I will be leaving the great Walter Reed Medical Center today at 6:30 P.M,’ says president
President Trump announced he’d be discharged from Walter Reed Military Medical Center Monday afternoon, and assured the American people not to fear the coronavirus.
“I will be leaving the great Walter Reed Medical Center today at 6:30 P.M. Feeling really good!” Trump tweeted.
“Don’t be afraid of Covid. Don’t let it dominate your life. We have developed, under the Trump Administration, some really great drugs & knowledge. I feel better than I did 20 years ago!”
Trump also poked fun at the mainstream media for lambasting him over his impromptu drive-by for his supporters outside Walter Reed.
Trump and the First Lady Melania were admitted to Walter Reed Friday evening after testing positive for coronavirus and experiencing symptoms.
The president had been given supplemental oxygen, Remdesivir treatment, and anti-inflammatory treatments under constant monitoring by the Walter Reed medical team over the weekend.
Keep praying for our President and our First Lady America. We aren’t out of the woods yet.
In a 371-18 vote, House Democrats voted to essentially make opposition to pedophilia a hate crime in their pursuit to demonize the Q Anon movement.
“President Trump has not condemned the QAnon conspiracy, which revolves around the baseless theory that Trump and his allies are working to expose a cabal of Democrats, media figures and celebrities who are running an international child trafficking ring,” the resolution states.
“The First Amendment is a powerful weapon. Turning that weapon on those who use fantasies as a menacing grift is the responsibility of reasonable citizens, legislators and executives.”
Posted at 6:30 pm on July 13, 2020 by Michael Thau
As RedState’s very own Sister Toldjah reported earlier today, the doubts President Trump recently expressed about the wisdom of Dr. Fauci’s advice on COVID-19 have elicited a chorus of smug accusation from the usual suspects that he’s “ignoring the experts.”
Sister Toldjah pointed out that it’s hard to know what their complaint even means given how often Fauci and other media-anointed authorities have done total 180s.
But, even putting aside how their advice seems to change with the political winds, the idea that there’s some scientific consensus in favor of the extreme measures inflicted on us in response to COVID-19 couldn’t be further from the truth.
Though you don’t hear their perspectives on CNN, countless scientists and doctors have tried to warn us not only that COVID-19 isn’t nearly as deadly as we’ve been led to believe; they’re also confident that the real threat to public health we’re facing is from the lockdowns.
For example, though the establishment media has somehow failed to make it widely known, in May, over 600 physicians from “all specialties and from all states” signed a public letter to President Trump describing, not COVID-19, but the lockdowns as a “mass casualty incident.” Since the letter first appeared, the number of doctors signing on has grown into the thousands. Their letter warns:
It is impossible to overstate the short, medium, and long-term harm to people’s health with a continued shutdown. Losing a job is one of life’s most stressful events, and the effect on a persons health is not lessened because it also has happened to 30 million other people. Keeping schools and universities closed is incalculably detrimental for children, teenagers, and young adults for decades to come. The millions of casualties of a continued shutdown will be hiding in plain sight, but they will be called alcoholism, homelessness, suicide, heart attack, stroke, or kidney failure. In youths it will be called financial instability, unemployment, despair, drug addiction, unplanned pregnancies, poverty, and abuse.
600 physicians sent a letter to @realdonaldtrump saying a continued shutdown can lead to a "mass casualty incident" with "negative health consequences." It is time to reopen the nation. @gracemarietweethttps://t.co/fg9Z1LzDDm
Similarly, way back in April, two California emergency room physicians gave a press conference in which they rejected basically every single premise used to justify the lockdowns. Moreover, unlike Fauci, they actually gave detailed explanations of the reasons behind what they were saying rather than demanding blind obedience.
Dr. Dan Erickson and Dr. Artin Massihi presented data from all across the world, indicating that Fauci’s response to COVID-19 was entirely out of proportion with the threat it posed. They also explained that isolating healthy people is an unheard-of response that violates the basic tenets of both microbiology and immunology. And, like the thousands of doctors who signed that letter to the president, they described in painful detail the disastrous public health consequences working emergency room physicians on the front lines are seeing every day as a result of these lockdowns.
“Child molestation is increasing at a severe rate. We can go over multiple cases of children who’ve been molested due to angry family members who are intoxicated, who are home, who have no paycheck. These things last a lifetime. They aren’t like a seasonal flu, they are going to follow these children and affect them in a negative fashion for their entire lives… Spousal abuse. We see people coming in here with black eyes and cuts on their face… Alcoholism…anxiety… depression… suicide is spiking… These are things I’m hearing from E.R.s, talking to my doctors, and talking to people across the country to find out what they’re seeing. [They will] effect people for a lifetime, not for a season.
In a sign of how much our elites really care about following the science, Youtube banned the video of Dr. Erickson and Dr. Massihi’s press conference even though it not only featured medical experts fully explaining the science behind their conclusions; a local News channel also posted it. Fortunately, the video is still available on other platforms that don’t censor views contradicting the mainstream media’s official narratives.
Some local news outlets have also acted like journalists instead of gatekeepers and given the public a chance to hear Dr. Erickson’s take.
But Youtube also censored Laura Ingraham when she interviewed Doctors Erickson and Massihi on Fox News:
https://twitter.com/qlactaka/status/1255134973918498816 [Twitter has now suspended this account…funny, that.]
Nor are Erickson and Massihi by any means the only physicians who’ve tried to warn us that the lockdowns Fauci’s pushed have Nothing to do with “following the science.” Some have even thus far managed to avoid YouTube censorship.
Have you ever actually listened to a doctor who is skeptical of the mainstream narrative about Covid-19? Dr. Jeff Barke is a good example and as far as I can tell, he makes some good points. See what you think.https://t.co/0bQAg9gGyD
As Powerline’s John Hinderaker wrote back in April in a post linking to Drs. Erickson and Massihi’s now censored Youtube video:
It is perhaps unfortunate that bureaucrat doctors and academic doctors have dominated public discussion of the Wuhan virus. What some would call real doctors–those who actually treat patients–have been little heard.
Dissent from Fauscism, however, is by no means restricted to working physicians. Eminent scientists with more theoretical backgrounds have also tried to get the word out that the prescriptions Fauci’s pushed on us, far from “following the science,” are, in reality, the worst sort of pseudoscientific quack medicine.
John P. A. Ioannidis is a professor of medicine at Stanford University and both a professor of epidemiology and population health. When these lockdowns first started kicking in, Dr. Ioannidis published an op-ed titled:
Again in sharp contrast to Fauci, Dr. Ionnidis broke down his reasons for thinking the threat of COVID-19 was dangerously exaggerated.
Since then, Dr. Ioannidis has researched the prevalence of the COVID-19 virus, which indicates that its fatality rate is likely comparable to the flu’s
Alan, the 4.5% number is derived from known cases. When selection bias is removed (testing only people who are sick), mortality is more like flu. Get a grip.https://t.co/HZ5Vi7UMFg
Media airheads like CNN’s S.E. Cupp excoriated President Trump for ignoring the science when he criticized Fauci. Meanwhile, in the real world, Nobel Prize-winning biophysicist Michael Levitt has been hammering away at how idiotic this lockdown is in terms that make the president’s remarks seem mild:
“Thus, the Western World has been encouraged by their lack of responsibility coupled with uncontrolled media and academic errors to commit suicide for an excess burden of death of one month. Surely we or someone we know can do something about this!” Now 105 days later! HELP!!! pic.twitter.com/Xa65z6ciFl
Apparently, S. E. Cupp doesn’t think Nobel Prize-winning biophysicists know anything about science.
Likewise, for Oxford University’s Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. They’ve been presenting cold hard data since the day these lockdowns began showing that Fauci‘s testimony to congress that COVID-19 is “at least ten times more lethal than the flu” had no basis in scientific reality.
Sorry, of course (as is also evident in pic), it is Infection Fatality Rate, not Case Fatality Rate
Former chief of neuroradiology at Stanford University Medical Center, Dr. Scott W. Atlas, warned us way back in April that, Fauci’s lockdown, rather than being based on science, contradicted the “empirical evidence” as well as the “fundamental principles of biology established for decades.” According to Dr. Atlas’s expert opinion:
The overwhelming evidence all over the world consistently shows that a clearly defined group — older people and others with underlying conditions — is more likely to have a serious illness requiring hospitalization and more likely to die from COVID-19. Knowing that, it is a commonsense, achievable goal to target isolation policy to that group… The appropriate policy, based on fundamental biology and the evidence already in hand, is to institute a more focused strategy like some outlined in the first place: Strictly protect the known vulnerable, self-isolate the mildly sick and open most workplaces and small businesses with some prudent large-group precautions… Let’s stop underemphasizing empirical evidence while instead doubling down on hypothetical models. Facts matter.
Dr. Scott W. Atlas: 'The data is in — stop the panic and end the total isolation' https://t.co/m8qzu41SP9
I could go on listing working physicians and distinguished scientists who are opposed to Fauci’s lockdown all day. And, like those already listed above but unlike Fauci, the reasons for their opinions would be clearly explained, and their assessments wouldn’t change with the shifting political winds.
But there’s a more general point that’s crucial here.
S. E Cupp, Pete Buttigieg, and all the others who defend Fauci by chanting “follow the science” don’t have a clue what they’re talking about. Nothing could be less scientific than blindly following the word of some alleged authority and trying to bully everyone else into doing so by mindlessly regurgitating some idiotic catchphrase. Science is about believing things for a reason, not because some media-anointed expert insists on them.
Science is also about research. And if Cupp, Buttigieg, and the rest had the slightest interest in discovering whether our response to COVID-19 was justified, they would have spent a half-hour doing some and found any number of prominent scientists and working physicians who believe these lockdowns have violated the basic tenets of science and altogether reject Fauci’s scaremongering about COVID-19.
In fact, one scientist whose opinion both Cupp and Buttigieg respect published an article in the New England Journal of Medicine just 11 days before Fauci’s March 11 testimony to congress. And, just like all the many dissenters cited above, this highly respected researcher totally rejected Fauci’s frightening claim that COVID-19 is “at least ten times more lethal than the flu.”
According to this researcher, whose opinions are also often featured in the mainstream media:
The overall clinical consequences of Covid-19 may ultimately be more akin to those of a severe seasonal influenza (which has a case fatality rate of approximately 0.1%).
The author of that New England Journal of Medicine piece was none other than Dr. Fauci himself. Apparently, the “expert opinion” to which S. E. Cupp and Pete Buttigieg are trying to bully the rest of us into joining them in blind allegiance is for the rubes and not something Fauci wanted to present to other experts unlikely to fall for bogus stats.
Forgot to include link to Fauci's article giving his real opinion on C-19 death rate. Appeared at NEJoM website 2/28 & in print edition 3/26. So Fauci lied to congress on 3/11 when he said its death rate was 10 times worse than flu. Time to #arrestFauci https://t.co/1KwfqDg6jN
So the next time someone tries to convince you that COVID-19 is substantially more deadly than the seasonal flu, just tell them they need to shut up and listen to Dr. Fauci.
***
Did you know that the research on COVID-19 has repeatedly shown that around half of us have preexisting “crossover immunity” from prior contact with very common but harmless variant strains?
How could you when top public health officials like Anthony Fauci and CDC Director Robert Redfield have not only withheld the data but gone so far as to commit perjury by denying it before Congress?
Find out more on how the real COVID-19 science is being suppressed:
Were you aware that the Chinese Communist Party started hyping COVID-19 in their official English language publication way back on January 1st?
In the ensuing months, they conducted a far-reaching propaganda campaign to convince Western nations to commit suicide by imposing these unprecedented anti-science lockdowns and make billions selling us shoddy medical supplies along the way.
The CCP even used a mass of fake social media accounts to attack dissenting Governor Kristi Noem for having enough brains and courage to buck the tied and not impose their lockdown-weapon on South Dakota.
For the details on how China attacked America with what their top military strategist has called a “new concept of weapon” see:
From Unrestricted Warfare by Qiao Liang, China's top modern strategist:
"What must be made clear is that the new concept of weapons is in the process of creating weapons that are closely linked to the lives of the common people."
The
disastrous policies and shocking misinformation peddled by those
charged with safeguarding America’s public health these past six months
may be more than just incompetence or corruption. In some cases, it
might be treason.
“America has no choice but to come to some kind of way to live peacefully with China”
Steve Watson | Infowars.com – OCTOBER 1, 2020
Chinese state media once again attacked diversity of opinion in the US to promote the Communist state’s brand of global authoritarianism, this time reviewing the Presidential debate between Trump and Biden, and noting that Americans must be “disappointed.”
Suddenly appearing to become television critics, China’s Global Times on Wednesday described the debate as “full of personal attacks and disruptions which jeopardized the audience’s viewing experience”.
The State run outlet described the debate as “epitome of U.S. chaos,” and a “representation of the sharp division within U.S. society.”
The piece also covered “racial issues”, suggesting that they “are triggered by the fundamental divergences over US values and where the US heads within its society.”
“Such divergences are implacable. What is worse, the US leadership is intensifying the divergences, making conflicts between different races more difficult to resolve,” the article proclaimed.
Given the communist Chinese government’s fondness of internment camps for Uyghur Muslims, using them as forced slave labor based on their ethnicity, which was even mentioned in the article, it is hardly in a position to lecture America about “racial issues”.
Gerald Celente guest hosts The Alex Jones Show to break down how the ChiComs are infiltrating and subverting the American people.
Another state publication, The People’s Daily, got in on the act, lamenting on how bad it feels for Americans because their politicians won’t make nice with communist China.
“The US can neither achieve lasting unity by “making” foreign enemies at the expense of America’s own interests nor deceive the public for a long time by playing a dangerous game of misleading the world about its relationship with China, as truth will come to light sooner or later,” the article proclaimed.
“It should be noted that the extreme words and deeds of the US for grabbing attention and gaining private profits will harm the country’s future,” the piece also threatened.
It also claimed that America’s “political shows to deflect attention and shift the blame to other countries are not conducive to solving the increasingly serious systemic crises inside the US,” adding that “Instead, such practices have caused damage to international relations that should not be overlooked.”
The piece concluded that “short-sighted political calculations are doomed to do more harm that good to the U.S.,” further claiming that “America has no choice but to come to some kind of way to live peacefully with China.”
Commentator Gordon G. Chang noted that diversity of opinion and heated debate is actually the cornerstone of a free country, something that the Chinese government knows all too well, and therefore has almost completely eradicated:
Finally “Cardinal” Comey meets his match. Senator Josh Hawley from Missouri destroys Comey in yesterday’s hearing before the US Senate.
Fired FBI Director Jim Comey, who was right in the middle of the coup to remove President Trump from office, was in front of the US Senate yesterday. He spoke from home while the Senate met in Washington, D.C. to question him.
The real highlight of the hearing was when Missouri Senator Josh Hawley had his turn.
Below are the transcripts from a couple of the exchanges as recorded by PJ Media:
HAWLEY: Do you regret your role in this unprecedented misleading of a FISA court?
COMEY: I don’t regret my role, I regret that it happened?
HAWLEY: Why not? Why don’t you regret your role in the unprecedented misleading of a FISA court?
COMEY: I regret that the FBI supplied information to a FISA court that was inaccurate, incomplete, and should have been updated.
HAWLEY: Do you regret that you signed off on it?
COMEY: Well, I regret that it happened. The only reason that I’m hesitating is that what the FBI director does in connection with a FISA is actually very narrow but put that to the side, it’s important that it be accurate and it wasn’t and I regret that.
HAWLEY: You’ve said this several times and I frankly don’t understand it—the certification that the statute requires is a certification by the FBI director as to the contents of the application. You signed off on it. The FISA court said it was so misleading that it now had reason to doubt the FBI’s truthfulness across the board. Are you responsible for these certifications or not?
COMEY: I don’t believe you’re accurately describing the statutory requirements…
HAWLEY: Are you responsible for these certifications, or not? Answer my question.
COMEY: I sign certifications on every FISA the FBI sends over to the FISA court, including these.
HAWLEY: Are you responsible for this misleading evidence given to the FISA court? Yes or no?
COMEY: Yes in the sense of command responsibility, no in that I didn’t have personal knowledge that would have led me to understand that we weren’t supplying complete information.
Hawley pressed Comey on this issue:
HAWLEY: Let’s talk about what personal knowledge you have. When you certified the first Carter Page FISA application you believed that Mr. Steele was working for the Democratic Party, didn’t you?
COMEY: I don’t remember if I knew the Democratic Party, I knew that he was working for political opponents of President Trump.
HAWLEY: Now let me remind you of your testimony under oath on December 7th, 2018, at the House Oversight Committee in which you said, and I quote, “Steele was retained by Republicans adverse to Mr. Trump during the primary season and then his work was underwritten after that by Democrats opposed to Mr. Trump during the general election season.” Now, surely you recognized at the time that relying so heavily on a biased source would undermine public confidence in the FBI’s activities, didn’t you?
COMEY: No, I did not.
HAWLEY: Why wouldn’t you? You told the same committee…and I quote, “When you’re the leader of a justice agency,” that’s YOU, “the appearance of bias is as important as the existence of actual bias.” You also said, “A reasonable appearance of bias can corrupt the American people’s faith in your work as much as actual bias can.” Do you stand by those remarks?
COMEY: Very much so.
HAWLEY: But you nevertheless allowed the Democratic Party to leverage the federal government’s most invasive intelligence capabilities against President Trump and you personally signed off on it. You also knew at the time that other officials in the Department of Justice had serious concerns.
But then Hawley destroyed Comey with evidence refuting Comey’s comments and actions:
HAWLEY: Do you know who Stuart Evans is?
COMEY: I do.
HAWLEY: Mr. Evans was a lawyer in the national security division of the DOJ under President Obama, wasn’t he?
COMEY: I don’t know. I think he was a career official at the Department of Justice…
HAWLEY: He was a lawyer in the national security division of the Department of Justice. Before the first Carter Page FISA application Mr. Evans raised serious concerns about the ostensibly partisan nature of the information provided by Mr. Steele, did he not?
COMEY: I don’t know.
HAWLEY: He did. The IG reports it on pages 136 and 137 on this report and you knew of those concerns before you signed off on the FISA application, didn’t you?
COMEY: I don’t think I knew before, I remember reading a footnote that attempted to inform the court of potential bias.
HAWLEY: No, actually the Inspector General found on page 139 of the report and I quote “on October 12, 2016 Evans’ concerns about Steele were briefed to Comey.”
COMEY: (shrug)
HAWLEY: And yet you signed off, knowing that the research was funded by the Democrat Party, knowing that senior officials in the DOJ National Security Division had serious concerns, you signed off.
Below is the 10 minute exchange.
Hawley was right at the end of this exchange as well when he shared, “It’s time we held people responsible.”
A hot mic captured the moment a Pennsylvania House rep admitted to the state’s governor Tom Wolf that face masks are only being worn for the camera as “political theater.”
In video footage of the Tuesday press conference, Gov. Wolf can be overheard addressing Democrat District 143 Rep. Wendy Ullman off-camera, coordinating the move to take their masks off while they speak on the microphone.
“So Wendy,” Wolf tells Rep. Ullman. “I’m gonna take my mask off when I speak, so-”
“I will as well,” Rep. Ullman acknowledges, adding, “just, I’m waiting so that we can do a little political theater.”
“Okay,” Gov. Wolf responds, as they both proceed to laugh.
“So that it’s on-camera,” Ullman adds, her voice getting louder as she nears the mic and points towards reporters.
Ullman appeared mask-less beside a masked Gov. Wolf in a photo later shared on her Twitter account following the presser.
I joined Gov. Tom Wolf and state Sen. Steve Santarsiero to stress the necessity for affordable health care coverage for Pennsylvanians, especially in the midst of an unprecedented pandemic. Learn more:https://t.co/z22IXKM0Lfpic.twitter.com/WQZ7zffvoY
After Ullman finishes her speech, Gov. Wolf approaches the mic and also removes his face mask before speaking, as can be observed in the CBS Pittsburgh report below.
The awkward hot mic moment comes as Gov. Wolf faces a lawsuit from two Pennsylvania couples calling his statewide mask mandate an oppressive, tyrannical “political symbol.”
“During this current political climate, a mask has become a symbol of government oppression. Because a mask has become a political symbol during this current and highly politicized pandemic, the wearing of a mask is a form of symbolic speech,” the lawsuit states, according to PhillyVoice.com. “Consequently, via the mask mandate, defendants are compelling plaintiffs to engage in a form of expression and to convey a message with which they disagree.”
‘It’s an open secret. She [Omar] will do anything that she can do to get elected and she has hundreds of people on the streets doing that,’ says whistleblower
Project Veritas has uncovered a ballot harvesting scheme by the political allies and associates of Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) with the help of a whistleblower, Snapchat videos, and undercover recordings.
A ballot harvester named Liban Mohamed described on his own Snapchat how he collected ballots from the Somali-American community in Omar’s district to help his brother Jamal Osman win a special election for a vacant Ward 6 city council race.
“Numbers don’t lie. Numbers don’t lie. You can see my car is full. All these here are absentees’ ballots. Can’t you see? Look at all these, my car is full. All these are for Jamal Osman… We got 300 today for Jamal Osman only,” said Liban Mohamed in several Snapchat videos posted July 1 and July 2 on his own Snapchat profile.
“Money is everything. Money is the king in this world. If you got no money, you should not be here period. You know what I am saying.”
Mohamed said that money is central to the political operation.
“Money is everything and a campaign is managed by money,” he said. “You cannot campaign with $200 or $100 you got from your grandmother or grandfather. You cannot campaign with that. You gotta have an investment to campaign. You gotta have fundraisers.”
Project Veritas founder James O’Keefe joins The Alex Jones Show to explain a ballot scheme he uncovered tied to far-left darling Rep. Ilhan Omar.
A local whistleblower and insider in the Somali community named Omar Jamal came to Project Veritas to expose the corruption in Omar’s political web.
Jamal, as part of his participation in the investigation, interviewed a Somali-American who functions as a ballot harvester his community. In the interview, the harvester described how he was paid to vote in the Aug. 11 special election and primary, along with a Project Veritas undercover journalist.
The harvester said Somali-American vote-buying operatives from the Omar machine came to his apartment building to oversee the voter filling out the paperwork.
Omar operatives request the ballots and fill them out for the voters, he said.
“They come to us. They came to our homes. They said: ‘This year, you will vote for Ilhan,’” he said. “They said: ‘We will make the absentee ballots. We will fill out the forms for you and when you get them back, we will again fill it out and send it.”
There was no need to go to the voting site, because the Omar operatives told him: “You stay home and you will not go to the place.”
After the ballots are signed and documented the harvester said he got paid.
“When we sign the voting document and they fill it out is when they give us the money,” he said. “The minute we signed the thing [ballot] for the election. That’s when we get paid.”
Project Veritas’ legal adviser Jered Ede said Mohamed and the other individuals involved violated both federal and state law, punishable by up to five years in prison in some cases.
“The federal laws, 18 USC §597 and 52 U.S.C. §10307(c), are quite clear,” he said. “In the case of 18 USC §597, it is punishable by up to two years in prison and in the case of 52 USC §10307 it’s punishable by up to $10,000 in fines and up to five years in prison.”
The Minnesota statute, 211B.13(1) prohibits paying a person or receiving money to register to vote or to vote, he said. “This is a state felony punishable by more than one-year imprisonment.”
Ali Alexander breaks down the newest election theft occurring, this time again we take our eyes to Broward country where an unmarked vehicle is caught, this time on camera by Laura Loomer, with piles of election ballots.
Researcher and attorney Michael P. Senger suggests that the Chinese government launched an aggressive propaganda campaign to exaggerate the severity of coronavirus in order to force the rest of the world into a draconian lockdown that would serve to benefit Beijing.
In an article for Tablet Magazine, Senger details how in late January, “international COVID-19 hysteria began” with a series of suspicious videos posted to social media sites showing people in China suddenly collapsing on the streets, including one instance where a man held out his arm to break his fall, suggesting the collapse was staged.
After tens of millions of people were confined to their homes during one of the most brutally enforced lockdowns in history, Senger notes how in February the CCP “reported an exponential decline in coronavirus cases, until March 19 when they announced their lockdown had eliminated domestic cases entirely.”
China has officially recorded just 4,634 deaths from coronavirus, despite having a population almost five times larger than the United States, where the current death toll stands at over 205,000.
The World Health Organization and other scientific experts then waxed lyrical about China’s response to COVID-19, which is what led to virtually every other country on the planet mirroring its approach.
However, Senger argues that the initial hysteria over COVID and lockdown that followed could have been a carefully orchestrated Chinese propaganda campaign to hoodwink its hegemonic competitors into destroying their own economies in response to a virus with a relatively low fatality rate.
The researcher documents how armies of Chinese bot accounts on Twitter were instrumental in promoting early lockdowns in countries like Italy while bombarding political figures who refused to order strict lockdowns, such as South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem, with criticism and abuse.
By promoting fraudulent data, aggressively deploying disinformation, and flexing its institutional clout, Beijing transformed the snake oil of lockdowns into “science,” crippling rival economies, expanding its influence, and sowing authoritarian values.https://t.co/VdC2DkDckG
He also highlights how Chinese state media organs savaged the “herd immunity” approach, which was initially considered but then rejected by several western leaders, as a violation of “human rights.”
Sweden, which went for the herd immunity approach by refusing to enforce a lockdown and came out economically better than any other European country, was also targeted by the bots, as was British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, who was accused of engaging in “genocide” by initially considering the herd immunity approach.
Senger’s conclusion explores why China aggressively emphasized the need for global lockdowns.
“The most benign possible explanation for the CCP’s campaign for global lockdowns is that the party aggressively promoted the same lie internationally as domestically—that lockdowns worked. For party members, when Wuhan locked down it likely went without saying that the lockdown would “eliminate” coronavirus; if Xi willed it to be true, then it must be so. This is the totalitarian pathology that George Orwell called “double-think.” But the fact that authoritarian regimes always lie does not give them a right to spread deadly lies to the rest of the world, especially by clandestine means.”
“And then there’s the possibility that by shutting down the world, Xi Jinping, who vaulted through the ranks of the party, quotes ancient Chinese scholars, has mastered debts and derivatives, studies complexity science, and envisions a socialist future with China at its center, knew exactly what he was doing.”
Senger’s theory holds weight when one considers how China has now been back to “normal” for months, while western countries, still panicked by COVID hysteria, continue to lockdown their citizens and cripple their own economies despite hospitalizations and deaths due to coronavirus having flatlined in countries like the United Kingdom.
We are now 50 days out from the most important election in world history — tune into this live Sunday transmission to get the latest analysis from Alex Jones and Roger Stone who is with Trump in Las Vegas
Infowars.com – September 13, 2020
Alex Jones breaks down the record-breaking wildfires spreading across the Pacific Northwest, with police claiming leftists are behind some of the blazes. Also, Roger Stone joins the show to explain the new coup plot hatched against President Trump with only 50 days to go until Election Day.
Rioters can now be hit with federal charges for crimes local district attorney declines to prosecute
By Dan Lyman Wednesday, September 02, 2020
State police officers in Oregon have been federally deputized as Portland riots rage out of control and the local district attorney refuses to prosecute certain misdemeanors, according to reports.
Some Oregon State Police (OSP) officers have received cross-deputization from the U.S. Marshals Service, authorizing them to enforce federal law, while also enabling the Department of Justice (DOJ) to pursue charges against rioters who commit crimes against these officers or disobey their orders.
This means state troopers can now crack down on protestors in Portland knowing they’ll likely face harsher punishment from the US Attorney’s Office rather than the local DA.
“Oregon State Police are sending in federally deputized troopers to respond to protest-related violence in Portland — effectively circumventing the Multnomah County DA’s office, which OSP has criticized in the past for not prioritizing prosecutions,” independent journalist Deborah Bloom reported on Wednesday.
“This means state troopers can now crack down on protestors in Portland knowing they’ll likely face harsher punishment from the US Attorney’s Office rather than the local DA.”
Bloom reports an OSP spokesperson informed her the agency is “not criticizing any officials and we respect the authority of the District Attorney, but to meet the Governor’s charge of bringing violence to an end we will use all lawful methods at our disposal.”
The move was reportedly made in late July, but is now receiving more attention as the federal government increases pressure on state and local officials to put an end to surging violence and acts of domestic terrorism in Portland.
“They are still Oregon State Police,” a spokesman for Oregon Gov. Kate Brown told KGW. “Some OSP troopers were federally deputized earlier this summer in order to be able to even enter the Hatfield Courthouse during their assignment downtown.”
“They are committed to working with our community, with the goal of protecting free speech, keeping the peace, and keeping people safe as they exercise their right to peacefully protest.”
Portland has been rocked by nearly 100 straight days of violent riots, arson, and a recent homicide.
This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. Cookie settingsACCEPT
Privacy & Cookies Policy
Privacy Overview
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
