Dr. Anthony Fauci and GOP Sen. Rand Paul on Tuesday clashed again over the Biden administration’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic, with the Republican lawmaker also accusing President Biden’s top medical adviser of conspiring to silence critics.
Paul, in a Senate hearing at which Fauci testified, introduced an email exchange between Fauci and former National Institutes of Health Director Dr. Francis Collins, in which Collins suggested “creating a quick and devastating public takedown” of several epidemiologists from Harvard, Stanford, and Oxford, who apparently held opinions about COVID with which Francis and Fauci disagreed.
“In an email exchange with Dr. Collins, you conspire, and I quote here directly from the email, to ‘create a quick and devastating published takedown’ of three prominent epidemiologists from Harvard, Oxford and Stanford,” Paul said.
Paul also said: “A planner who believes he is ‘the science’ leads to an arrogance that justifies, in his mind, using government resources to smear and to destroy the reputations of other scientists who disagree with him.”
Fauci, also director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, contested Paul’s claims, which included that Fauci promptly agreed to Collins’ plan.
“In usual fashion, senator, you are distorting everything about me,” Fauci said. “You do the same thing every hearing.”
To be sure, Paul, also a doctor, has been among Fauci’s most vocal critics since the early stages of the pandemic and has called for him to fired from his government post.
Their heated exchange Tuesday appeared to peak when Fauci pulled out photographs from the senator’s campaign website with the words “Fire Dr. Fauci” beside a picture of the doctor and an option to donate to the Paul’s reelection campaign.
Fauci also repeatedly accused Paul of attacking him for political gain.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Rochelle Walensky; acting Food and Drug Administration Commissioner Dr. Janet Woodcock; and Dawn O’Connell, the Department of Health and Human Services’ assistant secretary for preparedness and response, also testified before the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee on the pandemic response and the surge in COVID cases as a result of the highly contagious Omicron variant.
Questions about confusing communication efforts from the government to the American people about things like booster shots, test availability, and CDC guidelines quickly devolved into emotional, political sparring when Paul was given the floor.
The lawmaker opened his questioning period by calling Fauci a scientist who “rules by mandate” but often makes mistakes.
Committee Chairwoman Democratic Sen. Patty Murray briefly allowed Fauci to respond to some of Paul’s remarks, during which time he discussed the recent arrest of a man Iowa who was allegedly on his way to Washington, D.C., with an AR-15 weapon in his car to kill him.
Fauci said such accusations from Paul “kindle the crazies out there” to behave in way that could be harmful and dangerous to him and his family.
Paul, in 2017, was attacked on his own lawn by a neighbor who ran onto the lawmaker’s property and tackled him. As a result of the attack, Paul suffered five rib fractures and later required medical attention for pneumonia.
Since the beginning of the plandemic, the world was told that getting “vaccinated” with an Operation Warp Speed injection would “cure” the Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19). Nearly two years have passed, however, and the exact opposite is proving to be true.
A new letter from researcher Günter Kampf that was published in The Lancet blows some major holes in the mainstream injection narrative, one of the biggest being that Fauci Flu shots are not stopping the spread as claimed.
In fact, there appears to be a greater spread of illness and death among those who took the shots in obedience to government guidelines compared to those who left their immune systems alone to fight disease naturally.
According to Kampf, the epidemiological relevance of the fully vaccinated “is increasing,” based on the latest data. At best, the jabs are providing no protection whatsoever. At worst, they are making the people who take them more prone to a negative health outcome.
“In the UK, it was described that secondary attack rates among household contacts exposed to fully vaccinated index cases were similar to household contacts exposed to unvaccinated index cases (25% for vaccinated vs 23% for unvaccinated),” Kampf writes.
“[Twelve] of 31 infections in fully vaccinated household contacts (39%) arose from fully vaccinated epidemiologically linked index cases. Peak viral load did not differ by vaccination status or variant type.”
In Germany, he adds, the rate of symptomatic covid among the vaccinated is increasing. Back in July, it was around 16.9 percent among patients 60 years of age and older. As of October 27, that figure skyrocketed to 58.9 percent, “providing clear evidence of the increasing relevance of the fully vaccinated as a possible source of transmission.”
CDC: Most highly vaccinated counties are also the most diseased counties
A similar phenomenon is occurring in the United Kingdom as well. Symptomatic covid cases among the fully vaccinated are rising just as they are in Israel and elsewhere where Fauci Flu shots are being widely administered.
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recently announced that four of the top five counties with the highest percentage of fully vaccinated population (84.3-99.9 percent) are “high” transmission counties.
All of this would suggest that getting jabbed likely means getting sick or spreading sickness to others. And yet the official story is that the fully vaccinated are not to even be counted as a potential source of transmission.
“It appears to be grossly negligent to ignore the vaccinated population as a possible and relevant source of transmission when deciding about public health control measures,” Kampf says.
To continue calling the current situation a “pandemic of the unvaccinated” is simply false, Kampf warns. In reality, this is a pandemic of the vaccinated, as the plandemic would already be over had everyone chosen to remain unvaccinated.
“I don’t bend over for bullies trying to ‘stigmatize’ me,” wrote a Natural News reader about this unfair mischaracterization of the unvaccinated. “And being stigmatized in a sick society is a badge of honor while being well adjusted is the opposite.”
“The ‘vaccinated’ are the ones to avoid,” wrote another. “They are the sick. They are the disease spreaders. They have compromised immune systems. They have 251x the viral load in their nasal passages and throat. Stop cowering and go on the offense.”
This writer would further add that, yes, it is time for the unvaccinated to stand boldly and unashamed, and to equip themselves with this kind of knowledge in order to counter the constant falsehoods coming from the media and the government.
The latest Sage papers have been published, envisaging anything from 200 to 6,000 deaths a day from Omicron depending on how many more restrictions we’ll get — up to and very much including another lockdown. Earlier today I had an unexpected chance to ask questions of Graham Medley, the chair of the Sage modeling committee.
He’s a professor at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (LSHTM) which last weekend published a study on Omicron with very gloomy scenarios and made the case for more restrictions. But JP Morgan had a close look at this study and spotted something big: all the way through, LSHTM assumes that the Omicron variant is just as deadly as Delta. ‘But evidence from South Africa suggests that Omicron infections are milder,’ JP Morgan pointed out in a note to clients. Adjust for this, it found, and the picture changes dramatically:
“Bed occupancy by Covid-19 patients at the end of January would be 33% of the peak seen in January 2021. This would be manageable without further restrictions.
So JP Morgan had shown that, if you tweak one assumption (on severity) then — suddenly — no need for lockdown.
Why was this scenario left out? Why would this fairly important and fairly-basic fact on Omicron modeling not presented by Sage modelers like Professor Medley to ministers — and to the general public? I was thrilled for the chance to speak to him on Twitter. It was kind of him to make the time (he’s still going, as far as I can make out). The Spectator data hub has a page devoted to past Sage modeling vs actual, and I wanted to make sure I was not being unfair to Sage in my selection or presentation of those charts.
The latest Sage paper-drop — the 6,000-deaths-a-day one — refers to ‘scenarios,’ not predictions. Professor Medley emphasizes the distinction: saying something could happen is not saying that there’s a realistic chance of it happening. But then why do Sage modelers publish some scenarios and not others?
Apologies for the language at the end, but it was the last tweet that he replied to on this thread.
Revealingly, he seemed to think my question odd: if it’s quite plausible that Omicron is mild and doesn’t threaten the NHS, what would be the point of including that as a ‘scenario’? He seemed to suggest that he has been given a very limited brief and asked to churn out worse-case scenarios without being asked to comment on how plausible they are.
“We generally model what we are asked to model. There is a dialogue in which policy teams discuss with the modellers what they need to inform their policy.
Might this remit mean leaving out just-as-plausible, quite-important scenarios that would not require lockdown?
“Decision-makers are generally on only interested in situations where decisions have to be made.
Note how careful he is to stay vague on whether any of the various scenarios in the Sage document are likely or even plausible. What happened to the original system of presenting a ‘reasonable worst-case scenario’ together with a central scenario? And what’s the point of modeling if it doesn’t say how likely any of these scenarios are?
From what Professor Medley says, it’s unclear that the most-likely scenario is even being presented to ministers this time around. So how are they supposed to make good decisions? I highly doubt that Sajid Javid is only asking to churn out models that make the case for lockdown. That instruction, if it is being issued, will have come from somewhere else.
Professor Robert Dingwall, until recently a JCVI expert, has said that Medley’s candor reveals ‘a fundamental problem of scientific ethics in Sage’ — ie, a hardwired negativity bias. ‘The unquestioning response to the brief is very like that of SPI-B’s behavioral scientists,’ he says and suggests that the Covid inquiry looks into all this.
At a time when we have just been given a new set of ‘scenarios’ for a new year lockdown, it might be good if someone — if not Professor Medley — would clear up what assumptions lie behind the new 6,000-a-day-dead scenario, and if emerging information from South Africa about Omicron and its virulence has been taken into account. And how probable it is that a double-jabbed and increasingly boosted nation (with 95 percent antibody coverage) could see this worst-case scenario come to pass.
In my view, this raises serious questions not just about Sage but about the quality of the advice used to make UK lockdown decisions. And the lack of transparency and scrutiny of that advice. The lives of millions of people rest on the quality of decisions, so the caliber of information supplied matters rather a lot — to all of us.
I’ve asked Professor Medley to come on Spectator TV, to have a longer conversation outside Twitter. He has written for us before so I hope he accepts. For now, although I often curse the platform, I should thank Twitter for giving me the chance to ask some questions of someone so well-placed in such an important issue.
The federal agencies in charge of COVID-19 response are taking hits from former officials and high-profile medical professors for “sidelining experts,” not conducting basic research, and mischaracterizing evidence related to vaccines and masks for young people.
The Biden administration is getting a pass for “extreme political pressure” that “appropriately” prompted outrage against its predecessor, two FDA alumni wrote in The Washington Post Thursday.
Former Office of Vaccines Research and Review Deputy Director Philip Krause and former acting Chief Scientist Luciana Borio protested three recent actions authorizing boosters for people as young as 16.
“Before last month, the standard practice was for the agencies to convene standing outside advisory committees, whose members inspect the relevant data, debate it and vote,” they wrote. Earlier debates and votes suggest that “at least some experts would probably have voiced opposition,” and the refusal to hear them out “could hurt the credibility of these agencies.”
They criticized the FDA’s “unpersuasive” explanation that authorizing boosters for 16- and 17-year-olds “does not raise questions that would benefit from additional discussion by committee members.”
Exigency is “the exact circumstance when expert discussion and interpretation of the data can make the biggest difference,” the duo wrote.
An unidentified FDA spokesperson provided a statement to Just the News responding to the op-ed.
“As we said in our Nov. 19 press release, the FDA has determined that the currently available data support expanding the eligibility of a single booster dose of the Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccines to individuals 18 years of age and older,” it said. “Streamlining the eligibility criteria and making booster doses available to all individuals 18 years of age and older will also help to eliminate confusion about who may receive a booster dose and ensure booster doses are available to all who may need one.”
Krause left the FDA in apparent protest of the White House sidestepping the agency to promise booster shots across the board. He soon joined a public letter warning “there could be risks if boosters are widely introduced too soon, or too frequently,” with implications for “vaccine acceptance.”
The White House is “acting seriously reckless,” University of California San Francisco medical professor Vinay Prasad tweeted, echoing Krause’s argument. “If the last administration did this, all experts would be outraged. Principles only matter when they are inconvenient.”
Johns Hopkins University medical professor Marty Makary, who agrees boosters can harm low-risk groups, blasted the feds for too much “speculation” and too little research on the Omicron variant, just their latest pandemic failure.
“In fact, most of our COVID findings have come from Israel and scientists abroad,” he wrote in a New York Post op-ed Dec. 8 decrying “turtle-speed bureaucracy.”
It’s baffling that the National Institutes of Health or CDC has not “mobilize[d] any of their 7,000-plus scientists” to quickly answer how antibodies from vaccines and natural immunity respond to Omicron, said Makary, editor-in-chief of MedPage Today. There’s not even a “real-time data dashboard” on Omicron cases.
“Perhaps [Anthony] Fauci could have done fewer media interviews and university lectures … and instead personally overseen an NIH Omicron-antibody-binding experiment,” he said.
Makary blasted the CDC for consistently releasing “tardy and incomplete data, missing key information on risk stratification, the role of obesity and a breakdown of child deaths by comorbidity as we imposed blanket restrictions on 72 million children.”
Also coming in for criticism: the FDA’s monthslong “paralysis,” as Makary put it, over how to respond to serious side effects reported from the Johnson & Johnson vaccine, and the CDC’s belated recommendation to take mRNA vaccines instead.
“This is a decision that should have been made 8 months ago, which was needlessly delayed, benefiting the sponsor, and hurting people,” said UCSF’s Prasad, a columnist for Makary’s publication.
Prasad also called out Walensky for making overbroad claims about vaccine safety, even though the feds have acknowledged higher-than-expected heart problems following mRNA vaccination in young people for months.
In a Dec. 10 interview with ABC News on early results from the vaccination of five million 5-11 year-olds, the CDC director said its “incredibly robust vaccine safety system” had not picked up “anything yet” regarding myocarditis reports.
The CDC’s own data as of Dec. 10, Prasad noted, showed more than 3,200 reports in that age group to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, including 14 myocarditis reports, eight of which met the CDC’s “working case definition.” The damage from this “suboptimal” messaging “will last long after COVID19.”
Some of the schools had been open twice as long as others within the July 15-Aug. 30 study period. The measurement of “school-related outbreaks” didn’t necessarily show in-school transmission, and one county excludes masked students from the definition of “close contacts,” creating “detection bias.”
Yale University economist Jason Abaluck of the Bangladeshi mask study said the Arizona study was “ridiculous” for not controlling for the vaccination status of staff or students, which could misattribute reduced spread to masks rather than vaccines.
The CDC and National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases did not respond to queries about the criticisms.
As a high-profile Harvard professor stands trial for hiding his ties to the Chinese government, the Biden administration is coming under intense pressure from a loose coalition of lawmakers, nonprofits, and academics to abandon the so-called China Initiative, a Justice Department effort to preserve America’s technological edge by thwarting Chinese spies.
Launched by the Trump administration in 2018 and continued so far by its successor, the China Initiative is designed specifically to identify and prosecute those engaged in hacking, stealing trade secrets, and conducting economic espionage for the Chinese government on U.S. soil. The program has led to several arrests and convictions, including, for example:
Last month, a federal jury convicted Yanjun Xu, deputy division director of China’s Sixth Bureau of the Jiangsu Province Ministry of State Security, for attempting to steal trade secrets and commit economic espionage.
In July, three officers in China’s Ministry of State Security were charged with participating in a global computer intrusion campaign targeting infectious disease research.
In April, a PhD chemist and U.S. citizen from Michigan was convicted of wire fraud, economic espionage, conspiracy to commit trade secret theft, and possession of stolen trade secrets to help set up a new company in China.
Charles Lieber, a renowned nanotechnology professor who chaired Harvard’s Chemistry Department, was arrested and charged nearly two years ago. Federal prosecutors allege he lied about his involvement in China’s Thousand Talents Plan, a Chinese government initiative meant to recruit experts in science and technology, and about becoming a “strategic scientist” at Wuhan University of Technology.
Lieber’s trial, which began Tuesday, may help determine the fate of the China Initiative.
“It may have a real impact on the future of these cases being brought under the China Initiative,” Derek Adams, a partner at the Potomac Law Group, told the Harvard Crimson. “If Lieber ends up being found not guilty on this one, then I think it’s just going to increase the pressure of some folks in Congress to shut down the initiative entirely.”
The Justice Department’s push to shut down Chinese espionage activities seems to have deterred at least some potential spies. More than 1,000 researchers who had hidden their affiliation with the Chinese military fled the United States last summer, according to the department.
However, critics argue any successes are the exception to the rule and part of a witch hunt that’s having a chilling effect on scientific research.
Activists are calling for the Biden administration to end the China Initiative, arguing it targets people of Asian descent with racial profiling. These critics also claim the program is mainly focused on innocent academic researchers and has largely yielded charges of fraud — such as lying about links to Chinese entities or accepting foreign money — as opposed to concrete espionage.
This month, the MIT Technology Review found that nearly 90% of China Initiative defendants are of Chinese origin, only about a quarter of defendants charged under the initiative have been convicted, and the initiative’s focus has shifted from espionage to cases of “research integrity,” often involving researchers failing to disclose ties to China.
Academics at some of America’s most elite universities have made similar complaints. Nearly 100 Yale University professors signed on to a letter castigating the China Initiative as invasive and discriminatory. They also endorsed an earlier open letter signed by 177 Stanford University faculty members to Attorney General Merrick Garland claiming the China Initiative “disproportionately targets researchers of Chinese origin.”
The Stanford professors, who called for Garland to kill the program, didn’t mention that last year federal authorities arrested a Stanford researcher for failing to disclose she was actively working for the Chinese military.
Academics aren’t the only ones targeting the China Initiative. The Committee of 100, a nonprofit promoting closer U.S.-China relations, released a study arguing American prosecutors are more severely punishing and more often falsely accusing Asian and Chinese defendants of espionage than others.
The U.S. Heartland China Association, a pro-China business group that regularly works with organizations tied to the ruling Chinese Communist Party, described the Justice Department program as “McCarthyism,” a reference to the late Sen. Joseph McCarthy’s crusade against communist influence in the early years of the Cold War. Two of President Biden’s picks for senior roles in his administration — Reta Jo Lewis to run the Export-Import Bank and Mitch Landrieu to serrve as infrastructure czar — are both listed as “strategic advisers” for the association, according to the Washington Examiner.
California Democratic Rep. Ted Lieu and 90 other members of Congress made similar accusations, calling on the Justice Department to investigate “the repeated, wrongful targeting of individuals of Asian descent for alleged espionage.”
Supporters of the China Initiative reject accusations of racial profiling, noting that the overwhelming majority of China’s espionage activities are carried out by individuals of Chinese ethnicity and that each individual accused of spying for China gets due process under U.S. law.
One problem with distinguishing between Chinese espionage and legitimate research is that China doesn’t distinguish between the civil and military domains and commercial and military applications. As part of its strategy, Beijing blurs the lines between academia, industry, the private sector, and military research, according to experts.
“While the U.S. government often twists itself into knots determining what is classified or unclassified, the Chinese government often sees little-to-no distinction,” said Craig Singleton, an adjunct China fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. “Instead, Beijing is focused on collecting and harnessing any and all useful information to power its defense modernization. This includes everything from foundational knowledge taught on U.S. college campuses to cutting edge research, much of which is not technically classified but still has potential military applications.”
The U.S. must also account for China’s “passive collection of information in support of its military aims,” Singleton continued. “The Chinese government has not been transparent about its defense build-up … thereby making it very difficult to determine which kinds of cooperation pose a national security risk … These disciplines vary widely, from specialties such as artificial intelligence and armaments technology to fields not typically associated with the defense industry, including geology.”
Singleton just authored a new report detailing how numerous U.S. universities — and even some K-12 schools — support China’s military-industrial complex.
Whatever the outcome of the Lieber trial, Chinese espionage isn’t going away. In fact, U.S. officials say the threat is only growing.
About 80% of all economic espionage cases brought by the Justice Department allege activities that would benefit the Chinese state, according to recent department figures. Meanwhile, two-thirds of the department’s trade secret theft cases are connected to China.
This surge in known Chinese espionage activity has caught the U.S. intelligence community’s full attention.
FBI Director Christopher Wray testified his agency is opening counterintelligence investigations into China “every 12 hours.”
Chinese espionage costs the U.S. between $200 to $600 billion a year in stolen intellectual property, according to Mike Orlando, the acting director of the National Counterintelligence and Security Center. This has been happening for some 20 years, putting the total cost well into the trillions of dollars.
Earlier this year, Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines described Beijing as “an unparalleled priority for the intelligence community.”The Justice Department didn’t respond to a request for comment.
Judicial Watch has done it again by procuring another fresh trove of evidence implicating fake government “doctor” Tony Fauci for using American taxpayer dollars to fund the tweaking of bat coronaviruses and other pathogens.
Many of Fauci’s experiments took place at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) in China – this is why we call it the Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) – with direct funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the parent agency of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), which is overseen by Fauci.
This latest batch of records completely validates the claims of Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), who was mocked by Democrats and “journalists” after he chastised Fauci during a series of Senate hearings.
An NIH spokesperson falsely claimed that Fauci was “entirely truthful” during his exchanges with Paul, even though we now know that Fauci funneled cash to Wuhan and who even knows where else in order to create deadly bioweapons, including the “vaccines” and “boosters” currently being pushed by the government.
It turns out that Fauci had direct access to data from the infamous EcoHealth Alliance, a partner of the WIV, a full 15 months prior to when he was confronted by Paul on national television.
“Judicial Watch announced today that it received 221 pages of records from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) which include a grant application for research involving the coronavirus that was submitted in 2018,” Judicial Watch reported.
“The grant application appears to describe ‘gain of function’ research involving RNA extractions from bats, experiments on viruses, attempts to develop a chimeric virus and efforts to genetically manipulate the full-length bat SARSr-CoV WIV1 strain molecular clone.”
Other documents obtained by Judicial Watch include various records of communications, contracts and agreements with the WIV that expose Fauci and EcoHealth for conspiring over many years to tamper with coronaviruses. Peter Daszak of EcoHealth was of course involved, as was Ralph Baric, Ian Lipkin and various others, we now know.
“NIAID has been funding Peter’s group for coronavirus work in China for the past 5 years through [grant] R011R01A|110964: ‘Understanding the Risk of Bat Coronavirus Emergence,’” Judicial Watch further reported.
“That’s now been renewed, with a specific focus to identify cohorts of people highly exposed to bats in China, and work out if they’re getting sick from CoVs … Collaborators include Wuhan Institute of Virology (currently working on the nCoV) and Ralph Baric.”
UNC also on the dole of illicit bat coronavirus research money
One Fauci project involved the discovery that SARS-related CoVs can, in fact, bind to human cells when manipulated in a lab. These manipulated pathogens can then cause SARS-like disease in humanized mouse models.
A disease they are calling Swine Acute Diarrheal Syndrome Virus, or SADS-CoV, was also used in the killing of more than 25,000 pigs in China’s Guangdong Province.
Daszak’s allies also worked on a program involving viral discovery in bats. This is where SARS-CoV is said to have originally been identified. These and other projects were discussed in emails sent back and forth between Fauci, Daszak and other allied parties.
A “Notice of Award” dated July 13, 2020, also increased the amount of NIH money going to Daszak’s firm by a whopping $369,819, all of which was siphoned from American taxpayers.
The project period for this award began on June 1, 2014, and is scheduled to run through June 30, 2021. The name of it is “Understanding the Risk of Bat Coronavirus Emergence.”
“EcoHealth was to receive $637,980 in each of the years 2019 through 2024 under the grant,” Judicial Watch revealed.
The specialists overseeing the award that went to UNC and its partners specified that it “may include collaborations with and / or between foreign organizations.” It also highlighted “Highly Pathogenic Agents” that may require the use of a biocontainment safety facility of BSL3 or higher.
The research “aims” listed in the EcoHealth grant application include “sequence receptor binding domains (spike proteins) to identify viruses with the highest potential for spillover which we will include in our experimental investigations.”
“We will use S protein sequence data, infectious clone technology, in vitro and in vivo infection experiments and analysis of receptor binding to test the hypothesis that % divergence thresholds in S protein sequences predict spillover potential,” the application further reads.
All throughout the application and other documents are admissions of allyship among Daszak, Baric and various Chinese and other foreign partners. This was a large-scale international affair, in other words.
In response to these and other bombshells, the NIH published an open letter and accompanying analysis that it claimed would “set the record straight.” In a nutshell, the NIH insists that its bat coronavirus research was not the catalyst for the plandemic because the viruses it was working on and the alleged viruses currently in circulation have “sizable genetic differences.”
“Researchers like Fauci can circle the wagons all they want, but that doesn’t mean the rising tide of questions will magically disappear,” noted American Liberty.
“How much evidence is needed before Fauci is fired, NIAID and NIH disbanded, and China held accountable for the bio-warfare it has started?” asked one of the news outlet’s commenters.
More related news about Fauci, the Wuhan Institute of Virology, bat coronaviruses and deep state bioweapons operations can be found at Pandemic.news.
A myriad of dubious chemicals has been introduced into our food supply in the last 120 years. This is a difficult truth that many can’t seem to reconcile, as most of us have been consuming ultra-processed foods since birth.
Even everyday household products and cosmetic items that are inhaled, applied to the skin, or absorbed through the scalp, can contain a bevy of harmful chemicals. The sum total of the overwhelming presence of these chemicals has been linked to nearly every modern chronic affliction and disease, particularly various forms of cancer and neurodegenerative disorders. Two recent examples of everyday products which were finally admitted to being carcinogenic are Monsanto’s pesticide Round-Up (Glyphosate) and Johnson and Johnson’s baby talc powder (asbestos).
There are many off-ramps on the highway to truth. When faced with an inconvenient truth, most people will search for confirmation of their preferred reality, and the AMA, the FDA, the chemical/ pharmaceutical companies in conjunction with the colleges and media outlets they fund are all too willing to provide that comfortable numbing to the truth. The most notable example that comes to mind is an extremely neurotoxic chemical called fluoride which has been added to the public water supply in most municipal areas. Fluoride is known to interrupt the basic function of nerve cells in the brain, causing more docile and submissive behavior as well as IQ devastation. Fluoride has never been proven to prevent tooth decay, according to Dr. Robert Carton, a former scientist for the EPA, “Fluoridation is the greatest case of scientific fraud of this century, if not all time.”
But fluoride isn’t the only harmful additive that exists in our food and water, not by a long shot. Let’s take a look at 10 lesser-known additives that also have a negative effect on our wellbeing:
There are at least 5 artificial sweeteners that have been outed as neurotoxic, carcinogenic, and/or allergenic; Aspartame being the most prevalent and possibly the most damaging of them all. When searching for information on aspartame, depending on which search engine you’re using, you will find (as with most controversial topics) two separate realities: the reality where huge corporations, the medical institutes, and media outlets that they fund dismiss all negative claims directed at aspartame or the reality where current and former MD’s around the world as well as former EPA scientists are trying to raise awareness about the dangers of said sweetener.
You’ll find testimonials by all manner of “experts” and important-sounding people endorsing aspartame while denouncing those “aspartame alarmists” as lunatics, citing studies conducted by the same pharma funded institutes giving the illusion of unbiased science; but you will also find scientific papers the world over showing the exact opposite. Since only one of these realities can be objectively true you have to ask yourself, who is more incentivized to lie? The corporations profiting from hazardous products or the folks who are putting their careers on the line to raise awareness?
Aspartame is an excitotoxin, a substance that overexcites cells to the point of damage or death, and is commonly found in diet/zero sugar sodas, jello, sugar-free gum, drink mixes, sugar-free sports drinks, baking goods, tabletop sweeteners like Nutrasweet, kool-aid, ice tea, chewable vitamins, breath mints, toothpaste, and mouthwash. It was listed as a potential biochemical weapon by the Pentagon. In the peer-reviewed journal, Aspartame: Methanol and the Public Health, Dr. Woodrow Monte wrote: “When diet sodas and soft drinks, sweetened with aspartame, are used to replace fluid loss during exercise and physical exertion in hot climates, the intake of methanol can exceed 250 mg/day or 32 times the Environmental Protection Agency’s recommended limit of consumption for this cumulative poison.” The effects of aspartame are documented by the FDA’s own data. In 1995 the agency was forced, under the Freedom of Information Act, to release a list of aspartame symptoms reported by thousands of victims. From 10,000 consumer complaints, the FDA compiled a list of 92 symptoms, including death.
A report of a 1980 FDA Board of Inquiry, comprised of three independent scientists, confirmed that aspartame “might induce brain tumors.” The FDA had previously banned aspartame based on this finding, that is until establishment Republican and American Businessman Donald Rumsfeld, while president of G.D. Searle (the company that originally held the aspartame patent) vowed that he’d “call in his markers,” to get it approved. Eventually, Monsanto bought out Searle and was untroubled by aspartame’s clouded history. You can read more about Rumsfeld here.
This information barely attempts to scratch the surface when it comes to the dangers and shady history associated with aspartame.
High Fructose Corn Syrup (HFCS)
High Fructose Corn Syrup is a highly-refined artificial sweetener which has become the number one source of calories in America. HFCS is found in just about all processed foods, packs on pounds faster than any other ingredient, increases your LDL Cholesterol levels, contributes greatly to the development of diabetes and tissue damage, promotes cancer, stimulates fat accumulation in the liver, increases the risk of heart disease, and increased mercury intake. Here are some statistics as of September 2016:
Americans consume an average of 50 grams of HFCS every day.
HFCS now represents more than 40 percent of caloric sweeteners added to foods and beverages and is the sole caloric sweetener in soft drinks in the U.S.
HFCS has been shown to increase the risk of developing high blood pressure, diabetes, and heart disease.
Consumption of HFCS increased more than 1,000 percent between 1970 and 1990, far exceeding the intake changes of any other food or food group, and is a main factor in our current obesity epidemic.
HFCS can cause leaky gut syndrome.
HFCS contains up to 570 micrograms of health-hazardous mercury per gram.
HFCS has been shown to promote cancer.
The average 20-ounce soda contains 15 teaspoons of sugar, all of it high fructose corn syrup.
To create HFCS, caustic soda is used to shuck the corn kernel from its starch, and corn syrup is then created. Enzymes (commonly GMO) are introduced to convert the corn syrup’s sugars to super-sweet fructose. HFCS contains no enzymes, vitamins, or minerals; only sugar and calories. Since HFCS is produced from corn, a natural vegetable, some people try to say that it’s a natural sugar; but there is so much processing that goes on to produce and chemically alter corn to make it into HFCS that it’s so far from natural. On top of that, so much of the corn today isn’t natural because it’s being genetically modified by growers for bigger crop yields and more money.
The fiscal incentives for companies to include trans fat in their products are numerous. It’s used to greatly extend the shelf life of processed foods and is among the most dangerous substances you can consume. Found in deep-fried fast foods as well as processed foods that have been made with margarine or vegetable oils. Numerous studies show that trans fat increases LDL (bad) cholesterol while decreasing HDL or “good” cholesterol; it has also been shown to increase the risk of heart attacks, heart disease, stroke, and inflammation. Oils and fats are now forbidden in the Danish market if they are found to contain trans fatty acids in excess of 2 percent. Besides fast food, trans fat is also found in margarine, chips, crackers, and most commercial baked goods.
The link between trans fat and cardiovascular disease shouldn’t be ignored. Multiple studies on Pacific Island populations who get 30-60% of their total caloric intake from fully saturated coconut oil have all shown nearly nonexistent rates of cardiovascular disease. The truth is that not all saturated fats are created equal, the operative word here being “created” because some saturated fats do occur naturally, while others are artificially manipulated into a saturated state through a man-made process called hydrogenation. Hydrogenation alters vegetable and seed oils by adding hydrogen atoms while heating the oil, producing a rancid substance that really only benefits shelf life and profits. Just about all experts finally agree that hydrogenation does nothing good for your health and actually causes harm.
Monosodium Glutamate (MSG/E621)
MSG is a slow poison that hides behind numerous titles like: “natural flavoring”, “yeast extract”, “textured protein”, “disodium guanylate”, “disodium inosinate”, or “hydrolyzed pea protein”. Currently, labeling standards don’t require MSG to be listed by name, meaning it can hide behind all kinds of disarming verbiage. MSG is an amino acid used as a flavor enhancer in soups, dressings, frozen foods, seasonings, cookies, lunch meats, and many restaurants. MSG, like aspartame, is an excitotoxin. Studies show that regular consumption may result in adverse effects such as depression, disorientation, impaired vision, fatigue, headaches, and obesity.
MSG affects neurological pathways in the brain and disengages the “I’m full” response which explains the rapid weight gain. The part of MSG that negatively affects the human body is the “glutamate”, the glutamic acid in corn, molasses, or wheat is broken down by processes like hydrogenation or by fermenting with strong chemicals, bacteria, and enzymes. It has been well-established that MSG has some laudable gustatory and psychological effects as well as positive effects with regard to hypertension and iron deficiency. However, at the same time, there are abundant reports of harmful effects such as oxidative stress, DNA damage, protein modification, and lysis of stromal cells.
5. Common Food Dyes
The dangers of food coloring have been known for decades, and for decades scientists were bankrolled by the food industry to produce results that showed the contrary, tweaking details in the abstract to elicit the desired result. The food colorings that are still on the market today are linked to cancer and neurological issues. Blue 1 and 2 is found in beverages, candy, baked goods, and pet food; and has been linked to rapid cancer growth in mice. Red 3, used to dye cocktail cherries, grenadine, candy, and baked goods; has been shown to cause thyroid tumors.
Green 3, most commonly found in candy and beverages, has been linked to bladder cancer. The widely used yellow 6, added to beverages, sausages, gelatine, baking ingredients, and candy has been linked to tumors of the adrenal gland and kidneys. Multiple studies have shown that artificial colorings may contribute to behavioral problems in children and a significant reduction in IQ. Blue #1 & #2 are banned in Norway and Sweden.
6. Sodium Sulfite (E221) and Sodium Chloride
I know you might be scratching your head at the mention of sodium chloride on this list, common table salt exists in an overwhelming majority of diets the world over, but most diet-conscious individuals are aware that sodium chloride has almost nothing in common with traditional rock or sea salt. Even the mainstream media will admit that you should stay away from sodium chloride.
Sodium Sulfite, a preservative used in wine-making and other processed foods, is even more dubious. According to the FDA, approximately one in every 100 people is sensitive to sulfites in food, but some believe that this ratio is optimistic. Some medical experts have suggested a possible link between sulfites and asthma. Sulfite-sensitive individuals may experience headaches, breathing problems, and rashes. In severe cases, sulfites can actually cause death by closing up the airways altogether, leading to cardiac arrest. Sulfites are also commonly found in some brands of dried fruits as well.
7. Potassium Sorbate, Sodium Sorbate, Sodium Benzoate, and Potassium Bromate
Potassium Sorbate is one of the most prolific preservatives used in the food industry, it’s nearly impossible to find any packaged candy or ice cream without it The food industry and its “scientists” will parrot endless assurances that potassium sorbate isn’t a health threat, but conflicting data suggests otherwise. The combination of sodium benzoate or potassium benzoate with ascorbic acid in soft drinks may result in the production of benzene, a carcinogen. Potassium Bromate is used to increase volume in white flour and is found mostly in bread and rolls. Potassium Bromate is known to cause cancer and even small amounts in bread can create problems for humans.
Sodium Sorbate is known to be genotoxic (DNA damaging), As per a 2012 study:
“Results of the study revealed that SS, which is commonly used in the food industry, has genotoxic and clastogenic effects in human peripheral lymphocytes. Madle et al. (1993) reported that using human lymphocytes could provide the best results for human mutagenicity studies. According to these data, it can be concluded that SS may also cause cancer because of its mutagenic and genotoxic effects.”
8. Sodium Nitrate (Sodium Nitrite)
Sodium nitrate is used as a (drumroll) preservative, food coloring, and “flavor enhancer” in bacon, ham, fish, hotdogs, lunch meats, corned beef, and other processed foods. This ingredient, which sounds harmless, is actually highly carcinogenic once it enters the human digestive system. Once ingested, it forms a variety of nitrosamine compounds that enter the bloodstream and wreak havoc on a number of internal organs: the liver and pancreas in particular. Sodium nitrite is widely regarded as a toxic ingredient and the USDA actually tried to ban this additive in the 1970s but was vetoed by influential food manufacturers who complained that had “no alternative” for preserving packaged meat products.
Why does the industry still use this additive? Simple, this chemical (sodium nitrite) just happens to turn packaged meats bright red. It’s a “color fixer”, and it makes old, dead meats appear fresh and vibrant for an unnaturally long time. Like its nitrate counterpart, it can be found in hotdogs, bacon, ham, lunch meat, cured meat, corned beef, smoked fish, and other forms of processed meat.
9. Butylated Hydroxyanisole (BHA) and Butylated Hydroxytoluene (BHT)
BHA and BHT (E320) are used to preserve common household foods and are known to be toxic. Any processed food item that has a particularly long shelf life is often filled with BHA. These preservatives are found in things like cereal, chewing gum, potato chips, and vegetable oils. BHA and BHT keep foods from changing color, changing flavor, or becoming rancid. They are also oxidants, which form potentially cancer-causing reactive compounds in your body and can affect the neurological system of the brain and alter behavior.
These additives are typically found in potato chips, chewing gum, cereals, frozen sausages, enriched rice, lard, shortening, cake, candy, and jello. Propyl Gallate is another preservative often used in conjunction with BHA and BHT. It is sometimes found in meat products, chicken soup base, and chewing gums. Animal studies have suggested that it too could be linked to cancer growth, though other studies claim it can induce cell death to cancer cells. Propyl Gallate can also cause stomach and skin irritation, liver damage, kidney damage.
10. Sulfur Dioxide (E220)
A lot of these additives can be downplayed by clever manipulation of wording and how the more biased “studies” alter the parameters to end up with a more desired result, but Sulfur additives are undeniably toxic. In the United States, the FDA has actually completely prohibited their use in fruit and vegetables. Adverse reactions include bronchial problems, particularly in those prone to asthma, hypotension (low blood pressure), flushing, tingling sensations, or anaphylactic shock. Sulfur additives also destroy vitamins B1 and E, which can be particularly damaging to developing children.
The International Labour Organization of the UN says to avoid E220 if you suffer from conjunctivitis, bronchitis, emphysema, bronchial asthma, or cardiovascular disease. It is found in beer, soft drinks, dried fruits, juices, cordials, wines, vinegar, and potato products.
Author's Note:I hope that while you read these texts you do your own cross-referencing and learn firsthand just how split the medical and scientific communities really are on most topics. I would ask that you put your problem-solving and critical thinking skills to use and consider who has more to lose on either side of these arguments, and what could possibly cause a respected MD or scientist to commit career suicide.
If you still prefer to use Google for these fact-finding ventures, you will likely be provided a surplus of damage control articles and “testimonies”, if you use duckduckgo it will be closer to an even mix, and if you use Qwant you will see things you’d never find otherwise. You will no doubt come across a media outlet called “Healthline” which provides assurances that all of these claims are false despite scientific evidence to the contrary (provided below in the sources section). I’d also like to point you towards the primary funders of Healthline, a who’s who of big-money investment firms containing many dozens of corporations each. Lawsuits against these funders include everything from security fraud to violating the Clean Water Act, so consider this before placing blind trust in the words of a well-financed propaganda mouthpiece.
To some, these times may seem dark and uncertain, like the country has been sentenced to death and we are all awaiting a call from the governor. Giving up would be the path of least resistance, but patriots and those who love truth seem to be making moves of their own.
Weekly Report #2 (The week of November 9th to 15th 2020)
Where’s the Hope Report #2
“They use the columns of these papers to club into submission or drive out of office public officials who refuse to do the bidding of the powerful corrupt cliques which compose the invisible government. It operates under cover of a self-created screen [and] seizes our executive officers, legislative bodies, schools, courts, newspapers and every agency created for the public protection.” – New York City Mayor John F. Hylan, New York Times, March 26, 1922
All is far from lost despite the Establishment Media and Big Tech’s mass hypnotic spell. In an attempt to create a narrative and an act of psychological warfare, the deep-state actors prematurely called Biden/Harris the winners and have been trying like hell to make that stick, losing more than half of the country in the process.
The targets of this mass media lie, the people, are waking up in droves and it is doubtful they will be coaxed back into slumber after everything that has transgressed, especially after what is likely to come. Pending litigation at the state and federal levels will soon reveal widespread voter fraud, likely followed by John Durham and the long-awaited flight of the midnight riders.
The Lies of the Media Are Being Exposed
Just hours ago, Maria Bartiromo shared this on her Twitter. As you’ll see, the media is so desperate to convince you and those you know that Biden won—fair and square—and anything to the contrary is a “dangerous conspiracy that undermines our democracy.”
Is this true? Look at the President’s words yourself (which is the basis of the article you just saw). Then watch the video by Jesse Watters.
Do these sound like the words and sentiments shared by someone who thinks they lost to Joe Biden?
If you’re thinking to yourself “No”—then you aren’t the only one.
The hope in this story is that millions of people agree—Trump isn’t giving up and the media are clearly the ones who are delusional.
The media has been lying to the people, across the planet, for years. But it’s been hard to sort fact from fiction—they’re that good at deception.
But now, because of patriots and President Trump, he is exposing their lies. They have to twist Trump’s words by quoting him out of context to convince those who believe the lie to keep on believing.
Often the best way to prove to people that a liar is within their midst is to show them. This is essentially the theme of the past week “The media is lying to you and here’s the proof.” All you have to do is take 10 minutes to honestly look at the situation yourself to see it. And many are doing just that.
The first theme of hope for today is that the media is finally being revealed to be the lairs that they are. Writ large in the court of public opinion, droves, no legions, of people are seeing the truth for themselves. And this is just the beginning.
“Sometimes you must walk through the darkness before you see the light.”
More folks are beginning to understand that elections are conducted by private companies under contract by the county. They have no security standards, the software is so wide open that you can easily go in and change things if you have the know-how, A novice hacker could affect the outcome if they wanted to or were contracted to.
Listen to Andrew Appel, Princeton Professor, who testified before Congress in 2017 about how easy it was to hack the Dominion voting machines.
The people have grown complacent and we all just assumed in our calcified, diet-coke trance that everything was on the up and up, that the election process was flawless, it appears that it is decidedly not.
But it wasn’t, and might never have been. If this level of coordinated manipulation took place during the 2020 election, how many other elections have been rigged? Perhaps Sydney Powell will let us know this week.
In last week’s report we mentioned the DOMINION Ballot counting software whose convenient “glitches” in multiple states may have severely tilted the elections in a certain direction—Biden’s. As the days roll on we are learning a lot more about the company and those attached to it.
Sidney Powell was on Mornings with Maria and she unloaded on the monstrous amount of Democrat voter fraud in the 2020 election. But during this discussion Maria Bartiromo dropped a bomb as well, stating:
“…I’ve also seen reports that Nancy Pelosi’s longtime Chief of Staff is a key executive of that company. Richard Bloom, Senator Feinstein’s husband is a significant shareholder of this company.”
Truly a bold statement, but It turns out that Bartiromo is indeed correct.
Bloomberg reported in April 2019 that:
“Dominion Voting Systems — which commands more than a third of the voting-machine market without having Washington lobbyists — has hired its first, a high-powered firm that includes a longtime aide to Speaker Nancy Pelosi.”
In addition, we’ve now learned that Democrat Diane Feinstein’s husband does have a major stake in Dominion via 6 different holding companies each at 10% making a grand total of 60% stake
And on top of all that, we also know that Dominion has ties to the Clinton Foundation.
A former federal prosecutor and current attorney of General Michael T. Flynn Sidney Powell, a lawyer so good she makes Judges lawyer up, has joined President Trump’s legal team appeared on Lou Dobbs this week and offered up her own take on the situation and some hopeful things to say.
First, she claimed the software was originally created to be used in Venezuela to elect Hugo Chavez, then went international. It’s funded by Cuba, China, etc and apparently, there is “staggering evidence” they are currently sitting on.
Here’s the same interview from above.
She claimed that many Governors were involved, which comes as no surprise. She also claims that patriots are coming forward with information, testimony, and evidence faster than they can keep up with.
The “Invisible Government”
If you are new to the discussion then a brief explanation is in order to clear up any disconnects. When we set out to put these reports together we operate on the understanding that the U.S. government is and has long been under the control of an invisible government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people.
Listen to the closing statement by Sen. Inouye from 1987.
These individuals are an amalgamation of foreign policy officials, Fortune 500 CEO’s and board members, international banking families and figureheads, and so on.
Past presidents of the United States and other high profile political leaders have repeatedly issued warnings about these “powers that be” over the last 214 years.
“I sincerely believe, with you, that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies.” —Thomas Jefferson, dent of the United States (1801–1809)
“A power has risen up in the government greater than the people themselves, consisting of many and various powerful interests, combined in one mass, and held together by the cohesive power of the vast surplus in banks.” – John C. Calhoun, Vice President (1825-1832) and U.S. Senator, from a speech given on May 27, 1836
“Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people. To destroy this invisible government, to befoul the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmanship of the day.”— Theodore Roosevelt, 26th President of the United States, Theodore Roosevelt, An Autobiography, 1913 (Appendix B)
“Since I entered politics, I have chiefly had men’s views confided to me privately. Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it.” – Woodrow Wilson, 28th President of the United States, The New Freedom, 1913
“The Rockefellers and their allies have, for at least fifty years, been carefully following a plan to use their economic power to gain political control of first America, and then the rest of the world. Do I mean conspiracy? Yes, I do. I am convinced there is such a plot, international in scope, generations old in planning, and incredibly evil in intent.” Congressman Larry P. McDonald, November 1975
“There exists a shadowy government with its own Air Force, its own Navy, its own fundraising mechanism, and the ability to pursue its own ideas of national interest, free from all checks and balances, and free from the law itself.” – Daniel K. Inouye, US Senator from Hawaii, testimony at the Iran Contra Hearings, 1986
There may be a blatant effort to destroy and rewrite history happening in this country presently, but a mind capable of critical thought and the proper knowledge can see exactly where it is coming from. This international swamp-monster needs a Biden victory to continue the plans that previous administrations have been building towards.
A great many people have seen the truth of this shadow government but weren’t able to do much about it. But today, Trump has done more to expose the deep state and put a stop to it than any POTUS in history. What is likely happing right before our eyes is the culmination of a plan developed years ago, to entrap the media, deep state, and other actors, by letting them believe they could rig another election, only to catch them in the act. This means the hope that many wished of over the years is finally being answered.
Trump and the Patriots advising him came along and in 4 years undid a considerable amount of damage to the republic. Regardless of how one might feel about the man, the world needs Trump to win if they hope to be free of the central banking establishment. That doesn’t mean idolize him, it means use discernment and judge by his actions.
So, can we pull this thing off? Joe Hoft of TheGateway Pundit put together a pretty long list of potential instances of Voter Fraud occurring nationwide on the 8th, so here’s just a few examples of what was uncovered in just the first week following election night:
This isn’t even 10% of what’s out there, you can view a much more comprehensive list here.
Where’s the Hope?
There are a lot of folks out there on the world wide web trying their darndest to impose the unofficial dictate of CNN and FOX News. It can be frustrating to watch but it is a true test of love and compassion to stay your judgment of our brothers and sisters who have yet to wean off of the Establishment Media Kool-Aid, yet be compassionate we must.
Stooping to anger and name-calling is basically lowering yourself to the same hind-brain reactionary states we see many unhinged individuals displaying across the country.
Their consciousness has literally been hijacked by social media and pop-culture, and though it’s easy to give in to hostility we have to realize that they are only doing what they think is right because they have yet to open themselves up to other possibilities. I think the hope is to evolve past these trying times through a better understanding of the heart and mind.
As far as the Hope is concerned, we have plenty of reasons to keep it alive and well. Here are some positive actions to be taken:
Manually recount any state results where Dominion Vote Machines were used to tally results
Focus on closely contested and swing states
Focus on cities (i.e. Milwaukee, Detroit, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, Atlanta, Las Vegas, Phoenix, Minneapolis, etc…)
Focus on absentee and mail-in Ballots
Investigate Biden only votes
Identify dead people who voted
Identify felons who voted
Identify illegal aliens who voted
Identify children who voted
Identify individuals who voted more than once
Identify newly registered individuals over 90 years old
Identify non-registered voters and review
Identify who made the call to stop counting in certain states, rationale for doing so and timing of the call
As you can see there are numerous activities to perform to gain comfort that all legitimate votes are counted and illegitimate votes are not. Do not fear my fellow “chumps”, they are panicking and the Patriots are in control.
As one last ray of hope the page for Joe Biden changed from President-Elect to Politician.
Does this mean Joe Biden lost and we can expect something this week that will usher Trump into a second term?
Hope is all around us if we dare to embrace the truth with a whole heart and discerning mind.
Justin Deschamps has been a truth seeker all his life, studying physics, psychology, law, philosophy, and spirituality, and working to weave these seemingly separate bodies of information into a holistic tapestry of ever-expanding knowledge. Justin is a student of all and a teacher to some, sharing what he has discovered with those who are ready and willing to take responsibility for making the world a better place. The goal of his work is to help himself and others become better truth-seekers, and in doing so, form a community of holistically minded individuals capable of creating world healing projects for the benefit of all life—what has been called The Great Work. Check out his project Stillness in the Storm to find some of his work. Follow on Twitter @justinstillness, Follow on Parler, Facebook Stillness in the Storm, and minds.com.
Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe on Tuesday declassified two documents showing President Obama’s CIA feared in summer 2016 that Hillary Clinton was “stirring up” a false Russia collusion narrative to “vilify” Donald Trump and distract from her own controversies heading into the election.
The memos indicate the CIA first received the information through the monitoring of Russian sources and deemed it credible enough to brief Obama on it in July 2016 and to refer the intelligence to the FBI in September 2016 for possible investigation.
The warnings came as the FBI was just starting its Crossfire Hurricane probe into now-disproven Trump-Russia collusion, aided by the Clinton campaign-funded dossier by Christopher Steele. They are likely to bolster GOP claims the James Comey’s FBI ignored clear evidence that the allegations were a political dirty trick and not evidence of a counterintelligence threat.
“Per FBI verbal request, CIA provides the below examples of information the CROSSFIRE HURRICANE fusion cell has gleaned to date,” the September 2016 referral from the Agency to the bureau read. “An exchange [redacted] discussing US presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s approval of a plan concerning US presidential candidate Donald Trump and Russian hackers hampering US elections as a means of distracting the public form her use of a private email server.”
Two months earlier, then-CIA Director John Brennan briefed Obama, according to handwritten notes written after the briefing.
“We’re getting additional insight into Russian activities from [redacted],” Brennan notes read. “CITE alleged approved by Hillary Clinton a proposal from one of her foreign policy advisers to vilify Donald Trump by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by the Russian security service.”
The documents provide corroboration to a letter Ratcliffe first sent Congress last week with the explosive revelation.
Officials said Ratcliffe was authorized by President Trump to released the documents over the weekend while he was hospitalized for coronavirus treatment.
CIA Director Gina Haspel has opposed releasing some of the information on the grounds that the agency could not fully determine whether some of the Russian intelligence that the U.S. intercepted was misinformation, officials said. Ratcliffe has decided to release the materials in part because they provide insight into possible red flags the FBI ignored in pursuing a flawed Russia collusion probe, the officials said.
A U.S. intelligence official said while the CIA could not fully verify the allegations in Russian intercepts it did not assess the intelligence to be Russian disinformation and believed it was solid enough to brief Obama and refer to the FBI.
Ratcliffe is also exploring declassifying evidence requested to be released by House Intelligence Committee ranking member Devin Nunes (R-Calif.). The evidence includes a referral Nunes made to the CIA inspector general in 2018 about flaws in the U.S. intelligence assessment about Russian interference as well as evidence showing what Christopher Steele’s primary sub-source for his dossier told the FBI and what the bureau knew about the sub-source’s ties to Russia.
White House chief of staff Mark Meadows hinted at that declassification on Monday.
Trump has “already tasked me with getting some declassification rolling in a follow-up to some of the requests that Nunes and others have made,” Meadows said.
Nunes said he believed the evidence – including three interview the FBI did with Steele’s sub-source confirming the dossier was flawed – is explosive.
“The documents that are underlying what we now have seen — I’ve only seen a few of those — they’re definitely smoking guns,” Nunes told Fox News host Maria Bartiromo on Sunday. “That information definitely needs to be made available to the American public.
“The American public needs to see the three reports that we know about, at least from the Democrats’ Russian spy that they hired,” he added.” So those are additional documents that we need to see.”
Democrats have already previewed their planned attacks, suggesting the release of evidence just a month before the election was political and possibly infected with Russian disinformation.
“It’s very disturbing to me that 35 days before an election, a director of national intelligence would release unverified Russian rumint,” said Senate Intelligence Committee Vice Chairman Mark Warner (D-Va.).
Democrats’ arguments that Clinton wasn’t behind the Russia collusion probe are strongly challenged by the evidence.
Steele testified he told the FBI in his first meeting about the dossier in July 2016 that Clinton had authorized his research. Bank records and testimony showed Steele’s dossier was paid for by the law firm representing Clinton’s campaign and the Democratic National Committee.
And former FBI General Counsel James Baker testified the bureau was inundated with unverified allegations of Trump-Russia collusion from Clinton sources, including from long-time Clinton associate Cody Shearer.
Baker described the pressure campaign on the FBI by Clinton associates as unusual and uncomfortable.
“I had a jaundiced eye about everything, yes,” Baker testified. “I had skepticism about all this stuff. I was concerned about all of this. This whole situation was horrible, and it was novel and we were trying to figure out what to do, and it was highly unusual.”
A new report out of Norway uncovered that former Nobel Committee chair Thorbjørn Jagland denied having met Jeffrey Epstein but now he confirmed that he entertained Epstein and billionaire Bill Gates at his Strasbourg residence in 2013.
Gates denied a friendship or working relationship with Epstein as well until it too was proven false.
Jagland gave the Nobel Peace Prize to Barack Obama in 2009 eight months after he took over the Nobel Committee.
DNMagasinet released a shocking report on Friday where they uncovered that Jeffrey Epstein was present at a meeting in Strasbourg in 2013 with the then Chairman of the Nobel Committee and billionaire Bill Gates.
According to the Norwegian newspaper,
After several inquiries this last week regarding new information about the meeting, Jagland confirmed that Gates and Epstein attended a meeting at his residence in March 2013, at an official meeting. According to him, Gates and Epstein arrived together.
December 2019: Berit Reiss-Andersen, chair of the Nobel Committee, had a question for the members of the committee. Queried by the Norwegian business daily DN, she asked whether they had ever had contact with Jeffrey Epstein, the convicted sex offender and well-connected financier.
Former chair Thorbjørn Jagland, by now a regular member of the committee, was among those answering no.
It turns out the answer was yes.
Not only did Jagland meet Epstein, he hosted him at his lavish residence in Strasbourg, France. At the time, Jagland was the sitting chair of the committee, which awards the prestigious Nobel Peace Prize. Also present: a philanthropist touted as a possible Prize recipient.
As the Secretary General of the Council of Europe, Jagland had his own residence, able to host several hundred guests. On the afternoon of March 27, 2013, Jagland hosted a small but exclusive group of very famous people.
One of those attending was Bill Gates, at the time the second-wealthiest man in the world and head of the largest charitable foundation in the world. Since leaving Microsoft a few years earlier, Gates had become a dedicated philanthropist. Having invested heavily to eradicate polio, he was among those mentioned as possible candidates for the Nobel Peace Prize.
Also present were representatives of the think tank International Peace Institute (IPI), who later that year partnered with Gates’ foundation in the fight against polio.
In addition to Gates and his assistants, another financier was also present. A person well-known for his network of powerful people and accused of participating in trafficking and sexual abuse.
A convicted sex offender, why was Jeffrey Epstein present in Strasbourg?
According to the sources, Gates and his assistants were already present when the representatives of IPI arrived. Epstein, who knew Gates, was the person that introduced the billionaire to IPI.
The meeting, where IPI introduced Gates to a polio eradication project, was to be very successful. Later the same year, Gates’ foundation granted IPI 2.5 million dollar. Since then, an addition 6 million dollars has followed, according to the foundation. The most recent grant was earlier this year, with an additional 250,000 dollars.
Despite Epstein pleading guilty in 2008 to charges of soliciting a prostitute, with a minor, as well as paying compensation to a number of women, Epstein was in no time back in the top circles around the globe.
(The above picture from the New York Times shows James E. Staley, at the time a senior JPMorgan executive; former Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers; Mr. Epstein; Bill Gates, Microsoft’s co-founder; and Boris Nikolic, who was the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation’s science adviser at Epstein’s New York mansion)
Jeffrey Epstein, the convicted sex offender who committed suicide in prison, managed to lure an astonishing array of rich, powerful and famous men into his orbit.
There were billionaires (Leslie Wexner and Leon Black), politicians (Bill Clinton and Bill Richardson), Nobel laureates (Murray Gell-Mann and Frank Wilczek) and even royals (Prince Andrew).
Few, though, compared in prestige and power to the world’s second-richest person, a brilliant and intensely private luminary: Bill Gates. And unlike many others, Mr. Gates started the relationship after Mr. Epstein was convicted of sex crimes.
Mr. Gates, the Microsoft co-founder, whose $100 billion-plus fortune has endowed the world’s largest charitable organization, has done his best to minimize his connections to Mr. Epstein. “I didn’t have any business relationship or friendship with him,” he told The Wall Street Journal last month.
In fact, beginning in 2011, Mr. Gates met with Mr. Epstein on numerous occasions — including at least three times at Mr. Epstein’s palatial Manhattan townhouse, and at least once staying late into the night, according to interviews with more than a dozen people familiar with the relationship, as well as documents reviewed by The New York Times.
There is clearly more to this story – due to Epstein’s death we may never know what the entire story is.
“As far as I'm concerned, it's a damned shame that a field as potentially dynamic and vital as journalism should be overrun with dullards, bums, and hacks, hag-ridden with myopia, apathy, and complacence, and generally stuck in a bog of stagnant mediocrity.” -Hunter Thompson