If anyone is curious about why this was taken down, the presenter said (in another video) there were two reasons:
1) A fair amount of the data problems could be isolated to Texas and Florida (and he wants more time to analyze this)
2) Some people were using this data as "evidence" that wearing masks didn't matter. (and that scared him)

Some people really are willing to sell their own grandmothers.

One of the ways in which Martin Luther broke from the Catholic church was by not seeing marriage as sacramental: he wanted to be able to acknowledge marriage between non-Christians rather than just marriage between Christians. Thus, from the perspective of Protestant theology, it's not clear that the church should have much to do with marriage. (This was most succinctly summarised for me thus: have a civil wedding, and then come back to the church for potato salad and a party.)

What about the civil arrangement, then? For me, the clearest argument for a non-paternalistic state granting some people preferable treatment (e.g. untaxed inheritance, etc.) is that those people are reducing the burden on the state somehow. In the 'traditional marriage', they do this partly by providing (on average) a more stable environment in which to raise children (thus, raising somehow more productive - on average - citizens for the state), and partly by caring for each other in their old age (thus, saving the state costs). From this point of view, whether or not they have sex, on whatever basis, with each other is irrelevant: an adult son living with and caring for his elderly mother is saving the state in the same way that an wife caring for her husband is. Thus, when France introduced its 'pacte civil', I thought that they missed the opportunity to get right out of the bedroom.

Reading comprehension, not a strong suit?

They didn't just reference Amerika, and didn't just host it's editor/creator, they actively supplied it with the personal information of artists that had discovered the secret alt-right agenda and publicized it.
BIG DIFFERENCE.

I'm not interested enough in the Canada thing to investigate, I've spent hours on this extensive discussion, I have no need to spark another discussion on another politicized topic today just to fight over every statement and act, but I'm fairly convinced the video clip she showed included the actual promotion of violence and hatred, not just a person who is well known in certain circles for promoting them. If that's against the rules, it's against the rules. Even in the unlikely event it did just include her innocuously, if she is a well known alt-right extremist provocateur and it's against the rules to discuss extremists and their views, then it's against the rules. I find that silly and unproductive, but institutions have a right to be silly. Like Malcolm X, some people don't need their positions verbalized, their image alone can get their message across because it's so well known.

And yet some people still wonder why the police are being protested... SMH...

Apparently first reports of it started early last year. So it would have been in several daily reports and security briefings even if he wasn't told specifically "Russians are paying bounties for our troops" which almost certainly happened several times. There will be mountains of evidence showing Trump attending multiple briefings and being told about it because some people are capable of doing their job and keeping records.

"The AP also reported that the Russian bounty threat was in Trump's PBD in 2019 and that Bolton had briefed Trump on it in March of 2019. "

Out of this world! I guess we know what some people do with their shelter-in-place time...

The way it's presented here, yes, his own words are edited and selected with other words/statements omitted to create right wing propaganda. Where are the parts where he admits he was wrong and apologized over and over?

How about Trump's own words, and Trump's own position then. He said the Clinton/Biden crime bill was way too soft and lenient. Here's a taste from Trump's book....

"The perpetrator is never a victim. He’s nothing more than a predator. (pages 93-94).

A life is a life, and if you criminally take an innocent life, you’d better be prepared to forfeit your own. My only complaint is that lethal injection is too comfortable a way to go. (pages 102-103).

Criminals are often returned to society because of forgiving judges. This has to stop. We need to hold judges more accountable… The rest of us need to rethink prisons and punishment. The next time you hear someone saying there are too many people in prison, ask them how many thugs they’re willing to relocate to their neighborhood. The answer: None. (pages 106-107)."

If that doesn’t sound like support for mass incarceration and the death penalty with little chance for criminal justice reform in sentencing, I’m not sure what does.

https://observer.com/2019/06/trump-crime-2000-book-biden-1994-crime-bill/

How about the Central Park 5? Trump paid for adds calling for the death penalty for these wrongly accused boys. Despite DNA evidence and a confession by the real rapist and restitution from the state in the $40000000 range Trump STILL insists they're guilty of something (he doesn't know what they did, but they're definitely guilty) and deserve the death penalty.....clearly forgetting he's bragged about doing what they were wrongly accused of....sexual assault.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/06/19/what-trump-has-said-central-park-five/1501321001/

Biden has admitted his position was wrong, and repeatedly apologized. Trump has NEVER done that, even about calling for the death penalty for the proven innocent.

*facepalm. You still don't understand that some people have a longer memory than a gnat, and we can recall that no matter the topic, Trump's position was worse than Democrats at the time, and his current position is worse than their current position.
*D'Oh*

I'm going to say something, and some people are going to lose their shit because they won't understand what I'm trying to say, but I'm going to say it anyway.

You know what this is?
Another dead n****r.

You know what Americans can give a shit less about?
Dead n****rs.

You know when Americans start giving a shit about dead n****rs?
When live n****rs start kneeling at sporting events because America doesn't give a shit about dead n****rs.

If you're dark-skinned in America, you don't matter; you never mattered and you will never matter.
It will always be open season on you. You will always be "them"; you will always be the enemy.
You will never get justice, you will never get equality, you will never be welcomed.
The slightest infraction by any one of you will be equated as a shortcoming of your entire race.
If you raise your voice, then they'll call the police and if you raise your fist then they'll call out the National Guard.
It doesn't matter what you accomplish in your life, it doesn't matter how high you climb in your profession and it doesn't matter how much you better the human race as a whole, America will always view you as JAFN.
But the day you start voting with the bullet and not the ballot, all that changes. Equality has a blood price and when you make them pay it, then you'll start to be considered equal.
And not one fucking second before.

A good medium works for all viruses, when Trump was the virus, the media helped spread it.

Now fear of Covid is the virus, the media helps spread it.

There is not a lack of information about cancer. Its just not news.

People die for various reasons but that is not a valid excuse for killing people. Everyone dies eventually and no one wants to die sooner just for economic reasons. Bad sci-fi that is.

Proposing to kill 1 in 5 grandparents because they were sick anyway (and throw in a few random young people, mostly doctors and medical personel for good measure) to help the economy is very Ayn Randish but I bet on humanity as always. Even the chinese eventually decided to fight the virus rather than "keep the economy open" and just let some people die.

Some people want to be Karen...

No surprise these morons think a few thousand anti choice extremists are a bigger crowd than the millions in the pro women's march, just as there's no surprise Bobski would label this minuscule march against women's rights "California thanking trump". Women at this rally held signs saying "My husband is going to force me to vote for Trump again in 2020"
Keep dreaming buddy.
Trump will be lucky to get 15% in California. He is universally despised here, and his constant attacks, smears, frivolous lawsuits, threats, and lies about California haven't gained him any votes. Better toughen up buttercups. https://videosift.com/video/If-Youre-Gonna-Be-Dumb-You-Gotta-Be-Tough
Sad that there are some people this delusional who aren't institutionalized.

they should not put him on tv. some people needs to be protected from themselves. jeez peeps.

*edit, yeah this is satire >D

Have I said any such things? I certainly don't recall saying any of that.
You must note, however, that the overreaction you get from some people likely stems from attempts to shame them using exaggeration, hyperbole, and even outright lies, which tend to make enemies to your cause rather than converts. I've never met a vegan that didn't operate that way to some degree. Perhaps those people are just giving back the same level of honest discussion and discourse they received. There's apparently something about veganism that makes it's practitioners think their movement is more important that fact and truth, like the "Dr." (and his followers) who claimed eating any amount of any red meat is just as carcinogenic as smoking a pack a day of cigarettes, citing WHO studies that said nothing of the sort. Many have said "If you agree with my goal, stopping animal suffering, why would you contradict my claims, even though I privately agree they're exaggeration and fantasy?". Ends don't justify means imo, and nothing justifies lying.

I don't need a degree in nutrition or to be a dietitian to understand the basics covered in multiple health classes I've passed and multiple scientific studies I've read. Is meat healthy? Yes....if it's raised and prepared properly and eaten in moderation. Is meat unhealthy? Yes...when eaten excessively or prepared unsafely.
Is veganism healthy? Yes....when practiced properly with a balanced diet that has all the nutrients humans need. Is veganism unhealthy? Yes...it is the way it's practiced by most vegans who don't have a grasp on what proper nutrition is. It's definitely harder to have a balanced healthy diet without any animal products, but isn't impossible.

Once again, I feel you are being fast and loose with fact by implying any of those statements have come from me. The only people I expect to die 6 times in a row are the ones in my dungeon that I'm keeping alive to prolong their torture....and they know what they did to deserve it. ;-)