Thread by @DYShor

There’s been lots of focus on the discriminatory nature of the New York restrictions, and their thuggishness.

But not enough was said about the manipulation of the statistics/numbers, so let’s do that:

At first they were going to be specific zip-codes nytimes.com/2020/10/04/nyr…

Then Andrew Cuomo decided to make the lines based on what he said were the “cluster-zones” nypost.com/2020/10/06/cuo…. These red-zones mostly followed the zip-codes, with minor adjustments to include specific Jewish neighborhoods, while excluding non-Jewish sections. (((Yes, !!!)))

At the time, the targeting of the Jewish neighborhoods by itself seemed to be the only evil motivation here. But with time, it became clear that it wasn’t all.

Cuomo wanted to make sure this lockdown would be prolonged; so he departed from the zip-code metric.

In other words: While it was the higher positivity rate for these specific zip-codes that was used as the basis for the second lockdown, reopening would only be able to occur once the entire “cluster-zone” was below whatever ever-changing threshold.

To do so, the city simply stopped releasing the same data that was used to trigger the second lockdown. No more positivity percentage for the 7-day rolling average can be found on city databases. Rather only a 28 day (!) average. politico.com/states/new-yor…

So the (((red-zones))) are now being kept hostage, to no data, and the local elected officials @SEichenstein @ChaimDeutsch @KalmanYeger are rightly fuming hamodia.com/2020/10/25/exc…