"Back in the USSR" - Everybody sing! More on Saule Omarova

[Bill Vanek]

This should please comrades Dutch and BillB:

REVIEW & OUTLOOK

A Banking Regulator Who Hates Banks

The left wants everyone to ignore what Saule Omarova believes.

By The Editorial Board

If you want to revolutionize the U.S. banking system, should you be in charge
of regulating it? Apparently Democrats think so, as they rally to defend
President Biden’s nominee for Comptroller of the Currency, Saule Omarova.

Ohio Sen. Sherrod Brown accuses Pennsylvania’s Pat Toomey of “red scare
McCarthyism” for drawing attention to Ms. Omarova’s academic papers and
statements. Ms. Omarova advocates central political control of capital,
credit and wages, and she has praised the Soviet-era economic system. Are her
own words off-limits to scrutiny?

Ms. Omarova wants to put an “‘end to banking’ as we know it”—again,
her words—and transfer private banking functions to the Federal Reserve,
where accounts would “fully replace” private bank deposits. The Fed would
control “systemically important prices” for fuel, food, raw materials,
metals, natural resources, home prices and wages.

She says the Fed should be remade into what she calls “The People’s
Ledger.” By “the people” she means progressive elites like her. She
calls for “reimagining” the role of central banks “as the ultimate
public platform for generating, modulating, and allocating financial
resources in a modern economy.”

A Washington Post columnist hails her as a “trenchant and informed critic
of the current financial system” and praises her “innovative ideas about
how to reform banking” and “tough approach to banking regulation.” Her
ideas were innovative—circa Moscow, 1918.

Others are whitewashing her views and biography. Mr. Brown declared that Ms.
Omarova, who was born and raised in Soviet Kazakhstan, should be lauded for
her “courage and conviction” to flee “communist repression.” Except
she didn’t. By Ms. Omarova’s own account, she immigrated to the U.S. by
“pure chance.”“I was an undergraduate student at Moscow State
University and there was at the very end of the Gorbachev era an exchange
program between Moscow State and University of Wisconsin Madison,” she told
MSNBC’s Chris Hayes. She attended Madison for a semester in 1991 and while
there “the Soviet Union fell apart. So there I was, a student without
anywhere to go back.”

Senate Republicans have asked for a copy of her thesis “Karl Marx’s
Economic Analysis and the Theory of Revolution in The Capital.” She
hasn’t complied, and neither has she repudiated her Soviet-era views.

Progressives are demonizing her critics as “xenophobes,” and Ms. Omarova
is playing the identity-politics victim card. She claims she’s being
criticized because she’s “an immigrant, a woman, a minority.” Yet
Republicans confirmed Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Chairwoman Jelena
McWilliams, a Trump nominee who immigrated from communist Yugoslavia. Mr.
Brown and Sen. Elizabeth Warren voted against Ms. McWilliams.

Opposition to Ms. Omarova is based on her radical views and concern that
she’d abuse her supervisory power as Comptroller to expand political
control over the private economy. Most financial regulatory agencies are
structured as boards or commissions, but the Comptroller can exercise power
unilaterally. She would also sit on the Financial Stability Oversight
Council—which has sweeping power to regulate “systemically important”
risks.The Senate should defer to Presidents on most nominees, but not on one
who loathes the institutions and system she’d regulate.

[BillB]

You might as well copy and paste an opinion piece from the National Enquirer.

[risky biz]

On Monday, October 25, 2021 at 11:19:32 AM UTC-7, Bill Vanek wrote:

This is just more hamhanded misrepresentation of Omarova's proposals. As for Jelena McWilliams, this is why the Murdoch/News Corp-owned WSJ liked her:

'Before McWilliams' confirmation, The Wall Street Journal previewed the proposed change in leadership at the FDIC, along with changes at the Federal Reserve and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, saying banks "can expect to see significant further relief" from postcrisis rules under the new leadership.

"McWilliams has said she wants to speed up new-bank approvals"), fintech, leveraged lending (loans to heavily in debted companies) ..

and ..'[relax] capital, liquidity and overall and supplementary leverage rules.'
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jelena_McWilliams

She was a godsend to the same assholes who brought us the profitable for them 2008 financial meltdown.

[Dutch]

In Canada the banking sector is heavily regulated. The result is, they
still make potloads of money, and in times like the banking crisis of
2008 they are stable enough to not require government bailouts to
survive and remain profitable.

And talk about hypocritical, the cabinet ministers in the previous
administration from education to the environment all tried to undermine
and tear down those departments.

[BillB]

Hey, Dutch, do you think gay people are sexual predators? Riskytard just accused you of that in another thread. Can you clear that up for him?

[Tim Norfolk]

I suspect grandstanding, yet again. If they really wanted her thesis, those are available from the University in question, for a modest fee.

[risky biz]

~ Hey, Dutch, do you think gay people are sexual predators? Riskytard just accused you of that in another thread. Can you clear that up for him?

Yes, 'dutch', why don't you clear that up and do it in the relevant thread rather than this completely unrelated one that Blabbermouth couldn't restrain himself from because he's so severely butthurt. LOL.

What a maroon.

[BillB]

I thought he had a right to know ASAP that you were libeling him by projecting your pathetic transphobia and homophobia onto him. This would be a good time to apologize to him for your filthy lies.

[Dutch]

As soon as I saw that thread was about something Jim Banks said I made
the decision to ignore it. He's a troll.

[risky biz]

On Monday, October 25, 2021 at 4:11:11 PM UTC-7, Tim Norfolk wrote:

~ I suspect grandstanding, yet again. If they really wanted her thesis, those are available from the University in question, for a modest fee.

Absolutely lame grandstanding given that in a Soviet Socialist Republic university a thesis is probably assigned rather than chosen and if a student wants a university degree they have no choice but to mouth the required narrative.

In any case, a thesis titled 'Karl Marx’s Economic Analysis and the Theory of Revolution in The Capital' isn't an indication that someone is an advocate of communism. It is merely an indication that they understand Marx's theory which anyone with two ears, two eyes, and a brain had recognized by then was spurious. And not spurious because of poor execution by the Bolshevik revolution but spurious because it was fundamentally flawed in the prospect of a new social order proceeding from the proletariat which would be successful.

[risky biz]

~ I thought he had a right to know ASAP that you were libeling him by projecting your pathetic transphobia and homophobia onto him. This would be a good time to apologize to him for your filthy lies.

This would be a good time for you to apply a thick layer of Biofreeze to your fat, red ass.

[risky biz]

On Monday, October 25, 2021 at 5:20:25 PM UTC-7, Dutch wrote:
> On 2021-10-25 2:40 p.m., BillB wrote:

~ As soon as I saw that thread was about something Jim Banks said I made

> the decision to ignore it. He's a troll.

Blabbermouth calling someone who sent another man a sexually suggestive text a 'closet pervert' isn't trolling? And he's less of a bigot than Jim Banks who referred to a biological woman that is described by the news media as 'transgender' a 'man'?

Should a man who sent a woman a sexually suggestive text be called a 'pervert'? That could rightly be considered inappropriate but since when has sexual interest become a 'perversion'?

And good job helping your troll Narcissistic Personality Disorder neighbor fuck up a serious discussion thread so he could bend the narrative to a discussion that revolves around him, his favorite subject.

[BillB]

Maybe you should email that advice to Patrick Mahomes. As you found out, he's even "fatter" than me. I have a very positive body image. But I'm still not going to send you that pic of me in my underwear you were angling for.

[BillB]

Sexually suggestive text?? Are you having fantasies about me again?

[Bill Vanek]

On Oct 25, 2021, Tim Norfolk wrote
(in article<fe41557c-5c22-4add...@googlegroups.com>):

Where’s Obama’s thesis? Why don’t you pay that modest fee and get a
copy? Read it to us afterwards.

[risky biz]

On Monday, October 25, 2021 at 5:40:24 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:
> On Monday, October 25, 2021 at 5:23:15 PM UTC-7, risky biz wrote:
> > On Monday, October 25, 2021 at 5:20:11 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:
> > > On Monday, October 25, 2021 at 5:06:21 PM UTC-7, risky biz wrote:
> > > > On Monday, October 25, 2021 at 2:40:05 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:
> >
> > ~ Hey, Dutch, do you think gay people are sexual predators? Riskytard just accused you of that in another thread. Can you clear that up for him?
> > > >
> >
> > > > Yes, 'dutch', why don't you clear that up and do it in the relevant thread rather than this completely unrelated one that Blabbermouth couldn't restrain himself from because he's so severely butthurt. LOL.
> > > >
> > > > What a maroon.
> > ~ I thought he had a right to know ASAP that you were libeling him by projecting your pathetic transphobia and homophobia onto him. This would be a good time to apologize to him for your filthy lies.
> >
> > This would be a good time for you to apply a thick layer of Biofreeze to your fat, red ass.

~ Maybe you should email that advice to Patrick Mahomes. As you found out, he's even "fatter" than me. I have a very positive body image. But I'm still not going to send you that pic of me in my underwear you were angling for.

Yeah, sure- and you played poker with Paul, you've been playing poker since you were 4 or 5 years old, you specialized in stud, and you thought a Bill Chen video backed up your bullshit about stud poker.

LOL. What a maroon.

[risky biz]

~ Sexually suggestive text?? Are you having fantasies about me again?

You must have found it pretty damned hard to locate someone who would ever have sexual fantasies about you.

I think any normal human being could only have fantasies about stuffing a sock in your dumb mouth.

[BillB]

On Monday, October 25, 2021 at 6:13:14 PM UTC-7, risky biz wrote:
> On Monday, October 25, 2021 at 5:40:24 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:
> > On Monday, October 25, 2021 at 5:23:15 PM UTC-7, risky biz wrote:
> > > On Monday, October 25, 2021 at 5:20:11 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:
> > > > On Monday, October 25, 2021 at 5:06:21 PM UTC-7, risky biz wrote:
> > > > > On Monday, October 25, 2021 at 2:40:05 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:
> > >
> > > ~ Hey, Dutch, do you think gay people are sexual predators? Riskytard just accused you of that in another thread. Can you clear that up for him?
> > > > >
> > >
> > > > > Yes, 'dutch', why don't you clear that up and do it in the relevant thread rather than this completely unrelated one that Blabbermouth couldn't restrain himself from because he's so severely butthurt. LOL.
> > > > >
> > > > > What a maroon.
> > > ~ I thought he had a right to know ASAP that you were libeling him by projecting your pathetic transphobia and homophobia onto him. This would be a good time to apologize to him for your filthy lies.
> > >
> > > This would be a good time for you to apply a thick layer of Biofreeze to your fat, red ass.
> ~ Maybe you should email that advice to Patrick Mahomes. As you found out, he's even "fatter" than me. I have a very positive body image. But I'm still not going to send you that pic of me in my underwear you were angling for.
>

> Yeah, sure- and you played poker with Paul,

Yes (weak player)

> you've been playing poker since you were 4 or 5 years old,

Yes, but I didn't go pro until I was 7.

>you specialized in stud

Yes, for a time. I now specialize in O8.

>and you thought a Bill Chen video backed up your bullshit about stud poker.

No, there was no "bullshit"

> LOL. What a maroon.

Yes, you are.

[BillB]

On Monday, October 25, 2021 at 6:16:44 PM UTC-7, risky biz wrote:

> I think....

Do you ever stop lying?

[Dutch]

My decision to skip this thread had nothing to do with Bill or you. I
have had my fill of the freaks in the US Congress like Marjorie Taylor
Green, Jim Jordan, Banks and the rest. Nothing they say should be given
oxygen.

[Tim Norfolk]

Why should I? And what does that have to do with the current thread? Perhaps you are once again throwing out irrelevancies?

[da pickle]

You should because what you say is not true.

I was actually in the USSR when it existed. Although I was there to
study their legal system (another interesting topic), I was able to
observe the overall "picture" of the country. [As an aside, I also
visited China when folks were returning from their reeducation
adventures ... another topic to consider when comparing economic systems.]

All empires fail ... sad but true. I wonder what the world will look
like after WWIII ... which, of course, could never happen. Venezuela
anyone? I have a friend that lives in Cuba ... not such a bad place.

It all depends on what you where you want to place your bets. If you
conclude that one party or one world government is "the answer", I think
you might not be the best advocate for "change" in this exciting newsgroup.

[VegasJerry]

As much of a generality as that seems to be; I believe it.

I’ve read a book by Doctor Jared Diamond;
Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collapse:_How_Societies_Choose_to_Fail_or_Succeed

From which I’ve deduced that it’s useless for me to recycle, as our society, too,
is doomed. From, what is now uncontrollable global warming increases, to the
collapse of our democracy and unstoppable viruses. Too many stupid people.

> I wonder what the world will look like after WWIII ... which, of course,
> could never happen.

Never say never.

> Venezuela anyone? I have a friend that lives in Cuba ... not such a bad place.

Try being black in our south.

[Bill Vanek]

On Oct 26, 2021, Tim Norfolk wrote
(in article<366ebf54-fef1-4ff8...@googlegroups.com>):

You seem to imply that any thesis is available to the public. Or were you
talking only about her school? I’m pretty sure Obama’s school made theses
public, but then hid his to protect him. That’s what my post has to do with
this thread. Maybe her school is “protecting” her, too.

[BillB]

Who gives a shit what someone wrote in college? Anyhow, from snopes:

"As far as has been determined, Barack Obama did not produce a formal thesis for his degree at Columbia University; the closest match is a paper he wrote during his senior year for an honors seminar in American Foreign Policy. However, Columbia University has said it did not retain a copy of that paper, Obama spokesman Ben LaBolt has said that Barack himself does not have a copy, and the professor to whom the paper was submitted has said that he no longer has a copy in his possession either"

"In October 2009, a purported excerpt from Barack Obama’s “missing” Columbia thesis began circulating widely on the Internet, one which claimed the paper stated that the Constitution drafted by American’s founding fathers “did not allow for economic freedom” and failed to mention “the distribution of wealth” (a play on the common campaign charge that a redistribution of wealth was one of Barack Obama’s political goals).

"Had someone finally turned up Barack Obama’s elusive senior paper? The Pajamas Media web site reported on 21 October 2009 that writer/reporter Joe Klein had been permitted to read the first ten pages of it and had revealed that the paper (supposedly entitled “Aristocracy Reborn”) included the excerpt reproduced above.

"However, that claim seemed dubious, as a paper on “Aristocracy Reborn,” with musings about the Founding Fathers’ supposed lack of interest in “economic freedom” and “the distribution of wealth,” would have been rather unusual content to find in a senior paper on the topic of Soviet nuclear disarmament, written for a seminar on American foreign policy. In fact, the putative excerpt was fictitious, something lifted from a bit of satire published on the Jumping in Pools blog back on 25 August 2009"

[Tim Norfolk]

Formal theses and dissertations are available for graduate degrees, and constitute publications. Undergraduate 'theses' are often just papers, and do not fall under the same category. We had them for all of the Honors students, although the Honors college did actually keep them.

[Bill Vanek]

On Oct 26, 2021, BillB wrote
(in article<906655cb-646a-49b1...@googlegroups.com>):

Every leftist out to destroy every conservative, or even other leftists who
slipped up. That’s who.

> Anyhow, from snopes:

Sure, the paragon of unbiased evaluation. “As far as has been
determined...” Whatever.

[BillB]

On Tuesday, October 26, 2021 at 7:44:12 PM UTC-7, Bill Vanek wrote:

> > Who gives a shit what someone wrote in college?

> Every leftist out to destroy every conservative, or even other leftists who
> slipped up. That’s who.

So the "leftists" were trying to destroy "conservative" Barack Obama? Interesting.

> > Anyhow, from snopes:
>
> Sure, the paragon of unbiased evaluation. “As far as has been
> determined...” Whatever.

Ya, there's some real radical Marxists over there, right? I wouldn't be surprised if some of them studied sociology!
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/snopes/

I can see why you are embarrassed to have fallen more Obama-related baloney. Did you fall for the Kenya nonsense too? LOL
https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2009/oct/26/blog-posting/obamas-columbia-thesis-all-fiction-dreamed-blogger/

[risky biz]

On Monday, October 25, 2021 at 6:19:53 PM UTC-7, BillB wrote:

LOL@Blabbermouth's cascade of lies below:

> > Yeah, sure- and you played poker with Paul,

~ Yes (weak player)

> > you've been playing poker since you were 4 or 5 years old,

> Yes, but I didn't go pro until I was 7.
>
> >you specialized in stud
>
> Yes, for a time. I now specialize in O8.

> >and you thought a Bill Chen video backed up your bullshit about stud poker.

~ No, there was no "bullshit"

Paul tried to give you some rudimentary schooling about betting in live stud poker games, based on his decades of experience which you dimwittedly refused to accept (which is something to be expected from someone who claims to be a stud poker specialist but can't even recognize a blatantly obvious description of a stud poker hand). You then sought to back up your stupidity with a video that instead backed up what Paul was trying to teach your dumb ass. I don't know why he even bothered.

> > LOL. What a maroon.
>
> Yes, you are.

The average beagle has more character than you. For you, lying is like breathing.

[da pickle]

You do seem like a reflection in a mirror of another ... hummm

[Bill Vanek]

On Oct 26, 2021, BillB wrote

(in article<b6aff322-6e2a-456d...@googlegroups.com>):

>
> > > Anyhow, from snopes:
> >
> > Sure, the paragon of unbiased evaluation. “As far as has been
> > determined...” Whatever.
>
> Ya, there's some real radical Marxists over there, right? I wouldn't be
> surprised if some of them studied sociology!
> https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/snopes/

"Left center bias" != unbiased. Thanks for proving my point.

[risky biz]

On Wednesday, October 27, 2021 at 9:03:33 AM UTC-7, Bill Vanek wrote:

> > > > Anyhow, from snopes:
> > >
> > > Sure, the paragon of unbiased evaluation. “As far as has been
> > > determined...” Whatever.
> >
> > Ya, there's some real radical Marxists over there, right? I wouldn't be
> > surprised if some of them studied sociology!
> > https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/snopes/

~ "Left center bias" != unbiased. Thanks for proving my point.

Your own bias is revealed by your selective quoting. The (mild) "Left center bias" appears to be related to their 'original reporting and news curation', not the fact-checking itself.

'MBFC Credibility Rating: HIGH CREDIBILITY

'In general, their original reporting and news curation hold a left-of-center bias.'

Analysis
In 2012, FactCheck.org reviewed a sample of Snopes’ responses to political rumors regarding George W. Bush, Sarah Palin, and Barack Obama and found them free from bias in all cases.

In 2021, Snopes’ fact-checks remain properly sourced and factual. We have also found a reasonable balance between fact checks on the right and left as a new Democratic administration makes statements subject to fact-checking.'

'Further, Snopes always openly source their information and avoid emotional wording, though they occasionally publish news stories that offer some opinions'
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/snopes/

[Bill Vanek]

On Oct 28, 2021, risky biz wrote
(in article<472d10ff-27f1-4565...@googlegroups.com>):

> On Wednesday, October 27, 2021 at 9:03:33 AM UTC-7, Bill Vanek wrote:
>
> > > > > Anyhow, from snopes:
> > > >
> > > > Sure, the paragon of unbiased evaluation. “As far as has been
> > > > determined...” Whatever.
> > >
> > > Ya, there's some real radical Marxists over there, right? I wouldn't be
> > > surprised if some of them studied sociology!
> > > https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/snopes/
>

> > "Left center bias" != unbiased. Thanks for proving my point.
>
> Your own bias is revealed by your selective quoting. The (mild) "Left center
> bias" appears to be related to their 'original reporting and news curation',
> not the fact-checking itself.
>
> 'MBFC Credibility Rating: HIGH CREDIBILITY
>
> 'In general, their original reporting and news curation hold a left-of-center
> bias.'
>
> Analysis
> In 2012, FactCheck.org reviewed a sample of Snopes’ responses to political
> rumors regarding George W. Bush, Sarah Palin, and Barack Obama and found them
> free from bias in all cases.
>
> In 2021, Snopes’ fact-checks remain properly sourced and factual. We have
> also found a reasonable balance between fact checks on the right and left as
> a new Democratic administration makes statements subject to fact-checking.'
>
> 'Further, Snopes always openly source their information and avoid emotional
> wording, though they occasionally publish news stories that offer some
> opinions'
> https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/snopes/

Fact checkers checking fact checkers? Why would we need that if we can trust
fact checkers? And if we can’t trust them, what good does it do?

[VegasJerry]

Hee. Once again you advertise your stupidity and ignorance in your own question.

(JFC! It don't get no easier than this....)

[risky biz]

~ Fact checkers checking fact checkers? Why would we need that if we can trust

> fact checkers? And if we can’t trust them, what good does it do?

NOW you don't like them?

Media Bias/Fact Check is more properly described as a bias rater than a fact checker. Any indication of bias that it identifies is more of an opinion than a fact and they specify why bias is identified allowing an intelligent person to personally evaluate their ratings.

'The Columbia Journalism Review describes Media Bias/Fact Check as an amateur attempt at categorizing media bias and Van Zandt as an "armchair media analyst".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_Bias/Fact_Check

You seem to be on a 'nothing is knowable' campaign. That may be a relatively unassailable rhetorical redoubt but it doesn't contribute to an elevation of your credibility. I'm basing that opinion on a study that has been thoroughly fact-checked.

[Bill Vanek]

On Oct 28, 2021, risky biz wrote

(in article<4d1ab9d8-2ed7-4a91...@googlegroups.com>):

> > Fact checkers checking fact checkers? Why would we need that if we can trust
> > fact checkers? And if we can’t trust them, what good does it do?
>
> NOW you don't like them?
>
> Media Bias/Fact Check is more properly described as a bias rater than a fact
> checker. Any indication of bias that it identifies is more of an opinion than
> a fact and they specify why bias is identified allowing an intelligent person
> to personally evaluate their ratings.
>
> 'The Columbia Journalism Review describes Media Bias/Fact Check as an amateur
> attempt at categorizing media bias and Van Zandt as an "armchair media
> analyst".
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_Bias/Fact_Check
>
> You seem to be on a 'nothing is knowable' campaign.

No, it’s more like a,”nothing is quite provable with a study cite or a
news report because anyone can find competing studies and news reports.” In
other words, dueling studies and news reports aren’t all that helpful.
Plausibility checks and common sense are needed in addition to those things
for the average person, a person who does not have access to the full studies
or the capability to analyze/evaluate them. No one on this group is a
research scientist, but some people seem to think they are.

> That may be a relatively
> unassailable rhetorical redoubt but it doesn't contribute to an elevation of
> your credibility. I'm basing that opinion on a study that has been thoroughly
> fact-checked.

Oh, in that case...

[Dutch]

I am fully aware that contrary opinions can be dug up for just about
anything, like research can't trusted, or access to healthcare doesn't
improve health outcomes, these are disinformation tactics. Some of us
have more common sense than you give us credit for.

[VegasJerry]

Or the fact that as Fact Checking sites popped up, mostly to disprove the continual
Republican lies and disinformation, Republicans simply started their own fact check
sites to 'check' their own lies.

It was kinda like VP Dick Cheney, when he'd "leak" phony defense department information
to the New York Times that would look like they verified some of Cheney's lies.

"Yep, there is it, more proof that they have Weapons of Mass Destruction."

[risky biz]

~ Oh, in that case...

Yeah, well- more of your act.

The COVID-19 vaccine has been thoroughly drug tested and about 45% of the GLOBAL population had been fully vaccinated.

As of late July 'the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) received 12,313 reports of death among people who received a COVID-19 vaccine. [in the US]

Since more than 338 million doses of COVID-19 vaccines were administered in the USA, this data reflects a vaccination-death ratio of 0.0018%.

The CDC’s website says, ‘Reports of adverse events to VAERS following vaccination, including deaths, do not necessarily mean that a vaccine caused a health problem. This is because the U.S. FDA requires healthcare providers to report any death after a COVID-19 vaccination to VAERS, even if it’s unclear whether the vaccine was the cause.

Furthermore, a review of available clinical information, including death certificates, autopsy, and medical records, has not established a causal link to COVID-19 vaccines, says the CDC.'
https://www.precisionvaccinations.com/covid-19-vaccine-related-fatalities-updated

Have you been looking for 'competing studies and news reports'?

Oh, wait! RED ALERT!! Joe Rogan said he thinks 'they're' covering up deaths from the COVID vaccine. Seriously- he said that on video.

[Bill Vanek]

On Oct 30, 2021, risky biz wrote
(in article<b6cac885-37c9-44a9...@googlegroups.com>):

> > Oh, in that case...
>
> Yeah, well- more of your act.

Well, no, I was acknowledging your little joke.

> The COVID-19 vaccine has been thoroughly drug tested and about 45% of the
> GLOBAL population had been fully vaccinated.
>
> As of late July 'the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) received
> 12,313 reports of death among people who received a COVID-19 vaccine. [in the
> US]
>
> Since more than 338 million doses of COVID-19 vaccines were administered in
> the USA, this data reflects a vaccination-death ratio of 0.0018%.
>
> The CDC’s website says, ‘Reports of adverse events to VAERS following
> vaccination, including deaths, do not necessarily mean that a vaccine caused
> a health problem. This is because the U.S. FDA requires healthcare providers
> to report any death after a COVID-19 vaccination to VAERS, even if it’s
> unclear whether the vaccine was the cause.
>
> Furthermore, a review of available clinical information, including death
> certificates, autopsy, and medical records, has not established a causal link
> to COVID-19 vaccines, says the CDC.'
> https://www.precisionvaccinations.com/covid-19-vaccine-related-fatalities-upda
> ted
>
> Have you been looking for 'competing studies and news reports'?
>
> Oh, wait! RED ALERT!! Joe Rogan said he thinks 'they're' covering up deaths
> from the COVID vaccine. Seriously- he said that on video.

I hate to say this, but I really don’t even know who Rogan is, except from
what I’ve seen here. I’m sure he’s interesting, but not to me.

[risky biz]

~ I hate to say this, but I really don’t even know who Rogan is, except from

> what I’ve seen here. I’m sure he’s interesting, but not to me.

Better give him a second look. He has competing information. If you don't believe scientists then who better to turn to than someone who calls himself a moron?