Special Counsel John Durham asserted in a court filing Friday that the CIA concluded data from Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussmann alleging coordination between Donald Trump and Russia was "not technically plausible" and was "user created."
In the filing, Durham responded to objections from Sussmann’s defense regarding what evidence could be admissible at Sussmann's trial, which is scheduled to begin next month. Sussmann is accused of lying to the FBI by saying he was not attending a meeting on behalf of a particular client when he was actually presenting the information on behalf of the HIllary Clinton campaign and a technology executive with whom he worked.
In February, Durham said data was exploited "by mining the EOP's DNS traffic and other data for the purpose of gathering derogatory information about Donald Trump," adding the data was used to establish "an inference" and "narrative" tying Trump to Russia. But Sussmann is moving to preclude evidence concerning the "gathering" of that "DNS data" by "Tech Executive 1," who has been identified as Rodney Joffe, and his associates. In Friday's filing, Durham argued that the gathering of the data is a "necessary factual backdrop to the charged conduct."
"For example, while the FBI did not reach an ultimate conclusion regarding the data’s accuracy or whether it might have been in whole or in part genuine, spoofed, altered, or fabricated, Agency 2 concluded in early 2017 that the Russian Bank 1 data and Russian Phone Provider 1 data was not ‘technically plausible,’ did not ‘withstand technical scrutiny,’ ‘contained gaps,’ ‘conflicted with [itself],’ and was ‘user created and not machine/tool generated," Durham wrote.Bottom line is that the data that pretty much everyone used as an excuse to wage a two year investigation of accusations about Donald Trump were based on "technically implausible' data that was "user created". Moreover this information was provided to them by the Clinton campaign. Agency 2 (btw) would be the CIA.
Just stop for a minute or two and let that sink in.
Our intelligence community spent two years, millions of dollars, and provided a thousand and one leaks to the media about a politically damaging investigation of a Presidential Candidate who became President. This entire scheme was based entirely on evidence that was provided to them by a political opponent of this President that our own intelligence community actually KNEW was fake. But they investigated anyways?
147 comments:
Build two gallows the entire length of the reflecting pool on the National Mall
One on each side.
Try and convict these "Intelligence Community" traitors.
All of them, down to the lowliest.
Hang them all at once.
Make it a one-time National Holiday.
How long till someone brings up Jan 6th?
KILLED THE STORY
Several more details in the filings reveal just how far over his skis Durham is in claiming that the Democrats were the real impetus to the story (rather than, for example, April Lorenzen). Sussmann’s indictment, remember, starts with the two Alfa Bank articles published on October 31, 2016 even while he admits that Franklin Foer sources his story to Tea Leaves.
That’s true even though the indictment provides just three ways in which Sussmann was involved in the story. First and very significantly, in response to Eric Lichtblau asking (in a question that reflects past discussions about the very real hacking Russia was doing), “I see Russians are hacking away. any big news?,” Sussmann met with Lichtblau, brought Marc Elias into the loop, who in turn brought Jake Sullivan in. He undoubtedly seeded the initial story. And per his own testimony he may have pitched it to Foer and Ellen Nakashima, though Durham provides no evidence of that (unless it involves follow-up after the first Foer story).
Then, Durham describes that on October 10 — at a time when “Phil” was sending a series of DMs to the NYT about the Alfa Bank allegations and when several NYT reporters were in contact with a number of other experts, at least one of whom has never been mentioned in any Durham filings — Sussmann gave Lichtblau a nudge, but a nudge that (at least as described) not only didn’t mention the Alfa Bank allegation, but didn’t even mention Russia. He did so by forwarding an opinion piece talking about how NYT wasn’t reporting as aggressively on Trump as other outlets.
Then after Franklin Foer’s story (sourced to Tea Leaves and Jean Camp though possibly involving Sussmann) came out, Sussmann’s billing records show, he responded to other reporters’ inquiries about the story.
I have no doubt Sussmann would have loved this story to break, but Durham provides no evidence that Sussmann was the big push behind it (and the public evidence shows Tea Leaves was).
Indeed, new details in Sussmann’s filing make it clear that Durham has, as I suspected, replicated some of the erroneous assumptions that Alfa Bank did to sustain his conspiracy theories. Sussmann summarizes the journalist-involved communications to which Sussmann was not a party that Durham wants to introduce at trial.
This table puts names to the narrative Durham tells in his filing. Importantly, it reveals that the reporter who — in addition to making it clear he had gotten to Fusion’s “experts via different channels,” raised questions about the source of the data (the same topic Durham’s expert doesn’t seem prepared to address) — is Mark Hosenball.
That’s important because, according to Fusion’s lawyer Joshua Levy, Hosenball sent Fusion the link to Tea Leaves’ data, not vice versa. It’s not clear whether this later email reflects Hosenball sending that link (plus there’s a discrepancy between what date Durham says these emails were exchanged and what date Sussmann does, October 16 and October 18 respectively), but if so, it would mean Hosenball was shopping data that had been available via other means, means that aren’t known to involve Sussmann or Fusion.
In other words, just a single one of these later emails that Durham is pointing to to support his claim that Democrats were pushing this story involves the Democrats taking the initiative, and it only involves Peter Fritsch forwarding this story and pushing Foer to hurry up on his own story (which he sourced to Tea Leaves and Camp) on the Alfa Bank anomaly.
That’s important because Durham completely leaves out of his narrative how Sussmann helped kill the initial NYT story, and now he says that helping the FBI kill a story on his client’s opponent just before an election would not be exculpatory.
https://www.emptywheel.net/2022/04/16/john-durham-continues-to-hide-how-michael-sussmann-helped-kill-the-nyt-story/
JOHN DURHAM CONTINUES TO HIDE HOW MICHAEL SUSSMANN HELPED KILL THE NYT STORY
JOHN DURHAM CONTINUES TO HIDE HOW MICHAEL SUSSMANN HELPED KILL THE NYT STORYApril 16, 2022/22 Comments/in 2016 Presidential Election, emptywheel, Mueller Probe /by emptywheel
The two sides in the Michael Sussmann case have submitted their responses to motions in limine. They include:
Sussmann’s omnibus response to Durham’s motion, with links to:Durham’s initial 404(b) notice, dated March 18Durham’s untimely 404(b) notice, dated March 23Sussmann’s initial 404(b) response, dated April 4Durham’s defense of his expert witness, which provides the kinds of disclosure he should have submitted when he first noticed Sussmann of the expertDurham’s omnibus response to Sussmann, with links to:A Memorandum of a Conversation a CIA employee had with Sussmann about the YotaPhone allegation on January 31, 2017A Memorandum of the Conversation Sussmann had at the CIA on February 9, 2017
I’m not going to do a detailed analysis of the merit of these arguments here. The filings make it clear that, unless Durham accidentally turns this into a trial about Donald Trump’s numerous back channels to Russia, the trial will focus on the meanings of “benefit” and “on behalf of.” The entire record makes it clear Sussmann understood he was representing Rodney Joffe but that he was not asking for any benefit for Joffe, and as such said he was not there on behalf of a client. Because Durham doesn’t believe that Russia was a real threat even to Donald Trump, he doesn’t believe that such a tip could benefit the country, and so sees such a tip exclusively as a political mission. As I’ll show, the YotaPhone allegation–which Durham has recently turned to as his smoking gun–in fact undermines Durham’s argument on that point (which is probably why Sussmann has no complaint about it coming in as evidence).
In general, I think Sussmann’s arguments are stronger, sometimes substantially so, but could see Judge Christopher Cooper ruling for Durham on some of them.
But I want to look at some of the new facts revealed by these findings
Fox cherry picked evidence.
The more remarkable claim that Durham says Martin will make in rebuttal if Sussmann affirms the authenticity of the data is that, because the data was necessarily a subset of all global DNS data, it’s like it was cherry-picked, even if it was not deliberately so.
That while he cannot determine with certainty whether the data at issue was cherry-picked, manipulated, spoofed or authentic, the data was necessarily incomplete because it was a subset of all global DNS data;
Given what I’ve learned about the data in question, this judgment seems both to misunderstand the collection process and may badly misstate what an expert should be able to say. Significantly, this suggests Martin will testify as an expert without trying to replicate the effort of the various strands of research that identified the data in the first place, which is the process an expert would need to do to comment on the authenticity of the data. Not attempting to do so would only make sense if the FBI had less visibility into DNS data than the researchers in question (or if they knew replicating it would replicate the results and kill their case).
Real lawyers not propaganda
Lmao 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣
“PROFESSIONAL EMBARASSMENT” [SIC]: MICHAEL SUSSMANN CATCHES JOHN DURHAM ACCUSING FIRST AND INVESTIGATING LATER, AGAIN
“PROFESSIONAL EMBARASSMENT” [SIC]: MICHAEL SUSSMANN CATCHES JOHN DURHAM ACCUSING FIRST AND INVESTIGATING LATER, AGAINApril 17, 2022/25 Comments/in 2016 Presidential Election, Mueller Probe /by emptywheel
There’s one more important detail from the John Durham related filings submitted Friday that’s worth noting. Michael Sussman has caught Durham making accusations before he investigated them first.
This is not the first time that Durham has risked “professional embarassment” [sic] by making accusations before investigating them. Including the Baker-related failures laid out here, here are some of the investigative steps Durham did not take before accusing Sussmann of lying to cover up a plot involving Hillary Clinton to manufacture dirt on Donald Trump:
Interviewing a full-time Clinton campaign staffer before accusing Sussmann of coordinating with the campaignLooking for the records proving that Sussmann and Rodney Joffe helped the FBI kill the NYT story until after he charged SussmannLearning how closely the FBI worked with Rodney Joffe on DNS-related issuesFinding the January 31, 2017 CIA meeting record at which Sussmann clearly explained he was sharing an allegation at the request of a clientAsking DOJ IG for evidence of the investigation on related topics that found no evidence Sussmann committed a crimeDiscovering a similar tip that Sussmann had anonymously shared with DOJ IG on behalf of JoffeObtaining two James Baker phones, one of which Durham had been informed about years earlierSubpoenaing Baker for exculpatory texts involving Sussmann he stored on the cloud
I suspect there is far more, including never checking DOJ records to learn that someone totally unrelated to the Democrats was pushing the NYT story more aggressively than Sussmann in the period in question, to say nothing of all the evidence showing that April Lorenzen’s suspicions that Trump’s campaign manager was money laundering payments from oligarchs close to Putin were absolutely correct.
As of Wednesday, Durham’s investigation entered its 36th month. The “professional embarassment” [sic] has been going on so long, it’s hard to even capture it all anymore (but here’s a more accessible version). What’s clear is that every time he finds exculpatory information he should have obtained before charging Sussmann, he doubles down on his conspiracy theories — an approach that’s bound to lead to more “professional embarassment” [sic] down the line.
Nice try
You really are addicted to Hillary Clinton lock her up
Roger...
Durham is charging Sussman with lying to the FBI, nothing else. How Sussman dealt with the media is irrelevant to the charges.
While I understand that there are a lot of details from the filing are angering people and that they do not feel that it should be part of "this" particular indictment... they seem pretty relevant under any practical common sense measure.
When you are accused of falsifying your intentions while bringing information to the FBI... Durham is arguing that it is relevant exactly how unreliable that information was.
He not only has documentation evidence that the CIA believed that the evidence was "technically implausible" and "user created" - but Durham also has internal communications from the Clinton hired researchers who go back and forth on how shallow their evidence was and how easy it would be to show that it was doctored or misrepresented. He has internal communications that suggests that the researchers only needed to come up with a "plausible narrative" rather than absolute proof.
Five people associated the research team have taken the fifth on the basis that their own testimony would serve to incriminate them. At least one has flipped and has offered testimony in exchange for immunity. We will see in the end how many others end up flipping.
So here are the facts undisputed by actual documented communications:
1) The CIA believe that the evidence was implausible and user created (the fact that there were holes was just a side note, not the meat of their findings).
2) The team accumulating the data did not believe that it proved what the summary was suggesting and that those in charge told them that they did not actually need "proof" and asked them to come up with a "plausible narrative".
No article written that refuses to acknowledge those two facts is actually what is "excluding" information. Durham has no legal responsibility to describe to a Judge if Sussman attempted to stop a NYT story or not (and it is dubious that he did). It is completely irrelevant to this FROM A LEGAL STANDPOINT.
https://www.emptywheel.net/2022/04/17/professional-embarassment-sic-michael-sussmann-catches-john-durham-accusing-first-and-investigating-later-again/
Again you believe that the FBI and the DOJ are not independent, and they tried to destroy the Orange Monster from day one.
Durham has been at this for three years, Roger...
Three years. When someone suggests that he "accuses first and researches second" and ANYONE believes that... then both Parties are morons.
Durham is well known to cross all of t's, dot all of his i's, measuring many times and cutting once.
That criticism has no validity at all... and certainly no validity here. When you actually "look" at what he has accumulated (in comparison to the lack of finding that Mueller had) - you know he is prepared.
And at the end of the day...
The Judge agreed with Durham
All these critics are wrong.
Well Roger...
You believe that Donald Trump was a Russian spy and that Durham, the CIA, and the Clinton paid analysts are all lying... just because.
You believe that Donald Trump was a Russian spy and that Durham, the CIA, and the Clinton paid analysts are all lying... just because.
…because he’s the smartest person on earth, ask him, with such a titanic intellect he’s forced to share room the size of a closest with the 5th Beatle
Roger...
Perhaps you should read this:
https://jonathanturley.org/2022/04/17/durham-five-witnesses-connected-to-the-clinton-campaigns-false-russian-claims-have-refused-to-cooperate-under-the-fifth-amendment/
Now you can refuse to believe Turley and the filing.. and continue to believe that after three years that Durham is "accusing first and investigating later" if that makes you feel any better. But it looks like we have 10 times the "real" investigating that we had from Mueller and all of this information is "BACKED" by actual documented communications and sworn testimony.
I dare you to read it Roger!
Read the filing too...
and then ask yourself why (if what you read is true) why a Judge is not falling for your side of the story? Perhaps because it is just a tired excuse of a narrative that parrots what Sussman's legal team has been arguing (unsuccessfully) in court.
Blogger C.H. Truth said...
Roger...
Durham is charging Sussman with lying to the FBI, nothing else. How Sussman dealt with the media is irrelevant to the charges.
Within any story/issue, the alky can always be counted on to seize upon some ridiculous and trivial non-issue, and point to it as being central to the case.
"Empty wheel."
How appropriate a source.
Three years. When someone suggests that he "accuses first and researches second" and ANYONE believes that... then both Parties are morons.
How ironic. The Mueller/Weissman persecutors did exactly what the alky is complaining about. So many of the low-level people who did so much as share an elevator ride with Trump ended up doing stints in jail - some brief like Papadopoulos, some longer like Manafort, for issues that are never prosecuted lest the accuser get laughed out of court.
The cavalcade of stars at "empty wheel' are mostly firedoglake retreads.
https://www.emptywheel.net/about/
Makes sense.
I recall firedoglake. If one was inclined to seek out the craziest and most mentally ill of the early blogosphere, firedoglake was THE place to visit.
Durham is charging Sussman with lying to the FBI, nothing else.
Funny that Lil Schitty now thinks lying to the FBI should be prosecuted!!!!!!! Amazing how he takes both sides of that argument with the likes of Flynn and just calling it a process crime not worthy of prosecution....Funny how it changes when Hillary's involved.....BWAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!
Sunday Funniest thing
From the moment she announced her run for president in 2020, Kamala Harris was the Obamas’ preferred pick. When she could not achieve victory, the Obamas shifted to Biden. But Biden’s presidency was never really the endgame for the Obamas. He was too old and too senile for them. Harris remained the bedrock of their strategy for the future of the Democratic Party.
The Clintons, however, likely have other plans. And with Harris’ awful showing, there is a chance not only to wrest the DNC away from Obama’s Chicago clique, but possibly to restore the Clintons primacy in the party. Yes, Hillary will be 77 by then but, sadly, these days being old is not a limiting factor for running—and becoming—president.
The Trump Factor
The only hitch for Hillary will be whether her old Republican nemesis, Donald Trump, opts to run for reelection. Just as in 2016, Hillary likely could beat any Republican nominee she goes up against—other than the gonzo real estate magnate-turned-reality-television-star-turned-president, that is. It is my belief that, unless the current spate of investigations into his finances and other accusations the Left has lobbed at the 45th president stick, Trump will absolutely run for a second term.
For those wishing for Florida Governor Ron DeSantis to run, if Trump is running, he will not.
Trump has made it clear that, if 2016 was the political portrayal of his first bestselling book, The Art of the Deal, 2024 would be the real-world portrayal of his second book, The Art of the Comeback—and how fitting would it be for the billionaire to go up against his old rival, Clinton, once more?
Thus, 2024 could be a bizarre replay of America’s most interesting presidential election in modern history. Only this time, Trump will be angrier and out for even more revenge than he was in 2016.
Should Trump run again (which seems likely at this point), and should things continue deteriorating under the Democratic Party’s leadership as they presently are, then there is simply no way that Kamala Harris could make a serious run for president. At that point, lacking another viable, younger alternative, Clinton becomes the most likely Democratic Party nominee.
And both she and Trump have unfinished business.
Should Clinton run against Trump, it will be ratings gold and a made-to-order television spectacle. Yet, one can expect very similar results to 2016, if only because the Democrats will have so badly botched the previous four years. One thing is certain: 2024 is shaping up to be as wild of an election cycle as 2016 was.
I read before you but this is his opinion on this case.
“Durham notes that both the CIA and FBI were sent on an effective wild goose chase by the Clinton campaign. He notes that the government found the allegations to be manufactured and not even technically possible. He refers to the CIA in the following passage:
Agency-2 concluded in early 2017 that the Russian Bank-1 data and Russian Phone Provider-1 data was not “technically plausible,” did not “withstand technical scrutiny,” “contained gaps,” “conflicted with [itself],” and was “user created and not machine/tool generated.”
This dovetails with the statements of the Clinton associates themselves who were worried about the lack of support for the Russian collusion claims.
He is not independent on this matter.
The allegations are his opinion.
It's always a conspiracy theories.
Durham notes that both the CIA and FBI were sent on an effective wild goose chase by the Clinton campaign.
Lawyers say that as part of their job!
Beyond a reasonable doubt???
Not me.
Another weekend has come and gone and no one visited the doddering old fool in the nursing home
Roger lied about
Having a wedding on My 7th, 2022
Moving into a real single Family home in Bonney Lake, Washington
Buying a Audi A8
Having a "guaranteed six figure income".
Fraud and perversion is all Roger Amick knows.
Roger is to busy day dreaming and playing a child's game of "what IF".
Typically politics
House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) on Sunday suggested that Russia would not have invaded Ukraine if the U.S. provided weapons to Kyiv sooner.
“This is going to get stronger and rougher and what really needs to happen is, Ukraine is not asking for American men and women to fight, all they’re asking for is the weapons to defend themselves,” McCarthy told Fox News chief Washington correspondent Mike Emanuel on “Fox News Sunday.”
“If we would have taken those actions earlier instead of waiting till after Russia invaded, they probably never would’ve invaded had we done that sooner,” he added.
He later said sending weapons to Ukraine earlier could have saved thousands of lives.
“Ukraine was craving the ability to defend themselves. Had we moved the weapons to Ukraine earlier, that they could defend themselves, it would have saved thousands of lives and probably the decision of Putin not to enter,” McCarthy said, referring to Russian President Vladimir Putin.
The claim came in the seventh week of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, which began on Feb. 24.
The Biden administration has provided Ukraine with more than $3.2 billion in security assistance, which includes $2.6 billion since the invasion began.
That aid has included anti-tank weapons, unmanned drones, small arms, ammunition and defense equipment.
McCarthy on Sunday also took aim at the administration for rejecting Poland’s proposal to transfer MiG-29 fighter jets to a U.S. air base in Germany, which would then to go Ukraine to help their forces fight Russia.
The Pentagon ultimately said the proposal was not “tenable.”
“The president denied Ukraine and denied Poland for providing MiGs to Ukraine to protect themselves on a flyover. All of that is a wrong action going forward,” McCarthy said.
Sunday Funny thing
Trump Proven Right again.
“Let me tell you, you take on the intelligence community, they have six ways from Sunday at getting back at you,” Schumer told MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow
“What the world really needs is a vaccine that can last a year,” stated Bourla.
The head of the pharmaceutical giant described this idea as “the optimal public-health solution,” arguing that it would be easier to get the public to comply with a yearly vaccination, as opposed to vaccination every three or four months.
“A vaccine that will be taken once a year is way [easier] to administer and [to] have the population be compliant with it,” he said.
“What the world really needs is a vaccine that can last a year,” stated Bourla.
SHEAR FUCKING GENIUS SHORTY.....EVEN LIL SCHITTY COULD COME UP WITH THAT!!!!!!!!!! BWAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!
It's pure politics 😐.
The ‘politicization’ of COVID vaccines
Bourla then complained about global vaccine hesitancy and opposition to tyrannical and totalitarian-like COVID restrictions.
He called the refusal to get vaccinated with the experimental, abortion-tainted mRNA injections, which have generated millions of reports of adverse events worldwide, a “politicization” of the vaccines, which he claimed was damaging to public health.
“I think that what didn’t help at all, and this was a very big issue, was the fact that there was a politicization,” he said.
“It became a political statement [to get] a vaccine or [to] wear a mask or not, and that created tremendous damage to global health.”
Your own link provided political bias.
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/pfizer-ceo-calls-for-new-annual-vaccine-to-achieve-more-compliance/
adverse events worldwide, a “politicization”
Or it was the lies from, the WHO, the CDC, NIH….
All to get “Bad Orangeman” and rid the world of mean tweets
He stupid they don’t work, you fat dwarf these
REALLY ASSHOLE.....THE CDC THINKS YOU ARE MISTAKEN YOU SHORT DUMB FUCK!!!!!!!
And they thought masks and shutdowns worked, keep having shit shoved down your gaping maw. Old, morbidly, obese diabetics like you need to live in fear, not I
LOL
What is the link for your 2:02, Roger?
And they thought masks and shutdowns worked,
MASKED WORKED......SHUT DOWNS NOT SO MUCH. GOD YOU ARE AN ARROGANT ASSHOLE SHORTY.!!!!!!!! KEEP TRYING TO SHOW HOW FUCKING BRAVE YOU ARE.....BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!! ALL YOU GOT IS A BIG MOUTH BRAVE BOY!!!! Heading back to my cabin this week....when are you getting your lake house??????LOLOLOLOL.
Long-term Lancet study shows vaccines don't prevent death
Follow-up of trial participants found 'no effect on overall mortality'
A long-term study published by the prestigious British journal The Lancet that follows up on participants in the Moderna and Pfizer trials found the vaccines had no effect on overall mortality.
Among 74,000 trial participants, there were 31 all-cause deaths among the vaccinated and 30 among the placebo groups as of January, reported Daniel Horowitz of The Blaze.
Curiously, as Horowitz noted, the authors of the Danish-government-funded study state: "Based on the RCTs with the longest possible follow-up, mRNA vaccines had no effect on overall mortality despite protecting against fatal COVID-19."
Horowitz asked: "So how is it that mRNAs had no effect on all-cause mortality but protect against fatal COVID?"
He supposed that either the vaccines "don't really protect against COVID, or the nominal benefit is washed away by the mortality from adverse events."
Horowitz noted that the authors concede that the clinical trials were mainly conducted on healthy adults.
"They surmise that for sicker adults, the mRNAs might have induced a better mortality result, but that is pure speculation," he wrote.
"What is clear, however, is that the mRNA vaccine makers understood that there was no mortality benefit for healthy people and pushed the shots on them anyway, even though they came with substantial non-COVID risk of adverse events."
Horowitz pointed out that epidemiological data also indicate the shots are ineffective in reducing mortality overall.
New Zealand is a good case study, he wrote, because the island state had very few COVID deaths for the first two years of the pandemic. Further, nearly every age bracket had a vaccination rate higher than 90%, except for those ages 5-11. And more than half of all adults, especially those in vulnerable categories, received a booster shot.
Nevertheless, New Zealand experienced nearly all of its deaths after all of that was accomplished. As of Nov. 4, 2021, New Zealand recorded just 29 COVID deaths, but the country now has 469. And that spike has happened, Horowitz pointed out, during the wave dominated by omicron, a variant that largely produces an upper respiratory infection with mild symptoms.
About 98% of all confirmed COVID cases in New Zealand occurred after February 2022.
Other data
CDC and U.K. government data also have indicated that the COVID-19 vaccines not only are ineffective in preventing cases and transmission, they rapidly lose protection against severe illness or death while posing risks.
Dr. Meryl Nass, a clinician and epidemiologist, presented on her Substack page an analysis of CDC data on 30 million adults in California and New York, three-quarters of whom were vaccinated. Nass compared COVID hospitalization and case rates in those who were vaccinated and had no prior COVID illness with adults who were never vaccinated but had recovered from COVID and presumably had natural immunity. The data were collected from June to November 2021, before the Omicron wave appeared.
She found vaccinated Californians and New Yorkers were three times more likely to develop COVID than those who had prior immunity and were unvaccinated.
Further, vaccinated Californians had a higher rate of hospitalizations (severe illness) than those who were unvaccinated but had prior immunity. New York did not provide hospitalization data.
In the U.K., the age-standardized data from the Office of National Statistics indicated the double-vaccinated were protected against death for most of 2021. But in December 2021 and January 2022, COVID death rates in the doubly vaccinated but unboosted were higher than in those who had never been vaccinated.
Meanwhile, a former adviser to the FDA commissioner who continues to serve in an oversight role says the agency is ignoring its requirement to disclose clear safety and efficacy problems with the COVID-19 vaccines. Last month, an Army flight surgeon testified in federal court that she was ordered by high-level command not to discuss the controversy over Department of Defense data indicating a massive spike in serious injuries and illnesses among military personnel when the vaccines were rolled out in 2021. And, among many other safety signals, an analysis of CDC data by a former Wall Street executive an an insurance industry expert shows an alarming rise in excess deaths among Millennials over the past year amid the COVID vaccine rollout.
continues:
https://www.wnd.com/2022/04/long-term-lancet-study-shows-vaccines-dont-prevent-death/
Clay Travis
https://twitter.com/ClayTravis/status/1514280223717605376
The CDC has extended the airplane mask mandate an additional two weeks because being on airplanes without a mask isn’t safe due to covid. Simultaneously the same CDC has opened up our Southern border and ended Title 42 because they say covid is no longer a threat.
and anybody who thinks masks work haven't been following the science
and that includes the CDC
Joe Scarborough
@JoeNBC
https://twitter.com/JoeNBC/status/1514265803587260416
Enough. Stop. Just stop.
Two vaccines, a booster, and two years of increased immunity means it is time to move forward. Make this voluntary now. And for God’s sake, lift the damn mandates in airports.
even the biggest idiot on MSNBC now agrees
Maybe Joe will be in the teens before this ends
and we know he likes pre-teens
* Joe Biden likes pre-teens
Joe Biden
@JoeBiden
United States government official
https://twitter.com/JoeBiden/status/1252389082723790850
The President needs to stop blaming others and do his job.
Joe Biden needs to listen to Joe Biden
You dumb fuck Republicans believe in freedom??? Not unless you approve it first! No freedom for women or teachers or students. Just freedom for guns and white man power!!!!!!
https://www.wnd.com/2022/04/long-term-lancet-study-shows-vaccines-dont-prevent-death/
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!! Complete and utter BS!!!!!
"Masks worked" fat man Denny
Nope.
BWAAAAAAAAAA!!!
The sound an unsuspecting male makes when being penetrated by another male's hardened genitalia
in case VERY lo iq has forgotten
ROFLMFAO !!!
Shot 4 in your viens Denny?
BWAAAAAAAAAA!!!! loses again
well guess that's not news
Bet he wears a mask while getting it from behind
PLEASE don't answer VERY lo iq
ROFLMFAO !!!
Durham notes that both the CIA and FBI were sent on an effective wild goose chase by the Clinton campaign.
Lawyers say that as part of their job! Beyond a reasonable doubt??? Not me.
Roger...
It is the Clinton paid researchers who are documented in seized communications as claiming that their own work was manufactured and that it would be easily revealed that it was. They are are documented to have been told that they needed to create a plausible narrative.
It is CIA own documentation that catches this, calling the allegations (based on the research) implausible and man made.
Are you saying that the Researchers and the CIA are liars???
Who exactly (at this point) is actually arguing any differently?
Sussman is not "denying" providing the information and he is not "really" denying the underlying allegations. They are making issues out of red herring portions of the filings that have little to do with the meat of the filings' purposes.
Sussman's legal challenges to toss the charges have already been denied. A judge already went over all of this and stated that Sussman WILL stand trial (if he doesn't plea out before).
There is nowhere that any of your argument (based on biased media sources parroting a losing legal argument) is actually legally to have been found to have any merit.
Biden promised "food Shortages".
He is delivering .
Eggs are none existent in many shelves.
REALLY ASSHOLE.....THE CDC THINKS YOU ARE MISTAKEN YOU SHORT DUMB FUCK!!!!!!!
You mean the same CDC that was wrong about the lockdowns, masks, social distancing, and ultimately the long term effects of the vaccine.
Well I am very curious why you still trust their judgement?
REPLY TO CH'S THREAD ARTICLE
FROM WIKIPEDIA: [CAPS and italics ADDED]
In a February 2022 court motion related to Sussmann's prosecution, Durham alleged that Sussmann associate Rodney Joffe and his associates had "exploited" capabilities his company had through a pending cybersecurity contract with the Executive Office of the President (EOP) to acquire nonpublic government Domain Name System (DNS) and other data traffic "for the purpose of gathering DEROGATORY INFORMATION ABOUT DONALD TRUMP." Joffe was NOT CHARGED and his attorney did not immediately comment.[26]
After Sussmann's September 2021 indictment, The New York Times reported that in addition to analyzing suspicious communications involving a Trump server, Sussmann and analysts he worked with became aware of data from a YotaPhone — a Russian-made smartphone rarely used in the United States — that had accessed networks serving the White House, Trump Tower and a Michigan hospital company, Spectrum Health. Like the Alfa-Bank server, a Spectrum Health server also communicated with the Trump Organization server. Sussmann notified CIA counterintelligence of the findings in February 2017, but it was not known if they were investigated.[27]
Durham ALLEGED in his February 2022 court motion THAT SUSSMAN HAD CLAIMED his information "demonstrated that Trump and/or his associates were using supposedly rare, Russian-made wireless phones in the vicinity of the White House and other locations," BUT DURHAM SAID HE FOUND NO EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THAT.
SUSSMAN's attorneys RESPONDED THAT DURHAM KNEW SUSSMAN HADNOT MADESUCH A CLAIM TO THE CIA.[28]
Durham alleged Sussmann's data showed a Russian phone provider connection involving the EOP "during the Obama administration and years before Trump took office." Attorneys for an analyst who examined the YotaPhone data said researchers were investigating malware in the White House; a spokesman for Joffe said his client had lawful access under a contract to analyze White House DNS data for potential security threats. The spokesman asserted Joffe's work was in response to hacks of the EOP in 2015 and of the DNC in 2016, as well as YotaPhone queries IN PROXIMITY TO THE EOP and the TRUMP CAMPAIGN, that raised "SERIOUS AND LEGITIMATE NATIONAL SECURITY CONCERNS about Russian attempts to infiltrate the 2016 election" THAT WAS SHARED WITH THE CIA. Durham asserted that Sussmann bringing his information to the CIA was PART OF a broader EFFORT TO RAISE the intelligence community's SUSPCIONS of Trump's connections to Russia shortly after he took office. DURHAM DID NOT ALLEGE that any eavesdropping of Trump communications content occurred, nor did he assert the Clinton campaign was involved or that the alleged DNS monitoring activity was unlawful or occurred after Trump took office.[29][30][31]
Durham's filing triggered a furor among right-wing media outlets, including misinformation about what Durham had alleged, which was challenged by other outlets and lawyers for the involved parties.[29][30][32][33] Fox News FALSELY REPORTED THAT DURHAM CLAIMED Hillary Clinton's campaign had PAID a technology company to "infiltrate" White House and Trump Tower servers; that narrative ACTUALLY CAME FROM TRUMP ALLY KASH PATEL.[34] The Washington Examiner CLAIED med that this all meant THERE HAD BEEN SPYING on Trump's White House office. Charlie Savage of The New York Times DISPUTED these claims and explained that "MR. DURHAM'S FILING NEVER USED THE WORD 'INFILTRATE.' And it NEVER CLAIMED that Mr. Joffe's company was being paid by the Clinton campaign."[30]
Sussmann's attorneys asserted Durham's motion contained falsehoods "intended to further politicize this case, inflame media coverage, and taint the jury pool" as part of a pattern of Durham's behavior since Sussmann's indictment.[35] Durham objected to a motion by Sussmann's attorneys to have the "factual background" section struck from Durham's motion, stating that "If third parties or members of the media have overstated, understated, or otherwise misinterpreted facts contained in the Government’s Motion, that does not in any way undermine the valid reasons for the Government’s inclusion of this information."[36][37]
Hillary Clinton responded to the right-wing MEDIA ATTACKS by hinting at DEFAMATION: "It's funny the more trouble Trump gets into the wilder the charges and conspiracy theories about me seem to get. FOX LEADS THE CHARGE with accusations against me, counting on their audience to FALL FOR IT AGAIN. As an aside, they're getting awfully CLOSE TO ACTUAL MALICE in their attacks."[38]
Sussmann's attorneys also explained that "Although the Special Counsel implies that in Mr. Sussmann's February 9, 2017 meeting, he provided Agency-2 with (Executive Office of the President) data from after Mr. Trump took office, the Special Counsel is well aware that the data provided to Agency-2 pertained ONLY TO THE PERIOD OF TIME BEFORE Mr. Trump took office, when Barack Obama was President,"[29] a time period (2015 and 2016) where MUCH INVESTGATION of Russian HACKS OF DEMOCRATIC PARTY AND WHITE HOUSE NETWORKS HAD OCCURED:
"...cybersecurity researchers WERE 'DEEPLY CONCERNED' to find data SUGGETING RUSSIAN-MADE YotaPhones WERE IN PROXIMITY TO THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN SO 'PREPARED A REPORT OF THEIR FINDS, WHICH WAS SUBSEQUENTLY SHARED WITH THE C.I.A'."[30][39]
If you can even find eggs, you meet Bidenomics.
Day #1 of Biden eggs cost $1.51.
Today of Biden Eggs cost $ 2.05
WIKIPEDIA - The lefts FAKE MINISTRY of "TRUTH"
figure the charlatan would rush to it
big tech loves protecting the regime
as does the "pastor"
Denny , answer
"You mean the same CDC that was wrong about the lockdowns, masks, social distancing, and ultimately the long term effects of the vaccine.
Well I am very curious why you still trust their judgement?"
And answer the Call CDC link.
Tell us what in the
Wiki article is
in error.
IT ONLY MAKES SENSE:
FORBES
60% of Americans are in favor of extending the travel mask requirment.
Moreover, more than half of Americans have intense feelings on the mask mandate — and the breakdown is notable. Nearly a third of Americans (32%) say they “strongly support” extending the mask mandate for travel, compared to 19% who “strongly oppose” doing so.
The partisan differences are also telling. Among Democrats, 70% support keeping the mandate in place and 30% oppose. Among Republicans, it’s a clean 50/50 split.
EVEN THE REPUGS ARE DIVIDED!
Other surveys have revealed similar findings. A recent Pew Research Center survey shows that a majority of Americans not only support the mask mandate, they go further by also supporting a vaccine mandate for air travel. In a tracking survey fielded in late January, nearly six in 10 Americans (58%) said proof of vaccination should be required to fly.
Notably, the Pew Research Center has consistently found that vaccinated Americans, who now make up a significant majority of the country, are more than twice as likely (70%) than unvaccinated Americans (32%) to report wearing a mask in public places regularly.
Last month, a Morning Consult survey found that 60% of US adults believe travel and hospitality companies should require customers to wear masks—though that was down from 71% in January, at the peak of the omicron surge. Notably, however, those who plan to travel in the next three months are more likely to support keeping face mask mandates.
“The travel industry has reached an interesting inflection point,” wrote Matthew Howe, senior manager of travel intelligence at global intelligence company Morning Consult. “Americans are more interested in personal choice than mandates and prescribed personal responsibility. The one curveball is, of course, a new variant, given that omicron has already stagnated consumer comfort levels.”
Given the unpredictability of the pandemic, Morning Consult concluded it was too early to drop masks. “We believe travel brands should wait and see what the impact of Covid BA.2 is before eliminating mandates,” wrote Howe.
The airlines have often posited that frictions like mask-wearing and Covid testing hurt their business, but those claims have become harder to argue. With the mask mandate still in place, passenger volume has already returned to roughly 92% of pre-pandemic levels, according to throughput data from the Transportation Security Administration (TSA).
“My sense is that lifting the mask mandate will do very little, one way or another, when it comes to actual overall travel volume numbers,” says Keyes. “I don't think there are many people who are not taking trips today because of the mask mandate. And I don't think there are very many people who would not take trips on April 19 in the absence of a mask mandate.”
Indeed, since the pandemic began, the sole metric that has driven travel demand has been Covid-19 case numbers. Covid surges and demand have had a predictable inverse relationship: As Covid cases rise, demand falls; as Covid cases fall, demand rises.
...the sensible article continues...E
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1515176792956547074.html
This is something -
That data Michael Sussmann passed to the CIA in 2017?
The CIA concluded it was not "technically plausible" and was "user created and not machine/tool generated"
[Thread on latest Durham filing] (link above)
Durham has granted immunity to "Researcher-2" - identified as David Dagon.
Dagon raised concerns to Sussmann that the Trump data "was being unlawfully collected and used"
As we predicted here:
https://technofog.substack.com/p/john-durham-michael-sussmann-and?s=w
There's more. It's big.
Trial immunity is granted to Christopher Steele.
The issue: Whether Sussmann was "was acting on behalf of the Clinton Campaign when he assembled and conveyed the Russian Bank-1 allegations"
Whew.
Small victory lap on that one -
We also suspected on April 5 that Christopher Steele would be granted immunity.
technofog.substack.com/p/john-durham-…
John Durham, Michael Sussmann, and the Broader Clinton Conspiracy
Texts from Sussmann prove his lies
https://technofog.substack.com/p/john-durham-michael-sussmann-and?s=w
Back to the Russian Phone allegations provided to the CIA -
Sussmann said the "presence and activity of a Russian made phone around President Trump" started in April 2016.
It continued after Trump's "move to the White House."
They spied on Trump.
We've previously reported that they targeted the Executive Office of the President AFTER Trump was elected.
CIA notes of the Sussmann meeting confirm this.
They extracted and manipulated data from the Executive Office of the President during the transition.
link contains the actual documents and references
Well Reverend...
Sussman's legal challenges have so far been completely unsuccessful.
Whether or not their argument that the recent filings politicize the case or taint the jury pool has any merit whatsoever, it doesn't change the underlying Facts:
1) the researchers that created the findings have documented communications that states that the data was not legitimate and that it would be easy for that to be revealed.
2) Five of those researchers have plead the 5th, stating that their own testimony would incriminate themselves. One has flipped and will testify against the others.
3) Agency 2 concluded in early 2017 that the Russian Bank 1 data and Russian Phone Provider 1 data was not ‘technically plausible,’ did not ‘withstand technical scrutiny,’ ‘contained gaps,’ ‘conflicted with [itself],’ and was ‘user created and not machine/tool generated."
You understand that the "quotes" in the filing are the "quotes" from the agency 2 reports... and echo the "quotes" from the researchers who stated that what they alleged was not going to pass that technical scrutiny.
“By saying that, um, by taking away the teaching of one race as superior to another, that is inherently white supremacy. Because white people learn from birth that they are superior. There is no thing that they need to be taught in school that tells them that. They learn that from their lived experiences. And so, by teaching, you know, and white supremacy is not something that you learn about, um, by any means. And it’s a relatively new term, and it’s a term that is heavily debated because a lot of people don’t like calling white people superior. Um, and I completely understand with that. But there is no such thing as “white inferiority.” There would be a protest if somebody said that on this campus. Like, literally — “white people are inferior.” And I’m gonna say that right now, because this is my space to say that. But I do believe that black people are superior. Um, but that’s not something…taught in schools, by any means.”
James, your team has scared 3 million able bodied adults from work .
They have been so traumatized, they plan in forever living on the done of the workers.
Joel Brizzée
https://twitter.com/BrizzeeJoel/status/1490170219964239872
50 years from now Democrats will claim they were the party against masks and vaccine mandates and that the parties switched.
there may not be a democrat party after 2024
Durham did not prove anything.
Your own link
DURHAM DID NOT ALLEGE that any eavesdropping of Trump communications content occurred, nor did he assert the Clinton campaign was involved or that the alleged DNS monitoring activity was unlawful or occurred after Trump took office.[29][30][31]
Durham's filing triggered a furor among right-wing media outlets, including misinformation about what Durham had alleged, which was challenged by other outlets and lawyers for the involved parties.[29][30][32][33] Fox News FALSELY REPORTED THAT DURHAM CLAIMED Hillary Clinton's campaign had PAID a technology company to "infiltrate" White House and Trump Tower servers; that narrative ACTUALLY CAME FROM TRUMP ALLY KASH PATEL.[34]
You would have been a terrible lawyer.
The Real Halfbaked Soars Pundit said...
Your own link
Hey roger, you can't even keep the posts from the charlatan's lefty Wikipedia entry and CHT's responses straight
You must be a terrible patient
DURHAM DID NOT ALLEGE that any eavesdropping of Trump communications content occurred, nor did he assert the Clinton campaign was involved or that the alleged DNS monitoring activity was unlawful or occurred after Trump took office.[29][30][31]
That's nice Roger...
Only nobody suggested that Durham alleges any of that. Durham also didn't allege that Sussman only wears red shirts. He didn't allege that Sussman cheats at poker. He didn't allege that Sussman masterbates in the shower. Is any of that relevant as well?
Maybe it's time for your meds.
* And you sure fall for straw man arguments included in those "facts"
A recent court filing by Justice Department special counsel John Durham alleges that a lawyer linked to the Hillary Clinton campaign shared with the CIA internet traffic data concerning networks near the White House, Trump Tower and other places associated with Trump.
The lawyer’s meeting with the CIA took place in early February 2017, but there’s no evidence that the data he passed along was gathered after Trump became president.
There is also no evidence the data was obtained illegally, nor did the filing suggest that it was. The filing also doesn’t say the Clinton campaign directed the effort, as Scott claimed.
Former President Donald Trump regularly claimed that the Obama administration spied on him during the 2016 presidential election. Now, Republicans and conservative media are saying that it was Hillary Clinton’s campaign that did the spying.
Their evidence? A new filing in an ongoing federal probe by special counsel John Durham.
For Florida Republican Sen. Rick Scott, the Durham material is a smoking gun.
"The latest with the Durham report is that the Clinton campaign, the same group that fear-mongered this Russian collusion, actually spied on the president of the United States," Scott said Feb. 15.
Many commentators have embellished what’s in this latest information, and Scott’s statement also treats some fuzzy elements as if they were solid proof.
That's nice Roger...
Only nobody suggested that Durham alleges any of that. Durham also didn't allege that Sussman only wears red shirts. He didn't allege that Sussman cheats at poker. He didn't allege that Sussman masterbates in the shower. Is any of that relevant as well?
Maybe it's time for your meds.
Well the "pastor" capitalized some of those Wikipedia entries and put them in bold.
Did you consider that ?
ROFLMFAO !!!
Durham’s filing doesn’t say the Clinton campaign spied on Trump, nor does it say that the data referenced in the filing came from the time when he was president.
We’ll unpack the details.
What’s in Durham’s filings
In October 2020, Trump’s attorney general, William Barr, appointed Durham to investigate how and why during the 2016 election the Justice Department decided to probe possible links between Trump and Russia. One of two people indicted as part of Durham’s probe is Michael Sussmann, an attorney for a law firm that represented Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign.
In 2015, Sussmann was separately retained by another client, a technology executive, according to Sussmann’s September 2021 indictment. News reporting later revealed that executive to be Rodney Joffe.
Joffe worked with a team of cybersecurity researchers who had access to internet traffic data under a pending contract with the federal government to monitor for security threats and breaches. They thought that some data they were analyzing may have amounted to potential evidence of a communications channel between the Trump Organization and a Russian bank.
The data they were parsing was domain name system, or DNS, data, which essentially tracks every time a computer or smartphone connected with a web server on the internet. It does not reveal the content of a person’s screen or messages.
WOW, roger forgets what he has already posted
Who knows how many times
may be way too late for meds to help
Ch, I am well aware it is futile to attempt any logical argument with you, so I will only point out that--
the word "plead" in the past tense can only be either "pled" or "pleaded."
Today we plead our case.
(rhymes with "seed")
Yesterday we pled our case.
(rhymes with the color "red")
or
Yesterday we pleaded our case.
(rhymes with "seeded")
The indictment Durham secured against Sussmann charged him with making a false statement when he brought this information to the FBI during a 2016 meeting. Durham alleges that Sussmann told the FBI he was not there "for any client" when, the indictment says, he was actually acting on behalf of both Joffe and the Clinton campaign.
Sussmann has pleaded not guilty and denied wrongdoing. Joffe has not been charged with any criminal activity in the matter. Neither have Clinton or other campaign officials.
Durham’s Feb. 11 filing at the center of the most recent coverage built out the case against Sussmann, adding some details about a second meeting Sussmann had with the CIA in February 2017. The meeting had been referenced in the original indictment and was the subject of previous reporting.
At that meeting, Sussmann relayed that Joffe and researchers had developed other suspicions while sifting through the internet traffic data. Their concern was that the data showed Russian-made phones were being used from networks serving Trump Tower and the White House, among other locations. Joffe’s firm at the time had legal access to the data because it was providing services for the White House.
What’s clear and unclear in Durham’s filing
Thanks Reverend...
I will ask you and Roger the same thing.
I know I will not get any response, because in spite of suggesting you can make a logical argument, I doubt you can.
I want you to explain IN YOUR OWN WORDS what Durham is accusing Sussman and Rodney Joffe of doing. I will provide you a hint. They are two different accusations, but ultimately related. I won't ask you to explain IN YOUR OWN WORDS why they are related, because that is much too complicated.
Go ahead...
Roger?
Reverend?
Give it a shot!
to help the "pastor" who said
"...cybersecurity researchers WERE 'DEEPLY CONCERNED' to find data SUGGETING"
I think that quote wasn't quite right
are you suggeting it was ?
I thought this was your area of expertise and you sure like to correct others?
ROFLMFAO !!!
Anonymous James's Fucking Daddy said...
WOW, roger forgets what he has already posted
While you the dumb fuck you are never once mention the goat fucker posting the same drivel multiple times.....Typical of brainless trump lovers who have no working brain!!!!!!
Like typical losers... Durham is feeding the believers that there is something there that ain't.....why can't they just pull the plug in this asshattery and move on to trumps fuck ups!!!!!
There is no question that Sussmann worked for Clinton’s 2016 campaign for president. But he says that when he met with the FBI, the information he passed along was not on behalf of the campaign. He also said he didn’t make any false statements about whom he represented. Durham’s filing says he billed the campaign, but Sussman’s lawyers say that he couldn’t have represented the Clinton campaign because by the time of Sussman’s February meeting with the CIA, the campaign no longer existed.
Sussmann presented information to government officials based on internet traffic data that came from the White House executive offices, Trump Tower and other places.
But several points remain murky.
Durham’s filing does not say that the DNS data was captured after Trump took office. The filing says that on Feb. 9, 2017, Sussmann "provided an updated set of allegations" to the CIA, and the indictment says the DNS data he shared ranged "from 2016 through early 2017."
The filing doesn’t make clear whether any of that data came after Trump was sworn in on Jan. 20, 2017.
Sussman’s lawyers have argued that it did not. His attorneys and those representing one of the researchers who worked with Joffe have said that none of their information was gathered after Trump took office.
Sussmann told congressional investigators, under oath, that the second meeting took place in February because it was delayed, not because he had collected new data. He said he first reached out to the CIA in December 2016, while Barack Obama was still president, but that "it took a while to have a meeting, and so it ended up being after the change in administration."
Durham’s filing also doesn’t say that the DNS data was collected illegally. He writes that the technology company had access to data from the Executive Office of the President and "exploited this arrangement by mining the EOP’s DNS traffic and other data for the purpose of gathering derogatory information about Donald Trump."
Scott's office cited this line, among others from the Feb. 11 filing, in response to PolitiFact's inquiry.
Ric Simmons, a law professor at the Ohio State University, said that’s not the same as saying anyone broke privacy laws.
"The tech company had legal access to these servers and there is no indication that they were not allowed to share the information," Simmons said.
"As a result of the hacks of the Executive Office of the President and the Democratic National Committee servers in 2015 and 2016, respectively, there were serious and legitimate national security concerns about Russian attempts to infiltrate the 2016 election," the statement said. "Upon identifying DNS queries from Russian-made Yota phones in proximity to the Trump campaign and the EOP, respected cybersecurity researchers were deeply concerned about the anomalies they found in the data and prepared a report of their findings, which was subsequently shared with the CIA."
The legal process might produce more details, but at this point, Durham has not said using the data was a crime. By itself, this undercuts the notion that anyone spied on Trump. And if the target was Russian meddling, as Joffe’s statement said, and not Trump, there’s even less basis to cast this as spying.
Finally, Durham’s filing didn’t say that campaign officials directed this activity. Sussmann worked both for a law firm that represented the campaign, and for Joffe, who had lawful access to the data. Simmons said Scott’s statement "implies that the decision-makers of the Clinton campaign knew about this or directed these actions, and the filings make no mention of such a link."
"There’s no evidence suggesting any of this was elaborately masterminded by Hillary Clinton," said Julian Sanchez, a senior fellow at the Libertarian Cato Institute, in a Twitter thread. "The rather tenuous Clinton link is that Joffe passed the researchers’ findings on to FBI & CIA via Sussman, a prominent cybersecurity lawyer who’d also done work for the Clinton campaign."
Simmons also noted that nothing has been proven.
"Nobody ‘hacked’ or ‘intercepted’ anything," Sanchez said.
Our ruling
Scott said "the latest with the Durham report is that the Clinton campaign … actually spied on the president of the United States."
The filing from Durham is more tentative than Scott presents.
It states that an attorney for an internet company that was collecting data related to White House communications from 2016 to early 2017 also served as an attorney for the Clinton campaign. It does not say that the Clinton campaign directed these activities. And it does not assert that the data was gathered illegally or that it was collected while Trump was president.
We rate this claim False.
https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2022/feb/21/rick-scott/durham-filing-scott-exaggerates-proof-clinton-camp/
CHT is asking a more relevant and meaningful question so I will cede to him
Good luck getting a real answer
I won't wait
Failing to pay "their Fair Share"
"Joe and Jill Biden Paid Less Taxes in 2021 than 2020 Despite Earning More Income"
So they don't live up to their own Socialist stamdards.
btw Reverend...
I have actually read the filings and several adult legal opinions about them.
You really think that quoting "wikipedia" in terms of what the filings say (or do not say) is more accurate than the filings themselves?
Perhaps you should consider why you believe "Wikipedia" over the actual filings? Who is editing Wikipedia who knows "more" about this than Durham does? Why would you accept a website that quite literally almost anyone can update and create content... vs the actual filing?
The FBI was not tricked by the Clinton campaign
They did not conceal evidence against Hillary Clinton...in order to protect her.
I want you to explain IN YOUR OWN WORDS what Durham is accusing Sussman and Rodney Joffe of doing. I will provide you a hint. They are two different accusations, but ultimately related. I won't ask you to explain IN YOUR OWN WORDS why they are related, because that is much too complicated.
Go ahead...
Roger?
Reverend?
Give it a shot!" CUT
Good Luck
James and I provided evidence that you are 100% wrong
Bottom line is that the data that pretty much everyone used as an excuse to wage a two year investigation of accusations about Donald Trump were based on "technically implausible' data that was "user created". Moreover this information was provided to them by the Clinton campaign. Agency 2 (btw) would be the CIA.
Just stop for a minute or two and let that sink in.
Our intelligence community spent two years, millions of dollars, and provided a thousand and one leaks to the media about a politically damaging investigation of a Presidential Candidate who became President. This entire scheme was based entirely on evidence that was provided to them by a political opponent of this President that our own intelligence community actually KNEW was fake. But they investigated anyways?
It did not happen
I want you to explain IN YOUR OWN WORDS what Durham is accusing Sussman and Rodney Joffe of doing.
Why don't you explain why you believe the Durham BS!!!!!!!! BWAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!! Maybe after that you can explain how you don't own your property.....LOLOLOLO
The Intelligence community lied .
They knew it.
Now they are caught.
Attack Durham.
Okay Roger...
The researchers were wrong, the CIA was wrong, Durham is wrong, the Judge presiding over the case is wrong...
Sussman didn't lie. The researchers wrong and their data was actually correct. The CIA lied about it being implausible. The FBI did not have any reason to doubt the DNS evidence (or the Steele document). They had every reason to investigate Trump for nearly three years.
Because the bad orange man WAS a Russian spy. He just got away with it because of FOX News, Racism, and Joe Rogan.
You and Reverend "proved" that by cutting and pasting opinion pieces and Wikipedia. Good for you! You must feel really special now!
Thanks for clearing that all up!
Candace Owens
@RealCandaceO
https://twitter.com/RealCandaceO/status/1514608362570194961
I received an e-mail last night to my generic “info” account from Poynter Institute which runs @PolitiFact. They wanted a response to something I said 5 years ago and gave me a 3 hour deadline—which I of course missed by a couple hours.
But I did muster a response to the hack.
It is important that we continually showcase to the world just what hacks these “fact-checkers” are.
They are employed by the elite and their job is to protect the investments of the elite by keeping the general population ignorant to their intentions.
Facebook was their largest contributor last year but from her list (see link above) such notables as Soros's foundation, Gates foundation, Omidyar Network, Google etc
Interesting group of "donors" for a "fact checking" organization
Ministry of Truth
1984
C.H. Truth said...
Okay Roger...
The researchers were wrong, the CIA was wrong, Durham is wrong, the Judge presiding over the case is wrong...
Well they have managed to convince themselves and BWAAAAAAAAAA!!!!
Wonder if that room has space for three
Four if you include the 5th Beatle
Biden has pour 7 trillion on the his economy, very little of it has done any good, in fact most has done a lot of harm.
Hey fatboi
Maybe you can prove this wrong..
Masks help prevent COVID-19, yet another study shows
Feb 10, 2022 · ATLANTA - While several studies already show that face masks and respirators effectively filter virus-sized particles and help reduce the spread of COVID-19 transmission, yet,
I did
Hey fatty here’s the CDC very own pic note the “*” from that study
*Not Statistically Significant
LOL
*Not Statistically Significant
BWAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!! I guess you think that When you cherry pick what you want....the whole report also states the following you disingenuous loud mouthed idiot!!!! Thanx again for proving you are nothing but a UGA failure!!!!!!
New study finds which masks offer the most protection against COVID-19
The group of researchers used a laser to detect droplets and map their path.
ATLANTA - While several studies already show that face masks and respirators effectively filter virus-sized particles and help reduce the spread of COVID-19 transmission, yet, another study is backing this evidence up.
According to a study, published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention last week, consistent use of a face mask or respirator in indoor public settings was associated with lower odds of a positive COVID-19 test.
The study enrolled randomly selected California residents who had received a test result for COVID-19 between Feb. 18, 2021 and Dec. 1, 2021.
Face mask or respirator use was assessed among 652 participants who had received a positive test result for COVID-19, and 1,176 participants who had received a negative test result but reported being in indoor public settings during the two weeks preceding testing and who reported no known contact with anyone with confirmed or suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection during the time.
4
"Always using a face mask or respirator in indoor public settings was associated with lower adjusted odds of a positive test result compared with never wearing a face mask or respirator in these settings," the study authors wrote.
A higher proportion of participants (78.4%) was unvaccinated compared with vaccinated participants (57.5%).
An additional analysis assessed differences in protection against the infection by the type of face covering worn, and was limited to a subset of participants enrolled after September 9, 2021, who were asked to indicate the type of face covering they typically wore.
"Face masks or respirators (N95/KN95) have been shown to help filter out virus particles in laboratory conditions. This study builds upon data from laboratory settings and demonstrates the real-world effectiveness of wearing masks to protect the wearer from COVID-19," the California Department of Public Health told FOX Television Stations Group.
This study did not account for other preventive behaviors that could influence risk for acquiring infection, including adherence to physical distancing recommendations.
Yet, these findings are consistent with existing research demonstrating that face masks or respirators effectively filter viruses in laboratory settings and with other studies showing reductions in SARS-CoV-2 incidence associated with community-level masking requirements.
In November, mask research analyzing several studies worldwide showed wearing a mask cut the number of new infections by 53%. Meanwhile, another study in the U.S. reported a 29% reduction in new COVID-19 cases in states where masks were mandatory.
No wonder why you are a failed salesman.....no fucking brain or common sense!!!!
Illustration of a man wearing a mask
To fight the spread of COVID-19, many places now require people to wear face masks. But the advice on wearing them has changed over the course of the pandemic. This has led some people to question: Do face masks even protect against COVID-19?
“Yes, absolutely,” says Dr. Adriaan Bax, a biophysicist at NIH. He has been testing how well different types of masks work. Masks, he explains, can help stop the spread of COVID-19 for a few reasons.
First, masks can trap fluid droplets that exit the mouth while you’re speaking. If you have COVID-19, these droplets contain virus that can be inhaled by others.
Bax and his colleagues have shown that just by talking, a person produces thousands of these little droplets every second. Speaking loudly or singing produces even more droplets.
Stopping droplets at the source is the easiest way to prevent the virus from spreading through the air. Wearing a mask can play a crucial role. Bax and colleagues have found that even a simple cloth mask can stop nearly all droplets produced during speech.
After droplets leave someone’s mouth, the water in them quickly evaporates. This causes the droplets to shrink. These shrunken droplets are called aerosols. They can float in the air for anywhere from minutes to hours. Once the virus is carried in such tiny aerosols, it becomes more difficult to stop.
Masks can also help protect the people wearing them. Studies have found that NIOSH-approved N95 respirators and KN95 masks block aerosols from entering the airway very effectively.* Surgical and cloth masks are less effective, but they still provide some protection. How well they work depends on the number of layers, choice of materials, and whether they’re worn properly.
Even if a mask doesn’t block all of the aerosols, it may still protect the wearer against severe disease. Severe COVID-19 tends to occur when virus gets into the lower airway and the lungs.
Wearing a mask may help the body clear out virus from the lower airway before it reaches the lungs. This is because, as Bax’s team has shown, wearing a mask traps the moisture that would otherwise escape when you exhale. This raises the amount of moisture in your airways (or the humidity).
Moisture is essential to promote the natural clearance process of the airways. This helps keep the lungs free of contamination by dust, pollutants, and viruses. Masks may aid this process by raising the humidity.
“Some may find wearing a mask uncomfortable, especially on hot and humid days. This is largely because of the humidifying effect. But this drawback is very minor compared to the benefit that masks offer,” says Bax.
For most people, cloth masks and surgical masks don’t interfere with normal breathing. Oxygen and carbon dioxide are much smaller than the respiratory droplets that carry the virus and pass easily through masks.
Masks work best when we all wear them. But with any mask, not all virus particles are blocked. That’s why it’s still important to stay a distance from others, generally about six feet. For tips on wearing masks, see the Wise Choices box.
And remember: Getting a COVID-19 vaccine is the best way to protect yourself and others from the virus.
*Editor's Note: "respirators and" were added to the text after publication for clarity.
Related Stories
Y
Exactly what I have always thought of the CRT bullshit that the right has fabricated!!!!! Unfortunately most R's that reside here are not smart enough to figure this out, only knee jerk in agreement as a political problem only they can solve!!!!! BWAAAAAAAAAAAA!
'Critical race theory' not what you may think it is, history prof says at Titusville event
Eric Rogers, Florida Today
Sun, April 17, 2022, 10:34 AM
Please consider subscribing to FLORIDA TODAY for a limited time offer of $1 for 6 months of unlimited digital access to local coverage on politics, crime, education, and other issues you care about.
Critical race theory is not what you probably think it is.
That was the message of J. Michael Butler, a professor of history at Flagler College in St. Augustine, at a community discussion on the controversial topic held Saturday at the LaCita Country Club in Titusville.
A crowd of about 60, mixed race and mostly older, attended the two-hour event, which was sponsored by the Harry T. and Harriette V. Moore Cultural Complex board of directors and the Humanity Task Force for Social Justice, Inc. Spectrum News 13 anchor Tammie Fields moderated the event.
Butler's presentation — entitled "Critical Race Theory: What it is, What it is not" — was followed by a robust Q&A with audience members.
Brevard School Board: Training accused of critical race theory has nothing to do with race
The version of "critical race theory" assailed by conservative politicians and media critics, often in defense of contentious legislation and executive actions, is an intentional distortion, argued Butler, who has authored two books on the civil rights movement in Florida.
What those critics call critical race theory or "CRT" is a catch-all term, used to demonize what they view as "liberal" ideas about the history of race in the United States, Butler said.
J. Michael Butler, history professor at Flagler College, explains what critical race theory is (and what it isn't) at a community discussion event in Titusville.
J. Michael Butler, history professor at Flagler College, explains what critical race theory is (and what it isn't) at a community discussion event in Titusville.
"It is a weaponized word. You can distort it, and present it in a way that's frightening, dangerous, scary," Butler said during his presentation.
The conflation only serves to obscure Black history and foil anything resembling constructive public debate, he said.
Butler pointed to a January incident in which he was disinvited from a seminar on the civil rights movement for Osceola County teachers when school officials worried, without evidence, that his talk would include critical race theory. The incident drew national headlines.
"It's so obviously used for political reasons that its interpretation at the local level leads citizens to argue with each other for reasons that have nothing to do with intellectual honesty. That's an example of this" he said.
In reality, critical race theory is a niche academic school of thought that is mainly taught in law school classrooms, he said, as one way of making sense of the history of law and the courts in light of the nation's ugly (and deeply entrenched) racial past. Critical race theorists typically argue that laws in the U.S. have historically been structured to favor white people over other races, for instance.
But even among those scholars who practice it, there is significant disagreement on what it means and what lessons should be drawn from it, Butler said.
More: School board member recall dominates Brevard County Charter Review Commission talks
"It's a prism through which — one prism, and not the only prism — through which we can understand how the past continues to have impacts on the present," Butler said.
Hey VERY lo iq your "study" said
"A higher proportion of participants (78.4%) was unvaccinated compared with vaccinated participants (57.5%)".
Now the "pastor" would be concerned with the grammar but it also fails basic math.
And trial design. Asking people about their mask compliance and what type of mask they had worn is not very scientific.
Figures you would swallow
And that was the best you could do
You earn your nickname
VERY lo iq
ROFLMFAO !!!
* btw that was a failed study referenced by the CDC but mocked by true scientists including Dr Atlas.
You should read his book
before it gets banned
Fatman here’s the link to the actual study I wonder why you didn’t post your sites????
note their first pic. Not Statistically Significant
Now eat a pie fatman
I own you
LOL
Like I said.....cherry picked....also from that report. BWAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!! Of course you think you are correct.....LOLOLOL
This figure describes how people who wore a face covering were less likely to test positive than people who didn’t wear one.
resize iconView Larger
The use of face masks or respirators (N95/KN95) is recommended to reduce transmission of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19 (1). Well-fitting face masks and respirators effectively filter virus-sized particles in laboratory conditions (2,3), though few studies have assessed their real-world effectiveness in preventing acquisition of SARS-CoV-2 infection (4). A test-negative design case-control study enrolled randomly selected California residents who had received a test result for SARS-CoV-2 during February 18–December 1, 2021. Face mask or respirator use was assessed among 652 case-participants (residents who had received positive test results for SARS-CoV-2) and 1,176 matched control-participants (residents who had received negative test results for SARS-CoV-2) who self-reported being in indoor public settings during the 2 weeks preceding testing and who reported no known contact with anyone with confirmed or suspected SARS-CoV-2 infection during this time. Always using a face mask or respirator in indoor public settings was associated with lower adjusted odds of a positive test result compared with never wearing a face mask or respirator in these settings (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 0.44; 95% CI = 0.24–0.82). Among 534 participants who specified the type of face covering they typically used, wearing N95/KN95 respirators (aOR = 0.17; 95% CI = 0.05–0.64) or surgical masks (aOR = 0.34; 95% CI = 0.13–0.90) was associated with significantly lower adjusted odds of a positive test result compared with not wearing any face mask or respirator. These findings reinforce that in addition to being up to date with recommended COVID-19 vaccinations, consistently wearing a face mask or respirator in indoor public settings reduces the risk of acquiring SARS-CoV-2 infection. Using a respirator offers the highest level of personal protection against acquiring infection, although it is most important to wear a mask or respirator that is comfortable and can be used consistently.
I cherry picked the CDC’s own conclusion, wow you are dumber than I thought and or do not understand the definition of cherry picking.
Either way you’re just fat, old and not very bright
I'm surprised that you didn't post it yet
Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin has written 36 letters, starting in August 2020, to many agencies — FDA, CDC, NIH, NIAID, HHS, and DoD — about the mishandling of COVID-19, lack of transparency, adverse events, lack of early treatment, vaccine mandates, and health care freedom.
The DoD has not provided a single response. Some of the other agencies have responded, although the majority of the responses received were considered incomplete. The grossly inadequate reaction to Senator Johnson's legitimate oversight demonstrates a level of arrogance toward the American public that is unacceptable. In particular, the lack of transparency from federal health agencies has eroded public confidence in the agencies, which will take years (and probably a complete restructuring) to repair.
Perhaps most concerning is the treatment of those in our military, who have been given an unconstitutional mandate to receive the experimental vaccine or face being ejected. The fact that there is irrefutable evidence of vaccine adverse events for the military members getting the vaccine and expulsion for those who don't, poses a real threat to our nation's defense capabilities.
Her's is there actual conclusion shorty.....BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!! Your cherry picked footnote without explanation shows your complete lack of integrity and intellect .....Sorry sport....your ass is grass again!!!!! Asshole
The findings of this report reinforce that in addition to being up to date with recommended COVID-19 vaccinations, consistently wearing face masks or respirators while in indoor public settings protects against the acquisition of SARS-CoV-2 infection (9,10). This highlights the importance of improving access to high-quality masks to ensure access is not a barrier to use. Using a respirator offers the highest level of protection from acquisition of SARS-CoV-2 infection, although it is most important to wear a well-fitting mask or respirator that is comfortable and can be used consistently.
Roger, you do want the Truth from the Biden Administration, right?
Trump was not a Russian spy 🙄
Because I'm not fucking crazy like you 🤪
Dayum shorty.....try to wiggle your stupid white ass out of your conclusion which was a FUCKING LIE!!!!!!!!
BTW.....I posted the authors and names....even you are smart enough to know they are legit!!!!!!! BWAAAAAAAAAA!!!
Very curious how we are suddenly seeing various stories popping up that are negative to Elon Musk. Love this media.
Caliphate4vr said...
Fatman here’s the link to the actual study I wonder why you didn’t post your sites????
note their first pic. Not Statistically Significant
Now eat a pie fatman
I own you
I don't think VERY lo iq can understand what not statistically significant means.
Nor what "self-reported" does to a "study"
but he loves the "conclusion" so he swallows it
and ignore all the evidence that wearing masks was just a distraction
worldwide
My balls, true.
SEC & DOJ are tag teaming Elon.
Biden is a failed President.
Since August, U.S. military aid to help Ukraine repel Russia has surpassed $3 billion under Biden.
The aid has provided more than 1,400 Stinger anti-aircraft systems and some 5,500 Javelin missiles.
Biden provided another $800M Wednesday to widen Ukraine's military capabilities for a drawn-out war.
Is it enough??
How is the Biden admininistration doing on finding the root cause of the illegal immigration crisis.
And the related drug crisis
and the related housing crisis
and the related crisis with wages not keeping up with inflation
and the related education crisis
and the related crime crisis
too soon ?
Has Biden or Kamala found time to visit yet ?
anonymous said...
I don't think VERY lo iq can understand what not statistically significant means.
When your own study says it was "not statistically significant" and you can't grasp that it does prove that you are VERY lo iq.
now that is true science
but way above VERY lo iq's intellect
what's that saying about arguing with a pig ?
one who always is going BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!
ROFLMFAO !!!
At least Scott isn't this crazy 😜 yet!
Alex Jones considering Chapter 11 bankruptcy to stall lawsuits: report
Tom Boggioni
April 17, 2022
According to a report from Bloomberg, conservative conspiracy provocateur Alex Jones is weighing filing for bankruptcy in an effort to keep his companies afloat as he battles lawsuits over his Sandy Hook and Jan 6th rants.
Jones has been begging fans for help after he was found liable in a defamation lawsuit brought by relatives of Sandy Hook children killed in 2012 that he called a hoax. The Infowars founder has yet to learn what monetary damages he will have to pay, and the new report claims he is meeting with advisers about filing for Chapter 11 protection.
According to Bloomberg, "A Chapter 11 filing would aim to allow Jones’s businesses, such as Infowars and Free Speech Systems, to keep operating while pausing civil litigation against them, said the person, who asked not to be identified because the discussions are private," adding, "Lawyers representing Jones and his businesses have said the defamation lawsuit was strategically filed to silence their free speech on matters of public interest, according to court filings."
Just over a week ago, Jones was accused by the Sandy Hook families of hiding a "jaw-dropping" amount of cash, with the Daily Beast reporting Jones allegedly transferred $18 million out of his company starting when the families sued him in 2018, and transferred the funds to a company called PQPR, which they claim is controlled by Jones or his family members.
Anonymous James's Fucking Daddy said...
anonymous said...
I don't think VERY lo iq can understand what not statistically significant means.
It’s getting close for fatty’s bedtime, he’s really old and has nothing else to do but show his fucking stupidity, I mean seriously the CDC said it wasn’t statistically significant.
Unbelievable
This Fox News story will definitely drive rrb crazy...
PENTAGON ROLLS OUT ‘EQUITY’ PLAN
Over a year later, more than 90 agencies, including all Cabinet departments, released their plans, outlining more than 300 strategies and action plans to make federal policies fairer.
"Across the federal government, agencies are taking ambitious action to expand federal investment and support in communities that have been locked out of opportunity for too long, including communities of color, Tribal communities, rural communities, LGBTQI+ communities, people with disabilities, women and girls, and communities impacted by persistent poverty," the White House said.
The Department of Homeland Security released a plan that will focus on everything from naturalization, access to humanitarian protection, bidding on DHS contracts, countering all forms of terrorism and targeted violence, filing complaints and seeking redress in DHS programs and activities, airport screening and accessing Trusted Traveler Programs.
As a part of the plan, DHS vowed to "identify barriers that may impede access to naturalization among underserved communities" and remove those barriers to make the naturalization process easier. In addition, DHS said it will "expand engagement" with small businesses that are owned by or that support "members of underserved communities."
The department also said it would work to "expand gender-identification options" for certain traveler programs like TSA PreCheck.
Meanwhile, the Pentagon announced it will seek to rearrange its supply chain in order to open up opportunities for underserved communities. It will also bolster a variety of programs aimed at assisting those same communities in the area of military bases, such as American Indian initiatives and environmental efforts.
Ron DeSantis' radical agenda is the 'the death rattle of white supremacy': MSNBC panel
Sarah K. Burris
April 17, 2022
In a discussion about the Florida "Don't Say Gay" bill, panelists couldn't help but observe the radicalized agenda for America that Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-FL) has for achieving his own far-right vision.
Host Julian Castro explained that the changing America is moving forward whether the far-right wants to or not.
"As our country makes strides accepting people of all backgrounds, Republicans want to go slam the brakes on that progress," he said. "Last week DeSantis approved a 15-week ban on abortions and no exceptions for rape or incest. There's the so-called 'don't say gay' law, limiting how teachers and students can express themselves in school."
He went on to say that Republicans are going up against Disney after the company reaffirmed its support of LGBTQ+ people.
Daily Beast columnist Wajahat Ali called out DeSantis from the start, saying that his bigotry is just more of the extremist behavior the GOP is known for.
"Yeah, what we are witnessing right now is the death rattle of white supremacy that has become a death march," Ali said. "If you want to see the blueprint for how the GOP wants to achieve the minority rule — and as a minority rule for white Christian men exclusively — then you have to look at Florida. Specifically, they don't care about democracy. They don't care about rule of law. They don't care about rights. They just care about winning and owning the libs. They want to violently hijack this country and take the DeLorean back to 1953."
He listed off some of the things in the Republican agenda like attacking women's rights and refusing to allow women the ability to get an abortion even if she's raped, molested or endured human trafficking. He noted the schools and private companies who are being punished for embracing diversity and equality. Republicans are passing voter suppression laws. The GOP is also banning books that talk about civil rights and equality while intimidating school boards, teachers and anyone "who is not in lockstep with this radicalized vision of America."
"This is the blueprint for the GOP moving forward and DeSantis has raised over $100 million. So, it's successful and we should not discount this."
Former Rep. David Jolly (R-FL) warned that this kind of politics will continue as long as the public continues to reward it. Once the public decides that they support women, equality and people of color and will vote against leaders who endorse these ideas, the GOP will evolve their campaigns or face extension.
David Hogg
@davidhogg111
No it wasn't millennials that ruined the economy- it was Reaganomics
Feckless and Senile Biden
"Biden confronts a host of problems he can't do much to solve
Analysis by John Harwood, CNN"
Happy Sunday Funny Night
‘Election integrity summits’ aim to fire up Trump activists over big lie
The Conservative Partnership Institute’s meetings promote poll watching and ‘clean’ voter rolls, sparking fears of vote suppression
Peter Stone
Mon 18 Apr 2022 02.00 EDT
An influential conservative group that includes two Trump allies who helped push lies about voter fraud in 2020 is spearheading “election integrity” summits in battleground states, advocating for expanded poll watching, “clean” voter rolls and other measures watchdogs say could curb voting rights to help Republican candidates.
The Conservative Partnership Institute (CPI) “election integrity network” is run by the veteran GOP lawyer Cleta Mitchell, who helped to spread misinformation about supposed election fraud in 2020.
Mark Meadows, Donald Trump’s last White House chief of staff, is a senior partner of the CPI and reportedly had a lead role in at least one of its summits.
Mitchell, CPI’s senior legal fellow, has hosted multi-day summits, seeking to mobilize hundreds of conservative activists for elections this year in Georgia, Arizona and Pennsylvania, all states that Trump lost to Joe Biden, and Florida, which he won.
CPI is slated to hold summits this spring in Virginia, Michigan and Wisconsin, as it seeks to build “election integrity” infrastructure in swing states.
Powerful groups on the right such as Heritage Action and Tea Party Patriots Action have participated in previous summits.
Ties between CPI and Trump were underscored last July, when the former president’s Save America leadership Pac donated $1m to the group weeks after the House voted to create a committee to investigate the attack on the US Capitol on 6 January 2021 by Trump loyalists seeking to disrupt certification of Biden’s election victory.
Analysis: Note that since Russia invaded Ukraine, most Republicans have become negative on Putin and Russia, but have not rallied around President Biden. We're at war with Russia but unlike the situation in previous wars, Republicans have not rallied around the commander-in-chief.
There are two connected explanations for this. One is that many Republicans like Putin because he reflects their world view. Putin is a racist misogynistic bully. Many conservatives see him as a rugged individual guided by the philosophy of self-interest popularized by Ayn Rand (BTW: She was born Alisha Rosenbaum in Saint Petersburg, Russia.) In other words, Vladimir Putin is not woke. He has a very simple moral philosophy; the ends always justify the means. Writing in the New Statesman Emily Tamkin opined: "The far right – or at least the Trump-aligned far right – is already too deep into conspiracy theories to break with Russia, or at least to side cleanly with Ukraine..."
The other explanation for the undue influence that Putin has had on US politics is that we have allowed Russian money to have undue influence in US politics. Since Donald Trump launched his presidential campaign, there have been indications that Russia funneled money to the Republican Party. The Mueller investigation reported that Russia "interfered" in the 2016 election and there were troubling links between the Trump campaign and Russian actors including Russian Oligarchs; see for example, this article by professor Ruth May.
Summary: Recently, CNN host Jim Acosta pointed out that Tucker Carlson (Fox News) was repeating Russian talking points about Ukraine: " Last week Tucker Carlson tried to imply that some of what you are seeing [about Russian atrocities] has been fabricated and amplified by news organizations. That sounds a lot like what we heard from Putin’s spokesman who said bodies lining the streets were, quote, a forgery, aimed at denigrating the Russian army.” Prominent Republican members of Congress like Marjorie Taylor Green and Josh Hawley are also repeating Russian talking points.
It's time to call out the ongoing Russian-sponsored disinformation campaign for what it is: a national security threat.
It's time to call out Republicans, who praise Putin and denigrate Biden, for what they really are: traitors. It's time to brand Tucker Carlson as a traitor.
We are at war with Russia. We don't have to put up with Republican craziness any longer.
Bob Burnett is a Berkeley Quaker, activist, and writer. In another life he was a Silicon Valley executive — co-founder of Cisco Systems.
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Biden administration is taking a key step toward ensuring that federal dollars will support U.S. manufacturing — issuing requirements for how projects funded by the $1 trillion bipartisan infrastructure package source their construction material.
The guidance being issued Monday requires that the material purchased — whether it’s for a bridge, a highway, a water pipe or broadband internet — be produced in the U.S., according to administration officials. However, the rules also set up a process to waive those requirements in case there are not enough domestic producers or the material costs too much, with the goal of issuing fewer waivers over time as U.S. manufacturing capacity increases.
“There are going to be additional opportunities for good jobs in the manufacturing sector,” said Celeste Drake, director of Made in America at the White House Office of Management and Budget.
ADVERTISEMENT
President Joe Biden hopes to create more jobs, ease supply chain strains and reduce the reliance on China and other nations with interests that diverge from America’s. With inflation at a 40-year high ahead of the 2022 midterm elections, he’s betting that more domestic production will ultimately reduce price pressures to blunt Republican attacks that his $1.9 trillion coronavirus relief package initially triggered higher prices.
InteractivePolls
https://mobile.twitter.com/IAPolls2022/status/1515497525452673024
Voter Registration Net Difference since 2020 Election (Apr 2022)
✅ FLORIDA: GOP +245,777
✅ PENNSYLVANIA: GOP +120,548
✅ NORTH CAROLINA: GOP +92,656
✅ IOWA: GOP +49,633
✅ OKLAHOMA: GOP +56,500
✅ NEVADA: GOP +24,336
✅ COLORADO: DEM +12,786
✅ CALIFORNIA: DEM +193,256
looks like it's safe for roger to wander around in California
except the crime
and the door code
Blogger The Real Halfbaked Soars Pundit said...
James and I provided evidence that you are 100% wrong
Alky, I haven't seen you get your clock so thoroughly cleaned like this in quite some time.
Your "evidence" directly contradicts facts that really, truly are in evidence. You're denying reality.
The 5th Beatle is not the mentally ill one in your little Cuckoo's Nest. You are.
"The 5th Beatle is not the mentally ill one in your little Cuckoo's Nest. You are."
Bingo.
Proof, Roger was going to marry a former hot model on May 7th, 2022.
Now that is delusional.
Roger said his debt burden is too much.
Debt on what Roger?
You don't own anything.
Home Builders confidence in Bidenomics drops two full points.
EXCLUSIVE: Border Patrol apprehended at least 23 people coming across the southern border whose names are on the terror watchlist in 2021, according to Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data obtained by Fox News.
Sponsored
BY FARMERS & MERCHANTS BANK OF...
F&M Bank - Flexible CRE Lending
Customized Lending Solutions for Your Business Needs with Flexible Amortization Schedules, No Prepayment Penalties, and Cash Out Refinances Allowed.
Learn more
Between Jan. 20 and Dec. 27, 2021, there were 23 encounters with individuals whose names matched on the Terrorist Screening Database (TSDB).
Four were in the Rio Grande Valley Sector, 4 in Del Rio Sector, 3 in El Paso Sector, 2 in Tucson Sector, 2 in Yuma Sector, 4 in El Centro Sector and 4 in San Diego Sector. The information was provided to Fox News in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request submitted in December.
HOUSE REPUBLICANS PUSH BIDEN ADMIN FOR INFORMATION ON MIGRANTS ON TERROR DATABASE
Blogger KansasDemocrat said...
Home Builders confidence in Bidenomics drops two full points.
And between rising mortgage interest rates and rising prices for building materials, this get's a whole lot worse before it starts to get better.
Nice job BWAA.
Your CDC "report" only has 8 gaping self-admitted holes in it.
The findings in this report are subject to at least eight limitations. First, this study did not account for other preventive behaviors that could influence risk for acquiring infection, including adherence to physical distancing recommendations. In addition, generalizability of this study is limited to persons seeking SARS-CoV-2 testing and who were willing to participate in a telephone interview, who might otherwise exercise other protective behaviors. Second, this analysis relied on an aggregate estimate of self-reported face mask or respirator use across, for some participants, multiple indoor public locations. However, the study was designed to minimize recall bias by enrolling both case- and control-participants within a 48-hour window of receiving a SARS-CoV-2 test result. Third, small strata limited the ability to differentiate between types of cloth masks or participants who wore different types of face masks in differing settings, and also resulted in wider CIs and statistical nonsignificance for some estimates that were suggestive of a protective effect. Fourth, estimates do not account for face mask or respirator fit or the correctness of face mask or respirator wearing; assessing the effectiveness of face mask or respirator use under real-world conditions is nonetheless important for developing policy. Fifth, data collection occurred before the expansion of the SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1.529 (Omicron) variant, which is more transmissible than earlier variants. Sixth, face mask or respirator use was self-reported, which could introduce social desirability bias. Seventh, small strata limited the ability to account for reasons for testing in the adjusted analysis, which may be correlated with face mask or respirator use. Finally, this analysis does not account for potential differences in the intensity of exposures, which could vary by duration, ventilation system, and activity in each of the various indoor public settings visited.
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7106e1.htm
Your CDC "report" only has 8 gaping self-admitted holes in it.
BWAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!! I am sure you can explain to all that you have no fucking idea what it means.......LOLOLOLOL. Shorty can't read and you can't think....typical of low intellect R's!!!!!!!!!! Now why don't you tell us how the exceptions damage the CDC's conclusion with some real data and not your inane jaded opinion LOLOLOLOLOL. BTW...the google search on do masks work has many more confirmations than your patent they don't work!!!!! Sorry sport....you ass is grass again!!!!
"And between rising mortgage interest rates and rising prices for building materials, this get's a whole lot worse before it starts to get better."
Exactly, because of Biden Policies his ineptitude and the unqualified staff and Secretarial.
Inflation is at 10 %.
😷😷😷😷💉💉💉💉
James, Alky and Denny , three blind mice
Bidenomics
WSJ
"Unfortunately, inflation-adjusted wages are falling faster than they have in 40 years
Durham: Five Hillary Clinton Associates Are Taking the Fifth in Russia Hoax Prosecution
The bottom line is that during the trial, we will see if his allegations will convince the jurors to convicted him.
U.S. Special Counsel John Durham has asserted in a court filing on Good Friday that the CIA concluded data from Clinton campaign lawyer Michael A. Sussmann alleging coordination between Donald Trump and Russia was "not technically plausible" and was "user created," according to multiple reports.
In the filing – Case 1:21-cr-00582-CRC Document 70 Filed 04/15/22 – Durham responded to objections from Sussmann’s defense regarding what evidence could be admissible at trial, which is scheduled to begin next month.
I will provide the link
The legal process might produce more details, but at this point, Durham has not said using the data was a crime. By itself, this undercuts the notion that anyone spied on Trump. And if the target was Russian meddling, as Joffe’s statement said, and not Trump, there’s even less basis to cast this as spying.
Finally, Durham’s filing didn’t say that campaign officials directed this activity. Sussmann worked both for a law firm that represented the campaign, and for Joffe, who had lawful access to the data. Simmons said Scott’s statement "implies that the decision-makers of the Clinton campaign knew about this or directed these actions, and the filings make no mention of such a link."
"There’s no evidence suggesting any of this was elaborately masterminded by Hillary Clinton," said Julian Sanchez, a senior fellow at the Libertarian Cato Institute, in a Twitter thread. "The rather tenuous Clinton link is that Joffe passed the researchers’ findings on to FBI & CIA via Sussman, a prominent cybersecurity lawyer who’d also done work for the Clinton campaign."
Simmons also noted that nothing has been proven.
"Nobody ‘hacked’ or ‘intercepted’ anything," Sanchez said.
Our ruling
Scott said "the latest with the Durham report is that the Clinton campaign … actually spied on the president of the United States."
The filing from Durham is more tentative than Scott presents.
It states that an attorney for an internet company that was collecting data related to White House communications from 2016 to early 2017 also served as an attorney for the Clinton campaign. It does not say that the Clinton campaign directed these activities. And it does not assert that the data was gathered illegally or that it was collected while Trump was president.
We rate this claim False.
“Inflation is pushing prices higher and higher, and some of those costs may never come back down to the levels Americans were accustomed to before the pandemic,” Axios reported Monday. [T]he good old days of cheap goods, and even cheaper services, may be long gone.”
It is called Systemic Inflation.
Durham.has flipped people in Hillaries
Inner circle for emunnity.
Hillary can just Volunteer to give testimony to Durham.
The Debate on Bidenomics is settle Science.
It has the US in a declining position .
Socialist cheer.
rrb said:
Your CDC "report" only has 8 gaping self-admitted holes in it.
Trying to explain that to VERY lo iq is a senseless exercise
The CDC tried to justify their bullshit and this was the best they could do.
A self-reported "study" conducted after the fact on a limited group.
If Fauci wanted a real study he had 2 years to do it and didn't
Like so many other things
Other studies have confirmed the mask bullshit including a gold standard Danish study during the pandemic
It was all about the narrative and not the science
The CDC tried to justify their bullshit and this was the best they could do.
The last dumb fuck shows up to prove he knows less than the others!!!! ( am sure the CDC just exists to placate idiots like you with fake studies.....Another sad commentary of the root cause of America's core problem......idiots !!!!!!!!!!
including a gold standard Danish study during the pandemic
BWAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!
Sorry sport.....but at best the danish study proved shit!!!!!!!!
The glaring critique is that of the mask-wearers, 46% wore the mask exactly as they were supposed to, while 47% “predominately as recommended”. (What this exactly means is unclear.) 7% didn’t really wear the mask and they were excluded from the results. This is always a problem with any study. We can’t lock-up humans like rats, as occurred in the Stanford prison experiment of the 1970s. In every experiment, some of the volunteers don’t abide by the exact rules, or cross-over to the other arm of the study, and this is a known and accepted limitation of research. But of participants who complied, most used more than 1 mask a day, changing them out as recommended. This is better than how most mask wearers around the world perform.
Danish Face Mask StudyIn the end, 1.8% of the mask group and 2.1% of the non-mask group
https://rockymountainbrainandspineinstitute.com/danish-face-mask-study/#:~:text=The%20Danish%20mask%20study%20intended%20to%20prove%20that,assess%20whether%20wearing%20masks%20prevented%20spread%20to%20others.
THANKS for PROVING you are the LOWEST IQ on the PLANET !!!
So you take a gold standard trial and find a rockymountainbrainandspineinstitutecritique (whoever the fuck they are) of it but believe an after-the-fact self-reported "trial" not meeting even the basics of a real trial
You are the king of the LOW IQ'ers
Undisputed
ROFLMFAO !!!
(whoever the fuck they are) of it but believe an after-the-fact self-reported "trial" not meeting even the basics of a real trial
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!! The king of twitter misinformation now only has ad hominem for a study proved to be ineffective....MOST AMUSING!!!
Danish Mask Study: No Benefit
Published: November 18, 2020 (upd.)
The Danish randomized controlled trial on the real-world efficacy of face masks against coronavirus infection – the first of its kind – has now been published in the Annals of Internal Medicine. As expected, the trial found no statistically significant benefit of wearing a face mask. The study used “high-quality surgical masks with a filtration rate of 98%”.
For political reasons, three major journals had previously refused to publish the Danish study.
Meanwhile, US researcher Yinon Weiss has updated his charts on mask mandates and coronavirus infections in various countries and US states. The charts indicate that mask mandates have made no difference, or may even have been counterproductive.
People who want to avoid a coronavirus infection must avoid situations in which they can get infected. If they cannot avoid such situations, and if they belong to a high-risk group, they should discuss prophylactic and early treatment options with their doctor, which according to international studies may significantly reduce the risk of severe disease.
The Danish study: Effectiveness of Adding a Mask Recommendation to Other Public Health Measures to Prevent SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Danish Mask Wearers. A Randomized Controlled Trial. AIM 2020.
https://swprs.org/danish-mask-study-no-benefit/
a randomized controlled trial vs. VERY lo iq's after-the-fact self-reported "study"
ROFLMFAO !!!
what a loser
but that's all he's got
Losing
* the "pastor" would want me to put the comma in the right place
I'm sorry ass, rrb pointed out yours wasn't even a study, but a "report"
Not that you can tell the difference.
Post a Comment