Author: Spocko

I learned many troubling things about the Secret Service from Carol Leonnig’s book and during her virtual book interview with Michael Krasny hosted by Book Passage (Video link) Leonnig makes it clear that politicized members of the Secret Service played an active role in spreading COVID.  Specifically Tony Ornato, who went from protecting Trump as a Secret Service agent to promoting Trump as his Deputy Chief of Staff in charge of the rallies.

Leonning explained on her book tour that Congress and the White House are “allergic” to investigating the Secret Service. But if we are to keep the current President and VP safe post January 6th. there needs to be an investigation to see who can be trusted.

I did some simple research and found out the Secret Service is under the Department of Homeland Security, The House committee that would investigate them is chaired by a Democrat, Bennie G. Thompson, so I wrote to see if they were planning on investigating the role senior members of agency played in spreading COVID, or in covering up for Trump’s campaign staff’s reckless disregard for the health of agents, officers and the general public.

We need to push for this. If we don’t, the committee will be pushed by the right on “the border crisis” and then all the hard work done revealing the problems will be covered up.  When I suggested an investigation my friends were quick to point out all the ways that Trump will “get away with it” Or ask “Why bother? We have a better chance of busting Trump for tax fraud.”  Because people died! When they get away with murder, they will keep doing it.

Here’s my letter.  If you would like to see an investigation happen you can help by asking the members on the committee. (They are listed below. I’d especially like to alert those in New Jersey where Trump’s Bedminster club is located that Leonnig said agents were told not to wear masks, in violation of CDC guidelines & state laws.

========================

Rep. Bennie G. Thompson, (D) MS
Chairman, House Committee on Homeland Security 

On Oct 5, 2020 you requested a briefing from the Secret Service agency on the current safeguards in place for Secret Service employees to be kept safe from coronavirus-related threats–including those from the President.
(CHAIRMAN THOMPSON STATEMENT ON TRUMP’S DISREGARD FOR HEALTH OF PUBLIC, SECRET SERVICE)

1) What was the response to your request? Was it satisfactory?

2) As the Chairman of the group that oversees the agency, will you convene a hearing to investigate it based on the reporting from Carol Leonnig’s recent book Zero Fail?

3) I’m specifically concerned about the role played by Tony Ornato while he was Trump’s Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations during the COVID rallies. Ornato has returned to the Secret Service in a training capacity, so he is under the purview of your committee for oversight.

Carol Leonnig’s reporting has shown over 300 agents were infected or taken off the line because of exposure to co-workers with COVID. (Video link) This weakened the ability of the agency to do its job.

4) Leonnig said that there is definitive proof that the Tulsa rally led to a 4-fold spike in COVID cases in the community.  (Video link)

Is your committee looking into whose actions led to this unnecessary illness and loss of life following that event and others in multiple states?

8) If there is no investigation planned by your committee, are you aware of other committees that are looking into the role of the Secret Service in spreading COVID nationwide?

LLAP,

Spocko

Rep. Tom Malinowski, (D) NJ 7th District Trump’s Bedminster Golf Club is located in Malinowski’s district @RepMalinowski

I’ve been a fan of animated science explainers since “Hemo the Magnificent*” so of COURSE I was going to love this explainer video by Dr. MarkAlain Dery, an infectious disease physician, and Dr. Eric Griggs, a community health specialist. Watch as they journey inside the human body to explain COVID-19 vaccines!

It has the whole Fantastic Voyage “tiny humans in a body” action which I love. It gives visuals for people to lock onto to understand what is happening with the MRNA vaccines. If you want more details watch him on the Majority Report. He answers a lot of questions about what is happening with the vaccines and discusses why we might be needing booster shots.

I’m a huge fan of Dr. Dery because he talks about the science behind viral epidemics and ALSO how society responds to them.

To get the message out about an effective response to COVID we need to do more than just tell people the truth. We must understand where people get their information from and figure out how to reach different audiences with different concerns.

(Dr. Dery @thedrdery mentioned he is working on a book on the history of discrimination in medicine. We need to understand how racism, misogyny, trans and homo phobia in medicine impacts our responses so we can address them.)

People and organizations are actively working to confuse people about vaccines.

The Government is hesitant to crack down of dangerous misinformation. Asking social media organizations to do this is a problem since they generate revenue through siloed sharing of any type of information.

The government likes to fund positive actions and using gimmicks like vaccination lotteries which are apparently very successful.
(Ohio hits highest vaccination rate in weeks after offering $1m lottery prize)
I happily support those efforts, but the government also needs to bust people for spreading disinformation. On that front I suggest you listen to this GREAT interview with Imran Ahmed, the CEO, of the Center for Countering Digital Hate on Matt Binder’s Doomed Podcast.

I learned about @imi_ahmed and @CCDHate back in March when they exposed the 12 people behind vaccine disinformation (The Disinformation Dozen. PDF link)
He explained how they profited from it and how to stop them. If you want to hear the short version, listen to NPR, which finally got around to talking to him May 7th,

You should know that Matt Binder is months ahead of all media on stories like this. I was on his show in April Hit ‘Em Where It Hurts: How to Defund the Right (w/ Spocko) explaining how the Spocko Method cost right wing media 100’s of millions in lost ad revenue and how to use it today. Multiple independent listeners said it was informative, funny and riveting.)

Hemo the Magnificent* was the second of nine Bell Lab videos that were produced in the late 1950’s . Four of them, including Hemo, were written and directed by Frank Capra. They had a huge impact on me, I can still quote lines from Hemo to this day. “Sea water.”

Today we aren’t just fighting the COVID virus, we are also fighting the vicious virus of misinformation. We need to defeat that too.

Anyone else notice there are no photos of Biden with Trump since he lost the election? Trump doesn’t want anyone to see photographic proof he was beaten by Biden and that he’s a loser. I think VP Harris should set up a lunch with Trump to show he was beaten by Biden and a woman!

One of the constructs in the mind of right wingers is the need to show people the right way to treat your defeated opponents to prove your manliness. You make them grovel. You boast. You point at them and laugh like Nelson Muntz. HA HA! I won! You lost!

It’s what CONAN the Barbarian says is best in life.

In video games you teabag your opponent. (I just found out that teabagging dated back to 1985 NWA World Championship wrestling which makes it even more on brand for Trumpsters. )

Trump has made it clear that he holds grudges and is vindictive. I still remember Richard Branson talking about his lunch with Trump. Apparently he spent the whole time talking about how he was going to spend the rest of his life destroying the people who didn’t help him get out of bankruptcy. (I wonder who those people are. Have they been destroyed? )

We see how DJT continues to use the GOP’s fear of crossing him.  He wants people to be afraid of what happens to them when they don’t help him or suck up to him. This strategy is still paying off for Trump post his election defeat.

Biden isn’t going to get Trump into a lunch photo op where he can grin and make him admit publicly he lost. Biden says that we shouldn’t treat our political opponents like enemies.

For a normal political opponent that would be the right thing to do, but when your political opponent is a lawbreaking, thieving, insurrection inciting, narcissistic you need to think about other ways to deal with them.

Set up the video, present the evidence, prepare for the evasion

What I’ve noticed is that the only time DJT admits the truth is under oath during a deposition. So that is what it is going to take in this case. I don’t know what will be the occasion for Trump to admit, under oath, he lost the election–but we should be looking for it. Maybe Georgia’s Attorney General can get in a question about this during that case. (And by we I mean voting rights activists, since the Biden administration isn’t going to do this. The national media won’t do this either. Maybe we can get some secretly recorded video, but that won’t be under oath.)

I want to make clear that the reason we need to do this is NOT to humiliate Trump, although that would be a nice side benefit, but because we must have some visual evidence from him to throw at his base.

“TRUMP admitted he lost! Here’s video proof!”

This video evidence can be used like we have been using the story of Trump being vaccinated to get his base vaccinated “Even Trump got the vaccine!”

We know that we COULD have had video evidence of Trump getting vaccinated, but he didn’t allow himself to get photographed getting the vaccine. It’s important to acknowledge that Trump and his staff knew the power of that visual, yet they chose not to set up a video and show it to his base. (Yet another example of Trump intentionally deciding that more COVID deaths will happen.)

Every day we don’t have video evidence of Trump acknowledging his loss is another day factually wrong statements about the election can be pushed by him to the media. The media need visuals, accepted by his base, to bring to his base.

Even the right wing media need something if they want to be in the general vicinity of the truth. The MSM can use it on Republicans when they are talking about voter suppression laws. And as I said, we need Trump acknowledging this under oath. Because as Corey Lewandowski told us he has no obligation to be honest to the media. Remember, Trump is not under oath talking to the media.

Anything the reporters bring up to him can be questioned. No one he talks to in the media will even pin him down with anything that is certified. Now he’s working on creating his OWN “alternative facts” to keep the doubt going that the press WILL talk to him about.

This whole process reminds me of how Trump used Obama’s birth location to constantly sow doubt about Obama’s legitimacy. Nothing was good enough for Trump, ‘That’s not the long form birth certificate! It’s different than a certificate of live birth!”

Then, when the long form was provided, people still questioned the validity of the actual document.

They developed a trick to avoid having the validity of the evidence come out of their own mouths. When asked, “Is Obama a citizen?” They responded, “I take him at his word.” That dodge allowed them to not mention their personal acceptance of the validity of the evidence and shifted the burden to the person who is giving their word.  Which can then imply uncertainty about character of the person, “Just how good is his word?”

The media falls for all this because of their need to be “fair & balanced” and a desire for good faith responses. Because it’s not a crime to lie to the media, the GOP keeps dragging this out. You would think that after four years the media would be better trained and prepared for this level of manipulation, but they keep “leaving it there” so they can return to it next week.

The media still expect Trump to follow the norms they believe in. But Trump is following norms. They just happen to be the ones that criminals and many rich and powerful people use.

We need to understand what finally gets these types of people to admit defeat. We need to understand what proof they will accept that shows that defeat.

We need to use some of the right’s own measurements to show them that their leader has lost. If we don’t, they won’t stop pretending they are still the winners.

We need to take steps to make this video evidence happen. Then we need to rub that evidence in the faces of their supporters. It’s what’s best in life.

#Leftisbest

On Wednesday’s Senate hearing on dark money’s influence on the Judiciary, Oxford-educated attorney Sen. John Kennedy played his, “I’m just a Southern hick” character.
He pushed the idea that if the dark money isn’t a bribe, it’s okay.

Lisa Graves schooled him. He cut her off.

Sen. Kennedy knows that millions in dark money don’t go out to people in brown paper bags of cash. But pretending that’s the only way the judicial system is influenced is part of his corn porn act. (Or is it corn pone? I don’t know, I didn’t graduate from Oxford with first class honours. I’m just a simple Vulcan from the 23rd Century)

I watched the whole Senate hearing, March 10, 2021.
What’s Wrong with the Supreme Court: The Big-Money Assault on Our Judiciary

Lisa provided a through brief with details that Sen Whitehouse praised.
The right pushed a false equivalency narrative, whined that the dark money on the left is bigger and pretended that the only way to influence people is with huge bags of cash.

The “both sides use massive amounts of dark money to influence the Judiciary” line of BS came from Cruz, Tillis, and Lee. (I would include clips of Cruz, but he makes my skin crawl.)

Finally, at the end of the session Senator Blumenthal asked Graves a question that let her point out just how big Leonard Leo and the Federalist Society’s influence was/is on the judicial system.

I’m glad there was a hearing. I learned a lot, just from Graves’ opening remarks, which I annotated here.

Sen. Whitehouse pointed out that this is the first hearing of its kind. I want to see more and I want more than just a show. I want to see action.

Lisa Graves addressed this in her response to the demand by Ted “My longtime friend Leonard Leo” Cruz that groups on the left instantly disclose donors, without doing the same for groups on the right.

But what matters is that if we had this disclosure, we would all know definitively the answer to those questions. And as Senator Hirono said, quite frankly, the only members of Congress who are supporting this kind of disclosure in HR 1 in the DISCLOSE Act in the travel bill that you propose are Democrats.

And that’s a shame because quite frankly, this should not be a partisan issue. Everyone should be in favor of this kind of transparency and the effort to try to command that a particular group, like a People for the American Way, instantly disclose their donors when there’s not the same parity, is sort of a way to have a show, but not to actually do anything to embrace and support laws that would level the playing field for everyone.

All the World’s a Zoom Meeting, How Do I UnMute?
One of the things that the late Joel Silberman and I talked about was understanding the theater that is part of these events. The means if you are doing the questioning or testifying, you should be prepared with your own narrative, and look for opportunities to shoot down their narratives. The right will use false equivalencies, bad faith arguments and unsupported data all the time. I’ve seen them use so many of the same attacks they can be anticipated, scripted and turned into a clip that I know will be picked up by MSNBC or the late night comedy shows.

But that involves thinking beyond the liberal misconception that “If we just present the facts, people will agree with us!” Make sure your facts are compelling! Don’t let them box you into their bogus frame of “both sides do it” which the press feel compelled to use no matter how ONLY ONE SIDED it is.

Messaging on an issue is about more than putting out your message, it’s also about figuring out how to dismantle theirs at every opportunity.

*Full Disclosure: Lisa is a friend of mine and I’ve worked with her before. I’m not backed by George Soros, but I would happily disclose that if I was.

On Jan 6th I knew that incitement was going to be a key issue. I found Lee Rowland, an ACLU lawyer who made a video about incitement and asked what she thought. She said she thought Trump had crossed the line.

Yes, I believe it crossed the line today.

— lee rowland (@berkitron) January 6, 2021

Last week I watched Chris Hayes’ experts praise the Impeachment brief by the House managers then attack Trump’s brief. (A typo in the first line! 14 pages of Incoherence!) But attacking Trump’s lawyers’ incompetence isn’t enough. We need to make the case to regular people who don’t understand what incitement is and what it takes to fulfill a legal definition. On the Feb 4th episode of Stay Tuned with Preet Bharara, he brought up the argument that Trump’s lawyers will make.

-Trump’s lawyers} will make some of these points beyond the procedural points, Donald Trump did not say, “Invade the Capitol.” Donald Trump did not say, “Break windows.” Donald Trump did not say, “Engage in violence.” Donald Trump did not say, “Insurrection.” He did not say, “Riot.” He didn’t say any of those things, does that make a difference? And if the impeachment lawyers on behalf of Donald Trump make that argument in full or form than I just made it, what’s the rebuttal to that?

At 36:49 Adam Schiff gives his thoughtful and articulate legal response. But Dan Goldman’s reply 40:40 is the one that hit home for me.

Goldman: [Trump] talks like a mob boss. He is not going to use those words you referenced like, “Go execute an insurrection, go riot, go storm the Capitol.” He never would actually say those words, just like a mob boss would not say, “Go kill that person.” The mob boss would say, “Can you please take care of this?” …

When he says, “Go fight.” Or, “If Mike Pence doesn’t do the right thing, bad things will happen.” That’s violent talk, everyone understands that. And if you have any question as to whether they understood it or not, just wait until we see all of the Parler videos from social media of the people who attended his rally, who were going to the Capitol and saying that the president told us to storm the Capitol. They understood what he was trying to say.

Trial 2 for Individual 1 (with Daniel Goldman and Adam Schiff)

I haven’t read the brief yet, but just now @chrislhayes discussed how hard incitement is to prove. Pls get an expert to explain what incitement is AND book someone who successfully prosecuted someone for incitement.@LenNiehoff @markfollman https://t.co/vpEh0qn9A1

— Spocko (@spockosbrain) February 3, 2021

I found this article two days later, it needs to be read and retweeted.

Yes, what President Trump did was incitement

 Opinion by Len Niehoff

Law professor Len Niehoff laid out the incitement criteria in the Detroit Free Press:

• The speech must be directed toward producing action.
• It must be likely to result in such action.
• The action must be unlawful
• And the action advocated for must be imminent.

Liehoff thinks Trump’s words and actions on Jan 6 met these criteria. I wrote Niehoff last week explaining why I want to see him on my favorite MSNBC shows.

I’ve found the MSM often goes out of their way to defend speech that falls in the category of threatening speech–and in this case speech that fits the criteria of incitement.

Please explain why incitement IS possible for Trump and explain how his words & actions up to and during the Jan 6th riot meet the criteria for incitement. I find it fascinating how much of this case will be about threats, both behind the scenes, public, real and/or perceived.

I want people to understand the legal, technical part of incitement so that when they hear the EMOTIONAL part of the riots, they don’t go into a defensive crouch thinking they have to defend the inciting or threatening speech because they think it is going against upholding the 1st Amendment or free speech.  

I’m not a lawyer, but I learned about the specifics of legal incitement  years ago, when I was working to defund RW media. I found out that what one radio host said didn’t meet all the criteria for incitement since he wasn’t advocating for action that would be imminent. So when I watched Trump’s speech, and he told them to march to the capital, I knew that this fit the criteria for incitement.

Great thread by @SethAbramson breaking down Trump’s incitement before the insurrection. He ACKNOWLEDGES the crowd chanting “FIGHT FOR TRUMP” & thanks them. @berkitron @JameelJaffer @benwizner https://t.co/QCarg631il pic.twitter.com/FE20GObiyO

— Spocko (@spockosbrain) January 9, 2021

Also, actual scholars and lawyers spoke out last week:

“Legally frivolous”: Over 140 lawyers, scholars slam Trump’s First Amendment defense

“The First Amendment is no defense to the article of impeachment leveled against the former President, because the First Amendment does not apply in impeachment proceedings; because the president does not have a First Amendment right to incite a mob and then sit back and do nothing as the hostile mob invades the Capitol and terrorizes Congress; or because, in context, President Trump engaged in unlawful incitement.”

The letter is great, but I really hope the media gets some PROSECUTORS on to talk about incitement because when I see 1st Amendment experts on they are always putting themselves in the shoes of the person saying something horrible.

The right loves to use any attack on their speech and actions as an opportunity to be aggrieved and turn around to use the same criteria to attack the left.

I’ve already been seeing this in the Trump incitement case. “But BLM! PORTLAND! You liberals loved that! Kamala Harris set up defense funds for rioters!”  I’ve seen these comments on OANN and Newsmax lately.

What you will be seeing next week will be campaigns to go after people on the left who they say incited a riot at BLM protests. Another thing that I learned when defunding the right wing media is that they will attack the people who interrupted their revenue stream. They will attempt to say we did the same things at they did — EVEN IF OUR WORDS AND ACTIONS DON’T FIT THE CRITERIA OF INCITEMENT.  And when we don’t have a clear understanding of what is incitement, the mainstream media picks up “the controversy” and does a “both side do it” story.

I’ve taken actions to hold people and companies accountable for their violent rhetoric and threatening speech. I’ve written a lot about threatening speech, violent rhetoric and what we can do to hold people accountable for them.  I looked for economic leverage points because they are the most powerful in a country that cares about money above all else. IT WORKS.

As we have seen recently with the voting machine defamation lawsuits, when someone get in the way of the revenue stream, things happen. But I also know that focusing on the money can’t be the only method, the RW media moved to get funding by Dark Money and hides under the cover of monopolies to push an agenda. (Reminder, the New York Post loses 60-100 million dollars EVERY YEAR!)

Will Trump be convicted for incitement? I don’t know, as Schiff and Goldman said on the podcast, the senators have already made up their minds and they are making a political decision. I’ve always believed that when plan A doesn’t work you need to have plan B, C and D ready. So the other thing that I hope Professor Liehoff or Prosecutors talk about during the trial is what else can we do because the jury is rigged?

For example, when I found that the local radio host didn’t meet the specific criteria for incitement, I went to plan B and contacted his management AND the insurance carrier for the radio station. I sent them links to all the violent rhetoric and language from the host and the context of his words.  I also copied the SF District Attorney, Kamala D. Harris.

Before the actual event happened the host suddenly started talking about being peaceful. I also noted that that was the last event that he organized through the station.  I want Trump to face multiple consequences for all this horrific words and actions, I hope that they bust him on incitement on Jan 6th.  Because as Schiff said, we need to learn from what happened.

Adam Schiff: And I continued to worry that if he escapes accountability in this impeachment now, he will feel once again at liberty to engage in new and more destructive conduct, in just the way that we warned during the last trial, that if he was left in office, we could expect him to try to cheat again. If he’s not disqualified from office, we can expect that in four years, he may very well try to cheat in new and more destructive ways.

Let’s be prepared for a failure to convict, and start the other cases against him. If he gets convicted for felony money laundering he won’t be able to hold office either! Keep prosecuting him for all of his other crimes.

Last night Brian Williams said “Big corps don’t like to be associated with seditionists.”
He was talking about the corporations who have suspended donations to any member of Congress who objected to the certification of the Electoral College vote. This campaign got going when Judd Legum and his new publication Popular Information made some calls.

Popular Information contacted 144 corporations that, through their corporate PACs, donated to one or more of these eight Senators in the 2020 election cycle. Popular Information asked if they would continue to support these Senators in the future. In response, three major companies said they would stop donating to any member of Congress who objected to the certification of the Electoral College vote.

Major corporations say they will stop donating to members of Congress who tried to overturn the election
– Jan 10, 2021 by Judd Legum and Tesnim Zekeria

I jumped on this as soon as I saw it and applied it to Nebraska Rep. Adrian Smith. I looked up his donations from the first 4 corporations listed at OpenSecrets.org and alerted the local media in Nebraska.

Then as more corps were added I started looking up if he got donations from any of them.

If you want to get involved here are some steps that you can take.

1) Find out who is on the list of people who voted to object to the certification of the Electoral College vote:

The long list of Republicans who voted to reject election results (The Guardian LINK)

2) See which corporations have already pulled money
Major corporations say they will stop donating to members of Congress who tried to overturn the election

Popular Information has an updated list. (Popular Information LINK )

3) Go to OpenSecrets.org
Search for the corporation that has pulled money. For example, Blue Cross Blue Shield
Then click recipients tab.
Scroll down to ALL RECIPIENTS and type in a name from the Sedition Caucus list.

I used Smith, Adrian from District 3 in Nebraska. It’s a Big Red district, in more ways than one here is how they have voted in the last four Presidential elections.
2008 President John McCain 69% – Barack Obama 30%
2012 President Mitt Romney 70% – Barack Obama 28%
2016 President Donald Trump 74% – Hillary Clinton 20%

2020 President Donald Trump 75% – Joe Biden 22%

Smith might see the polling that the 51% of Republicans Think Trump Deserves No Blame For Capitol Riots. But i’m thinking that if we polled the people in the corporations that are giving money they would NOT be holding the same views.

Do this for each cycle (2012-2020) You can either do a screenshot or export to a spreadsheet to keep track.

4) Facebook or Tweet this info to your friends and the local media.

5) Repeat for as many corps/ seditionists you can. (If you want to cross check to see if they voted against impeachment too here is how to check with the Clerk’s office.)

6) Call corporations that have NOT pulled their support yet.
Here is a tool from my friends at Color of Change.
Tell These Major Corporations To Suspend Republican Donations!
LINK

If you WORK at a corporation that has not spoken up yet, you can contact Judd Legum @juddlugum to see what the status is and perhaps help the executives see the problems with them tainting their brand by associating with seditionists.

“You cannot overstate the consternation by lawmakers about fund-raising drying up,” said a former senior Trump administration official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss private conversations with Republican lawmakers.

Pressure Mounts on Republicans to Buck Trump Amid Impeachment Battle

I suggest focusing on people with connections to you and be very specific. I chose Nebraska because I have friends there. I chose Blue Cross Blue Shield because they were a big donor to Smith and the health insurance industry is very powerful.

Have an impact? Expect a Backlash!

I wasn’t surprised by the number of Republicans elected officials who STILL voted to object to certifying Biden and kept the lies about the election going.

This is because they faced no financial consequences for doing so. They read the polling and a big percent of their voters still believed the lies that there was massive voter fraud.
But as I’ve demonstrated over the years with right wing media is that in America’s market-based system to really put pressures on people to change, you have to look into where they get their money. Who do they get it from & what do THOSE people care about?

If you can show the money suppliers that associating with violent rhetoric and the people who spout it taints their brand, they WILL leave.

Show more corporations that associating with the politicians who are still supporting lies and violent rhetoric taints their brands.

Here is what to expect from the seditionist politicians

They will:
1) Deny they are spewing violent rhetoric
2) Whine. “They are attacking us for our speech! I was just asking questions!”
3) Attack the people who point out their violent rhetoric and support of lies to the corporations.
(Only a few will attack the actual corporations that pulled the money)
4) Double down on their support for Trump while whining about being a victim 
However, SOME will finally
5) Change their behavior

Be aware that those that do change their behavior will say that it had NOTHING to do with the loss of funding. They will talk about how they get death threats from their own people. (Which is terrible and we should encourage them to ask the FBI to investigate so people can be arrested for doing it.)

The right wing knows that death threats work. On their side threats of criminal prosecution have been blocked or lessened by failure to prosecute crimes. So for many of these politicians, financial threats are the most powerful. Unless they have one of the 63 billionaires behind them that Trump had, they WILL respond to the loss of legitimate corporate money.

They will be looking for an excuse/reason that they stopped with their sedition. They will talk about unity, lowering the temperature and demanding that the Democrats reach out to them. Some will want to be part of the New Republican Party that the MSM really is desperate to make happen.

The bottom line is that the loss of corporate money is what will give them the excuse to publicly walk away from the Trump craziness. Let’s help make it happen.

Twitter has a policy that can be used to remove or flag COVID-19 misinfo, but not everyone knows how to use it. To illustrate how this policy can be used I wrote a letter to Joshua Clayton, South Dakota’s Department of Health State Epidemiologist.

On Dec 22 Governor Noem retweeted the following thread by Justin Hart.
It disputes the efficacy of a mask mandate. (Twitter Link)

• Do you, the state epidemiologist, agree with this “evidence“?
• Does the South Dakota Department of Health agree with this analysis?
• If you disagree, what steps has your agency taken to prevent misinformation about this serious public health crisis from being distributed by the Governor?

I know you are busy, I’m only contacting you because your communications director, Derrick Haskins, has been gone since Nov. 3 (although his info was still on your website as of 12/28/20)

If you have already answered this question for state & local media please have someone send me the response you gave them.

I’m aware people have gotten death threats when they advocated for mask mandates publicly. If that is a concern in your case:

Please contact @TwitterSafety to put a flag on COVID-19 misinformation retweeted by the Governor.

“We will label or remove false or misleading information about:
Personal protective equipment (PPE) such as claims about the efficacy and safety of face masks to reduce viral spread”

Twitter misleading info update

2. Is the claim demonstrably false or misleading?
“Under this policy, we consider claims to be false or misleading if (1) they have been confirmed to be false by subject-matter experts, such as public health authorities”

When you contact @TwitterSafety please let them know your titles and positions so they know you are not just some random person, but a subject-matter expert in your state .

You should also know that as of December 16th Twitter @Policy has updated their policy to include misinformation about vaccinations.

…we are expanding the policy and may require people to remove Tweets which advance harmful false or misleading narratives about COVID-19 vaccinations.

Twitter December 16 Covid 19- vaccine misleading information update

I understand your careers may be threatened if you speak out publicly against the governor. I have worked with whistleblowers in the past and watched how Governors in Florida and Nebraska have attacked their critics in their own government, I trust that you are keeping good email records and contemporaneous memos for future investigations and lawsuits.

To help you in that regard I’ve copied ASTHO, the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials and NACCHO, the National Association of County and City Health Officials. I’ve listed the regional directors that you may know professionally and staff members of these professional organizations who may be able to help you in dealing with elected officials sending out misinformation.

I’ve also copied South Dakota Nurses Association, South Dakota Health Care Association and the Nurse Practitioner Association of South Dakota, who have a vested interest in making sure the Governor of your state sends out an accurate message on public health. They will want to know what steps you are taking behind the scenes, since publicly there is no change in the Governor’s message on a mask mandate.

Finally, I’ve listed a few media outlets you regularly communicate with such as KELO-TV’s Angela Kennecke who did a piece disputing the claims about mask mandates.

I am not an expert on how to save lives during this pandemic, but you are. The Governor has found other sources to justify her decision not to pass a mask mandate or implement and enforce other public health policies.

Joshua, you have the expertise and tools to prevent misinformation from spreading and to have it removed from Twitter, please do so.

You may have already addressed this issue, but as of December 29th that retweet still stands with no label.

LLAP,
Michal Spocko
Senior Health, Safety & Activism Reporter

South Dakota Department of Health
Kim Malsam-Rysdon, Secretary of Health
Beth Dokken, Division Director, Family and Community Health
Mark Gildemaster, Health Statistics
Dustin Ortbahn, Infectious Disease Surveillance
Bill Chalcraft, Public Health Preparedness & Response

ASTHO, Association of State and Territorial Health Officials
Rachel Levine, MD President
Secretary of Health, Pennsylvania Department of Health
Region 8 Director: ND, SD, CO, WY, MT, UT
Gregory S Holzman, MD, MPH, State Medical Officer
Montana Department of Public Health and Human Services

NACCHO, National Association of County and City Health Officials 
Lori Freeman, CEO
Lilly Kan, Senior Director, Infectious Disease and Informatics
Theresa Spinner, Director, Media & Public Relations  

Renae Moch, MBA, FACMPE, Bismarck-Burleigh Public Health,
NACCHO HHS Region 8: ND, SD, CO, WY, MT, UT    

South Dakota Nurses Association
Eric Ollila, Executive Director
Deb Fischer-Clemens, President

Nurse Practitioner Association of South Dakota
Abigail Gramlick-Mueller, CNP, President.   

South Dakota Health Care Association, 
Mark B. Deak, Executive Director
Brett Hoffman, Director of Public Policy and Communications

Cross posted to Spocko’s Brain.

KELO-TV Angela Kennecke, Investigative reporter/news anchor KELO-TV   Bob Mercer, Capitol Bureau	Argus Leader Makenzie Huber, Business reporter Joe Sneve, Watchdog reporter covering South Dakota politics
AP  Regina Garcia Cano James Nord	South Dakota Public Broadcasting Lee Strubinger
Rapid City Journal Pat Butler, Managing Editor Morgan Matzen, Reporter	Capital Journal Casey Junkins
Aberdeen News Scott Waltman, Managing Editor Elisa Sand — K-12 education, courts and politics reporter	KNBN-TV Rapid City Chris Dancy, News Director
Dakota News Now Kevin King, News Director Vanessa Gomez, anchor	KXNET Hannah Woosley-Collins,

It’s Happy Hollandaise time here at Hullabaloo. If you’d like to drop a little something in the old Christmas stocking you can do so here (or at the P.O. box shown in the sidebar):

Everyone wants to show the happy videos of people getting vaccine shots.

The Governors in the 12 states that haven’t passed mask mandates especially want to get in on this hopeful news. They will crow about how Their President got them the vaccine. Not said, but implied, is that their refusal to pass a mass mandate was justified before and is not necessary now.

The experts say we will still need masks for months and we should NOT relax the mask protocols. I’ve watched the discussions on MSNBC shows with Dr. Vin Gupta “Face with medical mask!” @VinGuptaMD, Prof Peter Hotez MD PhD @PeterHotez, Dr. Rob Davidson #WearAMask @DrRobDavidson explaining this, but I know it’s not enough.

Here are some ways to use the vaccination press conferences to pressure Governors to pass mask mandates.

Method 1
Have the top medical experts tell the Governors behind the scenes, “You don’t get to be part of the vaccination press conference unless you pass a mask mandate.”

People in the public health medical community still want to believe that Governors will respond to facts and science. They won’t.
Withholding good PR at a press conference isn’t withholding their vaccine, just the reflected success of a vaccine.
But since most public health experts don’t want to be this direct, and the window for these first press conferences is closing, I suggest:

Method 2
PREPARE THE MEDIA for asking Governors why there is no mask mandate now and why they still won’t pass one.
This is especially important now that Trump botched the vaccine roll out!

First prep the experts to point out the EXCESS DEATHS that will happen because there is no MASK MANDATE.

When the Governor still doesn’t respond with a mandate, post photos of DEAD NURSES to call out the GOVERNOR for NOT pushing a mandate before.

REPEAT. THIS. MESSAGE.

VACCINES won’t be making an impact for months, but a MASK mandate can happen now!
Governors can save lives, but refuse to.

If the Governor says. “I’m not against masks. I’m BEGGING PEOPLE to wear a mask, I just don’t think a mandate is the way to go because …”

Prepare for lame answers.
“Governor, I just spoke to OUR STATE’s top expert, he said, “Without a mask mandate an extra [XXX] people will die in our state. Why are you still refusing a mask mandate?”

Prepare for his lame answer.
(If he quotes someone who is NOT an infectious disease expert (like Scott Atlas) prepare with details on that person’s lack of expertise in this area.

If he brings up lame economic “I have to balance things” prepare with economic experts calling BS.
“I spoke to an EXPERT who explained the false choice between the “inconvenience” of masks and how it might “hurt the economy” vs people getting sick and dying from COVID-19.”

The thing is that reporters don’t have to go into “gotcha” questions because politicians are prepared for those, they just need to make it clear what the failure to pass a mask mandate means in terms of human deaths.

Method 3
Start a Death Clock in each state showing numbers of deaths because there is no Mask Mandate.

“Researchers estimated that mask mandates would have produced a 40 percent reduction in deaths, nationally.  (Link to MIT study)

“The results hold up,” Chernozhukov says. “Controlling for behavior, information variables, confounding factors — the mask mandates are critical to the decline in deaths. No matter how we look at the data, that result is there.”

BTW, I’m basing my follow up questions on actual responses I’ve seen from Nebraska Governor Ricketts @GovRicketts.

If a public health group wanted to get a mask mandate passed they would create a specifically plan that included different kinds of pressure for each Governor based on the source of their power and weaknesses.

For example, in Nebraska they would quote University of Nebraska Medical Center @UNMC, infectious disease expert Dr. James Lawler and question the advice of Ricketts’ health advisor, Dr. Antone, a bariatric surgeon.

The reporters would be prepared to push back on Ricketts’ lame answers to serious questions (as shown here responding to Becca Costello with NET News @NETNewsNebraska @becca_costello

I’ll allow my human rage to come out for a moment,

The public health medical community is too f’ing polite to Governors whose actions lead to unnecessary deaths.

They can’t just put the truth out there. They also need to attack the diseased messages and messengers like white blood cells going after pathogens.

It’s Happy Hollandaise time! If you’d like to help keep this old blog going for another year, you can do so here: