Tuesday, May 19, 2020
Monday, May 18, 2020
Blogs With Rule 5 Links
These Blogs Provide Links To Rule 5 Sites:
The Other McCain has: Rule 5 Sunday: Sarah Rose McDaniel
The Other McCain has: Rule 5 Sunday: Sarah Rose McDaniel
Proof Positive has: Best Of Web Link Around
The Woodsterman has: Rule 5 Woodsterman Style
EBL has: Rule 5 And FMJRA
The Right Way has: Rule 5 Saturday LinkORama
The Pirate's Cove has: Sorta Blogless Sunday Pinup
Obamagate Isn’t a Conspiracy Theory
Those sharing #Obamagate on Twitter would do best to avoid the hysterics we saw from Russian-collusion believers, but they have no reason to ignore the mounting evidence that suggests the Obama administration engaged in serious corruption.
Democrats and their allies, who like to pretend that President Barack Obama’s only scandalous act was wearing a tan suit, are going spend the next few months gaslighting the public by focusing on the most feverish accusations against Obama. But the fact is that we already have more compelling evidence that the Obama administration engaged in misconduct than we ever did for opening the Russian-collusion investigation.
It is not conspiracy-mongering to note that the investigation into Donald Trump was predicated on an opposition-research document filled with fabulism and, most likely, Russian disinformation.
We know the Justice Department withheld contradictory evidence when it began spying on those in Trump’s orbit. We have proof that many of the relevant FISA warrant applications—almost every one of them, actually—were based on “fabricated” evidence or riddled with errors. We know that members of the Obama administration, who had no genuine role in counterintelligence operations, repeatedly unmasked Trump’s allies. And we now know that, despite a dearth of evidence, the FBI railroaded Michael Flynn into a guilty plea so it could keep the investigation going.
In these trying times, we must turn to the greatest document in the history of the world to promise freedom and opportunity to its citizens for guidance. Find out more now >>
What’s more, the larger context only makes these facts more damning. By 2016, the Obama administration’s intelligence community had normalized domestic spying.
Obama’s director of national intelligence, James Clapper, famously lied about snooping on American citizens to Congress. His CIA director, John Brennan, oversaw an agency that felt comfortable spying on the Senate, with at least five of his underlings breaking into congressional computer files. His attorney general, Eric Holder, invoked the Espionage Act to spy on a Fox News journalist, shopping his case to three judges until he found one who let him name the reporter as a co-conspirator.
The Obama administration also spied on Associated Press reporters, which the news organization called a “massive and unprecedented intrusion.”
And though it’s been long forgotten, Obama officials were caught monitoring the conversations of members of Congress who opposed the...
Money and Politics Behind Anti-Hydroxychloroquine Bias, New Report Suggests
Remdesivir, an antiviral medication that was developed by the biopharmaceutical company Gilead Sciences, has been widely touted as the most promising drug to treat COVID-19, even though—so far—the new and expensive drug does not seem to be terribly effective at fighting the disease.
The anti-malaria drug hydroxychloroquine, on the other hand, is cheap, has been used safely for decades, and has shown great promise as a weapon in the fight against the coronavirus—yet after President Trump mentioned it as a promising potential treatment for the disease, the media immediately blasted him for touting an “unproven” and potentially unsafe drug.
As Full Measure reported Sunday night, the two camps have divided along political lines, with conservatives siding with hydroxychloroquine and the left-leaning media backing remdesivir.
The FDA seems to have taken a side too, green-lighting emergency use of remdesivir for severely ill coronavirus patients, while warning that chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine should only be taken in the hospital or as part of a formal study due to reports of “serious heart rhythm problems.”
Investigative reporter Sharyl Attkisson spoke with a doctor and several scientists who told her that the anti-hydroxychloroquine bias in the media has been “unwarranted,” “harmful,” and has even “cost lives.”
Attkisson also “followed the money” to find out why the two drugs are being treated so differently. Not surprisingly, she found that many of the people promoting remdesivir have major conflicts of interest.
She first spoke with cardiologist Dr. William O’Neill, a medical director at the Henry Ford Health System in Detroit, Michigan, where both remdesivir and hydroxychloroquine are being studied.
O’Neill told Attkisson that the media’s attempts to “disprove and discredit” hydroxychloroquine has been “very harmful.”
“I think those of us that are actually involved in the scientific endeavor feel that there is some value to it and it has to be tested,” he said.
Joining many other doctors who have gone on the record to praise hydroxychloroquine as a promising treatment for coronavirus, O’Neill said that he’s seen improvement in every coronavirus patient to whom he has...
Is This Real Or Straight Out Of Orwell's Novel 1984?
Psychological Manipulation in 1984:
The Party undermines family structure by inducting children into an organization called the Junior Spies, which brainwashes and encourages them to spy on their parents and report any instance of disloyalty to the Party. The Party also forces individuals to suppress their sexual desires, treating sex as merely a procreative duty whose end is the creation of new Party members. The Party then channels people’s pent-up frustration and emotion into intense, ferocious displays of hatred against the Party’s political enemies. Many of these enemies have been invented by the Party expressly for this purpose.
In REAL sexual assault news:
Telegraph: UK Lockdown a Result of the ‘Most Devastating Software Mistake of All Time’
The UK’s coronavirus lockdown was caused by “the most devastating software mistake of all time, in terms of economic costs and lives lost,” according to a report by a British newspaper.
The essay is referring to computer modelling by Neil Ferguson and his team at Imperial College London that predicted enormous deaths in the UK and elsewhere and led to draconian lockdown measures.
The Imperial College team published a 20‐page report on March 16 forecasting that an uncontrolled spread of COVID-19 could cause as many as 510,000 deaths in Britain and as many as 2.2 million deaths in the United States.
In Britain, these astronomical figures “triggered a sudden shift in the government’s comparatively relaxed response to the virus,” the New York Times reported at the time.
The predictions, which were considerably wide of the mark were the result of radically deficient modelling, according to a report in British newspaper The Daily Telegraph by software developers David Richards and Konstantin Boudnik, who compare the disaster to the failed Mariner 1 Venus space probe in 1962.
Imperial’s unreliable microsimulation model moved policymakers to “mothball our multi-trillion pound economy and plunge millions of people into poverty and hardship,” the authors note.
The simulation code was so bad, the writers insist, that they “would fire anyone for developing code like this and any business that relied on it to produce software for sale would likely go bust.”
Imperial’s model “is vulnerable to producing wildly different and conflicting outputs based on the same initial set of parameters,” they state. “Run it on different computers and you would likely get different results. In other words, it is non-deterministic.”
In their contention that the Imperial model was “fundamentally unreliable,” the authors question why the government did not get a second opinion before radically altering the lives of millions of citizens.
The writers register their suspicion that “the Government saw what was happening in...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)