More to ignore, Book 56........

Ten Thousan Marbles

Well-Known Member
Feb 6, 2014
103,623
18,493
1


FR7XJJ3XEAACl_d
 

Ten Thousan Marbles

Well-Known Member
Feb 6, 2014
103,623
18,493
1
Ukraine update: Russia tries to counter Ukraine's counterattack ... and fails
Mark Sumner

GettyImages-1240443325.jpg

Some transportation is more reliable than others. Pokrovske. May 4, 2022,

At this morning’s press event at the U.S. Department of Defense, Brig. Gen. Joseph E. Hilbert quoted Ukrainian sources in saying that, “The worst thing the Russians did was give us eight years to prepare.” During that time, Ukrainian forces worked closely with the American military, including seeing numerous National Guard forces who spent extensive time in Ukraine training and working with the military there.

Through that association, the Ukrainian military took the U.S. focus on training (and training, and more training) “strongly to heart.” Ukrainian forces also saw something in the way U.S. forces were structured—especially something that kos has talked about several times, the value of non-commissioned officers.

Russia continued a top heavy command layout, based their strategy around an army of untrained conscripts, and reshaped their military structure around small, fragile battalion tactical groups. Ukraine implemented a program to insert and retain NCOs, doubled down on training that included training on complex strategies, and beefed up their brigade structure to improve redundancy and strength in depth.


All of that took time, which is why Ukrainian officials are glad that this invasion, if it had to come, came in 2022, not 2016, or 2018. There is no good time for a war, but the interval between Russia’s first and second advance was time Ukraine spent preparing themselves at every level to do what they’re doing right now.

At the afternoon session, reporters expressed concern about the missiles that Russia has been firing into western Ukraine, including at cities that had previously been spared bombardment. Many of those missiles have been directed at electrical substations, at rail infrastructure, and at factories connected with Ukraine’s defense. The Pentagon agrees that the intention of these missiles is to disrupt the flow of weapons entering the country and decrease Ukraine’s ability to “replenish and reinforce” their positions. On Tuesday, two of the missiles fired were reportedly the high speed Kalibr missiles launched from a Russian ship in the Black Sea.

The missile attacks are continuing on Wednesday. The total number of missiles Russia has launched since the invasion began is now over 2,300.



However, the U.S. notes that Russia still has a poor record when it comes to precisely hitting targets, that Russia’s “ability to target with precision has been less than advertised”, and they’ve had a lack of accuracy over the last 70 days. Without giving details, the spokesperson hinted that Russia may still not be making contact with the targets it really wants to hit.

Though they would not give any numbers to tie it down, the DOD insists that Ukraine is still seeing new weapons and supplies come into the country at “an incredible pace” and that those weapons are still reaching the front on a timely basis. The Pentagon also indicated that some of the U.S. M777 howitzers sent to Ukraine are now in use.

Also in the afternoon session, the Pentagon noted that both Army and National Guard units were involved with training Ukrainian forces in Germany (along with possible use of Air Force units to train on the new Phoenix Ghost, details of which are still obscure). While discussing this, the Pentagon stated that Ukrainian forces had also been trained on the use of “unmanned surface vessels” — in other words, drone ships.



Finally, while assessing that Russia is not making the progress that they want, the Pentagon said it believes Russia is still having problems with command, unit coordination, unit cohesion, and morale. Even so, Russia still has “a lot of firepower left to them to continue this fight. This could be a prolonged battle in the Donbas.”

That remark matches some coming from of Ukrainian officials this week, who appear to be warning their nation to prepare for an extended war.

KHARKIV​

For the last week, Ukrainian forces have been conducting a steady counterattack in the area north and east of Kharkiv. At the start of this offensive, Russian forces were right on the boundaries of the city, but Ukraine pushed those forces out of the suburbs, out of the nearby towns, and back through a series of villages to open a 40 km (25 mile) corridor around the battered city. The Ukrainian counterattack took them into Staryi Saltiv earlier in the week and has largely cleared forces east of the city to the Siverskyi Donets River.

Ukraine’s attempts to clear Russian forces, which apparently include a lot of Luhansk People’s Republic (LPR) militia, hasn’t gone off without a hitch. On Monday, Ukrainian forces attempting to enter the town of Kozacha Lopan ran into stiff resistance, losing several vehicles in the process. However, Ukrainian forces remain just a short distance away, but at the moment the biggest area of combat seems to be over on the east end of this line — where it seems, as of Wednesday evening, Ukraine has succeeded in driving Russian forces completely from Staryi Saltiv. There are also some statements that Ukraine has taken the town of Shestakove, which would go a long way to clear the main road between Staryi Saltiv and Kharkiv, but this is currently unconfirmed.

However, also on Wednesday, Russia apparently attempted to counter-counterattack. The location isn’t clear, though it seems to be back at the northwest end of the area, once again near that town of Kozacha Lopan, where Ukrainian forces were pushed back earlier. However, Russia’s attempt to recapture territory from Ukraine in this area has reportedly failed.




HOW RUSSIAN TANKS ARE DICTATED BY RUSSIAN STRATEGY, AND VICE VERSA​

As of Wednesday, Oryx is reporting more than 3,400 pieces of Russian equipment that have been lost. Over 600 of those are lost tanks, and a huge chunk of those is some form of T-72. Just as with the structure of their army, the nature of their tanks is defined by the expectation of Russian leaderships. And then the nature of what the army can do, is defined by those tanks.

"The biggest advantage with the T-72 is also its biggest weakness. Because this vehicle was designed to be used by a conscript army. So it's easy to operate. But that's also its biggest weakness, because a conscript army cannot pull off sophisticated tank tactics. It's supposed to be easy to maintain, but that's not the case if all of your corrupt generals are stealing the funds that are meant to be used for maintaining the vehicles."

 
Last edited:

Ten Thousan Marbles

Well-Known Member
Feb 6, 2014
103,623
18,493
1
Newsmax host has the caucasity to accuse Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson of leaking Alito opinion
Rebekah Sager

Instead of addressing that the U.S. Supreme Court is contemplating a reversal on Roe v. Wade, despite the fact that 69% of Americans are in favor of it, Newsmax host Grant Stinchfield went on a farcical rant Tuesday about who he believes is behind the leaked draft opinion written by Justice Samuel Alito.

No big surprise here, but Stinchfield called Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson his “ first suspect.”

Could someone please tell this guy that Jackson isn’t even on the court yet? She wasn’t on the court when it heard arguments in the case over Mississippi’s abortion restrictions, and she won’t be sworn in until this summer after Justice Stephen Breyer retires, as HuffPost reports.
.........
The court authenticated the leaked draft and opened an investigation, but that hasn’t stopped conservatives from focusing all of their energy on uncovering the person behind the leak.

Chief Justice John Roberts called the leak a “betrayal of confidences” and “a singular and egregious breach” of trust.

Stinchfield admitted that Jackson isn’t a justice yet, but that didn’t stop him from accusing one of her clerks of the leak.

Media Matters for America’s Jason Campbell tweeted Stinchfield’s laughable monologue.

“I find it suspect that the first leak coming out of the Supreme Court in history comes shortly after Judge Jackson is confirmed … I want to know if her law clerks, who I am sure have already been hired, possibly even working at the high court already before her swearing-in, have access to these draft decisions.

“She would be my first suspect when it comes to the leak because Ketanji Brown Jackson is a radical left-wing activist, more radical than any other justice in the history of the Supreme Court,” he added. “I believe she is capable of undermining the court this way.”



The reality is that leaks aren’t common, but they aren’t unheard of.

According to reporting by Vice News, Time Magazine published the original Roe v. Wade opinion ahead of its official announcement, and Jonathan Peters, a media professor at the University of Georgia’s Grady College, extensively outlined the history of the court’s leaks.

“Supreme Court leaks are rare and remarkable, but they are not unprecedented,” Peters tweeted. Click below for the full thread.


According to The Daily Beast, Stinchfield isn’t new to making absurd accusations.

In January, the Newsmax host posited that Breyer’s real reason for leaving the Supreme Court was to get Hillary Clinton into the White House as president. His theory was that President Biden would nominate Kamala Harris to the court, and the Democrats would then put Hillary up for the 2024 presidential candidacy because Biden and Harris couldn’t possibly win again.

“But what if, folks, what if he picked Hillary Clinton to be his vice president? Oh boy,” Stinchfield roared, according to Media Matters. “Then what if he picks Hillary Clinton and then decides to resign a short time later? Hillary gets the White House, and then ultimately the chance to run as an incumbent.”

He maintained: “If you don't think that they're thinking about this, think again. This is not far-fetched at all!”

So, forgive me if I bust a gut listening to the MAGA-loving host try to pin a Supreme Court leak on a Black woman who 1) isn’t even there, and 2) would be the last person on the planet to jeopardize all that she’s worked for in order to get there.
 

Ten Thousan Marbles

Well-Known Member
Feb 6, 2014
103,623
18,493
1
‘I chose to have an abortion,’ New York AG tells pro-choice protesters: ‘I make no apologies’
Rebekah Sager

New York Attorney General Letitia James gave a rousing speech at a pro-choice rally in Manhattan Tuesday. She candidly shared with the crowd her personal experience terminating a pregnancy and told protesters she made “no apologies” for her decision.

“I’m here to say we will not go backward; back into those days when we used wire hangers. Not now, not ever,” James said. She added: “The right to control our bodies is a fundamental right enshrined in the 14th Amendment. And if they go after this right, who’s next?”

Crowds gathered to denounce the recently leaked draft opinion written by Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, indicating that the Court would reverse the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling.
.........
In 2013, James, 63, was elected the public advocate for the City of New York—the first woman of color to hold citywide office. A Democrat, she became the 67th attorney general for the state in 2018, making her the first woman and first woman of color to hold the office.

“As a former city council member, many moons ago, I came to this issue in a very personal way. I was in this place, I was just elected, and I was faced with a decision about whether to have an abortion or not. And I chose to have an abortion and I walked proudly into Planned Parenthood,” James said.

“And I make no apologies to anyone. To no one. And all of you also know that I am a woman of faith, I go to church. But my God teaches me all about love and acceptance. And my God teaches me about privacy. And my God says that you’ve got to make the best decisions for your body and your life,” she added.



The Associated Press reports that James has advocated for funding to help underwrite abortion care for people who need it, and recently joined other attorneys general in filing briefs against states with restrictive abortion laws in place.

“I will not allow Justice Alito or any other judge on the Supreme Court to dictate to me or to you how to use your body. I will not allow Justice Alito to dictate to me my future, my destiny. It is not in the hands of the United States Supreme Court, it’s in our hands,” James said.

The 98-page draft opinion is a defiant indictment of the 1973 ruling promising federal protections for abortion. “Roe was egregiously wrong from the start,” Alito writes. “We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled… It is time to heed the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives.”

If all that isn’t enough, Alito pivots to the white savior role, actually attempting to argue that the removal of reproductive rights somehow aligns with a fight against racism—even citing the same misrepresented statistics used by pro-choice activists advocating for eugenics.

In another passage, Alito writes that societal norms around pregnancy when parents aren’t married “have changed drastically” since Roe v. Wade was enacted and argues there’s now a higher demand for adoption.

Adoption numbers are actually declining. Creating a Family reports that the number of children adopted via public child welfare was 57,881 in 2020.
 

Ten Thousan Marbles

Well-Known Member
Feb 6, 2014
103,623
18,493
1
We didn't want this outcome on Roe v. Wade. But abortion may be the midterm issue we've waited for
Kerry Eleveld

From Donald Trump's Jan. 6 coup attempt to GOP-led book bans to unbridled attacks on voting rights, grassroots Democrats have been waiting for leaders in Washington to actually take Republicans head-on on something—anything, really.

Instead, congressional Democrats have continually stuck with milquetoasty talking points about kitchen-table issues as Republicans hand them issue after issue on a silver platter. A federal judge ruling that Trump likely committed crimes on Jan. 6 comes to mind, for instance.

But the draft Supreme Court opinion gutting Roe v. Wade may have changed all that. The impending demise of Roe—a monumental disruption of modern American life—has organically captured the political spotlight. It's an issue so foundational and synonymous with the women's movement that it needs no introduction into the political mainstream.
.........
Which makes it a perfect issue for Democrats leery of straying from their kitchen table talking points. As Christine Pelosi told us on The Brief when asked whether Democrats were ready for this moment: "I think the base of the party is ready for the moment. I think the American people are ready for the moment. And I think the Democrats will rise to the moment."

In other words, this isn't a top-down moment, it's a bottom-up moment. That means it will be led by protesters and politicians alike that are outside of Washington. It's an uprising we are already witnessing among swing-state Democrats who are taking the issue head-on because it's both the right thing to do and good politics.

Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, for instance, promised to "fight like hell" to preserve abortion rights in her state.

At the same time, Republicans are telegraphing their weakness on the issue as they dodge any substantive discussion of the ruling.

The White House reportedly also views the ruling, once it actually drops, as a "galvanizing moment" for the Democratic base, according to Politico.

The White House quickly circulated a statement Tuesday from President Biden about the draft ruling stating that his team has been prepping internally for a variety of outcomes at the Supreme Court.

"We will be ready when any ruling is issued," read the statement.

Biden has also commented on the draft extemporaneously, noting that the decision as written would immediately call into question a whole host of other rulings on privacy issues—rulings that have become part of the fabric of modern American living.

“It would mean that every other decision relating to the notion of privacy is thrown into question,” Biden told reporters, calling the opinion "radical."

“If what is written is what remains, it goes far beyond the concern of whether or not there is the right to choose. It goes to other basic rights ... who you marry, whether or not you decide to conceive a child or not, whether or not you can have an abortion, a range of other decisions.”

Biden also suggested that such a decision could be weaponized at the state level to tear down other Supreme Court precedents.

“Does this mean that in Florida they can decide they’re going to pass a law saying that same sex marriage is not permissible? It’s against the law in Florida?” Biden asked. “It’s a fundamental shift in American jurisprudence.”

The nightmare scenario on abortion that absolutely none of us hoped for appears to be coming to fruition. But now that it has been forced upon us, perhaps it can help Democrats weather the midterms and save our democracy. The grassroots seem to get it. Swing-state Democrats seem to get it. And perhaps, even the White House gets it.

Now, we just need congressional Democrats to follow along.
 

Ten Thousan Marbles

Well-Known Member
Feb 6, 2014
103,623
18,493
1
"Pro-life" hypocrisy fuels the autocratic woman-hate of the anti-choice zealots
TheCriticalMind

Conservative orthodoxy has it that they are anti-abortion, and liberals are pro-abortion. Bullshit! No one is pro-abortion. I am sure that the vast majority of women who have had an abortion would have preferred not being in a position where they had to make that choice. I hope that the women in my life — and every woman — never have to get an abortion. But should the circumstance arise, proponents of small government ought to be the first to say it is a woman’s choice. But they are not.

Further, Conservatives have only one ‘solution’ to abortion. Ban it. But abortion in pre-Roe America was commonplace — even though it was mostly illegal. A study by the Guttmacher Institute extrapolated data from North Carolina to estimate that 829,000 illegal or self-induced abortions occurred in 1967. So the effect of Roe was not so much to increase the number of abortions but to make them legal — therefore safer.

Get rid of Roe, and it will be 1967 all over again.

So how do you reduce the number of abortions? To start, mandate comprehensive sex ed. And hand-in-hand with knowledge, give sexually active people of all ages access to free and readily available contraception.

Next, ensure that prospective parents have the resources to care for a child — or in 59% of cases another child. Because contrary to the popular right-wing belief that abortion is used as contraception by flibbertigibbets, the majority of women who receive an abortion are mothers who have already given birth at least once.

But that will never happen because these anti-women zealots are not about to spend a dime to achieve their stated aim. The sanctimonious, self-proclaimed “lovers of life” will not put their money where their mouth is. No paid parental leave. No universal pre-K. No Medicaid expansion. No free or reduced-cost higher education. Reductions in SNAP benefits. And no rise in the minimum wage (MW) since 2009.

At the very least, if the MW were tied to inflation, it would now be $9.72 instead of $7.25. If it had kept pace with inflation since 1970, it would now be $11.82. But of course, only the financial elite see anything like that kind of growth.

In contrast, consider the Scandinavian countries, with their extensive social welfare and support for new parents. They all have lower abortion rates than the US. They also have lower maternal fatality rates. That is veritably “pro-life”.

It gets worse. In addition to resisting any expenditure to reduce the rate of abortion, conservatives actively campaign to increase the number of unwanted pregnancies with their ludicrous “abstinence-only” sex ed philosophy. That absurdity is based on the assumption that teenagers and young adults have greater self-control than David Vitter (prostitutes, adultery) Jim Bakker (rape, adultery) Ted Haggard (hypocritical gay sex, adultery) Dennis Hastert (child molesting, adultery) Newt Gingrich (serial adultery) the Catholic Church (child rape) — and all the others.

And what of Justice (there’s an irony) Alito’s argument that the majority was wrong in Roe when they held that any constitutional right to privacy "is broad enough to encompass a woman's decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy." In Dobbs, Alito argued that "any such [substantive due process] right must be deeply rooted in this Nation's history and tradition . . . [t]he right to an abortion does not fall within this category."


First, abortion was legal in America in 1787. The first anti-abortion legislation was not enacted until the late 1800s. Even religious leaders thought abortion was moral before “the quickening” — fetal movements occurring around 15-20 weeks. I do not know how he can argue therefore that it is not rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition. Second, why does a “right” have to have been granted within a certain time frame? Where does the Constitution say that?

But that is what happens when you determine a legal outcome regardless of the law and logic.

To a conservative, their clinching argument is “the sanctity of life”. We have already established that is complete bullshit. And it misstates the reality of pregnancy. There is no guaranteed path from conception to birth. Somewhere between 10% to 20% of pregnancies end in a miscarriage — aka spontaneous abortion. We can never know the exact number because these pregnancies often end before the woman knows she is pregnant. But we do know the number is significant. And if there is a God, this would make him history’s most aggressive abortionist.
 
Last edited:

Ten Thousan Marbles

Well-Known Member
Feb 6, 2014
103,623
18,493
1
SICK! Matt Gaetz Gripes that Women Supporting Roe v Wade are Too Smart and Too Old - For Him?
News Corpse

In one of this year's most glaring self-owns, insurrectionist representative Matt Gaetz (FL-QAnon) posted a tweet that he surely thought would devastate the liberals that he hates so passionately. But, as usual, he could not have been more mistaken.

On Monday an unauthorized release of a draft opinion by the conservative wing of the Supreme Court indicated that they would be overturning the abortion precedent set by the Roe v Wade ruling fifty years ago. The Republican Party immediately sought to ignore the harm done to the rights of American women, and liberty in general, and instead focused on portraying themselves as victims (again) of a plot to embarrass them by revealing to the public what they are actually doing.

While there were innumerable bad takes on this news by rightist partisans in politics and the press, none were as cringeworthy as the one from Matt Gaetz who tweeted...

"How many of the women rallying against overturning Roe are over-educated, under-loved millennials who sadly return from protests to a lonely microwave dinner with their cats, and no bumble matches?"



Seriously? Let's set aside for the moment that Gaetz is disparaging adult women who had the audacity to get an education. What were they thinking? What's truly nauseating about this comment is that Gaetz is exposing his own heinous predilection for girls with limited education because they were still in high school. He is currently under investigation for allegedly having sex with an underage girl who he reportedly paid and transported across state lines.

Like his cult messiah, Donald Trump, Gaetz "loves the poorly educated." Presumably that's because they are the only ones who will fall for his bullsh*t. He is explicitly criticizing backers of Roe v Wade because of their academic achievement. That's something that he appears to regard as a personality flaw that he discourages among his constituents. He's also opposed to microwave ovens and pets, which further illustrates just how out of touch he is with most Americans.

Gaetz ought to be more concerned with "How many of the women rallying against overturning Roe" live in his district. Nationally, the support for Roe v Wade is more than 69%. Perhaps Gaetz is worried about millions of women - and men - rallying to defend reproductive rights because he couldn't get a handful of supporters to show up at recent protest that he organized with fellow insurrectionist, Marjorie Taylor Greene.

The spectacle of a man who is being investigated for unlawful sex with a minor attempting to mock reproductive rights supporters for being educated adults is, sadly, all too typical of the Republican Party. And no one exemplifies that perversion better than Matt Gaetz. And for some puzzling reason, he does publicly as if he's proud of it.
 

Ten Thousan Marbles

Well-Known Member
Feb 6, 2014
103,623
18,493
1
Wednesday, May 4, 2022 · 10:28:36 PM EDT · Mark Sumner
The New York Times is reporting that the U.S. helped provide Ukraine with the location of Russian generals; information that was … detrimental to their health.



However, considering the quality of Russian leadership so far, maybe the best thing to do is to follow the timeless advice of a Civil War private.


“I always shoot at privates. It was they who did the shooting and killing, and if I could kill or wound a private, why, my chances were so much the better. I always looked upon officers as harmless personages.” — Sam Watkins
 
  • Like
Reactions: tgar

Ten Thousan Marbles

Well-Known Member
Feb 6, 2014
103,623
18,493
1
China is not pitching in on Putin's war, and Biden administration pressure may be part of the reason
Aldous J Pennyfarthing

Despite Donald Trump’s early assurances that he beat Chiiiii-na all the time, one of his favorite pastimes as president was losing to the country—while encouraging its worst excesses.

Trump made a big show of acting tough toward China—imposing tariffs that succeeded in punishing our own citizens far more than Xi Jinping’s—but he ultimately lost his trade war, and rather decisively at that. Of course, when it came to issues Trump wasn’t personally interested in—including humans and their silly rights—Trump was even more squishy-soft.

As Pepperidge Farm-looking warmonger John Bolton noted in his 2020 memoir If You Buy a Book From This Piece of Shit, You’re a ****ing Asshole, So I’m Not Even Going to Link to It, Trump had exactly zero interest in defending the rights and liberties of China’s persecuted Uighur minority.

Associated Press:

At a summit in Japan in 2019, with only interpreters present, Xi gave Trump an explanation for the Chinese camps for Uighurs, who are ethnically and culturally distinct from the country’s majority Han population and are suspected of harboring separatist tendencies, Bolton wrote.
“According to our interpreter, Trump said that Xi should go ahead with building the camps, which he thought was exactly the right thing to do,” the book said.

So when it came to China, Trump bellowed and blustered a lot but achieved exactly nothing—unless you count selling out millions of vulnerable ethnic minorities as “something.”

Fast-forward three years to a more enlightened era in which a serious president is now calling the shots. Earlier this year, as Vladimir Putin was still deciding whether to invade Ukraine or cut his own balls off with a Play-Doh scissors (spoiler alert: he chose poorly), Putin and Chinese President Xi got chummy at the Olympics. Later, after Putin put a gun to his own head and pulled the trigger on his “special military operation,” there was grave concern among many U.S. government officials that China was poised to materially aid Russia’s war effort.

Well, about that …


Reuters:

U.S. officials told Reuters in recent days they remain wary about China's long-standing support for Russia in general, but that the military and economic support that they worried about has not come to pass, at least for now. The relief comes at a pivotal time.
President Joe Biden is preparing for a trip to Asia later this month dominated by how to deal with the rise of China and his administration is soon to release his first national security strategy about the emergence of China as a great power.

According to a Biden administration official who spoke to Reuters, “We have not seen the [People's Republic of China] provide direct military support to Russia’s war on Ukraine or engage in systematic efforts to help Russia evade our sanctions. We continue to monitor for the PRC and any other country that might provide support to Russia or otherwise evade U.S. and partner sanctions."

Well, that’s great news for the Ukrainian people, huh? Wonder what Trump would have done, other than withhold arms shipments to Volodymyr Zelenskyy in exchange for a saucy reach-around and a McRib.

Biden, on the other hand? He was unequivocal:

Biden himself has not spoken of China helping Russia since telling reporters in Brussels March 24 that in a phone call with Chinese President Xi Jinping, he "made sure he understood the consequences.

"Hmm, a U.S. president who stands up for freedom and justice around the world. How quaint.

Of course, geopolitics is a complicated game, so who knows what the Chinese are actually motivated by? They also couldn’t have helped but notice that Putin’s invasion was a disaster from the start. That said, there’s plenty of reason to suspect U.S. pressure prompted Xi to back off from any plan to militarily aid Russia.

“There has been consistent messaging that if China does so it will face severe consequences,” said Bonnie Glaser, an Asia expert at the German Marshall Fund of the United States. “It appears that so far, the Chinese have not. It is feasible that the Chinese planned to provide military assistance and changed their minds.”

Hmm, another big win for Biden. When will the media start to notice, I wonder?

 

Ten Thousan Marbles

Well-Known Member
Feb 6, 2014
103,623
18,493
1

......“Did none of you learn anything from the Gridiron Dinner? Nothing,” Mr. Noah said, referring to another elite Washington gathering in April, after which dozens of attendees tested positive for the coronavirus. “Do you read any of your own newspapers?”

By Wednesday, Mr. Noah’s chiding remarks at what he called “the nation’s most distinguished superspreader event” were beginning to appear prophetic as a growing number of attendees, including a string of journalists and Antony J. Blinken, the secretary of state, said they had tested positive for the virus. [...]

The growing number of cases presented another sign of an official Washington that has largely returned to prepandemic routines, even as officials still urge Americans to take precautions, and has decided to live with the result.

Journalists across several major news organizations reported testing positive. Among those were Jonathan Karl, ABC News’s chief Washington correspondent, who shook hands with Mr. Biden during the dinner, and Steve Herman, the chief national correspondent at Voice of America. CNN reported that those infected also included staff members from its network, as well as NBC News, CBS News and Politico.......
 

Latest posts