We differ in our opinions. I’m a big believer in the adage “actions speak louder than words”. Of course we can’t yet know the actions unless / until he attains some high governmental position of power. It won’t be as president, @ least this time around, but that doesn’t mean he couldn’t be a very important cabinet secretary or otherwise …
We differ in our opinions. I’m a big believer in the adage “actions speak louder than words”. Of course we can’t yet know the actions unless / until he attains some high governmental position of power. It won’t be as president, @ least this time around, but that doesn’t mean he couldn’t be a very important cabinet secretary or otherwise be a trusted advisor, etc. And again, even assuming best intentions, that doesn’t mean he or anyone else would be “allowed” to achieve them by the puppet masters.
I agree with the 'actions speak louder than words' bit.
At some point though, if we want change, we will have to roll the dice and take chances on some new faces. Calculated risks, if you will.
We've been let down and screwed over so many times, that I think it's easy to become such so entrenched in cynicism that we poo pooh anyone who even tries to make change. I see that a lot in the 'freedom' community lately — most of the energy being expended is on hunting 'traitors' and 'controlled opposition' etc...
Ironically, this circular-firing-squad (borne of disappointment and cynicism) makes it even less likely that any decent people will stand up to fight for freedom ...or that they will be able to succeed if they do.
I try to balance my skepticism with pragmatism, and so I've done a fair amount of research on Vivek (listened to the speeches, and the critiques; read his books; read the counter arguments; fact checking his background and source of wealth etc) and I'm satisfied with taking a punt on him. He may indeed let us all down, but imo he is the best of the candidates (by far) and is worth a calculated risk.
I understand your points & appreciate them. Still, entrenched cynicism, guilty as charged. The past 3+ years were not just infuriating, but deeply traumatic. I don’t trust anyone or anything. Esp anyone who has profited from the jabs, even if it was peripherally as an investor. Has he disavowed or divested from those gains or put at least some of it toward helping people damaged by them because it turned out his gains did incredible harm but he didn’t know at the time? I have no idea, I’m just asking.
Vivek and his wife (who is a doctor) both took the first 2 Covid shots. Vivek has stated that he regrets taking it. His wife has stated that she doesn't regret it (but isn't taking more, and wouldn't consider giving it to kids). She has pointed out that they disagree slightly in their views on that (and other things).
Vivek is worth close to a billion dollars, which is how he can run for President despite not having the backing of the GOP machine, or any of it's major donors. He made his money in investment banking and start-ups, mainly Roivant, a company he founded in 2014.
Prior to founding Roivant, he worked at a hedge fund, focused on value hunting in the biotech space. Roivant was a very clear idea for a start up, and was based on his observations as a stock picker and researcher when he was a fundie. Essentially, large scale drug trials are super, super expensive to fund and take years. A lot of drugs just fail to perform as expected in the trial, so without producing a flashy result the research gets shelved and the drug maker (a Pfizer, or similar) shelve it...
But if you actually dig through what's on the shelf, you can find some drugs that appear to show a signal of benefit and would be worth pursuing further. You also find some where poor trial design appears to be obscuring a potential signal. These patents can be bought cheaply, as the drugmakers are happy to offload these shelved dev lines. So you can pick up a handful of very cheap biotech IP, and then test and see which of them might actually be a winning drug. It's low hanging fruit.
Not all the drugs are successful, obviously. Often you find out you purchased and trialed a dud. But if you hit a winner, you've acquired that patent value for much lower cost (and therefore higher profit) than is standard for the sector.
Roivant is a public company now, he only retains a 10% stake. I believe it's a bit less than that now, as he recently sold $33m worth of stock to put the funds into his campaign.
Regarding Covid: Roivant has a joint-venture with the biotech company Arbatus.
Arbatus sued Moderna for patent infringement, claiming that the LNP technology used my Moderna when making their Covid-19 vaccine Spikevax, was an infringement of an Arbatus LNP patent. The court battle is actually two separate lawsuits, and was/is pretty complex as the US Govt are also involved. In one of the suits, the appeals court has ruled in favour of Moderna. The other case is not yet resolved. But at present, Arbatus has not yet succeeded and therefore hasn't made any money from the Moderna vaccine (and therefore neither has Roivant, or Vivek).
Vivek appears with Pete Buttigeig as a trusted resource planted in audiences and used as operatives on psyops for more than 20 years. A special pet of George Soros, listed on his site originally. Needed his Wikipedia page heavily edited to conceal all of this. Shill is shilling.
He is not a "special pet of George Soros". The only connection he has to anyone named Soros is that he won a full academic scholarship for post-grad (Yale law school), and that those scholarship places are funded by an endowment provided by the Paul & Daisy Soros Foundation. Paul is the brother of George Soros, who died in 2013. The foundation don't select the scholarship candidates, Yale do that — they just give a chunk of money each year (the endowment) and Yale use it to fund places for gifted students. Of course the Foundation put Vivek's picture on their website after he became a super successful entrepreneur! They do that with anyone who goes on to make a success of themselves, have a browse on their site.
And *of course* he sought to have this false accusation of connections removed from Wikipedia — you would too. For exactly this reason. You have now decided he is a Soros puppet, when that isn't actually true. But you believe it, because: Wikipedia.
Wikipedia is editable by anyone, and is often used to spread false information. If I were him I'd seek to have it removed too. They also did this to him with the WEF.
WEF just threw his name our there, and Wikipedia and other websites started saying he attended their courses. He did not. He had to take legal action against them to make them stop. [They lost and had to pay him damages].
It's genius really. They just throw their names over any rising talent, and tar them as 'part of the club'. Then, usually only two outcomes are possible from that point onwards: (1) the person is flattered and joins them to become a WEFfie, or (2) the person's reputation is in tatters and therefore the stubbornly non-WEFfie person has their political career cut off at the knees. It's like 'Heads they win; Tails you lose'.
They control the whole field by labelling everyone as 'their people'. Machiavellian, but very effective.
This is precisely why i did not mention the Soros and WEF ties, but they are not even necessary to invoke when establishing a damning profile of this candidate.
Respectfully, some of the claims in this piece are not accurate, or seem to misunderstand how a business like Roivant actually works (or any publicly traded company, tbh).
Example:
"Despite never having created anything in his life other than a series of companies engaged in various blatant scams, Forbes recently estimated Ramaswamy's net worth to be more than $950 million."
Read the first half of that sentence back to yourself. In the same breath you are stating that he has created nothing of value... but also that he has founded a series of companies (one of which is now a multibillion dollar, publicly traded company, Roivant).
The idea for Roivant was genius. You may not *like* the idea, because it's biotech, but the idea itself was killer and that's why people invested. Their pipeline is strong, which is why the stock growth has been strong. The 2022 stock bump was when their promising monoclonal antibody entered PH2 of it's trials, and other pipeline drugs were looking good too. It's not a "scam" or a "ponzi scheme", it's a drug dev company that selects it's candidates from the cutting floor of much bigger firms, and retests them to find the gems.
Not all the drugs they buy the IP turn out to be winners. Some (most actually) fail. But they acquire the IP at very low cost, and with some of the testing already done. Very clever business model.
For every Vivek, they have another 1000 people on the internet running defense for the guy on all forums and settings, as seen above.
First of all - the guy is a joke. He can't run for President any more than Nikki Haley can. He is not the natural born native son of two native born parents. Another Klownworld candidate who isn't even eligible.
What are you angling at? — there is no requirement that one's *parents* be born in the USA, only that *the person running* be a natural born citizen. Check for yourself:
The link to the article you provided says nothing about the definition of a "natural born citizen" -- not only that but you are 100% incorrect. The constitutional definition as affirmed by SCOTUS is a person who is born to two parents who are also U.S. citizens. Feel free to check out my Substack article which explains this important legal question in great detail.
Respectfully, whilst it's fun to do some archaeology about what the Founders *may have meant*, the practical interpretation of the term has been set.
Eight US Presidents have been elected and have served, despite at least 1 of of their parents not being American born.
The most recent of these was President Obama.
So, despite any obscure argumentation, in practicality it has been considered acceptable to simply be born on US soil in order to qualify as a "natural born citizen" (within the confines of this discussion about eligibility to serve as President).
I can't post that photo of Vivek and Buttigeig on Hardball pretending to be warm blooded mammals but both clearly regime assets for a long, long time. I think these guys were doing two-handers on a congo line for years before somebody suggested they use these towelboys as fake candidates. Get wise people, they're laughing at you.
We differ in our opinions. I’m a big believer in the adage “actions speak louder than words”. Of course we can’t yet know the actions unless / until he attains some high governmental position of power. It won’t be as president, @ least this time around, but that doesn’t mean he couldn’t be a very important cabinet secretary or otherwise be a trusted advisor, etc. And again, even assuming best intentions, that doesn’t mean he or anyone else would be “allowed” to achieve them by the puppet masters.
I agree with the 'actions speak louder than words' bit.
At some point though, if we want change, we will have to roll the dice and take chances on some new faces. Calculated risks, if you will.
We've been let down and screwed over so many times, that I think it's easy to become such so entrenched in cynicism that we poo pooh anyone who even tries to make change. I see that a lot in the 'freedom' community lately — most of the energy being expended is on hunting 'traitors' and 'controlled opposition' etc...
Ironically, this circular-firing-squad (borne of disappointment and cynicism) makes it even less likely that any decent people will stand up to fight for freedom ...or that they will be able to succeed if they do.
I try to balance my skepticism with pragmatism, and so I've done a fair amount of research on Vivek (listened to the speeches, and the critiques; read his books; read the counter arguments; fact checking his background and source of wealth etc) and I'm satisfied with taking a punt on him. He may indeed let us all down, but imo he is the best of the candidates (by far) and is worth a calculated risk.
I understand your points & appreciate them. Still, entrenched cynicism, guilty as charged. The past 3+ years were not just infuriating, but deeply traumatic. I don’t trust anyone or anything. Esp anyone who has profited from the jabs, even if it was peripherally as an investor. Has he disavowed or divested from those gains or put at least some of it toward helping people damaged by them because it turned out his gains did incredible harm but he didn’t know at the time? I have no idea, I’m just asking.
Vivek and his wife (who is a doctor) both took the first 2 Covid shots. Vivek has stated that he regrets taking it. His wife has stated that she doesn't regret it (but isn't taking more, and wouldn't consider giving it to kids). She has pointed out that they disagree slightly in their views on that (and other things).
Vivek is worth close to a billion dollars, which is how he can run for President despite not having the backing of the GOP machine, or any of it's major donors. He made his money in investment banking and start-ups, mainly Roivant, a company he founded in 2014.
Prior to founding Roivant, he worked at a hedge fund, focused on value hunting in the biotech space. Roivant was a very clear idea for a start up, and was based on his observations as a stock picker and researcher when he was a fundie. Essentially, large scale drug trials are super, super expensive to fund and take years. A lot of drugs just fail to perform as expected in the trial, so without producing a flashy result the research gets shelved and the drug maker (a Pfizer, or similar) shelve it...
But if you actually dig through what's on the shelf, you can find some drugs that appear to show a signal of benefit and would be worth pursuing further. You also find some where poor trial design appears to be obscuring a potential signal. These patents can be bought cheaply, as the drugmakers are happy to offload these shelved dev lines. So you can pick up a handful of very cheap biotech IP, and then test and see which of them might actually be a winning drug. It's low hanging fruit.
Not all the drugs are successful, obviously. Often you find out you purchased and trialed a dud. But if you hit a winner, you've acquired that patent value for much lower cost (and therefore higher profit) than is standard for the sector.
Roivant is a public company now, he only retains a 10% stake. I believe it's a bit less than that now, as he recently sold $33m worth of stock to put the funds into his campaign.
Regarding Covid: Roivant has a joint-venture with the biotech company Arbatus.
Arbatus sued Moderna for patent infringement, claiming that the LNP technology used my Moderna when making their Covid-19 vaccine Spikevax, was an infringement of an Arbatus LNP patent. The court battle is actually two separate lawsuits, and was/is pretty complex as the US Govt are also involved. In one of the suits, the appeals court has ruled in favour of Moderna. The other case is not yet resolved. But at present, Arbatus has not yet succeeded and therefore hasn't made any money from the Moderna vaccine (and therefore neither has Roivant, or Vivek).
Vivek appears with Pete Buttigeig as a trusted resource planted in audiences and used as operatives on psyops for more than 20 years. A special pet of George Soros, listed on his site originally. Needed his Wikipedia page heavily edited to conceal all of this. Shill is shilling.
That's just factually inaccurate.
He is not a "special pet of George Soros". The only connection he has to anyone named Soros is that he won a full academic scholarship for post-grad (Yale law school), and that those scholarship places are funded by an endowment provided by the Paul & Daisy Soros Foundation. Paul is the brother of George Soros, who died in 2013. The foundation don't select the scholarship candidates, Yale do that — they just give a chunk of money each year (the endowment) and Yale use it to fund places for gifted students. Of course the Foundation put Vivek's picture on their website after he became a super successful entrepreneur! They do that with anyone who goes on to make a success of themselves, have a browse on their site.
And *of course* he sought to have this false accusation of connections removed from Wikipedia — you would too. For exactly this reason. You have now decided he is a Soros puppet, when that isn't actually true. But you believe it, because: Wikipedia.
Wikipedia is editable by anyone, and is often used to spread false information. If I were him I'd seek to have it removed too. They also did this to him with the WEF.
WEF just threw his name our there, and Wikipedia and other websites started saying he attended their courses. He did not. He had to take legal action against them to make them stop. [They lost and had to pay him damages].
It's genius really. They just throw their names over any rising talent, and tar them as 'part of the club'. Then, usually only two outcomes are possible from that point onwards: (1) the person is flattered and joins them to become a WEFfie, or (2) the person's reputation is in tatters and therefore the stubbornly non-WEFfie person has their political career cut off at the knees. It's like 'Heads they win; Tails you lose'.
They control the whole field by labelling everyone as 'their people'. Machiavellian, but very effective.
This is precisely why i did not mention the Soros and WEF ties, but they are not even necessary to invoke when establishing a damning profile of this candidate.
Respectfully, some of the claims in this piece are not accurate, or seem to misunderstand how a business like Roivant actually works (or any publicly traded company, tbh).
Example:
"Despite never having created anything in his life other than a series of companies engaged in various blatant scams, Forbes recently estimated Ramaswamy's net worth to be more than $950 million."
Read the first half of that sentence back to yourself. In the same breath you are stating that he has created nothing of value... but also that he has founded a series of companies (one of which is now a multibillion dollar, publicly traded company, Roivant).
The idea for Roivant was genius. You may not *like* the idea, because it's biotech, but the idea itself was killer and that's why people invested. Their pipeline is strong, which is why the stock growth has been strong. The 2022 stock bump was when their promising monoclonal antibody entered PH2 of it's trials, and other pipeline drugs were looking good too. It's not a "scam" or a "ponzi scheme", it's a drug dev company that selects it's candidates from the cutting floor of much bigger firms, and retests them to find the gems.
Not all the drugs they buy the IP turn out to be winners. Some (most actually) fail. But they acquire the IP at very low cost, and with some of the testing already done. Very clever business model.
For every Vivek, they have another 1000 people on the internet running defense for the guy on all forums and settings, as seen above.
First of all - the guy is a joke. He can't run for President any more than Nikki Haley can. He is not the natural born native son of two native born parents. Another Klownworld candidate who isn't even eligible.
Remember, God is not the author of confusion.
You have stated that more than once.
What are you angling at? — there is no requirement that one's *parents* be born in the USA, only that *the person running* be a natural born citizen. Check for yourself:
https://www.usa.gov/requirements-for-presidential-candidates
Both Vivek and Nikki are natural born citizens of the USA.
Nikki is a complete dolt and a warmongering RINO, but she is eligible to run. So is Vivek.
Isn't the Supreme Court hearing a case regarding "natural born" citizen?
The link to the article you provided says nothing about the definition of a "natural born citizen" -- not only that but you are 100% incorrect. The constitutional definition as affirmed by SCOTUS is a person who is born to two parents who are also U.S. citizens. Feel free to check out my Substack article which explains this important legal question in great detail.
https://open.substack.com/pub/madamepublius/p/this-people-draw-near-to-me-with?r=2fkpo3&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
Respectfully, whilst it's fun to do some archaeology about what the Founders *may have meant*, the practical interpretation of the term has been set.
Eight US Presidents have been elected and have served, despite at least 1 of of their parents not being American born.
The most recent of these was President Obama.
So, despite any obscure argumentation, in practicality it has been considered acceptable to simply be born on US soil in order to qualify as a "natural born citizen" (within the confines of this discussion about eligibility to serve as President).
I see you
Blocking
Why?
That seems a bit childish tbh..
You obviously just made a mistake (misunderstanding the requirements for running) — it's not the end of the world. We all make mistakes.
There's no need to block me, and I would suggest to you that this is an overreaction.
Not buying it...
I can't post that photo of Vivek and Buttigeig on Hardball pretending to be warm blooded mammals but both clearly regime assets for a long, long time. I think these guys were doing two-handers on a congo line for years before somebody suggested they use these towelboys as fake candidates. Get wise people, they're laughing at you.
https://knowyourmeme.com/news/vivek-ramaswamy-and-pete-buttigieg-were-on-the-same-msnbc-show-in-2003