The media spent years pretending Trump could magically pardon his co-conspirators, consequence-free, at any time, even though nothing works that way. Now the media is pretending the GOP can magically filibuster, consequence-free, at any time. Nothing works that way. It gets old.
More from Palmer Report
More from Trump
Looks like the CDC Guidelines say Trump should be in the category that needs to isolate for 20 days after symptom onset.👇
Plus ...
Severe COVID Pneumonia defined as low oxygen sats <94 % as confirmed by the President\u2019s chief of staff, in addition to other clinically consistent information: shortness of breath to name one.
— Vin Gupta \u201c\U0001f637!\u201d MD (@VinGuptaMD) October 9, 2020
That buys 20 days of isolation. At 74 with co-morbidities, \u2066@CDCgov\u2069 is right pic.twitter.com/fR3jc9jYQI
2. Fauci on Thursday used a (test-based) approach, in which case, per Fauci:
Trump needs to isolate for 10 days after symptoms RESOLVE (not symptoms onset) and then two negative tests.
Note: based on his coughing on Hannity last night, Trump’s symptoms haven’t resolved yet.
Dr. Fauci: "If the President goes 10 days w/o symptoms & they do the tests-then you could make the assumption, based on good science, that he is not infected. But you have to make sure you go through those particular benchmarks delineated in the CDC guidelines." #AMRstaff
— Andrea Mitchell (@mitchellreports) October 8, 2020
3. Here’s a longer quote from Fauci (via @MarionRenault):
https://t.co/oRdrtxQe80

4. Also noteworthy: on Hannity last night, Trump wouldn’t say he’s tested negative.👇
Thus failing one of the conditions required by Fauci for Trump to be considered no longer contagious.
Mark the date, we have reached the point where even Sean Hannity is asking Trump simple questions that the president can\u2019t or won\u2019t answer https://t.co/HgMpIsOCJn
— Mehdi Hasan (@mehdirhasan) October 9, 2020
5/5. This resource on coronavirus (UpToDate) has been specially made available to the public. It describes the test-based and non-test-based approaches.
You May Also Like
Some random interesting tidbits:
1) Zuck approves shutting down platform API access for Twitter's when Vine is released #competition

2) Facebook engineered ways to access user's call history w/o alerting users:
Team considered access to call history considered 'high PR risk' but 'growth team will charge ahead'. @Facebook created upgrade path to access data w/o subjecting users to Android permissions dialogue.

3) The above also confirms @kashhill and other's suspicion that call history was used to improve PYMK (People You May Know) suggestions and newsfeed rankings.
4) Docs also shed more light into @dseetharaman's story on @Facebook monitoring users' @Onavo VPN activity to determine what competitors to mimic or acquire in 2013.
https://t.co/PwiRIL3v9x

Imagine for a moment the most obscurantist, jargon-filled, po-mo article the politically correct academy might produce. Pure SJW nonsense. Got it? Chances are you're imagining something like the infamous "Feminist Glaciology" article from a few years back.https://t.co/NRaWNREBvR pic.twitter.com/qtSFBYY80S
— Jeffrey Sachs (@JeffreyASachs) October 13, 2018
The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.

Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)

There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.

At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?