Should have called 911 it'd have been fun watching her have to answer the questions to establish orientation to person, place, time, and event (ie competency to refuse medical care). What questions are those, you may wonder... Funny you should ask, the standard ones are "What year is it?", "Where are we right now?" and.... wait for it... wait for it.... "Who's the PRESIDENT!!!!!!!".
From a purely medical perspective, the only difference wearing the carrier on top really makes is it allows you to dump your plate carrier before someone gets overzealous with a set of trauma shears. If it can fit in the jaws of trauma shears the ER staff will try to cut it, backboard straps, anti-shock trousers, EKG wires, pacing pad wires (while the patient was being paced), all these I have personally watch fall victim to "trauma teams". Anyways, speaking as a Paramedic if it's anything serious you're going to learn the term "trauma naked" real quick, I'm not too concerned with the order I have to go in to get there and as long as I can find the velcro and quick release buckles that's how your vest is coming off. I've had to take vests off injured cops a few times, not really an issue. That said, wear the vest on top when possible because it gives me something to grab onto and drag your ass to safety if need be.
To quote the late Mike Vanderboegh, God rest his collectivist fighting soul, "A socialist is a communist who has not yet found his AK-47 or the will to use it, a communist is a socialist who has found his AK-47 and would kill you with it".
No worries, it's an easy enough assumption to make. I've wrestled my share of violent patients on the side of the road and sometimes you get some leakage when you have to resort to "grab and stab" to sedate them. It's not ideal, but it beats getting your ass kicked by someone high on PCP.
Nah, just really shitty out of date technique. The idiot appears to be bunching the skin which stopped being taught to Paramedics at least fifteen years ago. My guess is she's a nurse administrator who hasn't done direct care in a long long time but couldn't resist the chance to get on TV. Reference 4:20-6:00 in the below video for both the old and current technique. To give some reference, I was taught the Z track method in 2004.
I have to respectfully disagree with you on whether or not the VP is able to choose which set of electors to count. While you are correct regarding the 1887 Congressional Statute, I submit that there's a Constitutional and historical argument to render it moot.
Constitutionally, the language of the 12th Amendment is that the VP shall open and count the votes in the presence of Congress. In my interpretation, this indicates that the VP has the power to decide which votes are valid, which are not, and that the Congress of 1887 lacked the authority to constrain future Vice Presidents in carrying out their Constitutional duty. Which brings us to the historical argument of the election of 1800 in which VP Thomas Jefferson counted the votes of Georgia for himself and Aaron Burr despite them being clearly shady and not in the form called for in the constitution.
Sauce:
The Memoirs of AAron Burr published 1836: On the 11th of February the ballots were opened ... Mr. Jefferson was the presiding officer. On opening the package [of] endorsed Georgia votes, it was discovered to be totally irregular. The statement now about to be given is derived from an honourable gentleman, a member of Congress from the state of New York during the administration of Mr. Jefferson, and yet living in this state. He says that Mr. Wells (a teller on the part of the Senate) informed him that the envelope was blank; that the return of the votes was not authenticated by the signatures of the electors, or any of them, either on the outside or the inside of the envelope, or in any other manner; that it merely stated in the inside that the votes of Georgia were, for Thomas Jefferson four; and for Aaron Burr four; without the signature of any person whatsoever. Mr. Wells added, that he was very undecided as to the proper course to be pursued by the tellers. It was, however, suggested by one of them that the paper should be handed to the presiding officer, without any statement from the tellers except that the return was informal; that he consented to this arrangement under the firm conviction that Mr. Jefferson would announce the nature of the informality from the chair; but, to his utmost surprise, he (Mr. Jefferson) rapidly declared that the votes of Georgia were four for Thomas Jefferson and four for Aaron Burr, without noticing their informality, and in a hurried manner put them aside, and then broke the seals and handed to the tellers the package from the next state. Mr. Wells observed, that as soon as Mr. Jefferson looked at the paper purporting to contain a statement of the electoral vote of the state of Georgia, his countenance changed, but that the decision and promptitude with which he acted on that occasion convinced him of that which he (a federalist) and his party had always doubted, that is to say, Mr. Jefferson's decision of character, at least when his own interest was at hazard.
A 2004 article in the Atlantic on the election of 1800... https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2004/03/how-jefferson-counted-himself-in/302888/
Well then allow me to introduce you to a bit of forgotten history, what the British termed the "Black Robed Regiment"... The revolution may have been conceived on Saturday nights in pubs, but it was birthed in churches on Sunday mornings by the clergy who laid out the moral, philosophical, and theological foundations for American Independence. Two examples are a 1750 sermon by Jonathan Mayhew which popularized the phrase, "resistance to tyrants is obedience to God", and the Virginia minister Peter Muhlengerg who after preaching a sermon one Sunday, stripped off his clerical robe to reveal an officers uniform and exhorted the men to join him in the Patriot struggle.
https://teachinghistory.org/history-content/ask-a-historian/24635
From The Memoirs of Aaron Burr published in 1836...
"On the 11th of February the ballots were opened ... Mr. Jefferson was the presiding officer. On opening the package [of] endorsed Georgia votes, it was discovered to be totally irregular. The statement now about to be given is derived from an honourable gentleman, a member of Congress from the state of New York during the administration of Mr. Jefferson, and yet living in this state. He says that Mr. Wells (a teller on the part of the Senate) informed him that the envelope was blank; that the return of the votes was not authenticated by the signatures of the electors, or any of them, either on the outside or the inside of the envelope, or in any other manner; that it merely stated in the inside that the votes of Georgia were, for Thomas Jefferson four; and for Aaron Burr four; without the signature of any person whatsoever. Mr. Wells added, that he was very undecided as to the proper course to be pursued by the tellers. It was, however, suggested by one of them that the paper should be handed to the presiding officer, without any statement from the tellers except that the return was informal; that he consented to this arrangement under the firm conviction that Mr. Jefferson would announce the nature of the informality from the chair; but, to his utmost surprise, he (Mr. Jefferson) rapidly declared that the votes of Georgia were four for Thomas Jefferson and four for Aaron Burr, without noticing their informality, and in a hurried manner put them aside, and then broke the seals and handed to the tellers the package from the next state. Mr. Wells observed, that as soon as Mr. Jefferson looked at the paper purporting to contain a statement of the electoral vote of the state of Georgia, his countenance changed, but that the decision and promptitude with which he acted on that occasion convinced him of that which he (a federalist) and his party had always doubted, that is to say, Mr. Jefferson's decision of character, at least when his own interest was at hazard."
Ok, so my background is in history, not law, but here's a TLDR version of it. Since the Constitution vests the COUNTING of the electoral votes with the VP his is the sole decision of whether and what votes count. This came into play in the election of 1800 when Thomas Jefferson was the VP running for POTUS. When congress met to count the certified electoral votes Jefferson is opening up the envelopes and calling out the votes. He gets to the one from Georgia and it's shady as fuck and clearly unconstitutional. Problem is, those are the votes that Jefferson and AAron Burr need to win, and prevent a five way race in the House which they most likely would have lost. So anyway, without skipping a beat Jefferson announces the Ga electoral votes for himself and Burr and moves on to the next envelope.
Here's a 2004 article from The Atlantic about it... https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2004/03/how-jefferson-counted-himself-in/302888/
Win, lose, or draw, this must happen even in states with little chance of tangible results. It creates relationships, forms coalitions, trains and vets leaders. This is how the infrastructure is built that puts crowds in front of politicians when legislation is being debated and institutions are being pressured to change. We start with MAGA Mondays in every state capitol but it has to end with gun rights groups showing up for school choice protests and pro-life church groups showing up to end the ATF, FBI CIA etc. We must also pressure the donor class to abandon muh think tanks in favor of boots on the ground organizations that get results. We must learn from the successes of the left AND the failure of the TEA Party (who on the cusp of becoming truly impactful, were co-opted and gelded by the Quisling class "True Conservatives").
He posted today on Bitchute so my guess is fuckery's afoot with Facebook... https://www.bitchute.com/channel/thesaltycracker/
Maybe partially. I believe they're overreaching in assigning the same motive to the Russian movements. While a destabilized US would benefit Russia under a Biden presidency, a strong nationalist noninterventionalist US under GEOTUS benefits Russia more as a counterbalance to Chy-na and the neo-con internationalists here and in Europe. Plus I really can't see Putin throwing his lot in with a bunch of Godless Christian persecuting atheist Communists considering how devoutly Orthodox Christian he appears to be.
I'm making one of those and hanging it from the mirror of my ambulance. Any bets on how many shifts it lasts?
Maybe, but there's no way to skip 1990's Yugoslavia in the process. The alternative, the center left and the right coalescing to form a Nationalist/Populist government and minimizing anything in culture, education and politics that subverts that for at least a generation in order to rebuild the ties that bind us into a common culture doesn't seem probable.
Considering that in NC our shitweasel Governor, AG, and board of elections engaged in the same sort of fuckery and have been fighting to keep from enforcing the voter ID constitutional amendment passed two years ago... I'd say you're right.
Let justice be done though the heavens fall! FIFY
Since you're flag shopping, check out the Battle of Plattsburgh Veterans Exempt flag. It's from a NY state militia unit formed during the War of 1812 from men exempt from service because they were veterans the War of Independence.
FBI - Faking Bogus Investigations since 1908.
If Roy Cooper were dipped in napalm, set on fire 40 yards from a river, and you went knocking on doors from Manteo to Murphy, I'd be shocked if you found enough people willing to form a bucket brigade to extinguish the fire let alone re-elect him our governor. That said, impeaching Cooper after Mark Robinson takes the oath of office for Lt Governor seems ideal since a. Forrest bent over and grabbed his ankles without so much as a whimper and b. Robinson is a black pro-gun conservative who's shown a willingness to fight which is a bitter pill for those in Cary, Charlotte, Greensboro (lotta Commies for a long time) and Asheville.
If we're organizing group projects, my vote is for a ballista. Of course I may have spent a bit too much free time picturing how that Antifa snack van would look with a fencepost arrow sticking through it's engine block.
Same here. I've been subsisting on a daily diet of Styxhexenhammer666, Salty, and TD for the last month.
Purely as a historical aside, it's worth noting that the Israelis put suppressed Ruger 10/22s to effective use in the West Bank and Gaza against rock throwers.
https://www.rugertalk.com/articles/the-plinker-went-to-war-the-idfs-ruger-10-22.126/
TLDR Caveat: this is NOT a "less lethal" option by any stretch of the imagination. In a time prior to the widespread use of tourniquets, I personally have worked my ass off trying to keep someone alive with a GSW that nicked the popliteal artery.
Please note that their pseudo-medics are legitimate targets as they have perpetrated violence in the past and then hid behind the psychological reticence to attack medical providers that has been culturally instilled when one sees a red cross. Something Hammas et al have taken advantage of by loading ambulances with terrorists and/or bombs to perpetrate attacks.
Tangentially, it occurs to me that the shields in the video present a few vulnerabilities aside from the obvious lack of resistance to the elements of the periodic table launched at high velocity. Facing the shield, it appears that if one were snag the upper right corner and pull violently, the bearer would be thrown off balance and fall flat on their face. Conversely, if one were to either grab the lower left corner and pull or push the bearer would be left exposed (it's my understanding that this tactic was quite effective when used in the Ukraine during their color revolution).
HL Mencken quote: “Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats.”