WelcomeUser Guide
ToSPrivacyCanary
DonateBugsLicense

©2025 Poal.co

103

The Senate on Saturday voted to acquit former President Donald Trump on a charge of incitement of insurrection largely along party lines, bringing an end to the fourth impeachment trial in U.S. history and the second for Trump.

Only seven Republicans voted to convict Trump for allegedly inciting the deadly Jan. 6 riot at the Capitol, when a mob of pro-Trump supporters tried to disrupt the electoral vote count formalizing Joe Biden's election win before a joint session of Congress. The final vote was 57 to 43, far short of the 67 votes needed to secure a conviction.

Republican Sens. Richard Burr of North Carolina, Susan Collins of Maine, Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Mitt Romney of Utah, Ben Sasse of Nebraska and Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania all voted guilty.

The vote means the Senate cannot bar Trump from holding future federal offices.

Moments after the vote concluded, the former president issued a statement praising his legal team and thanking the senators and other members of Congress "who stood proudly for the Constitution we all revere and for the sacred legal principles at the heart of our country."

The Senate on Saturday voted to acquit former President Donald Trump on a charge of incitement of insurrection largely along party lines, bringing an end to the fourth impeachment trial in U.S. history and the second for Trump. Only seven Republicans voted to convict Trump for allegedly inciting the deadly Jan. 6 riot at the Capitol, when a mob of pro-Trump supporters tried to disrupt the electoral vote count formalizing Joe Biden's election win before a joint session of Congress. The final vote was 57 to 43, far short of the 67 votes needed to secure a conviction. Republican Sens. Richard Burr of North Carolina, Susan Collins of Maine, Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Mitt Romney of Utah, Ben Sasse of Nebraska and Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania all voted guilty. The vote means the Senate cannot bar Trump from holding future federal offices. Moments after the vote concluded, the former president issued a statement praising his legal team and thanking the senators and other members of Congress "who stood proudly for the Constitution we all revere and for the sacred legal principles at the heart of our country."

(post is archived)

[–] 3 pts (edited )

I had this argument with a liberal acquaintance recently, and she sent me a study from JAMA. Now, for context, I'd made the claim that no clinical trials of mRNA vaccines had every been performed on humans. This is the thing with liberals...you can't let them get you wrong on even the most irrelevant detail, or they'll gloat. The fact is, they did test these on humans, but this is also where you have to wind up explaining to someone what clinical trials are.

The trial took place for 2 months (Nov and Dec) last year, and these 60 days were supposed to comprise full Phase I-IV trials. That's a joke. It typically takes much, much longer to get through these things. Especially for a technology that's never been tested on humans prior to this, the idea they were deemed safe after 2 months is ludicrous. But for the liberal NPC, if the publication says the trials were completed, then that's that. In that person's mind, the authority said it, and so it is truth.

If we base the possibility for future adverse effects on the mice studies, we could expect these things to start causing problems months from now - possibly 6-12 months or something before we'd start seeing the effects.

I've got a feeling that there is going to be another 'health crisis' later this year. They won't blame it on vaccines, and they won't tolerate any of us blaming it on vaccines. You'll be labeled a conspiracy theorist and they'll point to the JAMA study to back them up. The fact will be that COVID was used to justify the vaccine, and the vaccine will be the true result of an actual health crisis. Still, it will be blamed on another pandemic cause, some microscopic enemy because that's the new form of terrorism for this decade (and perhaps longer).

[+] [deleted] 1 pt
[–] 0 pt

But for the liberal NPC, if the publication says the trials were completed, then that's that. In that person's mind, the authority said it, and so it is truth.

God damnit if that's not the truth. They read the "conclusions/results" section of a study and spout it as fact without even considering the methods or statistical analysis. I've seen dipshits parrot statistically-insignificant findings (p >0.05) as if they were proven-fact, never mind the bullshit methods.

For example, CDC is now saying 2 masks prevent transmission of covid by up to 96% in trials. What were the trials? They sprayed particles of KCl (potassium chloride) ranging in size from 0.1-7 μm at fucking dummies with masks on. So not only did they not spray particles similar in size of the virus (~20 nm, 1/5 the size of the smallest particle used in testing), but HOW DO YOU TEST TRANSMISSION TO A FUCKING DUMMY EVEN IF YOU'RE SPRAYING VIRAL PARTICLES LET ALONE SALT SPRAY!?!?

But yea... I still see assholes wearing two masks, showing me the meme of pissing on others without pants on vs. pissing with pants on as if liquids and aerosols are even close to comparable. My go-to reply is "oh yea I bet you think no one can smell your farts because you're wearing pants and underwear huh?"

Which is actually a great analogy for double masking. Fart particles are way bigger than covid aerosols.