn-case-information

6
GavinJones 6 points ago +6 / -0

Why would the trial be on a 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals stream?

2
GavinJones 2 points ago +2 / -0

Trump is the Republican party.

If you're running against the Republicans, then you're running against Trump.