He’d be risking his life less if he published his source material and let others decide.
Until he does so they can prevent its release by terminating him.
Once it is public there is no advantage to that.
Anonymous source = no source. This is a fart in the wind unless there is evidence. There is no advantage to withholding that, certainly not this late in the game.
No anonymous sources.
Not on their side.
Not on our side.
If there is a witness who chooses to swear, let him or her be know.
If there is a recording, let it free.
In my book an anonymous source is no source.
If every stopped using them they would disappear overnight.
There are plenty of Trump supporters addicted to these services. They need to admit they have an addiction and break away.
Not so much in this case. Vast majority of docs scoff at the AMA.
The only avenue the AMA has to influence care decisions is through its journal, which was once respected but not publishes things about how white people should be shamed and asked if they have guns.
The ama has no credibility in medical circles. They are summarily ignored. Liberals trot out the AMA every time they are trying to steal something health related and need to pretend that doctors agree with them.
AMA is a shit leftist organization that represents democrats, not doctors.
That said they have zero power to ban anything. They are in the business of
- Maintaining lists of diagnoses and procedures for the government to use
And
- Pretending to represent medical doctors so as to be a disinformation tool for use by the left and the media.
It’s a useful indicator of when they are lying the most.
Whenever there is a reference to an unnamed source etc that’s when the lies avalanche.
This audit needs at least one pro-Trump Republican and one dem checking the signatures. If either one objects it goes into a pile. That is how it was done in Florida 2000.
The same crooked people with no oversight is idiotic!!!!!
The leftist AMA has among its members the 8% of doctors furthest to the left.
They supported Obamacare, which most doctors hated.
They are a convenient hollowed out dead husk of an organization that actually represented medicine in the 1960s but which has been taken over by the left in subsequent decades and is not just a dead skin the left wears to trick people.
They make their money chiefly not through dues but by selling lists of procedures and diagnoses to the government. A cozy relationship you might say.
If you like doing physical exams then I agree. The only notes I see rads placing in charts for physical exams are interventional rads, or limited exams for example thyroid exams, breast exams, etc.
Still, I would suggest that everything my rad colleagues do is clinical as they focus on making a diagnosis, which is the core of clinical work. Using a CT scanner rather than a stethoscope doesn’t change that.
Many of us glorious bastards ARE doctors.
I don’t want you to blindly trust me. Blind trust means you have given up all agency and responsibility for your health, nutrition, and outcomes and thrust it all on me.
I’d rather have an informed, involved, responsible patient any day.
All types go into plumbing. All types go into car repair. And all types go into medicine. I don’t shit on all mechanics because some asshole ripped me off once and screwed up my car. Stop pulling the same shit on docs.
I remember when people were posting furious and suspicious messages because the government was telling people “do not wear a mask.” 🤷🏼♂️
My colleagues in radiology attend and lead most of our cancer conferences and as far as I know practice clinical medicine 100% of their career (private practice, not academics). They do a fair amount of advanced treatments with us. You might want to consider a different residency if you don’t even think of what rads do as clinical. I can’t think of anything they do that isn’t clinical.
This small slice of sanity and human compassion is just what the Doctor ordered.
Adjudicated means someone voted their preference in your name.
“There is absolutely no evidence of an arson attack. “
Adjudication = someone else votes using your name
It should be illegal.
The AMA is a leftist hack organization that claims way under 10% of US physicians among its members. Only the toxic leftists.
It was ruined by leftists in the 1980s and is a dead husk that the liberal party trots out as a weapon every once in a while. Like academia or the news. They are one with the AMA.
The AMA is NOT physicians. I’m a doc and none of my many colleagues are members.
“Adjudication” = voting.
Whoever adjudicated a ballot actually votes the ballot in that person’s name.
If there are no logs or records of the process, or capability to ensure that the adjudication (voting) was aboveboard, then the process is in violation of basic election safeguards and all adjudicated ballots should be nullified.
My understanding is that Orion is the central hub and all other Solarwinds products are just plug-ins but the core Orion product is required for any solarwinds app. Do you have information to the contrary?
Sure. With deleted adjudication logs and 70% of the vote in the personal whims of poll workers, the ridiculous anomalies seen in the blue districts that kicked out republicans but kept working are a very clear sign of what happened.
Adjudication of a vote is essentially casting a vote.
So 70% of votes were cast by poll workers.
The purposeful deletion of adjudication logs, sharing of superuser credentials between poll workers, and illegal software updates without re-certification before and after the election were all practices to foil or spoil forensic reconstruction.
“Overseen by a bipartisan election board”
What does overseen mean.
Were republicans scrutinizing the 70% of ballots that were adjudicated in dem precincts? As in, directly involved in looking at the ballots and casting the vote through adjudication?
Or was there a bipartisan board but hundreds of poll workers with dem poll workers in blue cities essentially casting hundreds of thousands of votes through the adjudication loophole?
“I really support the second amendment, but...”
Fascinating read. Thank you.
Why not place it in the hands of hundreds of millions by publishing it out on the internet.
What possibly advantage is there, this late in the game, to playing the same “anonymous sources” game the fake news does.
If the point is to keep powder dry for some constitutional crisis, why tell the public at all?
And even if true, the only implication would be that Roberts would be expected to recuse himself in election decisions.