COVID-19 reporting is getting looser, shoddier, and more confusing.
Example: actual number of Americans who will be vaccinated for COVID-19 in 2020: 0.
Vaccination isn't complete until you receive a second injection 21 days after the first, which no one will prior to next year.
Excitement over the vaccine produces misleading reports.
Example: Fauci says "open season" for the vaccine will begin in April—implying that anyone who wants it will be able to get it then.
In fact there's no plan to vaccinate more than a million people—0.3% of Americans—daily.
There's a hyperbolic optimism to much vaccine rhetoric I find unnerving.
Example: Biden has an ambitious plan to vaccinate 100 million people by April 20—which means full efficacy for those vaccinations by May 20. Good! But that's only 30% of America. Herd immunity requires 70%.
When I hear Bill Gates say America will be back to normal this summer, I feel I'm being lied to by someone infantilizing Americans by disrespecting their intelligence. We're adding a quarter of a million new infections daily—and will every day until Fauci's "open season" begins.
In other words, the amount of virus that will be in America when the vaccine begins being received by the general population—which includes the folks most likely to spread the virus and least likely to accept a vaccine for it—is so staggeringly large the Gates timeline is a joke.
I'm thrilled we have a working vaccine. I'm terrified that the hyperbolic rhetoric surrounding it—and the farcical timeline leaders are giving to the public—will cause almost the whole country to let its guard down when we've only reached the end of the beginning of the pandemic.
Anyone who wants to keep themselves and their family and friends and community and nation safe should be quietly excited about this vaccine—while planning for the COVID-19 pandemic to be kicking the living hell out of America for all of 2021. Remain wary of politicians' optimism.
As for media, think about how important it is that it gets its terminology correct: *not one doctor in America* wants anyone who's received only one shot to consider themselves "vaccinated." The vaccination process with Pfizer is a 3-week process. But media ignores that subtlety.
Media and government apparatuses working hand-in-hand during a national emergency would have their messaging down.
We don't.
Instead, we have doctors and media using the word "vaccination" differently and have doctors using metaphors ("open season") that don't reflect reality.
Here's how responsible journalism would represent what's happening: an infinitesimally small percentage of at-risk Americans will begin the COVID-19 vaccination process in 2020 and complete it in 2021. Herd immunity in the US may be unattainable—but at a minimum will take a year.
If you turn on the news, what you will hear, instead, is that America has reached the beginning of the end and that the vaccine is "here." The fact that that is all empty rhetoric inconsistent with the logistics of vaccine deployment takes a backseat to the importance of ratings.
Meanwhile, both political parties have a vested interest in projecting a level of optimism about how quickly we can return to normal that bears no relationship to the hard mathematical realities of vaccine deployment, our growing infection/death toll, or the state of our economy.
*Everyone*—including me—agrees that first responders and the elderly should get the vaccine first. We *also* must understand that these aren't the super-spreaders. The real spreaders will start getting vaccinated at a glacial pace in April or else refuse to be vaccinated at all.
Understand that I'm not trying to be negative. In fact I think that if America can return to normal by mid-2022—a little over 24 months after the virus hit our nation hard—it'll be a wonderful miracle, given that we had a president who basically tried to kill everyone for a year.
Anyone who doubts the basic math and logistics of this thread should feel free to look at how long it took other countries to get the pandemic under control when those countries had an *infinitesimal fraction* of our outbreak, *total community buy-in*, and *competent* governance.
So confusing.
1) "By the summer we'll be way closer to normal than we are now." 2) "For 9 months—starting in the summer—big public gatherings will be restricted." 3) "12 to 18 months [from now] we have a chance—if we manage it well—to get back to normal."
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Dr. Fauci's timeline has 100 million getting vaccinated in the first 108 days (925,000/day), then 130 million getting vaccinated in the next 91 days (1.4 million/day). No one can explain how—as we get into the population hostile to vaccination—we'll be vaccinating 50% more daily.
(PS) We were previously told that vaccine shortages may appear in May/June because Trump didn't order enough vaccine. Now we're told May and June will see *50% more daily vaccinations* than the first 108 days. Sadly, no one is out front explaining such discrepancies to Americans.
(PS2) I hope the vaccine timeline goes as planned, and that 70% is in fact enough for herd immunity. But avid news-watchers are starting to see discrepancies in the rhetoric surrounding the timeline that no one is explaining, producing concern we're being sold a too-rosy picture.
235 million must be vaccinated for us to have a shot at herd immunity. Biden says we can vaccinate 1 million daily. The vaccine takes 30 days to have full effect. Herd immunity is therefore impossible until 8+ months from now.
(PS) My last tweet laid out *none* of the obstacles that would make even that 8+ month timeline impossible—like vaccine shortages, people not returning for the second shot, resistance to getting vaccinated, logistical hurdles at the state level. Again—what is Fauci talking about?
(UPDATE) Reuters and the government confirm that at *best* we can vaccinate 1 million/day. Reuters reports that 109 days from now, we'll have 100 million people vaccinated. The idea we can have 235+ million vaccinated in well under 200 days makes no sense. google.com/amp/s/www.usne…
UPDATE: I said that Dallas' "Allied Security Operations Group"—behind the disinformation-fueled attack on Michigan's certification for Biden—would be traced to Flynn.
Well, one of the men who headed it until days ago "served as an intelligence operations leader under DIA Flynn."
PS: So Trump *pardoned* Michael Flynn *in the midst of* a longtime Flynn associate being part of the management of an entity working to undermine Biden's win in Michigan—and found by Michigan officials to have lied about elections data. Cybersecurity-scam-for-pardon bribery case?
PS2: What I'm not sure of yet is whether any Michael Flynn associates/Donald Trump mega-donors in Dallas—where Allied Security Operations Group is headquartered—were paying ASOG to conduct this "research" or urged Kraft's name to be removed from ASOG to hide the linkage to Flynn.
BREAKING: Trump Agent Stephen Miller Says Fraudulent Trump Electors Will Continue to Claim Trump Is the Rightful President Through *At Least January 20*—2 Weeks *After* Congress Votes to Accept Biden's Legally Valid Battleground-State Electors on January 6 thedailybeast.com/brian-kilmeade…
You may recall that I expressed significant alarm over former CNN analyst and current Trump campaign official Steve Cortes claiming in a Twitter-posted video that the Trump campaign considers *January 20, 2021* the only significant date with respect to electors.
Now we know why.
The reason this is significant is that it means the Trump campaign does not consider the decision of Congress on January 6, 2021 to be the final word on who will be the next President of the United States—even though by *statute and Constitution* it is. This is a seditious claim.
18 USC § 2385 criminalizes "organizing any assembly of persons who advocate the overthrow of the government by force"—and distinguishes "force" from "violence."
The White House has organized fraudulent electors to block the democratically elected government from taking office.
(PS) I can't ascertain the scope of the word "force" in this statute (except that we can be statutorily sure it does *not* mean "violence") but creating a scenario—contra a Supreme Court ruling—in which there could be a hostile standoff at the White House on Jan. 20 may well fit.
(PS2) As a lawyer I'd tend to interpret "force" as meaning "unlawful compulsion short of violence" when it appears in a statute that deals with violence as a separate category. An unlawful attempt to retain the White House contra SCOTUS would be "force" under this interpretation.
BREAKING: Sidney Powell—Trump's Lawyer Until Days Ago, Still Arguing on His Behalf in Court—Just Retweeted a Message Saying "Biden and Harris [Must] Not Only Concede But Also Confess Their Crimes on National Television in Order to Avoid Capital Punishment"
PS/ Releasing Powell from his legal team so he could more readily and cleanly pardon her client Michael Flynn is no longer sufficient for Trump: he must publicly disassociate himself from her words—lest her advocacy for him in court be taken as *his* advocacy for executing Biden.
EVIDENCE/ Today's events in Washington and elsewhere should have the Secret Service and FBI and other key agencies working significant overtime over the next few weeks—and media demanding Trump *personally* and *publicly* put a stop to this dangerous, threatening rhetoric *now*.