Christmas bits: COVID vaccine data; Commentary about the USSC protecting DJT; Etc.

Merry Christmas!

___________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________

From the We Already Knew That Files: A cohort study of more than 1.5 million hospital admissions in Canada through the first 2 years of the COVID-19 pandemic has quantified the benefit of vaccinations. Unvaccinated patients were found to be up to 15 times more likely to die from COVID-19 than fully vaccinated patients. A person vaccinated with two or more doses was 12 times less likely for ICU admission and 15 times less likely to die. The authors did not consider socioeconomic status because just age and vaccination status were analyzed.

___________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________

Various sources are commenting on the unexplained USSC decision to not hear the issue of whether DJT is immune from crimes committed in office. Most normal people who believe in democracy and the rule of law would find it silly for this to even be an issue. But now America is no longer controlled mostly by normal people. Instead, corrupt, radical authoritarians wield significant power, especially the radicalized and corrupted USSC. The authoritarians are using their power to openly attack and destroy democracy and the pesky rule of law.

A NYT opinion comments (not paywalled off): The Supreme Court Helped Trump’s Delay Strategy. By How Much Remains to Be Seen. The former president’s claim that he is immune from prosecution will now be taken up by a federal appeals court — and could end up back in front of the justices within weeks. The Supreme Court’s decision on Friday not to fast-track consideration of former President Donald J. Trump’s claim that he is immune to prosecution on charges of plotting to overturn the 2020 election was unquestionably a victory for Mr. Trump and his lawyers. The choice by the justices not to take up the issue now — rendered without explanation — gave a boost to the former president’s legal strategy of delaying the proceedings as much as possible in the hopes of running out the clock before Election Day. 

Another NYT opinion: 

The Supreme Court’s Big Trump Test Is Here 

America is experiencing a creeping sense of déjà vu. Twenty-three years ago, a bare majority of the justices halted a recount in Florida, effectively handing the presidency to George W. Bush. The specter of Bush v. Gore, the case that stands as a marker of how not to resolve searing political disputes. On Friday, the court turned down Special Counsel Jack Smith’s request for fast-track review of Donald Trump’s claim that former presidents have “absolute immunity” from criminal prosecution for their conduct while in office. But that critical question will almost certainly return to the Supreme Court soon: The D.C. federal appeals court is hearing the case on Jan. 9 and will probably rule shortly thereafter. 

The point is not that getting the underlying legal questions “right” is irrelevant. But when the stakes are this high and the legal questions are novel, the justices have a duty to hand down decisions that resonate across the political spectrum — or at least that avoid inciting violence in the streets. That’s not subverting the rule of law; it’s preserving it.  

A universe in which the court somehow splits the difference — for example, keeping Mr. Trump on the ballot while refusing to endorse (if not affirmatively repudiating) his conduct and spurning his kinglike claim to total immunity — could go a long way toward reducing the temperature of the coming election cycle. Such an outcome could also help restore at least some of the court’s credibility.

As usual for clueless MSM opinionators, the two yahoos who wrote the latter opinion (Steven V. Mazie and Stephen I. Vladeck) refer to the six Republicans on the bench as “conservative.” Sigh. 

These people still cannot see anti-democratic authoritarianism, even when it’s repeatedly hitting them up side the head with a 2x4. Anti-democratic authoritarianism is not pro-democracy conservative, it is anti-democracy authoritarian. As Mark Zuckerberg would comment, dumb fucks. 

The MSM might learn, but

probably not until it’s too late

___________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________

The WaPo comments that the Ukrainian military is running out of munitions:

Ukrainian forces are suffering from a shortage of artillery shells on the front line, prompting some units to cancel planned assaults, soldiers said this week, and stoking fears over how long Kyiv’s troops will be able to hold their ground against continuing Russian attacks.

“The guys are tired — very tired,” a member of the 128th Mountain Assault Brigade said. “They are still motivated — many people understand that they have no other choice.”

“But you can’t win a war only on motivation,” he continued. “You should have some kind of a numerical advantage, and with the weapons and weapons systems, it only gets worse and worse. How long can we last? It’s hard to say, but it can’t be long. Everyone understands this.” 

We can thank America's authoritarian, radical right Republican Party for the imminent collapse of the Ukrainian military. Once again, American moral cowardice and untrustworthiness is out in the open for everyone to see and enjoy. Lest we forget, the US promised in 1994 to defend Ukraine's territorial integrity in return for it turning over Russian nuclear weapons. We broke that promise.

Regarding that 1994 promise:

When the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, Ukraine had the world’s third largest nuclear arsenal on its territory. When Ukrainian-Russian negotiations on removing these weapons from Ukraine appeared to break down in September 1993, the U.S. government engaged in a trilateral process with Ukraine and Russia. The result was the Trilateral Statement, signed in January 1994, under which Ukraine agreed to transfer the nuclear warheads to Russia for elimination. In return, Ukraine received security assurances from the United States, Russia and Britain; compensation for the economic value of the highly-enriched uranium in the warheads (which could be blended down and converted into fuel for nuclear reactors); and assistance from the United States in dismantling the missiles, missile silos, bombers and nuclear infrastructure on its territory.

American assurances aren’t worth spit.