The Second Term of Donald J. Trump as President of the United States of America

Shiftless2 said:
An expanded version of #3,515

A blocked COVID vaccine study has finally been published.

The study, published in JAMA Network Open, looked at how well the 2025-2026 COVID vaccine protected adults during the latest season of infections.

Researchers found that the updated vaccine was about 55% effective against COVID-related hospitalization and about 50% effective against COVID-related emergency department or urgent care visits.

That does not mean vaccinated people could not get infected. It means that, among adults who sought care for COVID-like illness, those who had received the updated vaccine were less likely to test positive for COVID than those who had not.

The study drew extra attention because it was originally expected to appear in the CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, one of the agency’s main public health publications. But Trump administration political appointees raised concerns about the study design and it did not run there.

The method, called a test-negative design, is widely used in vaccine research. It compares people who seek medical care for similar symptoms, then looks at who tests positive and who tests negative, and how vaccination rates differ between the groups.

Critics argue the method depends on assumptions that could skew results. Supporters say it is one of the best available tools for tracking vaccine effectiveness in real time, especially when viruses evolve and population immunity keeps changing.

The findings themselves are not especially surprising. COVID vaccines have repeatedly been shown to reduce the risk of severe illness, especially hospitalization.

But the controversy around this paper points to something bigger.

Public health depends not only on collecting data, but on publishing it clearly, quickly, and transparently so people can understand the risks and make informed decisions.

Read the study:

“Interim Estimated Effectiveness of 2025-2026 COVID-19 Vaccines in Adults Using a Test-Negative Design.” JAMA Network Open.


SOURCE
Click to expand...

Wrong.
By making our own cells grow spike proteins, the immune system then has to kill those damaged cells.
So for 2 weeks after an mRNA injection, the immune system is hyped up on overdrive.
But after 2 weeks, there is not a single recorded response to the mRNA injection other than damage, such as blood clots.

Use your own knowledge.
Spike proteins open up ACE2 receptors into our cells because our own exosomes need to use spike proteins in order to be let in.
So spike proteins can not be used as an epitope to identify a pathogen.
And since all mRNA does is make our own cells grow spike proteins, there can not possibly be any immunity information learned from mRNA injections.
 
Shiftless2 said:
View attachment 5561
Click to expand...

{...
The majority, composed of Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Amy Coney Barrett, and Ketanji Brown Jackson, determined that birth on U.S. soil plus being subject to U.S. law is enough for citizenship.
...
Several dissenters, including Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, say birth alone is not enough — the child’s parents must have a deeper political allegiance or relationship to the U.S.

Jackson’s direct disagreement with Thomas’ dissent highlights a major rift between the legal minds. Here are the justices in their own words:

Chief Justice John Roberts​

Much of Roberts’ opinion was a history lesson on English common law, in which he concluded that birthright citizenship has always depended primarily on birthplace — not on parents’ immigration status or domicile.

“Citizenship, then and now, was the right to have rights — to freely participate in our political community. The Framers of the Fourteenth Amendment extended that promise to ‘every free-born person in this land,’” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the court, citing congressional debate over the amendment, “We keep that promise today.”

“We break no new ground today,” Roberts said on the bench as he read the court’s majority opinion.

Justice Clarence Thomas​

Thomas, who wrote the main dissent, disagreed with the majority’s opinion and argued that American-born children are not automatically American citizens.

The basis of his argument, among other things, is that the court ignored evidence from Reconstruction debates that suggested citizenship depended on a deeper relationship to the country. After the Civil War, the U.S. underwent a series of political and constitutional battles over how to define the civil rights and citizenship status of formerly enslaved Black Americans.
...}
https://apnews.com/article/supreme-...constitution-6541b7ffa208162f482fd33dfd1798b6
 
1782936425148.png

BREAKING: In Fourth Federal Appeals Court Rejects Trump's Mass Detention Scheme

A federal appeals court in Denver just delivered another major blow to Trump's immigration crackdown, becoming the fourth circuit court in the country to reject ICE's attempt to detain millions of people without bond.

The unanimous three judge panel, appointed by presidents from both parties, ruled that the Trump administration twisted a decades old law to justify locking up people who have lived in the United States for years with no criminal record.

The judges did not hold back. They wrote that thousands of people are being subjected to detention under a reading of the law that has never been used this way before, and that the fight is almost certainly headed to the Supreme Court.

This is not an isolated ruling. More than 460 federal judges across the country have now rejected the Trump administration's approach in over 9,500 cases. Only 54 judges have sided with the administration.

Four circuit courts have now ruled against Trump's policy. Only two have sided with him. The math is not close, and it is not partisan. Judges appointed by Reagan, Obama, and Biden all agreed on this panel that the administration overstepped the law.

For nearly a year, ICE has been detaining people without the chance to prove to a judge that they pose no threat and belong in their communities. Courts across the country are now saying, over and over again, that this policy is illegal.

The Trump administration already asked the Supreme Court to step in. When it does, it will be facing a wall of judges from across the political spectrum who have told them the same thing again and again: this is not how the law works.

SOURCE with comments
 
Shiftless2 said:
View attachment 5563

BREAKING: In Fourth Federal Appeals Court Rejects Trump's Mass Detention Scheme

A federal appeals court in Denver just delivered another major blow to Trump's immigration crackdown, becoming the fourth circuit court in the country to reject ICE's attempt to detain millions of people without bond.

The unanimous three judge panel, appointed by presidents from both parties, ruled that the Trump administration twisted a decades old law to justify locking up people who have lived in the United States for years with no criminal record.

The judges did not hold back. They wrote that thousands of people are being subjected to detention under a reading of the law that has never been used this way before, and that the fight is almost certainly headed to the Supreme Court.

This is not an isolated ruling. More than 460 federal judges across the country have now rejected the Trump administration's approach in over 9,500 cases. Only 54 judges have sided with the administration.

Four circuit courts have now ruled against Trump's policy. Only two have sided with him. The math is not close, and it is not partisan. Judges appointed by Reagan, Obama, and Biden all agreed on this panel that the administration overstepped the law.

For nearly a year, ICE has been detaining people without the chance to prove to a judge that they pose no threat and belong in their communities. Courts across the country are now saying, over and over again, that this policy is illegal.

The Trump administration already asked the Supreme Court to step in. When it does, it will be facing a wall of judges from across the political spectrum who have told them the same thing again and again: this is not how the law works.

SOURCE with comments
Click to expand...

What I do not understand is that when I see demonstrators at ICE facilities, the police are still on the wrong side.
The judges all say ICE is wrong, so then why do the police not start arresting ICE?
 
1782990890464.png

While many people agree with his sentiments protesting while in uniform is in violation of the UCMJ.

Definitely a career ending move so was he making a brave statement or was this simply an act of stupidity?
 
1783015294820.png

MAGA went from “protecting babies” to “what if we just sterilize foreigners and hunt down pregnant women” in record time — and they’re saying the quiet part out loud now.

After the Supreme Court upheld birthright citizenship, Trump-world’s response wasn’t to accept the Constitution — it was to start spitballing fascism. A top MAGA media boss openly floated “sterilization of all foreign visitors” and banning all pregnant foreigners from entering the U.S., because nothing says “pro-life” like forced medical procedures on anyone who isn’t white and GOP-voting. Trump’s orbit is also cheering on expanded powers to deny visas and block pregnant women at the border under the guise of cracking down on “birth tourism,” a playbook they already started running the last time he was in office.

These people swear they’re defending the “sanctity of life” and “protecting women and girls” — right up until a woman is brown, foreign, pregnant, or inconvenient to their white nationalist project. Then suddenly it’s all surveillance, interrogations, and state violence. They want consular officers and border agents deciding who looks pregnant, who gets a visa, and who gets branded a criminal for daring to give birth on the wrong side of their imaginary line.

This was never about Jesus, morality, or family values. It was always about cruelty as a governing strategy: terrorize communities of color, make daily life so dangerous and humiliating that people “self-deport,” and call it “law and order.” If your movement’s first instinct after losing a constitutional fight is “okay, but what if we sterilize them or ban every pregnant woman at the border,” you’re not pro-life — you’re just pro-dominance, pro-racism, and proudly anti-human.

SOURCE
 
1783081964591.png

The administration that runs its mouth for a living just found out the hard way that a federal judge was writing it all down. A court blocked Pete Hegseth's Pentagon press restrictions and cited his own insults about reporters as the reason.

As reported by MS NOW and confirmed by Deadline and the Washington Times, U.S. District Judge Paul Friedman granted an injunction stopping the Pentagon from forcing journalists to have a government escort at all times while inside the building.

In his 35-page ruling, Friedman pointed directly at Hegseth's own words as evidence the policy was retaliation rather than security. He quoted the Defense Secretary calling press coverage an "endless stream of garbage" and referring to the "legacy Trump-hating press," and described "a consistent stream of derisive comments beginning shortly after the confirmation of Secretary Hegseth and continuing through the present."

The Pentagon's argument was that reporters roaming the halls might stumble onto classified secrets. The judge took that apart line by line. Civilians who staff the Pentagon's dry cleaners, coffee shops, and food counters walk the same halls every day with no escort.

So Friedman asked the obvious question in writing: why would the timing of a reporter's question make an official more likely to spill classified information? "Is the implication that a Department official is more likely to divulge such information while, say, in line at Starbucks?"

Then he delivered the line that ended it. "The notion that reporters should be treated worse than baristas, short order cooks, dry cleaners, or any other civilians given access to the Pentagon, surely is a perverse reading of the First Amendment."

Here is the part that makes it worse for Hegseth. This is not the first time. It is the third.

This same judge struck down Hegseth's original press crackdown in March. When the Pentagon rewrote the rule to get around him, Friedman blocked that too in April. Hegseth appealed, got a temporary reprieve, wrote a new version, and just lost again.

He kept talking. The judge kept quoting him. And every insult Hegseth threw at the press became another sentence in the ruling against him.

Turns out the loudest guy in the room makes the easiest case to lose.

SOURCE
 
Shiftless2 said:
"While many people agree with his sentiments protesting while in uniform is in violation of the UCMJ.
Definitely a career ending move so was he making a brave statement or was this simply an act of stupidity?" S2 #3,527
Click to expand...
U.S. military officers are encouraged to cultivate leadership skills.
In that context the standout here is that he's alone.

Stupidity might explain it.
I'm not sure that's the Ockham's Razor explanation.

Perhaps he has decided to avoid the conflict of having to disobey an unlawful order.

Whether the UCMJ exemption from this First Amendment right is modified by an officer's retirement is unclear.

Contemptuous Speech: Rethinking the Balance Between Good Order and Discipline and the Free Speech Rights of Retired Military Officers | Harvard National Security Journal

harvardnsj.org harvardnsj.org

The potentially catastrophic bottom line here is, though it may not happen before lunchtime today, Trump may be sowing the seed of future U.S. military incompetence.

Sensible citizens that might otherwise have enjoyed a career as a U.S. military officer may not. Thus Trump's "America First" may continue to do unfathomable detriment to the United States of America.

S2 3,527 ref: "UCMJ": Uniform Code of Military Justice

§888. Art. 88. Contempt toward officials​

Any commissioned officer who uses contemptuous words against the President, the Vice President, Congress, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of a military department, the Secretary of Homeland Security, or the Governor or legislature of
any State, Commonwealth, or possession in which he is on duty or present shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.
 
Shiftless2 said:
Either that or remove them from office

View attachment 5573
Click to expand...

I believe this is about ending birth right citizenship, which I think is really foolish since it is only birthright citizenship that allows anyone but native American Indians to be citizens at all.
I believe the Europeans lost rights by committing genocide and land theft.
Their ancestors only have birthright citizenship.
 
Shiftless2 said:
Walking while black ....

View attachment 5575
Click to expand...

{...

Nigerian nun arrested in Texas by ICE on her way to mass regains freedom after political intervention​

  • US immigration officers arrested Nigerian Roman Catholic nun Sister Leticia Ugboaja while she was walking to a Sunday mass in South Texas
  • The unexpected detention triggered immediate concern from her parish church before both Democratic and Republican lawmakers stepped in to assist her
  • Federal officials released the dedicated religious sister hours later following the swift political intervention, allowing her to return safely to her home
A Nigerian Catholic nun, Sister Leticia Ugboaja, has regained her freedom after being arrested by US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) while walking to Sunday Mass in McAllen, Texas.

She was released hours later following intervention from both Democratic and Republican lawmakers, as reported by The Guardian.

The church where she serves, Our Lady of Sorrows, confirmed that she was detained in a Facebook post on June 29, while heading to Mass dressed in her religious habit

Parish leaders asked members to pray for her safety and swift release.
...
At Our Lady of Sorrows, she volunteers as an extraordinary minister of holy communion. Beyond her church duties, she is also a registered nurse at South Texas Health System.

Riojas confirmed that she previously worked for a decade as a certified nursing assistant at DHR Health in Edinburg, Texas, as reported by The Guardian.
...}
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top