robinsonreport.substack.com/p/…
"What the F*&%!?" Janet Mills Freaks Out When Questioned Over Cocaine Use
Watch now | Maine Gov. Janet Mills lost her cool on a Fox News reporter who asked her about re-surfaced allegations that she was a heavy cocaine user in the 1980s and 1990s, including while a District Attorney.The Robinson Report
Marc Veldhoen
in reply to Marc Veldhoen • • •2/5
Marc Veldhoen
in reply to Marc Veldhoen • • •"It's embarrassing for the United States and it makes me incredibly sad."
"When you're up to 90% of those populations being vaccinated, of course you're going to have perceived over-representation of that population winding up in the hospital with COVID,"
My god..... the level.
3/5
Marc Veldhoen
in reply to Marc Veldhoen • • •4/5
Marc Veldhoen
in reply to Marc Veldhoen • • •5/5
Bilal Barakat 🍉
in reply to Marc Veldhoen • • •Exactly this. There was a recent article (in The New Yorker?*) arguing that, in distinction to the “space lasers” branch of the Right, someone like RFK does debate in something of a reasonable or even scientific style, because he does refer to studies, evaluations, and research.
But in reality it's all superficial half-truths. A prime example being pointers to the total number of self-reported adverse effects of Covid vaccines, for example, and claiming those are “the most for any drug ever”. But without understanding that the severity measure, for instance, is relative to each type of symptom, so that, for instance, you might have entries for “severe abdominal discomfort”. Obviously it is NOT in fact “scientific" in any way to juxtapose that kind of number with the risk of an equally (terminology-wise) “severe” case of the actual disease, where “severe" means you ended up in the ICU, just because both are statistics.
Point being: there is nothing scientific to merely pointing to studies and statistics without understanding what they actually mean and say.
* I remembered correctly:
newyorker.com/magazine/2025/05…