It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Lame-duck President Donald Trump spoke to the nation on Friday afternoon, his first public comments since Joe Biden was projected the winner of the 2020 presidential race. Trump’s remarks, made from the White House’s Rose garden, were typical: he overstated his administration’s role in the recent positive news on a possible coronavirus vaccine and continued to deny reality, refusing to acknowledge that he lost the election.
Trump praised his virus vaccine initiative, Operation Warp Speed, for its part in the funding of Pfizer’s Covid-19 vaccine, which the drug company announced on Monday had shown to be 90 percent effective in protecting people as compared to a placebo. However, there is a problem with the president taking credit—the federal funding Pfizer will receive is connected to distribution, not development. But the president never lets facts stand in the way of a good false brag.
“As a result of Operation Warp Speed,” Trump said, “Pfizer announced on Monday that its China virus vaccine is more than 90% effective. This far exceeds any and all expectations. Nobody thought they’d get to that level. And we have others coming, which we think will be an equal level. Maybe more, if that’s possible.”
originally posted by: Southern Guardian
a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed
Wait until the US Supreme court pisses on your parade.
So you want the Supreme Court to vote against the certified outcome of the elections?
How patriotic. Get Trump in by any means.
originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: AlaskanDad
This is an interesting point to me Dad. How is it that with hundreds of millions of citizens, the voting population seems to be drawn close to 50/50. One might think that it could easily be more one sided, but it isn't. That number of 50% vrs 50% seems so , well, existential.
Could it just be as simple as that there are two parties that divide people evenly. Might it be different if we had three parties, would it break down to each getting in general 33% vrs 33% vrs 33%. Or five parties, each holding about 20% of voters. Do you get my question here? How it comes about that it is divided so evenly?
originally posted by: Wookiep
Alaskancuck hates tRUmpf... How surprising.