Is that so?? That could be very handy if that was true.

that's days in session. they don't really work that many days, so it's going to be a lot longer than that

Maybe need to develop a 538 seat helicopter

I'm afraid the new congress is way too similar to the old congress. We may need to make some further adjustments.

Yes, I'm hoping the legislative landscape changes dramatically in the next 45 days.

But what I meant by misleading is that if congress makes no action (i.e. passes no bill re-affirming or amending the original legislation), after 45 session days the original bill becomes law automatically.

So, if they can wait out the 45 days there is no requirement that they vote on new legislation. A vote is only required if they want to get the bullshit parts of the law enacted immediately. Even then he could veto those re-affirmations, requiring a supermajority to pass them.

The current congress can try to pass whatever they like to re-affirm parts of the bill, but at this late date Trump can use the pocket veto (sit on the bill until the end of the session) and then that bill is gone and forgotten. So it's safe to say that any legislation re-affirming the pork won't happen until the new congress.

That's what I'm hoping for, personally. A lot can change in the next 45 days, and hopefully it will.

Yes, but with this reply that postpones disbursement of the money for 45 legislative session days, unless a second bill is passed that either re-affirms or amends the original legislation.

So they are now trying to pass a new bill that amends it to 2000.

If that passes, then once signed, it goes into effect immediately as 2000.

If it doesn't pass then nothing happens - and failing another bill the original 600 goes into effect after 45 days.

My point was that if the bill to increase to 2000 fails to pass, the 600 still does not take effect immediately.

Actually they are just plain lying. The incidence rate is much higher than background. Background incidence in us is 40000 per year or .01%, but if you factor in the coincidence with the vaccine, coming in a specific month after the vaccine, you should divide that by 12.

The incidence in covid trials was .02%

Are you sure? I think they need to pass a bill for it to take effect immediately, whether for 2000 or the original 600. If no bill is passed then 600 becomes law after 45 session days

Edit: Following not true, the veto override takes effect immediately I guess, without signature?

Not true? >> Because after the re-vote he has 10 days to sign and if Congress goes out of session in that time which it would, the bill is gone

Exactly! This is critical

One part of this is misleading.. they only need to respond if they want the money before the 45 days. After 45 days it proceeds as signed with no action.. so they can literally ignore this if they don't need the money right away.

So this only works with additional pressure on Congress to act.

I am hoping part of this strategy involves replacing most of Congress in the next 45 days

If they just wait 45 days it all gets funded by default. So this means very little without big changes in Congress

They don't have to do anything unless they need the funds released before 45 days.

The funds are held up for 45 days and if nothing happens they are approved by default. If Congress chooses to, they can vote to revise it or override the request now.

If somehow Congress was replaced by honest people who are not communists in the next 45 days this strategy could work. Perhaps that is part of the plan

Yes.. this strategy only works if somehow the Congress is very different in the next 45 days, which could happen. If say 2/3 of them were in prison where they belong

Yeah it's tough remembering which arm you pretended to get the shot

According to nih there are 40000 cases per year in the usa, 0.01%. so it is at least double. But if you consider the odds of developing in a particular month after a vaccine, that would be 24 times more likely.

So yes there is a correlation

Sounds like bs to me

Uh.. oh did I mention sterility?

Although, they haven't come out saying it has poison yet. One thought that occurs to me is that this could be a pearl harbor scheme.. "unknowingly" promote the poison vax and allow some injury, and then discover it was a Chinese act of war.

I don't know, I don't think it's the masks but all the shut down and stay home stuff is more effective for flu? It's only a theory to explain the fact that flu is gone.

I don't think masks do much though. It's been proven ineffective for catching covid and while not proven seems dubious that it would have a big impact on spread. Masks are proven ineffective against the spread of flu.

Yes that shit works on the flu. But where is the evidence that any of it affects covid stats? The curves all look identical, with no discontinuities from policy changes.