21 thoughts on “News/Politics 7-22-21

  1. Best news I’ve heard this week.

    “Rand Paul: I’m sending a letter to the DOJ asking that Fauci be referred for criminal charges”


    “Joe Biden’s Justice Department isn’t going to charge Joe Biden’s chief medical advisor with perjury for testimony about a complex scientific subject whose precise definition is disputed even by experts.

    But asking them to do so will be a crowd-pleaser. And it’ll keep the pressure on Fauci to explain precisely why the study referenced by Paul during their confrontation yesterday didn’t involve gain of function research. The technique described in the study, splicing parts of different viruses together to test whether the new virus was capable of binding to human ACE2 receptors, sounded like GOF to me. It sounded that way to molecular biologist Richard Ebright too. And it sounded that way to reporter Josh Rogin, who famously broke the news last year that containment measures at the Wuhan Institute of Virology weren’t as rigorous as you’d expect from a lab doing work as dangerous as it was doing:”

    ““What they did fund was exactly what Rand Paul said,” Giroir said. “They funded researchers to go hundreds of miles away into the back of bat caves, extract dangerous viruses from bats that have never been seen by humans before, and bring them to a city of 10 million people in the Wuhan lab. Next, they chopped up those viruses and created new Frankenstein viruses to see if they could infect human cells. That may not technically be ‘gain of function research,’ but it’s dangerous research, and Senator Paul’s questions deserve to be answered.”

    Fauci wants to split hairs about what constitutes “gain of function research” when the question should be more basic. Was NIH funding research at the Wuhan lab to engineer viruses that would be more likely to infect people, risking a pandemic? It sounds like they were. Even if that doesn’t mean some technical definition of GOF, why were they chancing it?

    Was this another case of Fauci thinking a possible pandemic was worth the risk?”

    Liked by 3 people

  2. ——

    Liked by 3 people

  3. Remember folks, the “Big Guy” had no idea about Hunter’s business “arrangements.”


    “Report: Hunter Biden Arranged Profitable Consulting Job for Then-VP Biden

    More evidence proving Hunter Biden is everything the MSM wanted Don Jr and Eric Trump to be. But we get silence with Hunter.”


    “The Daily Mail has emails that once again place doubts on President Joe Biden’s claims he never discussed business with his son Hunter Biden.

    In 2014, Hunter discussed a consulting firm with family friend and business partner Jeff Cooper.

    Hunter told Cooper the firm would have around $1.2 million in overhead. His late brother Beau Biden would get $500,000. Other costs include $250,000 for a senior attorney, junior attorney at $175,000, and $65,000 for administrative assistant. They would also have $20,000 for other expenses.

    Cooper asked Hunter if Beau (referred to as BB) could “offset the 500k by sitting on a few boards. He also wanted to know “if Hunter had ‘any guesses on built-in clients for the firm.’”

    Hunter also thought Beau would want more than $500,000, especially since he had offers to join other places after he ended his term as Delaware attorney general.

    Then Hunter brings up Daddy-O:

    Hunter then indicated that he would not only have Beau on board in the new venture, but his father too – referring to them both by ‘JRB’, the initials of their full names, Joseph Robinette Biden Jr and Joseph Robinette Biden III.

    ‘In order to develop this as a platform for both JRBs I think it is imperative we (the three of us) have full control come 2016 when JRB1 comes on board,’ Hunter wrote.”

    “What else is going to come up against Hunter? We found out he used his father and flights on Air Force 2 to get some business deals with Mexican billionaire Carlos Slim in 2014.

    Let’s not forget The New York Post expose before the election showing Hunter pursuing “lasting and lucrative” deals with a private Chinese energy company.
    Hunter’s business partner confirmed Joe Biden is the “big guy” in the emails. He also said Joe lied when he said he never discussed business with Hunter.

    The FBI opened a money-laundering investigation connected to Hunter’s laptop in 2019. It’s still active.”


    The FBI is useless when real crimes occur.

    Liked by 2 people

  4. Huh.

    Didn’t they impeach someone for exactly this?

    Oh that’s right, it’s only bad if an R does it.

    Now does he mean the corruption he was involved with that the last guy tried to look into?

    Liked by 2 people

  5. You smell that?

    Smells like…….


    “Suspects in Whitmer Kidnapping Plot Claim FBI Set Them Up

    One defendant filed a discovery motion after the lawyer found messages between an FBI agent and an informant proving entrapment.”


    “BuzzFeed News dropped a huge bombshell regarding the alleged plot by a militia to kidnap Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer.

    Only one of the 14 defendants pleaded guilty to the plot. The others claimed they never plotted to kidnap Whitmer.

    The outlet reviewed the evidence and found some shocking details that back up their defense.

    It turns out at least 12 of the FBI confidential informants had a larger role in the plot than outlets have reported:

    An examination of the case by BuzzFeed News also reveals that some of those informants, acting under the direction of the FBI, played a far larger role than has previously been reported. Working in secret, they did more than just passively observe and report on the actions of the suspects. Instead, they had a hand in nearly every aspect of the alleged plot, starting with its inception. The extent of their involvement raises questions as to whether there would have even been a conspiracy without them.

    A longtime government informant from Wisconsin, for example, helped organize a series of meetings around the country where many of the alleged plotters first met one another and the earliest notions of a plan took root, some of those people say. The Wisconsin informant even paid for some hotel rooms and food as an incentive to get people to come.

    The Iraq War vet, for his part, became so deeply enmeshed in a Michigan militant group that he rose to become its second-in-command, encouraging members to collaborate with other potential suspects and paying for their transportation to meetings. He prodded the alleged mastermind of the kidnapping plot to advance his plan, then baited the trap that led to the arrest.

    The prosecution insists their evidence, consisting of social media posts, text messages, and recordings, prove the defendants had anti-government feelings and wanted to kidnap or kill “law enforcement officers and elected officials.”

    The defendants said, “their talk never rose beyond the level of fantasy and they never intended to harm anyone.” They accuse the government of targeting them due to their political views:

    Although they have not denied participating in training events, attending meetings, and communicating with other defendants, they claim that no actual conspiracy to kidnap the governor ever existed.

    Instead, they say, they were targeted because of their political views. Some describe the case as a premeditated campaign by the government to undermine the Patriot movement, an ideology based on fealty to the Second Amendment and the conviction that the government has violated the Constitution and is therefore illegitimate. They argue that the recordings and text messages that the government calls proof of a criminal conspiracy are in fact constitutionally protected speech — expressions of frustration at what they see as the government’s betrayal of its citizens.
    Brandon Caserta’s lawyer filed a motion to compel discovery of one of the FBI informants, codenamed “Thor.” The motion includes text messages between the informant and an FBI agent. Caserta asserts the messages show the FBi agent directed the informant “to draw specific people into the conspiracy — potential evidence of entrapment that he said the government ‘inadvertently disclosed.’”

    The motion identifies the FBI handlers as Impola and Chambers.”

    “The lawyer requested “all texts sent and received by that informant.” Other lawyers have thought about taking similar actions.

    The lawyer wrote: “The evidence is material to the preparation of the dense because the Defendant is likely to assert a defense of entrapment and being able to demonstrate the trajectory of the F.B.I.’s directives to CHS-2 over time and how the Defendant’s involvement was ‘instigated by overzealous law enforcement agents…’”

    Also from the motion:

    What is surprising, and was unknowable to the defense, is S.A. Impola’s encouragement to CHS-2 to bring Caserta into one of the two recons, recons that are overt acts in the government’s superseding indictment, and thus into the conspiracy. Further, to push the recon into a specific location, location 1. This active participation of the F.B.I supports the defense theory of entrapment in that the government, or someone acting for the government, induced or persuaded the defendant to commit a crime, or an act in furtherance of the crime.

    The defense found the text messages “buried within hundreds of thousands of pdf reports, documents, text messages, audio recordings and photographs.”

    “Ths type of evidence is material and critical to the defense that CHS-2 was actively attempting to pull together a conspiracy together, create overt acts and he was doing it as a paid informant at the behest and direction of his F.B.I. handlers,” wrote Castera’s lawyer.”

    Liked by 1 person

  6. Oh goody.

    “COVID outbreaks happening in nursing homes again — thanks to unvaccinated staffers”


    “I remember Scott Gottlieb saying a few days ago that nursing homes would be the “canary in the coal mine” with respect to whether vaccinated Americans need booster shots or not. Nursing-home residents were the first people to be vaccinated this year and, being elderly, their immunity is weaker and should wane more quickly than it does in younger people. If they start dying again, the feds will probably scramble to authorize third shots for the entire senior citizen population.

    There have been several reports lately of outbreaks erupting in nursing homes in different parts of the U.S. but there’s not necessarily any silver-bullet cause. Maybe the immunity of frail residents is waning, or maybe the Delta variant is so contagious that it’s destined to break through the vaccinated population’s immunity more often. (Or both.) But there’s a third factor: A shockingly high number of nursing-home staffers across the country are still unvaccinated. Which is mind-boggling given the severe risk they pose to their patients.

    And the answer to the question of what to do about it isn’t as easy as it seems.

    Nationally about 59% of nursing home staff have gotten their shots, about the same as the overall percentage of fully vaccinated adults — but significantly lower than the roughly 80% of residents who are vaccinated, according to Medicare. And some states have much lower vaccination rates of around 40%…

    At one memory care facility in the Grand Junction area, 16 fully vaccinated residents were infected and four died, according to a CDC slide provided to The Associated Press. The residents who died were described as being in hospice care, with a median age of 93, indicating they were particularly frail…

    The CDC investigated several nursing homes in Mesa County that were experiencing new outbreaks. At one location — described as “Facility A” — 42% of the staff were still not fully vaccinated, contrasting with only about 8% of residents who had failed to complete their shots.

    One never can tell for sure how any specific outbreak began but nursing-home staff are obvious suspects each time since they’re moving back and forth between the facility and the surrounding community more often than anyone else. And unvaccinated staff are especially dangerous because the unvaccinated shed a much higher viral load than the vaccinated do, a problem compounded by Delta’s high transmissibility.

    The good news is that the vaccines are holding up in most cases even among elderly residents, preventing the mass death we saw last year. At one Cape Cod nursing home, 24 residents and nine staffers tested positive for COVID; “most” were vaccinated and experiencing only mild symptoms or none at all, which is terrific. But even in a blue northeastern state with high vax rates like Massachusetts, just 73 percent of nursing-home staffers have been immunized. More than one in every four workers who are around elderly residents risk exposing them to a high dose of the coronavirus.

    Not everyone fared well at an outbreak in an Indiana nursing home recently.

    Half a dozen residents at a long-term care facility in Kokomo have died due to a recent COVID-19 outbreak, local health officials said, marking the first major outbreak in a nursing home for months…

    A total of 19 staff and residents at the long-term care facility tested positive within the past few weeks, local health officials said. Of the 19, just a handful were vaccinated against COVID-19, Backer said, with one of the reported deaths being a vaccinated individual.

    “It is concerning, obviously, because I think a lot of us just assume everyone at a nursing home has got their vaccine,” Backer said, adding that the rate of staff inoculation at the facility was only around 35%.”

    Liked by 1 person

  7. Why participate either way.

    It’s just another witch hunt for the media to lie about for the next year, right up until the 2022 midterms.

    Lather, rinse, repeat. This is all they have, they can’t run on their abysmal record, so…..


    Liz Cheney is still an establishment/Dem tool.

    Liked by 2 people

  8. ——-

    Liked by 3 people

  9. It’s not like they have a choice, at least not if they want the truth to get out.

    “McCarthy: We Will ‘Run Our Own Investigation’ Into Capitol Riot After Pelosi Dropped GOP Reps

    “Unless Speaker Pelosi reverses course and seats all five Republican nominees, Republicans will not be party to their sham process and will instead pursue our own investigation of the facts.””


    “House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy said the GOP will conduct their own investigation into the January 6th Capitol Hill riot unless Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi changes her mind on two representatives she rejected from the committee.

    Pelosi rejected Republicans Reps. Jim Banks and Jim Jordan. Both men are supporters of former President Donald Trump.

    The House resolution to create a select committee gave Pelosi the power to appoint people to the committee. She has to consult McCarthy, but she has the “final veto power over the members.”

    A speaker using the veto power has never happened before:

    “Speaker Pelosi has taken the unprecedented step of denying the minority party’s picks for the select committee on Jan. 6. This represents something that has not happened in the House before for a select committee, by the historian,” McCarthy, R-Calif., said at a press conference.

    “It’s an egregious abuse of power. Pelosi has broken this institution. Denying the voice of members who have served in the military – Jim Banks, a Navy veteran who served in Afghanistan,” McCarthy continued. “As well as a leader of a standing committee. Jim Jordan isn’t ranking of just his first committee, he’s done it before.”

    McCarthy’s fiery comments followed a statement in which he said Republicans will completely boycott the select committee if Pelosi, D-Calif., does not allow all five of his picks, including Jordan, R-Ohio, and Banks, R-Ind., to be seated.

    “Unless Speaker Pelosi reverses course and seats all five Republican nominees, Republicans will not be party to their sham process and will instead pursue our own investigation of the facts,” McCarthy said.”

    Liked by 2 people

  10. Indeed they are.

    “The Biggest Source Of ‘Misinformation,’ Lies, And Delusion Is Leftist Corporate Media

    Why would people believe so-called misinformation? It’s a pivotal question, and the left can’t bring themselves to answer it because it damns them.”


    “Talking heads throughout the Democrat establishment and corporate media echo chamber are all saying the same thing: People are dying, it’s Facebook’s fault, and left-of-center politicians must save the day by “helping” to quiet views that threaten their messaging monolith.

    Joe Biden says Facebook is “killing people.” Sen. Amy Klobuchar says people aren’t getting vaccinated “because they’ve gotten something off of social media.” White House press secretary Jen Psaki insists it’s information on Facebook “that is leading to people not taking the vaccine, and people are dying as a result.” Don Lemon asserts, “Misinformation is killing us and our democracy.”

    But why? Why are people looking to unconventional sources for their coronavirus cues? How is a Facebook meme more persuasive than health agency guidelines or a presidential press conference? Setting aside the obvious problems with Big Tech censorship and Facebook operating as an extension of the federal government’s PR arm, these are questions that need to be asked.

    CNN host Brian Stelter, known for his Russia hoaxing and regular meltdowns over whatever Fox News happens to be doing, actually offered an apt observation. “Disbelief about election results, distrust of public health officials, disregard for democratic principles — it’s all connected,” Stelter wrote with Oliver Darcy in their Thursday newsletter.

    In other words, he’s claiming the people with concerns about the integrity of the 2020 election are the same people who are hesitant to take the COVID-19 vaccine, and the people who push back on the idea that the Jan. 6 Capitol riot was an “insurrection” (especially in light of the media-downplayed summer of rage) are “also susceptible to other types of misinformation,” according to Stelter.

    Stelter has a point. Many of the people who doubted the election are likely the same ones who now hesitate to stick themselves with an emergency-use mRNA vaccine. And perhaps those who rightly question “sedition” and “insurrection” language for the Capitol riot are reluctant to trust other media narratives.

    But that’s the extent of the CNN host’s accuracy in assessment. He then veers sharply off course. In Stelter’s summation, these political opponents of his are the problem. They’re gullible conspiracy theorists who foolishly fall for all types of misinformation — and this “information crisis,” Stelter and his media cronies surmise, is “killing us.”

    While the corporate media’s total lack of self-awareness is not its most nefarious failure, it is still a shocking shortcoming. When things go south, Stelter, Lemon, and the folks over at the Washington Post always look outward. They don’t look within. And they should.

    While it’s unsurprising when someone like Psaki runs cover for Biden and diverts blame to opponents — because it’s her job — the corrupt media have wrongly made it their job too. When the moment calls for introspection, their knee-jerk reaction is to revert to Democrat talking points and make their foes on the right out to be the bad guys.

    This brings us back to the question of why, a question Stelter, Democrat politicians, and their ilk refuse to grapple with honestly. Why would people believe so-called misinformation? It’s a pivotal question, and the left can’t bring themselves to answer it because it damns them.

    As Stelter says, these things are connected: “Disbelief about election results, distrust of public health officials, disregard for democratic principles.” His third point is a ubiquitous left-wing insult that’s lost all meaning, but what about the other two? What connects the “disbelief” and “distrust” he identifies?

    Maybe we can answer the question with a question. Might a person be justified in disbelieving media-touted election results concerning the defeat of Donald Trump if that same media spent four years delegitimizing his presidency, lying about collusion, weakening election integrity mechanisms, and then throttling stories unfavorable to his opponent? Might they have grounds for distrusting the public health officials who lied about masks, covered up the likely COVID-19 origin, kept kids home from school unjustifiably, and tanked the economy?

    This “disbelief” and “distrust” are inextricable from the media, which obediently carry water for the Biden family and Anthony Fauci and anybody else they believe will accomplish leftist goals. When Republicans reject those narratives and lose faith in the institutions overrun by left-wing hegemony, the media impugns motives such as “white supremacy” or smears them as conspiratorial QAnon nutbags.

    But do factions of conservatives really embrace “misinformation” because they’re all off their rockers? Or is it because would-be trustworthy sources of information have repeatedly failed them, lied to them, gaslit and slandered them?”


    B. Final answer.

    Liked by 2 people

  11. In a word…..


    “Did scientists stifle the lab-leak theory?

    Jeremy Farrar’s pandemic tale raises more questions than it answers”


    “In September 2019, even as a new respiratory virus may have started circulating in a central Chinese city, some prominent figures issued a wake up call to the world about the risks of a pandemic. The Global Preparedness Monitoring Board, a group of 15 politicians and scientists brought together by the World Health Organisation, warned that a new disease could spread rapidly around the planet, killing millions of people while sparking panic, crippling economies and destabilising security. “The world is not prepared for a fast-moving, virulent respiratory pathogen pandemic.”

    The board members included Sir Jeremy Farrar, director of the Wellcome Trust, alongside George F Gao, director-general of China’s Centre for Disease Control and Prevention, and Anthony Fauci, the US infectious diseases expert and presidential adviser. This was not surprising: Farrar is an expert in tropical diseases as well as head of Europe’s biggest philanthropic research funding body and a sure-footed political operator in the world of public health. His £29bn foundation also helped cover costs for the board.

    They were, of course, proved right almost instantly. Sadly, their report came too late to achieve its valiant aim of stepping up preparation for a pandemic given the speed of Covid-19’s spread from Wuhan last year. Yet their words were astonishingly prescient. And among the risks highlighted by these experts were the technological advances that “allow for disease-creating micro-organisms to be engineered or recreated in laboratories”, warning how their accidental release might be more devastating than a natural epidemic: “Accidental or deliberate events caused by high-impact respiratory pathogens pose global catastrophic biological risks.”

    History shows that labs can leak. So it is strange that Farrar, like his two expert friends, has played such a pivotal role in stifling suggestions that this new virus might have come from a laboratory rather than emerged through natural zoonotic transmission from animals. Spike: The Virus v The People — his book co-authored with Anjana Ahuja from the Financial Times — is a rather self-promotional work, lambasting the politicians he has been advising as a member of Sage for their failures in handling the disease, although his defence of publication seems valid. “Everyone needs to learn the lessons, scientists included,” he writes. “We only honour the dead by pledging to learn from the mistakes that cost them their lives. Protecting lives, and our way of life, is infinitely more important than protecting reputations.”

    Such was his fury with government actions last summer that Farrar sent a memo to colleagues about the need to “be honest and transparent”. So why does he decline to answer questions about his own actions in early days of this pandemic that led to the crushing of discussion over possibility that it might be the result of some kind of incident involving one of Wuhan’s laboratories? These include Wuhan Institute of Virology, the biggest bat coronavirus research unit in Asia that was carrying out risky experiments and had known safety concerns.

    “It was odd for a spillover event, from animals to humans, to take off in people so immediately and spectacularly in a city with a biolab” writes Farrar — especially with a new virus that “seemed almost designed to infect human cells”. Many others had similar suspicions — and in recent weeks, such concerns have started being taken more seriously.

    Yet Farrar was a central figure behind two landmark documents published by influential science journals that played a key role in shutting down discussion of the lab leak hypothesis by branding it conspiracy theory. These statements, signed and promoted by leading figures in the scientific establishment, pushed an idea that the pandemic was a natural occurrence by arguing against the plausibility of “any type of laboratory-based scenario”. Critics say this “false narrative” set back understanding of the disease for more than a year.

    Although Farrar criticises some aspects of China’s cover-up in his book — including confirming my report last June that scientists there had sequenced the Sars-CoV-2 genome in December 2019 before the world even knew about the disease — he went out of his way to praise Beijing in the early weeks of the pandemic. “China deserves great credit”, he gushed on Twitter in mid-January. Two weeks later he claimed it was “setting a new standard for outbreak response and deserves all our thanks”. Yet the reality was a Communist dictatorship that silenced doctors trying to warn citizens, covered up human transmission and allowed Chinese New Year festivities to carry on despite this entailing the largest annual migration of people on the planet.

    As the Wellcome boss says, “speed matters perhaps more than anything else in disease outbreaks”. Certainly things moved fast the day after that tweet when Fauci was sent an article in Science magazine examining how researchers were trying to unravel the virus origins. It detailed work by British scientist Peter Daszak and his friend Shi Zhengli from the Wuhan Institute of Virology in sampling thousands of bats and finding 500 new coronaviruses. The article discussed controversies over risky “gain of function” experiments, including mention of a 2015 paper by Shi and a US expert on modification of a Sars-like bat virus to boost infectivity to humans.

    Emails released through freedom of information requests show Fauci instantly circulated the article to US officials and contacted Farrar saying it was “of interest to the current discussion”. The Wellcome boss then set up a conference call for the pair of them with 11 other experts from around the world, warning their discussions were “in total confidence” and information “not to be shared” without prior agreement. Farrar also sent Fauci a link to an article on ZeroHedge, a financial blog, that tied a Wuhan researcher to the virus outbreak. The site was banned the next day from Twitter — a move the social media firm later admitted was “an error”.

    We do not know full details of what was discussed on the 1 February call since many of the emails were redacted and Farrar refused to tell me when I asked his office. We do know there were discussions that day over contacting Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, head of the WHO, with fears he might “prevaricate” — and that two days later the Ethiopian doctor made a call to “combat the spread of rumours and misinformation” and for countries “to work together in a spirit of solidarity”.

    We also know that five days after the conference call, Daszak began circulating the draft of a statement published later that month in The Lancet. This letter, signed by 27 global experts including Farrar and two Wellcome Trust colleagues, condemned “conspiracy theories suggesting that Covid-19 does not have a natural origin”. Later it emerged that Daszak had organised this missive, telling signatories they must ensure it was not “identifiable” as coming from one person or organisation so it was seen as “simply a letter from leading scientists”.

    This Lancet statement played a key role in stifling discussion of a possible lab leak. Such was its influence that Facebook reportedly used it to block discussion of the idea — leading to one of my articles being labelled a conspiracy theory. Yet four signatories have since said the hypothesis merits investigation — with one now convinced Sars-CoV-2 arose from a “sloppy” researcher. Strangely, Farrar does not mention the Lancet letter in his book. And there is only brief mention of Daszak, saying he should not have joined the WHO study team in Wuhan after dismissing the lab origin — including in a Guardian article attacking “conspiracy theories”, an article that Farrar promoted on social media. “Always worth reading @PeterDaszak” the Wellcome chief tweeted.

    Among the participants in Farrar’s call were four of the five eminent experts who published a commentary six weeks later in Nature Medicine entitled “The proximal origin of Sars-CoV-2”. This quintet — with lead author Kristian Andersen, an immunologist at Scripps Research institute in California — stated firmly that they “do not believe that any type of laboratory-based scenario is plausible”. This statement in a world-renowned journal, which has been accessed 5.5 million times, further depressed debate of alternative theories on the origins, despite being challenged by a few brave voices in the scientific community.

    Yet the release of thousands of Fauci emails last month revealed that Andersen, when sent the Science article at the end of January, admitted a close look at the genetic sequences of Sars-CoV-2 showed that “some of the features (potentially) look engineered” and that other experts agreed the genome was “inconsistent with expectations from evolutionary theory”. Andersen later explained this showed “clear example of the scientific process” — then deleted his combative account on Twitter. ”


    The “experts” have been lying from the start, as has a large portion of the medical community.

    Liked by 2 people

  12. Two different gain of function definitions. By Paul’s definition every lab is doing gain of function. Fauci is splitting hairs because American labs are engaged in similar research.


  13. I believe Jordan will be called as a witness so sitting on the committee is a conflict of interest. McCarthy probably knew this and appointed him deliberately to stall and discredit the committee.


  14. The fact that care workers aren’t mandated to have vaccines is insane (it’s not mandatory here either) Outbreaks in LTCs should not be happening. If you’re a health care you need to protect your patients


  15. Ukrainian corruption is a huge problem and prevents the West from helping Ukraine esp the EU. Bidens comments here are probably directed to the EU to signal he’s on board

    I find people are quick to accuse others of what they have and would do. The accusations directed at Hunter are similar to what the Trump family actually did. Did Hunter do it; I wouldn’t be surprised but let’s not pretend thus unique.

    Quickly read yesterday’s thread. Huge like to most of the comments. The phallic imagery and the rich boys on board has spawned memes everywhere. But let’s just tax them and direct the money to the common good not sone vanity project for aging men.


  16. Reminds me; Dolly Parton has used her millions to buy books for children and give out scholarships. Bezos ex wife is doing the same. Boys and their toys doesn’t look good in comparison

    Liked by 1 person

  17. Thank you, AMERICA’S FRONTLINE DOCTORS – keep spreading the truth!!!!


    “America’s Frontline Doctors—a nonprofit organization—filed a motion on July 19 seeking immediate injunctive relief to stop the emergency use authorization (EUA) of COVID-19 vaccines for three groups of Americans: anyone under 18 years old, anyone recovered from COVID-19, and those who haven’t received informed consent as defined by federal law.

    The motion was filed against Xavier Becerra, Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), and other defendants in a federal district court in the Northern District of Alabama.

    “The emergency declaration and its multiple renewals are illegal,” the complaint (pdf) alleges.

    According to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, when the Secretary of HHS declares that an emergency use is appropriate, the FDA (Food and Drug Administration) may then authorize unapproved use or EUA of the vaccines.

    On Feb. 4, 2020, then-Secretary of HHS Alex Azar declared a public health emergency, saying that existing circumstances justify the emergency use authorization.

    The complaint alleges that the legal requirements to issue and maintain COVID-19 vaccine EUAs are not met.

    Firstly, there is no underlying emergency and no “serious or life-threatening disease or condition,” the complaint notes.

    According to defendants’ death data, the CCP virus has an overall survivability rate of 99.8 percent globally, “on a par with the seasonal flu.”

    However, the defendants’ data is deliberately inflated, the complaint alleges, saying that HHS has changed the rules applicable to persons responsible for writing death certificates and requires them to make cause of death determinations primarily attributable to COVID-19. From last March, death certificates indicated “COVID-19 [as] being the underlying cause more often than not.”

    The way in which COVID-19 is diagnosed—using magnified values from PCR tests, which were also authorized for emergency use—guarantees “an unacceptably high number of false-positive results,” the complaint continued.

    Secondly, COVID-19 vaccines are not effective in diagnosing, treating, or preventing a disease or condition, which fails another requirement for issuing and maintaining EUAs.

    The complaint cited data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC): a total of 10,262 CCP virus breakthrough infections (detection of SARS-COV-2, 14 or more days after receiving required dosages) of those fully vaccinated were reported between Jan. 1 and April 30.

    “It is important to note that the vaccines were only shown to reduce symptoms—not block transmission,” the complaint added.

    Thirdly, the benefits do not outweigh the known and potential risks of each vaccine. Those risks are especially increased in reproductive health, potential death, neurological damage, more virulent strains, and others.

    Lastly, there are adequate, approved, and available alternatives to the vaccines, such as Ivermectin, Budesonide, Hydroxychloroquine, and others.

    The plaintiffs also allege that healthcare professionals and vaccine candidates are not being adequately informed, as the federal law requires.

    “No one ever provided me with any information regarding possible adverse reactions, nor did they provide me with any information regarding alternative treatments. I did not understand this was gene therapy rather than a traditional vaccine. Again, I also did not understand that the vaccines were not ‘approved’ by the FDA,” plaintiff Angelia Deselle said in a declaration included in the lawsuit.

    The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) was established to provide information regarding adverse events potentially caused by vaccines. The complaint pointed out that VAERS is not accurate and the federal government is failing to provide data from other sources such as the military, Medicare, and Medicaid.

    According to the complaint, a patient cannot give informed consent without an understanding of the risks.

    “CDC data indicates that children under 18 have a 99.998 percent COVID-19 recovery rate with no treatment,” the complaint says. “Injecting this under-18 subpopulation with the Vaccines threatens them with immediate, potentially life-threatening harm.”

    Last month, the CDC said more than 1,200 cases of heart inflammation in adolescents and young adults were reported following the administration of Pfizer’s or Moderna’s two-shot vaccines.

    “There is no public interest in subjecting children to experimental vaccination programs, to protect them from a disease that does not threaten them,” said Dr. Angelina Farella, a pediatrician who has actively practiced for over 25 years, in a declaration. Farella is an expert for America’s Frontline Doctors.

    The complaint asserts that Americans who have recovered from COVID-19 should not get vaccinated.

    It cited a recent Cleveland Clinic study that demonstrates natural immunity through prior infection is stronger than any benefit conferred by a COVID vaccine. Another study published in the New England Journal of Medicine shows that for those with preexisting COVID-19 immunity, 89 percent of them reported adverse side-effects after receiving the first vaccine injection.

    “COVID recovered patients are at extremely high risk to a vaccine,” plaintiffs’ expert Dr. Richard Urso said in a declaration. “They have all the requisite components of immune memory. Vaccination may activate a hyperimmune response leading to a significant tissue injury and possibly death.”

    Jane Doe, a computer programmer with expertise in the healthcare data analytics field, filed a sworn statement indicating the actual number of deaths following the COVID-19 vaccination is about 45,000.

    “It is my professional estimate that VAERS database, while extremely useful, is under-reported by a conservative factor of at least 5. On July 9, 2021, there were 9,048 deaths reported in VAERS,” Jane Doe said in her declaration (pdf).

    “I queried data from CMS medical claims with regard to vaccines and patient deaths, and have assessed that the deaths occurring within 3 days of vaccination are higher than those reported in VAERS by a factor of at least 5. This would indicate the true number of vaccine-related deaths was at least 45,000.”

    Jane Doe noted that the swine flu vaccine was taken off the market because of 53 deaths reported following the vaccination.”

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.