Blog powered by Typepad

« I defend your right to hate | Main | WWII - the best and worst of times »

Sunday, 03 May 2020


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Will the commie flu cost Donald his job? Probably not but the ChiComs, Democrats and MSM media are giving it all they've got. Pretty much the same line up as the last showdown, minus the USSR.

This WWII veteran has gotten a lot of broadcast time in America:

The lamestream commie pinko media just wanted to boost the socialist NHS. According to a blog, once the film crew turned off the camera they kicked his walker repeatedly.

As the true picture starts to emerge from the excess deaths statistics, England looks to be topping the charts ...

Excess deaths being the most accurate measure of the effects of C19 and a healthcare system's ability to respond. Takes into account deaths caused by taking the foot off the gas and not attending to other fatal conditions and the number of people under-treated for dangerous conditions on waiting lists who C19 finished off.

Compare to Denmark and Norway where no discernable excess deaths were apparent. And Sweden that stuck with the Blighty's herd immunity stance up the top of the charts too.

The unabashed lying and obfuscation that HMG, NHS, PHE, SAGE will do over the coming years will be second to none.

And they'll probably get away with it. No prison sentences, no sackings even.



Jesus H Christ listen to this effing nob-end ...

That's what I'm talking about. Screwed up May's election with his negligent social services care home plans, and now tries to do the same for Blighty's health care future.

Another utter twat who's never owned or operated anything in a competitive market let alone risen to the top, not a super-CEO, never even run so much as a whelkstall. An consummate nobody ...

Was given one opportunity through politics, not through merit or accomplishments, and fks it up. Then has the stupendous arrogance to suggest he has the answer and should have another go.

I truly despise that piece of human filth.


Trump is still unpopular and his Covid response hasn't helped:

"Trump’s overall job rating has changed little since late March (March 19-24); it remains among the highest ratings of his presidency. Currently, 44% approve of the way Trump is handling his job as president, while 53% disapprove."

It's a long time to November, though.

Likewise, Brits disapprove of Boris's response by about 2 to 1, and appreciate the NHS more:

"Meanwhile there has been a significant rise in the number of people that think the Government acted too late in taking stricter measures, up 9 percentage points, from 57% to 66% in the last two weeks. ...

Confidence in the NHS continues to grow and now stands at 82%, with just 16% of people not confident its ability to cope with Coronavirus."

Apparently the Chinese socialists have cleverly used a bioweapon to torpedo libertarianism in Britain.

It is extraordinary, Bob. Highest death toll in the world and the people still think it's the family silver, the "envy of the world".

Social services the same. The pols on top the same. They are all one centralised failure and yet the peeps still worship it like a religion. Like the Catholic church and it's institutionalised paedophilia and even witch burning and fingernail pulling from down the ages, the NHS still has a massive brainwashed herd who have to believe and just don't see it. No empirical evidence will stop them.

Quite extraordinary.


Oh Gawd, please let it end ...

So the NHSX tracking app won't exchange data with the Apple / Google apps that the rest of the world are developing. So no-one will be able to travel to or from Blighty for work or holidays because on arrival their contact history is effectively disconnected. Any alert that says they were in close contact with someone who's gone down with Covid before they left won't be received in the other app in the other country.

So the app will have to be re-written to switch horses to the Apple / Google API.

There still isn't one thing that HMG / NHS / PHE / SAGE have got right in this whole saga.

Not. One. Thing. Right.


Contact your representatives Bob and tell 'im to impeach him again.

With those sort of new lows they can't but do better. And think of all the press coverage for a round 2 - couldna kept a tighter lid on all this damned virus talk better'n if they'd tried.


There's plenty of selective belief and "facts" everywhere. that's why libertarianism can't possibly work. I just got back from my weekly shopping trip. We now have a new breed of asshole who won't wear a mask in public and will walk within a few feet of you while smirking because liberty.


I seldom think about Trump anymore unless I'm needling you guys. He's proven what he is tens of thousands of times at this point and has just become boring.


Re the above:

Some assholery probably deserves credit for imagination.

We now have a new breed of asshole who won't wear a mask in public

That's been the HMG / NHS / PHE / SAGE advice over here. One of the main reasons Blighty now has the worst death toll in Europe ...

The US has 328m peeps / UK has 66m peeps = near as dammit 5 times as many peeps as the UK.

So how would y'all be feeling if the US death toll was 5x 32,000 = 160,000 already? Bearing in mind the US death toll is nearly 70,000 right now?

Your decentralised federal system and its "asshole Libertarians" have done much better than Blighty and its centralised state and population of lackeys.

In fact you're 9th in the charts for deaths per million ...

You should be thanking your lucky stars you've got 49 more than one.

The Sweaties, Paddies and Taffies have all outperformed England. I think it's time to fully devolve home power to the old heptarchy plus Scotland, Northern Ireland, Wales, Cornwall and London. 12 states would do it. Let them compete on tax rates, fiscal, even have their own currencies if they want. And keep a single market and 4 freedoms between them.

And have Westminster just do foreign policy and defence on behalf of the 12.

It just can't go on like this.



Don't count us out of the running:

And that doesn't yet include the unknown rise in death rate that will follow thirty-some states reducing social distancing.

And we don't even have the NHS. Of course we do have very similar leadership. Who'd have guessed a couple of populist showmen could have blown it so badly?

Whoa Bob, hold on there a minit!

Wasn't it a model insisting to us there'd be two point two million deaths in the US by April 11th?

So where's that latest 134,000 fitting in - pardon the expression Bob but in "this climate" we're finding ourselves in at the moment ought we not at the very least question the modellers?

"Similar leadership" indeed.

Oh and Bob,

Of course I've noticed the header stating "not peer reviewed" but it also must be pointed out that the word "yet" should also have appeared because, in actuality, that process only began on the 3rd of May after its author only published May 1st.

The chart to look for would look like this ...

Along the bottom, arrange the countries by cases per million on the day of lockdown, least on the left, most on the right. So we're looking at those who locked down earliest with least cases per million on the left, increasing to the latest lockdowners with most cases per million at the time of lockdown on the right.

Then plot the deaths per million up the y axis in the body of the chart.

If you see a slope correlation going upwards from left to right then you'll know early lockdown was effective.

If it's all jaggedy white noise then there's no correlation.

Haven't seen that plotted, but have seen the required data around.

Might try charting it over the weekend if no-one can find the chart out in the wild already.


Cat got your tongue Bob?

Lemme guess...McAfee did a delete unneeded files to free up mg for you?

T'other day Bob you may recall, I suggested you "contact your representatives" [to get geared up for] Impeachment Round #2?

Then outta the blue a whistleblower complaint emerges which, history would suggest, a means to such a Round #2 was now possible.

However, after thorough study of Dr. Bright's complaint [begins on page #28] of the actual whistleblower complaint it's difficult to see how the blame can be laid at the feet of Trump:

Best contact your representatives again Bob and tell 'em I said "Try harder." Looks to me like the blame [if there is such] should be laid at the feet of Dr. Fauci himself specifically and CDC management generally.

Typepad is interacting with my system in an odd way.

Models are only as good at predictions as the input. The story about the model I linked above is the same model the administration cited regularly until the input was corrected.

I didn't intend to call libertarians a name, only some aggressive and confused souls loose in the population over here.

There was a study done in New Zealand that's close to what SoD wants. I'm not going to include the link because it might be what Typepad doesn't like.

It probably doesn't matter for now what Trump is accused of doing. The Senate will protect him.

Sorry if you are having problems, Bob, but feel free to let me have anything you want to say directly and I will publish.

Thanks, David, but I've probably figured it out.

The NZ study can be found by searching "effect of alert level 4 measures on covid 19 transmission".

Hey SoD?

You write above,

"Haven't seen that plotted, but have seen the required data around."

"Might try charting it over the weekend if no-one can find the chart out in the wild already."

Scroll down to the lowest presented chart. Does that help?

Thanks JK, that's one half.

The other half is the "number of cases per million, or just cases, at the lockdown date". The source data behind these graphs probably has that, or I'll try and find it over the weekend ...


Welcome SoD.

Now to Bobland.

Bob, seen and read this?

Now does that help elucidate for you the difference between a criminal investigation and a counterintelligence operation?

Now I will observe that those twenty pages do seem to make manifest there's a shitload of asscovering going on over at the DoJ.

My guess is it'd be kinda embarrassing to have a guy who held such a high position as Rod Rosenstein in anyway implicated in a crime having to with signing off on a FISA warrant application.


I don't know enough about law or the workings of the involved parties to make any kind of intelligent assessment. The law analysis I've heard or read seems to agree neither the DOJ or FBI were strictly on the up and up, but Flynn did plead guilty and there's plenty of evidence he was. We'll see if the judge allows the withdrawal.

Well I hope the correct segment is linked there Bob. Might help.

It's the 10th segment Bob - Goes 5 minutes 43 seconds.

Incidentally, though it's not addressed on this segment, Flynn's plea was very likely (confidence 90%) owing to ... well the charging offense under the statute would be 'ineffectual counsel' but that really doesn't describe what occurred.

Flynn's first lawyers (before he fired 'em after Mueller's investigation finished) made a 'lawyer to lawyer agreement' without telling Flynn so basically when Flynn pled he wasn't in on what that agreement contained. I haven't finished that tranche of newly released documents Bob so I can't as yet say whether the agreement was of an 'exculpatory nature' or maybe something like a country song except that it isn't 'she/he/the whiskey did me wrong' but rather Flynn's lawyers didn't have their client's best interests at heart.

From an earlier (October?) submission Flynn's now attorney S. Powell submitted for Judge Sullivan's consideration - I'm on memory here now Bob - I lean toward thinking Covington & Burling, with malice aforethought, conspired with the government (perhaps in the person of DoJ Solicitor Brandon Van Grack) to screw General Flynn.

If only that IG outta Missouri (forget his name) Barr's got on the case would recommend firing/censuring Van Grack it would save me a lotta case review. That would leave me more time to give you a proper law education before the Covid-19 Reaper kicks my bucket out from under me.


I'll take your word for the above, but the clip didn't help a lot and I'll still wait to see if the judge lets Flynn withdraw the guilty plea.
It seems like he will, but there's a lot of legal finagling involved:


Here's what someone familiar with the case law concludes:

"It’s telling that no career prosecutor was apparently willing to sign the department’s motion, which was signed only by interim U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Timothy Shea. The department’s arguments in this case fit a disturbingly partisan pattern of distorting longstanding legal doctrines in the service of protecting the president as an individual rather than the national interest. One hopes for the sake of the nation that the Justice Department is not applying this novel and crabbed view of the FBI’s counterintelligence authorities across the board; one suspects that it is indeed not, and that this is a ticket good for one trip only."

That sounds like another way of saying if Flynn gets off it's because there's a lot of legal finagling involved.

Bob, you done any research on "who all" makes up the Lawfare group?

Might check to see which political party they, to a man (and woman) contribute to one solely. And an interesting factoid Bob, you recall back when that "whistleblower" showed up and ol' Schiff (D. CA) promised "We will be happy to have him testify" then, ten or so days later Schiff thought it over (after it came out Schiff's staff had been in communication with the guy [Ciaramella of Victoria Nuland's Ukraine team since I know you very likely are ignorant of the guy's ID] before the complaint was even filed?

Care to guess what lawyers' group was "handling the *affairs" betwixt Ciaramella and Team Schiff? That those same lawyers "advised Schiff" it wouldn't be such a hot idea for Mr. Ciaramella to testify (or even be publicly identified) which caused Schiff's 'about face'?

Chew on that stuff Bob and then get back with me to see whether we may find ourselves in agreement that Lawfare's got a dog in the fight.


That's but one example of Lawfare's in-house attorneys.


For this first part of the comment I'm going on memory but as it's fairly fresh I think I'll get the gist fairly precise. Reason I'm going on memory is I know you prefer sources like the WaPo, NYT, NPR, Snopes, basically anybody except for those dastardly right-wing sites - problem is legacy media isn't covering/reporting anything not agreeing with the narrative 'Orange Man Bad.'


In the second tranche of these latest releases courtesy of US Attorney Jeffery Jensen [I remembered] 1)fired DoJ attorney Lisa Page texted fired FBI CI Director Strozk her '[unhappiness] with you closing the Flynn investigation' 2) Strozk texts back that he'd 'made all the edits to the 302 {FBI interview note form] you suggested' 3) Page texts back asking, 'Is Crossfire Razor [name of the inquiry into Flynn] officially closed?' 4) Strozk replies 'Yes.' 5)Page asks Strozk 'Isn't there anything we can do?'

6)Strozk texts REDACTED (but acknowledged to occupy a position located on the Hoover Building's 7th Floor - ie executive level management) 'You guys haven't got Crossfire Hurricane [name of the counterintelligence op against Carter Page - you know Bob the one guy who never got charged for anything by anybody, not even Mueller, indeed turned out to be a longterm FBI Confidential Human Source [CHS] Anyway Strozk texts 7th floor asking if 'Crossfire Hurricane is still open?' 7) Strozk texts Page back, 'I think we can roll Razor over into Crossfire Hurricane.' 8)Page replies 'Thank God.'

That's the background to the point I'm gonna let AG Barr provide via an interview he just gave CBS' Kathryn Herridge - you will accept CBS Media reporting Bob? I thought so.

HERRIDGE: "All of that said, General Flynn pled guilty to lying to federal investigators during his interview in January of 2017. And Flynn admitted in court, quote, his "false statements and omissions impeded and otherwise had a material impact on the FBI's ongoing investigation into the existence of any links or coordination between individuals with the campaign and Russia's efforts to interfere with the 2016 presidential election." Does the fact remain that General Flynn lied to federal investigators?"

BARR: "Well to constitute a false statement, you need two things. One, you need a false statement, lie. And then it has to be material to a legitimate investigation. And I think on the question of lying, it's as Comey, Director Comey said just a few months after this episode, he said it was a closed question. And that, while you might make that argument, it was a very closed question."

"But it's on the question of materiality that we feel really that a crime cannot be established here because there was not, in our view, a legitimate investigation going on. They did not have a basis for a counterintelligence investigation against Flynn at that stage, based on a perfectly legitimate and appropriate call he made as a member of the transition. So."

"Let me just also say that when he pled, the issue of materiality is related to whether the government has a bona fide investigation going on. And that's information that's really within the control of the government. The individual party would really not have that information. So as new information just became available that has a bearing on whether there was a legitimate investigation, that requires us, our duty, we think is to dismiss the case."

You'll maybe recall Bob me harping and harping and harping on the finer points of the differences between a counterintelligence operation and a criminal investigation [but as recent tranches reveal] Crossfire Razor wasn't, originally, even up to the level of a proper 'investigation' it was rather, a criminal inquiry (and at that, just supposedly into whether there was any irregularities eg Turkey).

The official reason Razor was closed was because investigators reported and documented, "no derogatory information developed."

You really ought to read the entire thing Bob - you might learn something.


You did exactly what I thought you would if I cited a blog, and I agree that Lawfare is not an unbiased source. Apparently you don't see the disconnect in being concerned about the objectivity of Lawfare, but not that of "right-wing" sites.

I already mentioned I don't read the NYT unless another outlet picks up their story, but I do stick with the mainstream media for actual news; mostly AP, which is the only outlet I read every day.

Mainstream news works something like science. Information they publish is fact-checked by the other mainstream outlets who want in on the story. They usually (not always) maintain journalistic standards and they're all concerned about their reputations. That's what makes them mainstream. It's not that they don't make mistakes, but the mistakes eventually get called out and corrected.

Right wing sites don't operate that way, since they are by definition biased. A few mornings ago I watched "Fox and Friends" while I had my morning coffee. I was wrong about comparing them to Orwell's Ministry of Truth. They're not that serious. They're actually a cross between a silly morning program like "Good Morning America" and North Korean state television. It would be funny how they constantly praise and rationalize the Dear Leader with straight faces if it weren't so insulting.

Information from blogs is always the opinion of one person or a group of similar thinking people, so they're never reliable. I've never seen one admit to having been wrong. They're only good for opinion.

CBS is a decent source, but as far as Flynn is concerned, I haven't changed my mind. I don't know enough about law to judge what Barr has to say any more than any other high powered lawyer. However, he's well known as a defender of Trump and "the unitary executive", so I don't trust him to be unbiased. On the other hand, if the judge lets Flynn off, then there was probably a good reason or at least a justifiable loophole.

By the way, has it ever crossed your mind the orange man is actually a bad president? How about that it's possible not to be either a right winger or left winger?

The comments to this entry are closed.