Hmmm...what happened to the big deal about Hunter and Ukraine? Looks like the big deal maybe Rudy......the poster boy for the Forum's Trumpsters. Too bad, Trump didn't add Rudy to his crony list of pardons.
Federal Investigators Search Rudy Giuliani’s Apartment and Office
Federal investigators in Manhattan executed search warrants early Wednesday at the home and office of Rudolph W. Giuliani, the former New York City mayor who became President Donald J. Trump’s personal lawyer, stepping up a criminal investigation into Mr. Giuliani’s dealings in Ukraine, three people with knowledge of the investigation said.
The investigators seized Mr. Giuliani’s electronic devices and searched his apartment on Madison Avenue and his office on Park Avenue at about 6 a.m., two of the people said.
Executing a search warrant is an extraordinary move for prosecutors to take against a lawyer, let alone a lawyer for a former president.
And we all know how totally reliable those unnamed sources are, especially when we are dealing with Maggie Haberman, a left wing hack shill for the Democrat party.
But to your point, I hope Rudy has multiple certified copies of that hard drive and one is in the possession of his attorney with instructions to release it if something happens to him. Ironic isn't it? We have documented evidence of pay for play and extortion by the Biden's but Rudy is allegedly being investigated for alleged work in Ukraine.......allegedly. It just drips with DOJ being back to their old, corrupt ways under the Obama reign of terror. Just wait for them to reweaponize the IRS. It's coming I can assure you. And why not? They totally got away with it the first time.
Heard from Durham recently? Yeah, me neither. I would love to meet him in person one day to tell him what an absolute disgrace he is.....regardless of what he finds. Nothing takes this long....nothing.
Sad, but Martini is in constant denial. Deny the mask, deny the election, deny Rudy was raided....young man there comes a time in life where the truth wins out. Constant denial of the facts just makes you look like a liberal in the classic sense.
When did I deny that his office was raided? Let me help you out here.....I didn't. I did express my extreme skepticism considering the source. I mean, how often have they been wrong with their initial reports based on unnamed sources? A hundred times? Two hundred? A thousand?
I even went so far as to express my hope that if they were after Hunter's hard drive, which would not surprise me in the least, that he has multiple certified copies. And I did mention the irony of these allegations when we have factual evidence of the Biden pay for play and corruption with Ukraine. But do they act on that information? Oh no.....but they are allegedly all over Guiliani for something....who knows what. Learn to read Goofy.....English isn't that hard.
More to the point, what facts? I have provided study after study that demonstrates masks don't work. Where are his facts? We have presented facts that would cause anyone with half a brain to at least wonder how free and fair the 2020 election was. Where are his facts? And for sure there are a lack of facts in the Guiliani story. Just unnamed sources.
And by the way, I have no problem being described as a classic liberal because in the classical sense a truly liberal person relies on facts, logic and reason. Not the emotion and wishful thinking of progressives and socialists that have perverted the term liberal to the point that it no longer means what it has always meant.
Fish, for the life of me I don't recall any valid studies from peer reviewed journals you have presented here that describe the efficacies of mask wear by yourself in a car, outdoors at a baseball game, on a two year old, etc. I know that MM has presented quite a few that even opened my eyes to benefits and alternatives to mask wear.
We questioned the motive of the Guiliani raid, not the raid itself. Big difference.
We have over the past 6 months presented much scientific support of our positions that are refuted by you all with nothing more than talking points from CNN talking heads and mindless polls and opinion pieces. Your assertion that we are the ones in denial of facts does not ring true.
CRD. I took this from Martini as a denial that the raid occurred..
"And we all know how totally reliable those unnamed sources are, especially when we are dealing with Maggie Haberman, a left wing hack shill for the Democrat party."
I do not understand how you read it differently.
From the NY POST>>
Former Mayor Rudy Giuliani on Wednesday accused federal agents of ignoring copies of Hunter Biden’s computer hard drives when they raided his apartment — and blamed the investigation of him on “Trump Derangement Syndrome.”
In a statement released by his lawyer, Giuliani said the FBI “steadfastly declined” to take the hard drives when he “offered them on several occasions.”
My unbiased opinion is that Hunter Biden and Rudy are slimeballs. Remember the old thing about lipstick on a pig? Well it applies in both of these men. We still know that Hunter Biden was not qualified for the board of the Ukraine and got the job because of his name. And we know that Joe Biden quashed the investigation by the Ukraine. It's on tape. I don't know what happened to Rudy since 2001 or maybe he was always a slimeball, but as far as I'm concerned he encouraged Trump's worst impulses, almost always to his detriment.
You used to post compelling, well thought out opinions. You have regressed into a FOX news sort of position. I know you claim to not read that channel, but it is for sure showing in your tired, didactic RWW responses. Along with it TGS, which is the contrast to the FOX news created TDS which you are so fond of exclaiming. Trump Glorification Syndrome. We change presoidents every 4-8 years - thats our process. Large segrments of the population are appalled @ each cycle. How ir this any different? And remember, based on your posts you can't answer that question.
I am not even sure what you are responding to.....nothing I posted has anything to do with anything other than scientific studies out of MIT and Stanford. I know left wingers only like science they agree with but that's your problem, not mine. Every study I have seen using meta data indicates that masks have zero impact on the spread of a virus......which is why they tell doctors and nurses to stay home if they are sick.
No, I don't watch Fox News or even look at its website but I assume you must if you are so sure my points mimic theirs......somehow I think you are not telling the truth about that. I am pretty sure you are a cnnBS or a pmsnBS sort of guy and that's what misinforms you about Fox News. And no, we don't normally switch out presidents every four years. In fact the norm at least in the last century is most presidents serve two terms. Other than that, I think if my reliance on science, facts, logic and reason wear you out you should get more sleep.
The reason you came to that conclusion is you have a reading comprehension problem. There was the alleged raid and there was the alleged reason. I doubted both given the unnamed source issue and the authors...but I never denied anything. And I still doubt the alleged reason for the raid and expressed the irony that we know the Biden's had corrupt involvement in Ukraine with nada being done but the unnamed sources are telling us that all of the sudden, after Dementia Joe becomes President and weaponizes DOJ and they go after Trump supporters, they are concerned about Ukraine?!?!?
You are so blinded by TDS that you are literally unable to comprehend that simple reality and dripping irony.
Litttle wine spritzer man is just way to into himself and his alleged grasp of politics. He is a cultist; nobody believes a word out of his mouth except the other idiots who once Trump was elected decided it was ok to out themselves as the racists they have always been. It's really sad because most of the country wants to move forward but the republicans are just standing in the way because "this is America" and they don't want their "rights" infringed upon......just selfish bullshit.
CRD - my wine spritzer appellation was aimed at martini man. As to you, I am quite impressed by your whiskey choices. I am a bourbon lover myself. Should we ever run into each other in a bar or restaurant, I suggest we put aside our political differences (which are massive) and enjoy a proper drink.
Not even sure what that means. But as for my use of selective studies that fit my agenda how about this challenge? Show me a study that refutes the ones I described? Show me studies using meta data that demonstrates that masks are effective in preventing the spread of the virus. Come on dude, don't just dismiss my position, prove it wrong with peer reviewed studies from stellar universities like Stanford and MIT and I am all ears. What you and other leftists don't get, because you are so anti-science, is that I follow the science and not some ideology. And as I pointed out I have long advocated for social distancing as actually working. The one study even calls that into question for reasons that are both scientifically sound and logical. Despite that, I am still going to keep at the social distancing as other studies have shown it can be helpful.....not so much with the masks.
But if you want to see real ideology trumping science, some left wing nut out DC said they are still going to wear a mask outdoors because they don't want people to think they are a Republican. That is prime facie evidence that this is all about ideology for the left and not science. But keep trying. And as I have long stated over and over again, if wearning masks makes you feel better please have at it. Just don't get lullws into a false sense of security and practice the other more reasonable and effective measures.
Stanford has disavowed the study. Stay current, Dude.
the problem with you and the FOX news right (despite your proteststions your positions are just too similar) is that you cling to anything - verified or not - and promote it whether dangerous or not as long as it fits in the ideology.
Read. Be careful as you blindly pontificate
the author "has no affiliation with Stanford, according to the university. Stanford School of Medicine spokeswoman Julie Greicius said in a prepared statement that Stanford supports the use of face masks to control the spread of COVID-19."
Yes we have seen the statement that they pulled it - can you show us the data that refutes the study or just where they did not want their name associated with it?
Saying that the person who authored the study was not a part of the school of medicine at Stanford is hardly disavowing the study. The guy never said he was. His CV is part of the study. You don't need to be a member of the school of medicine to look at and analyze data.
Now back to my original challenge.....show us a peer reviewed study using meta data that demonstrates that masks are effective. It should be easy for you mind numbed robots who believe anything the govt tells you. As for me, I deal with scientists in the govt every day and I can assure you that by and large they are not the brightest bulbs in the chandelier.
This from a Brown University study about infections in school settings with and without masks being required. See if you can figure this out for yourself or let me know if I need to assist you in interpreting the data. Here's a hint.....there is literally no correlation between mandatory mask wearing and no masks when it comes to student and staff infection rates....I know, science is hard and painful when it refutes the blind allegience of anti-science sheeple like you.
you wrote ..."nothing I posted has anything to do with anything other than scientific studies out of MIT and Stanford"
except the study wasn't out of Stanford, was it? My reading comprehension is fine. Maybe you should have ended the sentence a bit earlier, "nothing I posted has anything to do with anything." That would have been more to the point.
Not out of Stanford? Did you even read the paper? Wait....don't answer that as we already know that you didn't. Because if you had you would have seen the following in the title (with my emphasis added cause you're so dense).
Facemasks in the COVID-19 era: A health hypothesis
Baruch Vainshelboim * Cardiology Division, Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Health Care System/Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA, United States
I realize that the most complicated thing you probably read is the USA Today but here's a news flash for you. Go back and read the quote from the Stanford SCHOOL OF MEDICINE that he wasn't a member of the faculty there. Ya see, Stanford University is a little bit more than just their school of medicine. They actually do other things, including having a Cardiology Division in the Veteran Affairs Palo Alto Health Care System. The guy has a PhD in pulmonary rehabilitation. And the pulmunary system relates to the part of the body called your lungs.....and masks are something between the outside air and the lungs.....I am trying to make this easier for you.
But here's the real issue here with you mind numbed sheeple.....not a word about the study itself, no critique of the 67 citations, yes, he had 67 scientific studies that he referenced in the paper......no presentation of peer reviewed papers that came to a different conclusion......not one salient, intelligent fact or thought. You just parrot the left wing media with their logical fallacy of ad hominum attacks of the author because they can't even begin to respond to the weight of his arguments or the data that brought him to this conclusion.
So no, I am not thin skinned. I am deeply concerned for our country that far too many people like you can and do vote, which is your right. But it would be nice if you would take a moment at least once a day and think critically, examine your beliefs, compare them to the real world and how things really work and for crying out loud stop believing everything the govt and the media tell you. But if not, you can join Goofy in the category of those that love to be humiliated.
You trying to give Tucker a run for his title?!?!?
Date:
5/4/2021 8:37:28 PM
You seem to want to prop up up a guy who people are distancing themselves from as quickly as possible.
Just admit it, you hitched your wagon to a loser. Didn't you suggest that I needed to look beyond the Stanford reference to the basis of the study? How'd that go you you after the editor-in-chief retacted the article, credentials notwithstanding?
btw, I can read, no need to be a pedantic prick
The Editorial Committee concluded that the author’s hypothesis is misleading on the following basis:
1. A broader review of existing scientific evidence clearly shows that approved masks with correct certification, and worn in compliance with guidelines, are an effective prevention of COVID-19 transmission.
2. The manuscript misquotes and selectively cites published papers. References #16, 17, 25 and 26 are all misquoted.
3. Table 1. Physiological and Psychological Effects of Wearing Facemask and Their Potential Health Consequences, generated by the author. All data in the table is unverified, and there are several speculative statements.
4. The author submitted that he is currently affiliated to Stanford University, and VA Palo Alto Health Care System. However, both institutions have confirmed that Dr Vainshelboim ended his connection with them in 2016.
A subsequent internal investigation by the Editor-in-Chief and the Publisher have determined that this article was externally peer reviewed but not with our customary standards of rigor prior to publication. The journal has re-designed its editorial and review workflow to ensure that this will not happen again in future
The Editor-in-Chief and the Publisher would like to apologize to the readers of The Journal for difficulties this issue has caused.
More ad hominum attacks lacking real sustance I see. I am still waiting for you to share with us peer reviewed papers using meta data that confirms that the wearing of masks reduces the rates of virus infection. I shared with you the study from Brown University and the author of the other study included 67 citations of which he apparently misrepresented statements in a few of them. What about the other 64 studies that support his thesis? I can only imagine the pressure placed on Elsevier Press to retract this article and the likely threats they received from the govt and elsewhere. When you go against the tide of the day it's no surprise they folded.
But again, I challenge you to refute those 64 remaining studies. And don't just cherry pick the one alleged study that showed masks are effective.....which I note whoever wrote the retraction did not even bother to cite. So go get it. Prove us wrong. Prove the Brown University study wrong. Until then I will remain a pedantic prick when it comes to sheeple like you. All the meta data studies have shown that there is no positive correlation between mask wearing and lower ChiCom virus infection rates. But hey, if you can prove me wrong I will gladly wear my mask.
Oh and by the way, I have never watched Tucker Carlson in my life but it sounds like you do. Wonder why the obsession? You should seek help for that. I am sure there are psychtropic drugs that can make you stop being so obsessive with Fox News.
Of course he can't cite any studies. All he knows he gets from pmsnBS, etc. I have challenged him multiple times and he has yet to respond with anything factual. I suspect he looked for peer reviewed studies using meta data that demonstrates masks are effective and couldn't find one.....I know I haven't been able to. I cited another study by Brown University that demonstrated that mask wearing made no difference in infection rates in schools. Did he respond to that study with contradicting proof? Nope, he is stuck on stupid relying on the retraction of the article for issues that have nothing to do with whether his thesis was accurate or not.
He is invincibly ignorant and a mind numbed sheeple that believes whatever the govt and media tell him to believe. And he is very weirdly obsessed and apparently watches Fox News 24/7 because he thinks that is where I get my information.....so clueless. I don't believe anything I hear from the media although I can't comment on Fox News because I don't watch it or look at its website....although I do peruse Fox Business every day to see what's going on in the markets.
I do my own research on important issues like this and come to my own conclusions. And it appears based on the MIT study I may have been wrong about social distancing. However, it's just one study and I will wait to see if others confirm it. But I know I am right about masks not being effective and it isn't based on the paper I cited. All that paper did was compile the various studies that led to his conclusion. Sloppy work on the part of the author but his misquoting a handful of the papers means he accurately quoted the other 60 plus papers that showed no mask effectiveness. But when you are scientifically illiterate you wouldn't remotely understand it.....and he and others like Goofy are truly scientifically illiterate.
You trying to give Tucker a run for his title?!?!?
Date:
5/5/2021 9:17:57 AM
If masks were that great - a majority have been wearing them for over a year - why did cases spike and deaths go through the roof?
Masks either protect, they do not, or they may help in some degree - they are not magical one way devices that protect others but not yourself.
Several sites I have seen show the percent mask compliance in NY was some of the highest in the US - why did so many get infected and die?
Now I am sure that those of us in Red State America its just because those handful of people who did not wear a mask or refuse to were super spreaders - or at least that is the talking points we have seen regarding relaxing mandates.
There is a reason Drs changes masks often / between patients.
If masks are great - then why were there considerations or recommendations on double or triple masking?
I am guessing you take your democratic talking points with a spoon full of sugar to help it go down without any critical thinking.
Watching people walk around with masks on during winter with fog coming out around their masks explained all I need to know about how good a mask is. Yes it may slow or stop the mouth breathers that are spitting on your from a few feet away - but they also are petri dishes that grow all day long while being worn.
I do not claim that masks do not help at all - I am just pointing out that the claim that if you do not wear one you are killing people is pure emotion bull chit.
You trying to give Tucker a run for his title?!?!?
Date:
5/5/2021 9:35:03 AM
Yours are all arguments from a common sense perspective. Mine have been from common sense and studies that I've actually read. His are from the govt media. I can assure you he actually thinks the withdrawl of this article is proof positive that masks work. He is that scientifically illiterate and likely invincibly ignorant.
The meta data study from Brown University is a good example. A significant amount of data from numerous states with different masking requirements and zero correlation with lower infection rates. They were almost identical infection rates regardless of mask usage although interestingly on the high end they actually had higher infection rates with the mask wearers. I wonder if that is an anomaly of if there might be some correlation with mask wearers not being as diligent with the other measures.
I am waiting for your brilliant intellectual insights into the methodolgical flaws of this study and how the authors used to burn ants with a magnifiying glass when they were kids so their study actually proves that masks works and not the other way around.
Science is so hard when it goes against your slavish devotion to whatever your masters in the govt and the media tell you to think. I actually feel a little sorry for you......but only a little.
New Post
Search
Off-Topic Forum
Reply
»
Texas Lakes
»
Eagle Mountain Lake
Login
|
Home
