Better in their words…

Electrifying meeting between Trump and DeSantis leaves us guessing; protective jab wall starts crumbling after AstraZeneca admission; extreme midwest weather; holes appearing in Trump trial; more.

Source: THE RUBE GOLDBERG LAW FIRM ☙ Monday, April 29, 2024 ☙ C&C NEWS

WORLD NEWS AND COMMENTARY

🔥🔥 In case you were off enjoying real life and somehow missed this widely-reported, portentous news, Fox News ran the story late yesterday afternoon headlined, “Trump, DeSantis meet privately for several hours in Miami.” The meeting electrified the media, prompting a banner crop of articles sprouting from nearly every platform, from the New York Times down to the local Miami ABC affiliate. They’re on tenterhooks, eagerly waiting to launch the controversies and lawfare.

Nobody knows anything for sure about what the two men discussed at yesterday’s meeting in Hollywood (Florida). The articles gush with deep background, historical references to campaign events, and anonymous quotes, but no news beyond the bare fact they met together!

Like the rest of the media, Fox quoted anonymous “Republicans with knowledge of the meeting” who reported only that DeSantis had agreed to help Trump with fundraising. It means nothing, since the anonymous sources could easily have all agreed on some narrative that truthfully reported part of what was discussed at the meeting.

DeSantis probably did agree to help Trump with fund raising. Coincidentally, Vice Presidents can help with fund-raising, and with campaigning, just as well as can allied Governors in the home state.

Perhaps signaling how fearful a Trump-DeSantis ticket makes the New York Times, the Grey Lady dumped her leftover champagne bucket of ice cold water all over the vice-presidential idea:

Mr. DeSantis is not seen as a contender to join a Republican ticket with Mr. Trump… Both Mr. Trump and Mr. DeSantis have made clear that such a pairing doesn’t interest either of them, and they also live in the same state, which would make it an unconstitutional pairing unless one of them were to move out of Florida, which is unlikely to happen, especially since Mr. DeSantis is currently the governor.

The NYT’s claim that the Constitution forbids presidents and vice-presidents living in the same state is, well, a significant stretch. Which is why you probably never heard of that ‘rule’ before. What you need to know is there issome murky language in the 12th Amendment, which defines how the Electoral College procedure works. Here is the sticky bit:

The electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for two persons, of whom one at least shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves.

According to a 2016 article on History.com, written well before the current controversy (but ‘updated’ in January this year), that wordy constitutional provision has always previously been interpreted to mean that if the presidential and vice-presidential candidates are both from the same state, electors from that state may not vote for both candidates. Under that interpretation, a ticket could lose all the electoral votes for vice-president from the state of residence. That might be a big problem in a very tight race.

According to History.com, a tight-race showdown was narrowly avoided in the 2000 election:

When Texas Governor George W. Bush chose Dick Cheney as his running mate, Cheney had also been living and voting and paying taxes for five years in Texas. Shortly before the election, however, Cheney obtained a Wyoming driver’s license and put his Dallas home on the market. (He had a vacation home in Wyoming, the state he had formerly represented in Congress.)

Good thing he did: The Bush-Cheney ticket ended up winning with 271 electoral votes—just a slim five-vote margin—over Al Gore and Joe Lieberman, a total they certainly wouldn’t have hit without Texas’ 32 votes.

To avoid losing Florida’s vice-presidential electoral votes, Trump could just before the election change his driver’s license and temporarily relocate to one of his many other residences. It’s not unimaginable. The 12th Amendment requires the candidate to be an “inhabitant” of another state, which is probably a lower threshold than being a “citizen” or “resident.”

Bottom line, while appearing to casually dismiss the chances of a Trump-DeSantis ticket, the New York Times was actually preparing the battlefield. It’s hinting at a not-so-secret democrat scheme to launch a new lawfare missile against the Trump-DeSantis combination. They plan to argue the 12th Amendment’s obtuse language forbids a same-state ticket.

Which means, if Trump and DeSantis do hook up, we’ll soon be right back at the Supreme Court for another 9-0 decision in the — third? fourth? dang it, I lost count — another emergency Constitutional case over Trump’s candidacy.

Wheee! More legal records broken!

🔥🔥 From a purely selfish standpoint, I do not want it to happen. I want DeSantis to stay in Florida. But I can see the wisdom of the pairing. It seems to me that both men stand to benefit from DeSantis joining Trump’s ticket.

The advantages for Trump are clear: the matchup would end the Republican Party’s civil war, and maybe even convince some Never-Trumpers to get on board. You never know. And it would convincingly quash any complaints about Trump’s age, since DeSantis could immediately be an acceptable President if something were to happen to Trump. Unlike certain other very silly candidates I shall not single out (but whose name rhymes with Pamela Paris).

For his part, the Governor would also benefit, from turbo-charging his next four years of preparation for a 2028 run for President. It’s inarguable that an incumbent Vice-President enjoys a strong election advantage over challengers. If not, if he stays where he is, DeSantis will be wandering for two years in the political wilderness after terming out as Florida Governor in 2026.

The matchup would be exciting and would pour rocket fuel into the GOP’s thirsty fundraising tank.

Normally, we never see a strong VP pick because of personality issues. No strong politician wants the Presidential candidate, who they may dislike or disrespect, bossing them around. And the President usually doesn’t want a VP who might hog the political spotlight. But not only do the particular personalities involved reduce those risks for Trump and DeSantis, but this is also not a normal election, either.

Even the New York Times, in its final sentence, even after dismissing  the whole idea out of hand as unconstitutional, ultimately seemed to hint at the same conclusion:

Still, allies of both men say it is politically beneficial for them to come together for the 2024 campaign and beyond.

It depends on what you mean by “come together.” Come together in campaigning? Or come together on the same ticket? Like I said, it seems pretty obvious. It’s even too obvious for the Times to deny. Conservative social media seems to like the idea.

We shall see. In the meantime, what do you think? Should Trump pick DeSantis as Veep, and if so, should DeSantis accept?

💉💉 The truth continues slowly seeping out of the needle’s pointy end. This morning’s exhibit is the UK Telegraph’ story from yesterday headlined, “AstraZeneca admits for first time in court documents its Covid vaccine can cause rare side effect.” The AstraZeneca vaccine – lauded at its launch by Prime Minister Boris Johnson as a “triumph for British science” – follow the science! to the money! — is now discarded, no longer used in the UK, having been knocked out by the much more dangerous mRNA vaccines.

After a year of intense litigation in a class-action lawsuit brought by vaccine injured British folks, who’ve suffered brain bleeds, clots, and strokes, AstraZeneca finally grudgingly admitted in a court filing last week that um, well, maybe it does cause problems, after all. It’s just so baffling how the jabs are looking a bit less like a ‘triumph’ and a bit more like a painful trial.

In its latest filing, the giant British pharma company admitted that:

The AZ vaccine can, in very rare cases, cause TTS. The causal mechanism is not known. Causation in any individual case will be a matter for expert evidence.

These pharma people and their ugly corporate media handlers think we are stupid. Explain how they could possibly know with certainty that jabs causing TTS is very rare, but at the same time still have no idea about how it is caused.

TTS stands for Thrombosis with Thrombocytopenia Syndrome. It causes blood clots and low blood platelet counts. One year ago in May 2023, AstraZeneca’s lawyers insisted the exact opposite was true, writing, “we do not accept that TTS is caused by the vaccine at a generic level.”

If the evidence for a causal connection “in very rare cases” is strong enough to warrant an admission just one year later, why was the company so firm about rejecting it before?

The lawsuit includes 51 plaintiff, whose combined claims exceed 100 million pounds sterling. The Telegraph gushed, “The Government has pledged to underwrite AstraZeneca’s legal bills,” as if that were some wildly generous move, but almost certainly AstraZeneca’s contract requires the British government to indemnify the vaccine maker.

Kate Scott, whose husband suffered a permanent neurological injury after his vaccine-induced TTS, told the Telegraph it shouldn’t have taken this long to get an admission: “The medical world has acknowledged for a long time that TTS was caused by the vaccine. It’s only AstraZeneca who have questioned whether Jamie’s condition was caused by the jab.”

Sarah Moore, one of the small-firm lawyers bringing the claims, also noted how far behind the science the drugmaker is, compared to proper doctors: “It has taken AstraZeneca a year to formally admit that their vaccine can cause the devastating blood clots, when this fact has been widely accepted by the clinical community since the end of 2021.”

The same is true here in the States, of course. In spite of thousands of case studies flooding the academic literature, Pfizer, Moderna, the corrupt CDC, and the useless FDA all continue irrationally to insist the only “real” jab injuries are mild myocarditis/pericarditis, injection shot soreness, and temporary flu-like symptoms.

Behold the baffling disappearance of the “safe and effective” shibboleth from pharma’s covid jab lexicon. Here’s how AstraZeneca now lamely describes its defective, recalled product:

From the body of evidence in clinical trials and real-world data, the AstraZeneca-Oxford vaccine has continuously been shown to have an acceptable safety profile and regulators around the world consistently state that the benefits of vaccination outweigh the risks of extremely rare potential side effects.

How far the mighty vaccine has fallen! From being trumpeted as “the safest and most effective vaccine in human history” down to generic pharma phrases like “an acceptable safety profile.” Not to mention the squishy, jello-like, totally subjective term, “benefits outweigh the risks” wording that is popping up more and more here in the US about the mRNA shots as well.

‘Risks’ and ‘benefits’ are not clinically objective terms. How can they possibly compare the benefit to someone else of (allegedly) avoiding a mild case of covid? How can they evaluate someone else’s willingness to take the risk of getting TTS, however rare?

🔥🔥 This morning, CNN ran the latest extreme weather story headlined, “At least 4 killed in Oklahoma tornado outbreak, as threat of severe storms continues from Missouri to Texas.

Not just one tornado, but a whole “tornado outbreak” hit Oklahoma last night. It was like an epidemic of tornadoes. The tornado variant. No news on a vaccine, not yet. But you can be sure they are working on it.

The Norman, Oklahoma weather service confirmed twenty-two tornadoes hit just that one area alone. It sounds like things were pretty lively in Norman for a few hours. And at least two of the tornados featured wind speeds over 135 miles per hour. Severe storm forecasts continue threatening even more big twisters, heavy rain, and “ping pong-sized” hail, across the midwest from Missouri to Texas.

Ping-pong sized hail? If it happens, well, that could leave a mark.

In Sulphur (about 80 miles south of Oklahoma City), 30 people were injured, and according to a shocked Governor Stitt, “it seems like every business downtown has been destroyed.” He added, “It’s definitely the most damage that I’ve seen since becoming governor.”

You can add this midwest tornado epidemic to last year’s Acapulco insta-hurricane. Do you think all this extreme weather could be part of a major sun cycle? Climate change? Or just a coincidence?

🔥 The Hill ran an encouraging, hilariously-written Jonathan Turley op-ed on Friday, headlined “On Alvin Bragg and the art of not taking the law too seriously.” Of course I loved it, since Turley agrees with us. The trial is a joke about a farce.

Following last week’s testimony, Turley explained, Donald Trump’s trial is increasingly looking like a mad, Rube Goldberg-style prosecution machine being run by a pack of midwit lawyers who don’t take the law too seriously.

(By the way, I can’t tell you how delighted I am to see the conservative media begin shifting from constant outrage to mockery. To the extent C&C has helped effectuate the transition at all, I am grateful.)

Smart people like Jonathan Turley are starting to realize how threadbare is portly Alvin Bragg’s dumb criminal case. Here’s how Constitutional scholar Turley described the legal issues, if you can call them that:

The base charge is a simple misdemeanor under a New York law against falsifying business records. Trump paid Cohen hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees and costs, including $130,000 for a nondisclosure agreement with Daniels.

Bragg is vague as to what should have been noted on the ledgers for the payments. It is not even clear if Trump knew of this expense’s designation as a legal cost. However, it really did not matter, because the misdemeanor has been as dead as Dillinger for years.

The dead misdemeanor was shocked back into life by claiming that it was committed to conceal another crime. Under New York’s penal law, section 175.10, it can be a felony if the “intent to defraud includes an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof.”

Turley then caught a trick I’d missed. Showing a spark of neuronic life, mid-trial last week, in mid-case, or ‘mid-stream,’ Bragg ditched his original campaign finance reporting crime for a different weird, unused New York election law — surprise! — this one prohibiting an “unlawful conspiracy to promote an election”:

In the trial, Bragg added a type of frying pan flip to his Rube Goldberg contraption by arguing that Trump may have been trying to hide his violation of another dead misdemeanor under yet another New York election law prohibiting “conspir[ing] to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means.”

In other words, Trump was conspiring to try to win his own election. Even though the notations were made after he had already won the election. Even though Trump was running for a federal, not a state office.

So Bragg would use one dead misdemeanor to trigger a second dead misdemeanor to create a felony on the simple notations used to describe payments for a completely legal nondisclosure agreement.

The op-ed continued by then analyzing last week’s testimonial evidence (mostly from David Pecker), and what it all added up to — if anything — was just as disjointed and unfathomable as were the criminal charges. Read the whole thing.

Overall the week is off to a promising start.

Have a magnificent Monday! Return tomorrow, same coffee time, same covid channel, for another delightful roundup of news and analysis.

Share

We can’t do it without you. Consider joining with C&C to help move the nation’s needle and change minds.  I could use your help getting the truth out and spreading optimism and hope, if you can:  ☕ Learn How to Get Involved 🦠

How to Donate to Coffee & Covid
Twitter: jchilders98.
Truth Social: jchilders98.
MeWe: mewe.com/i/coffee_and_covid.
Telegram: t.me/coffeecovidnews
C&C Swag! www.shopcoffeeandcovid.com