Just to clarify, the post title here is misleading. "At that time [May 2020], 70 percent of all deaths" were attributable to Levine. The percentage is now +50%. Unacceptable either way. Just want to point this out as it took me a while to reconcile the difference when reading the article.
Yeah, I didn't disagree with that. There's an important clause that qualifies the rest of the sentence. It's omission can mislead the reader. Not a personal attack, but just clarification on the abridged quote.
Just to clarify, the post title here is misleading. "At that time [May 2020], 70 percent of all deaths" were attributable to Levine. The percentage is now +50%. Unacceptable either way. Just want to point this out as it took me a while to reconcile the difference when reading the article.
Quote is lifted directly from the article.
Still more credible than the Mockingbird media!
Yeah, I didn't disagree with that. There's an important clause that qualifies the rest of the sentence. It's omission can mislead the reader. Not a personal attack, but just clarification on the abridged quote.
Gotta hook the reader in somehow!