I finally found some! lots of info, time to start reading!
Honest to God, is there data on this at all? Even skewed data. I've called my government health officials and wrote them MONTHS ago. They could not give me any details on variants tests, transmission , NOTHING. I emailed again thinking maybe I'd get something now that they are "circulating" and surprise, I got told where and how to get tested for covid and the rules around covid! BAHAha In my area, these fucks are making the rules and they can't answer 1 single question or point me to the research. I was told to call my family dr after being on the phone with them for hours, as they have limited information on these things ya know!
Reminds me of the above video. Modern Educayshun. Resonated then and even more relevant now.
Poor dog, maybe he sniffs and touches the dog inappropriately. Now the dog has trust issues.
Then the comments section should be full of "Dislike." until they remove the comments 20 mins into the vid.
Then the comments section should be full of "Dislike." until they remove the comments 20 mins into the vid.
Jaundice discrimination!!!
Kappy thing has always been interesting, not sure what he is saying about him here. But Alex Jones ( in my opinion) gets enough right to pull people in to what he claims, then intentionally misdirects. There is a lot he is correct about, it just comes with so much bullshit.
is it possible to get a link to her statements? I've seen a few articles today that show an out of context quote from her motion to dismiss but I haven't see/read a response from her. If she said this, I'm super curious to read it.
“reasonable people would not accept such statements as fact view them only as claims that await testing by the courts through the adversary process" That statement doesn't necessarily mean her claims were not substantial, only that for people to take the claims as fact, they need to be proven in a court of law. Which is a reasonable. I'm not saying that everything she claimed is true either, but from what I read ( haven't finished reading the motion to be fair) her lawyer still argues substantial claims, not that it's opinion only, which is why I included the 12b quote.
WoW! what timing, didn't see that coming...
AmErIcA Is ReSpEcTEd AgAin!
Here's a link to the motion https://s.wsj.net/public/resources/documents/Powell%20motion.pdf. Even the quote that WSJ used does not necessarily mean it was just her opinion, " “reasonable people would not accept such statements as fact view them only as claims that await testing by the courts through the adversary process" That statement doesn't mean her claims were not substantial, only that for people to take them as fact, they need to be proven in a court of law. Which is a reasonable claim on it's own. Also in the intro it stated "Finally, should the Court decide to address the Complaint’s substantive allegations, the Complaint fails to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6)." which means they aren't arguing that she had nothing but opinion. I'm still reading through this, but everyone should see the primary source and make a decision based on that, not someone else's write up.
Thank you. God bless you as well, friend. Peace be with you.
This is the link to her motion to dismiss.. I'm reading it as I post (not done yet). So far I haven't seen "no reasonable person would believe it" However, I did see this in the intro " Finally, should the Court decide to address the Complaint’s substantive allegations the Complaint fails to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6)." To me, that sounds like they are still arguing that there's something,well, substantive to her statements. The link: https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.225699/gov.uscourts.dcd.225699.22.2_3.pdf
Just proves Trump supporters think for themselves. They can't fathom why someone wouldn't just follow authority.
Incompetence mainly. But I actually agree with OP. This is a have and have not situation, and I can easily see it turning into a 'GMO race' and 'non-GM race'. I just thought my comment was a funny half-joke.
haha okay let's give this a go, only for the sake of argument.. "they" kill the non-vaccinated OR the vaccine kills the vaccinated. Therefore, we will not have two new races. :D
Well, if there's any video evidence related to pizzagate stuff... they need plausible deniability. Just a theory of course.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanchi/article/PIIS2352-4642(21)00066-3/fulltext#sec1 Children and young people remain at low risk of COVID-19 mortality
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-84092-1 came out the other day staying at home/lockdowns did fuck all
Perfect example as to why you don't negotiate with terrorists.