I’m going to wrap up some arguments that have been going deep into threads
1: The US Press publishes “newsworthy” illegally obtained material
This has been true at least since the Pentagon Papers, so ~40 years
2: US social media has no rule against publishing illegally obtained material. This was clearly seen when the NYT published Trump tax information before the 2016 election, and promoted said reports on social media
3: US social media had no rule against publishing illegally obtained material. This was clearly seen when the NYT published Trump tax information before the 2020 election, and promoted said reports on social media
4: When a person legally obtains an individual’s tax information for his / her job / private use, and then gives that information to the NYT to publish, that person has committed a crime. So unless you’re going to claim that Trump personally gave his tax information to the NYT, we know that a crime occurred when it was published. 5: So Social media’s attempts to suppress the information that came from Hunter Biden’s laptop was not in support of any principle or law
It was the deliberate suppression of information of public interest because it harmed the private interest of the tech billionaires who wish to be our overlords.
1: No honest vote counter blocks poll watchers from doing their job. 2: It is a generally accepted rule in international elections monitoring that "blocked poll watchers" == "fraudulent election outcome." See: Uganda, Jan 2021. 3: I know that Detroit, Philly, Atlanta, are are on clear public record as having blocked Trump campaign poll watchers. Those right there are enough to flip the election 4: Therefore any claim that "of course the election was honest and fair, and anyone who claims otherwise is a nut" is a statement utterly lacking in principle or value, and to make that claim is to self identify as a nut. 5: http://wkow.com/2020/11/13/concerns-over-indefinitely-confined-voting-law-as-thousands-use-the-option-due-to-covid-19/ In 2016 there were ~60k "indefinitely confined" absentee voters in WI (IC voters can vote absentee without providing State issued photo ID. All others have to provide it, and thus prove they're actual real peop...
Working off of this , and replying to Captain Ed : Arginine is coded for by CG*, and by AGA and AGG. So, 6 potential options, and there's absolutely no competitive advantage for the * to be a G vs an A, C, or T. You don't need peer review to establish this, or to establish the math. You also don't need peer review to establish that CGGCGG is the lab preferred triplet pair for a double arginine, you'll find that in any published paper on the subject. So we have: 1: An arginine pair, which makes viruses much nastier to humans, is in Covid 19 2: It's coded for in the way that researchers commonly use to add an arginine pair (and once people get a way that works, pretty much everyone uses it. Because doing this is actually much harder than it looks) 3: That particular coding has a 1 in 36 likelihood by random chance 4: That particular coding has yet to be found anywhere in any genome from Covid19's family of coronaviruses 5: So no recombination event could have mad...
948.60 Possession of a dangerous weapon by a person under 18 . (1) In this section , “dangerous weapon" means any firearm, loaded or unloaded; ... (2) (a) Any person under 18 years of age who possesses or goes armed with a dangerous weapon is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor. ... (3) (c) This section applies only to a person under 18 years of age who possesses or is armed with a rifle or a shotgun if the person is in violation of s. 941.28 or is not in compliance with ss. 29.304 and 29.593 29.304 Restrictions on hunting and use of firearms by persons under 16 years of age . (1) Persons under 12 years of age. (2) Persons 12 to 14 years of age. (3) Persons 14 to 16 years of age. ... (b) Restrictions on possession or control of a firearm. No person 14 years of age or older but under 16 years of age may have in his or her possession or control any firearm unless he or she: ... (4) Parental obligation. No parent or guardian of a child under 16 years of age may authorize ...
1: The US Press publishes “newsworthy” illegally obtained material
This has been true at least since the Pentagon Papers, so ~40 years
2: US social media has no rule against publishing illegally obtained material. This was clearly seen when the NYT published Trump tax information before the 2016 election, and promoted said reports on social media
3: US social media had no rule against publishing illegally obtained material. This was clearly seen when the NYT published Trump tax information before the 2020 election, and promoted said reports on social media
4: When a person legally obtains an individual’s tax information for his / her job / private use, and then gives that information to the NYT to publish, that person has committed a crime. So unless you’re going to claim that Trump personally gave his tax information to the NYT, we know that a crime occurred when it was published.
5: So Social media’s attempts to suppress the information that came from Hunter Biden’s laptop was not in support of any principle or law
It was the deliberate suppression of information of public interest because it harmed the private interest of the tech billionaires who wish to be our overlords.