Saturday, November 28, 2020

Rep. Ilhan Omar’s Misguided Defense of John Brennan and The Logan Act: a Dangerous and Unconstitutional Law



The right to dissent from, and to work against, the official foreign policy of the U.S. Government is vital: foundational to Constitutional liberties. There is very little such dissent in the U.S.

ORIGINAL LINK

Seeds of Destruction by F. William Engdahl (excerpt)



My experience with the three day chemtrail aerial aggression reminded me that we’re being poisoned on all fronts, including the water we drink and the food we eat. This in turn reminded me of my friend and colleague F.

ORIGINAL LINK

Johns Hopkins Study Saying COVID-19 Has 'Relatively No Effect on Deaths' in U.S. Deleted After Publication



Conventional wisdom is that COVID-19 has caused thousands of deaths in the United States and nearly 1.5 million worldwide. This perception has been directly challenged by a study published by Johns Hopkins University on Sunday, November 22.

ORIGINAL LINK

EcoHealth Alliance orchestrated key scientists’ statement on “natural origin” of SARS-CoV-2



Emails obtained by U.S.

ORIGINAL LINK

Here's How to Think About the Danish Mask Study



I was drawn to science and medicine because of all human endeavors, ours is one where smart people can say, "I don't know." We don't stop there. We run a study or experiment that helps us know more. That is what makes what we do different than other human endeavors.

ORIGINAL LINK

What the Covid Vaccine Hype Fails to Mention



Pfizer recently announced that its covid vaccine was more than 90 percent “effective” at preventing covid-19. Shortly after this announcement, Moderna announced that its covid vaccine was 94.5 percent “effective” at preventing covid-19.

ORIGINAL LINK

Friday, November 27, 2020

Johns Hopkins retracts report finding COVID death count 'not alarming'

ORIGINAL LINK

Johns Hopkins University

A report of a senior Johns Hopkins lecturer's analysis concluding that the coronavirus had no overall effect on the total number of deaths in the United States was retracted by the university on Thursday.

Essentially, Genevieve Briand, a longtime professor of economics and statistics, argued in a recent webinar that the virus is deadly primarily to older people with multiple underlying conditions who already were near death, meaning the overall death count has not been affected.

But an editor's note posted Friday said an article about her presentation published by the student newsletter has been "used to support dangerous inaccuracies that minimize the impact of the pandemic."

The article, the Johns Hopkins University News-Letter said, was retracted "to stop the spread of misinformation" but made available as a PDF because it's "our responsibility as journalists to provide a historical record."

Genevieve Briand

The controversial report featured Briand's webinar Nov. 11 titled "COVID-19 Deaths: A Look at U.S. Data," which was hosted by the university's Krieger School of Arts & Sciences, where she is assistant program director of the Applied Economics masters degree program.

Briand, who teaches Microeconomic Theory, Statistics and Econometrics, argued the significance of COVID-19 on U.S. deaths can be fully understood only through comparison to the number of total deaths in the country.

The CDC data showed there were 1.7 million total deaths in the United States between mid-March and mid-September, of which 200,000 are COVID-19-related. Briand examined the total deaths in each age group and the cause of death in her analysis.

"Surprisingly, the deaths of older people stayed the same before and after COVID-19," she found, according to the News-Letter report.

"Since COVID-19 mainly affects the elderly, experts expected an increase in the percentage of deaths in older age groups," the report said.

But no such increase was seen in the CDC data.

"These data analyses suggest that in contrast to most people's assumptions, the number of deaths by COVID-19 is not alarming. In fact, it has relatively no effect on deaths in the United States," the report said. "This comes as a shock to many people. How is it that the data lie so far from our perception?"

The editor's note posted Friday explained that the News-Letter is an editorially and financially independent, student-run publication and its content is not endorsed by the university or the School of Medicine.

The decision to retract the article was made "independently."

"Briand's study should not be used exclusively in understanding the impact of COVID-19, but should be taken in context with the countless other data published by Hopkins, the World Health Organization and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)," the editor's note said.

The note pointed out that Briand is neither a medical professional nor a disease researcher and that she said in her talk that more research and data are needed to understand the effects of COVID-19 in the U.S.

However, Briand's analysis was within the scope of her expertise as a statistician. Before coming to Johns Hopkins, she was an instructor at the University of Idaho, adjunct assistant professor of economics at Washington State University and a tenured associate professor at Eastern Washington University. She received her PhD from Washington State University.

The editor's note insisted Briand's claim that death numbers in 2020 are not above normal "is incorrect and does not take into account the spike in raw death count from all causes compared to previous years."

"According to the CDC, there have been almost 300,000 excess deaths due to COVID-19," the note said.

Briand's study, the News-Letter's article and its retraction have sparked considerable debate on social media amid controversy over how COVID deaths are determined, the reliability of government data and the complexities of statistical analysis.

Overall, the CDC says, just 6% of the people counted as COVID-19 deaths died of COVID-19 alone. Those who died of coronavirus, according to the CDC, had an average of 2.6 comorbidities, meaning more than two chronic diseases along with COVID-19.

The CDC estimates a 99.997% survival rate for those from birth to age 19 who contract COVID-19. It's 99.98% for ages 20-49, 99.5% for 50-69 and 94.6% for those over 70.

Former New York Times reporter Alex Berenson, who has challenged the convential coronavirus narrative, arguing science doesn't support lockdowns, thinks Briand's analysis is flawed. He tweeted a link to CDC data showing mortality in 2020 is 13% above expected.

The CDC estimates more than 350,000 excess deaths this year, he points out. Many of those are due to the lockdowns, he said, but the majority are the sick and elderly.

Here's the CDC data. All-cause mortality in 2020 is 13% above expected (12% doesn't account for the reporting lag). There will be 350,000+ excess deaths this year. Many of those are lockdown deaths (including some fraction of those counted as COVID)...https://t.co/CFI8jZkpM5

— Alex Berenson (@AlexBerenson) November 27, 2020

Others took issue with him, contending he was misrepresenting Briand's argument.

'Recategorized'

Briand found in her analysis that there naturally was a sudden increase in deaths early in 2020 compared to previous years that was due to COVID-19.

But she also noticed a significant decrease in deaths due to heart disease and all other causes.

"This suggests, according to Briand, that the COVID-19 death toll is misleading," the report said. "Briand believes that deaths due to heart diseases, respiratory diseases, influenza and pneumonia may instead be recategorized as being due to COVID-19."

The Johns Hopkins News-Letter article noted the CDC classifies all deaths that are related to COVID-19 simply as COVID-19 deaths.

"Even patients dying from other underlying diseases but are infected with COVID-19 count as COVID-19 deaths."

It's likely "the main explanation as to why COVID-19 deaths drastically increased while deaths by all other diseases experienced a significant decrease."

"All of this points to no evidence that COVID-19 created any excess deaths," Briand concluded. "Total death numbers are not above normal death numbers. We found no evidence to the contrary."

See Briand's webinar:

Briand was asked by the Johns Hopkins News-Letter to address the question of whether COVID-19 deaths can be called misleading since the infection might have exacerbated and even led to deaths by other underlying diseases.

She said that if the COVID-19 death toll "was not misleading at all, what we should have observed is an increased number of heart attacks and increased COVID-19 numbers."

"But a decreased number of heart attacks and all the other death causes doesn't give us a choice but to point to some misclassification," Briand replied.

The News-Letter clarified: "In other words, the effect of COVID-19 on deaths in the U.S. is considered problematic only when it increases the total number of deaths or the true death burden by a significant amount in addition to the expected deaths by other causes."

"Since the crude number of total deaths by all causes before and after COVID-19 has stayed the same, one can hardly say, in Briand’s view, that COVID-19 deaths are concerning."

Briand emphasized in the interview that while COVID-19 is a serious national and global problem, people should not forget about the tragic loss of lives from other causes.

wnd-donation-graphic-2-2019

The post Johns Hopkins retracts report finding COVID death count 'not alarming' appeared first on WND.



via IFTTT
InoreaderURL: SECONDARY LINK

New Study Exposes Alleged Accounting Error Regarding COVID Deaths

ORIGINAL LINK
New Study Exposes Alleged Accounting Error Regarding COVID Deaths Tyler Durden Fri, 11/27/2020 - 18:00

Authored by Ethan Yang via The American Institute for Economic Research,

At the time of this writing, the United States currently maintains the highest number of Covid-19 deaths and ranks 11th for the highest deaths per capita. There have been approximately 262,000 recorded Covid-19 deaths in the United States, which is certainly a concerning number. 

However, a new study (link removed but now available at Archive.org) published by Dr. Genevieve Briand at Johns Hopkins University notes some critical accounting errors done at the national level.

The study – which is still being vetted – simply examines the raw data that should have been questioned months ago.

The overall conclusion is that Covid-19, at least according to collected data, is not the killer disease that it is currently hyped up to be. AIER is not endorsing the study as is without further study, but we are interested in the argument being examined and discussed.

Viewing Covid-19 Deaths in Context

It is already well established that Covid-19 is a disease that is most dangerous to those over the age of 65 and who have preexisting conditions. In the United States, there has been an observed 2.1% mortality rate, with elderly individuals making up over half that number. 

Young and healthy people are not by any significant capacity threatened by Covid-19. 

One of the most important factors when it comes to Covid-19 is preventing excess death. According to the CDC

“Estimates of excess deaths can provide information about the burden of mortality potentially related to the COVID-19 pandemic, including deaths that are directly or indirectly attributed to COVID-19. Excess deaths are typically defined as the difference between the observed numbers of deaths in specific time periods and expected numbers of deaths in the same time periods.”

Essentially, there is an average number of deaths every year due to a variety of causes that for the most part have remained constant through the years. This includes morbidities such as heart disease, which has long been the leading cause of death, and cancer, which has long plagued our existence. For Covid-19 to be a serious cause of alarm, it would need to significantly increase the number of average deaths. 

However, according to the study,

“These data analyses suggest that in contrast to most people’s assumptions, the number of deaths by COVID-19 is not alarming. In fact, it has relatively no effect on deaths in the United States.”

Total deaths in the United States show no significant change and even mirror past trends of seasonal illness. 

Source: CDC Data, Methodology Included in this Video

According to this graph constructed using data provided by the CDC from the last 6 years, total deaths have remained relatively constant and increases can be explained by various factors such as a larger population. The spikes in deaths in 2020 are consistent with historical trends, only topping 2018 by 11,292 deaths. There have been over 262,000 deaths attributed to Covid-19 in the United States, yet total deaths have not increased in any alarming capacity; they have only mirrored existing trends. In short, according to 6 years of data collected by the CDC, Covid-19 has not led to any significant increase in deaths.

Diving Deeper 

What is even more interesting if not more alarming is that the spike in recorded Covid-19 deaths seen in 2020 has coincided with a proportional decrease in death from other diseases. 

Yanni Gu writes

“This suggests, according to Briand, that the COVID-19 death toll is misleading. Briand believes that deaths due to heart diseases, respiratory diseases, influenza and pneumonia may instead be recategorized as being due to COVID-19.” 

Deaths have remained relatively constant, yet reported deaths due to deadly conditions such as heart disease have fallen while reported Covid deaths have risen. This suggests that the current Covid death count is in some capacity relabeled deaths due to other ailments. According to the graph, reported Covid deaths even overtook heart disease as the main cause of death at one point, which should raise suspicion.

This aligns with many other well-established facts about the virus, such as those with comorbidities are the most at risk. According to the CDC, about 94% of Covid deaths occur with comorbidities. This suggests that it could be possible that a large number of deaths could have been mainly due to more serious ailments such as heart disease but categorized as a Covid-19 death, a far less lethal disease.

Source: John Hopkins News-Letter, provided by Genevieve Briand

According to this graph provided by the study, deaths labeled under Covid-19 increased while deaths labeled under others decreased. It is important to note that this sample only applies to the month of April as the author notes these were the weeks with the highest reported deaths. Gu writes 

“The CDC classified all deaths that are related to COVID-19 simply as COVID-19 deaths. Even patients dying from other underlying diseases but are infected with COVID-19 count as COVID-19 deaths. This is likely the main explanation as to why COVID-19 deaths drastically increased while deaths by all other diseases experienced a significant decrease...

“If [the COVID-19 death toll] was not misleading at all, what we should have observed is an increased number of heart attacks and increased COVID-19 numbers. But a decreased number of heart attacks and all the other death causes doesn’t give us a choice but to point to some misclassification,” Briand replied.”

Furthermore, Briand’s research notes that the percentage of death has remained relatively constant through all age groups. Covid death statistics seem to mirror the normal distribution of death amongst age groups, further lending credence to the argument that many Covid deaths are recategorized deaths.

Briand provides this graph constructed from CDC data that shows that deaths amongst various age groups have remained relatively constant. 

By simply looking at the raw data presented by the CDC Gu writes that

“All of this points to no evidence that COVID-19 created any excess deaths. Total death numbers are not above normal death numbers. We found no evidence to the contrary,” Briand concluded.

What Do We Do With This Information?

Briand and likely many others suppose that the extreme emphasis on Covid-19 has led to the unintended classification of the disease as the cause of death. She further stresses that although this data challenges the idea that Covid is an unprecedented and lethal disease, we should still be concerned with mitigating death in general. 

However, it is clear that this significant accounting error regarding Covid deaths, if true, is not productive. It has caused mass hysteria and misinformed public policy. Closing down communities to fight a virus that according to the data, has had no significant contribution to total deaths, reduces our overall capacity to build a healthy society. 

[ZH: Alex Berenson (@AlexBerenson) noted on Twitter: "Folks: I know a lot of you are referencing this Johns Hopkins paper that’s been pulled. Unfortunately it is wrong. The excess deaths are real. Yes, they’re very, very skewed by age, but they’re real. Pretending otherwise doesn’t help."]

Lockdowns have resulted in severe damage to our capacity to improve the general health of society. From the catastrophic economic damage that lowers the standard of living for everyone to surgeries being deemed “unessential,” our current policies are not helping in preventing deaths in general; they are likely leading to more. Suicides and substance abuse are up, mental and physical health are down, all due to lockdowns. 

The late Dr. Donald Henderson, who led the eradication of smallpox, noted in 2006 that 

“Experience has shown that communities faced with epidemics or other adverse events respond best and with the least anxiety when the normal social functioning of the community is least disrupted.”

The hysteria over Covid-19 has likely led to the alleged accounting error noted in Briand’s study, the reclassification of expected deaths from all causes into Covid deaths.

That accounting error has likely led to a number of policy decisions that have drastically crippled our ability to support the general welfare of society, economically, socially, and spiritually. Going forward these findings should give us pause and reconsideration over the threat Covid-19 actually poses and realize how much avoidable damage we have done to ourselves as a result.



via IFTTT
InoreaderURL: SECONDARY LINK

The Definitive Case Proving Donald Trump Won the Election



If Joe Biden taking the lead in Michigan and Wisconsin was the moment the dynamic of the Presidential race changed, this may be the moment the dynamic changes again.

ORIGINAL LINK

Joe Biden: Return Of The CFR

ORIGINAL LINK
Joe Biden: Return Of The CFR Tyler Durden Thu, 11/26/2020 - 22:05

Submitted by Swiss Policy Research,

A Joe Biden presidency means a “return to normality” simply because it means a return of the US Council on Foreign Relations (CFR).

 

In 2008, Barack Obama received the names of his entire future cabinet already one month prior to his election by CFR Senior Fellow (and Citigroup banker) Michael Froman, as a Wikileaks email later revealed. Consequently, the key posts in Obama’s cabinet were filled almost exclusively by CFR members, as was the case in most cabinets since World War II. To be sure, Obama’s 2008 Republican opponent, the late John McCain, was a CFR member, too. Michael Froman later negotiated the TPP and TTIP international trade agreements, before returning to the CFR as a Distinguished Fellow.

In 2017, CFR nightmare President Donald Trump immediately canceled these trade agreements – because he viewed them as detrimental to US domestic industry – which allowed China to conclude its own, recently announced RCEP free-trade area, encompassing 14 countries and a third of global trade. Trump also canceled other CFR achievements, like the multinational Iran nuclear deal and the UN climate and migration agreements, and he tried, but largely failed, to withdraw US troops from East Asia, Central Asia, the Middle East, Europe and Africa, thus seriously endangering the global US empire built over decades by the CFR and its 5000 elite members.

Unsurprisingly, most of the US media, whose owners and editors are themselves members of the CFR, didn’t like President Trump. This was also true for most of the European media, whose owners and editors are members of international CFR affiliates like the Bilderberg Group and the Trilateral Commission, founded by CFR directors after the conquest of Europe during World War II. Moreover, it was none other than the CFR which in 1996 advocated a closer cooperation between the CIA and the media, i.e. a restart of the famous CIA Operation Mockingbird. Historically, OSS and CIA directors since William Donovan and Allen Dulles have always been CFR members.

Joe Biden promised that he would form “the most diverse cabinet” in US history. This may be true in terms of skin color and gender, but almost all of his key future cabinet members have one thing in common: they are, indeed, members of the US Council on Foreign Relations.

This is the case for Anthony Blinken (State), Alejandro Mayorkas (Homeland Security), Janet Yellen (Treasury), Michele Flournoy and Jeh Johnson (candidates for Defense), Linda Thomas-Greenfield (Ambassador to the UN), Richard Stengel (US Agency for Global Media; Stengel famously called propaganda “a good thing” at a 2018 CFR session), John Kerry (Special Envoy for Climate), Nelson Cunningham (candidate for Trade), and Thomas Donilon (candidate for CIA Director).

Jake Sullivan, Biden’s National Security Advisor, is not (yet) a CFR member, but Sullivan has been a Senior Fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace (a think tank “promoting active international engagement by the United States”) and a member of the US German Marshall Fund’s “Alliance For Securing Democracy” (a major promoter of the “Russiagate” disinformation campaign to restrain the Trump presidency), both of which are run by senior CFR members.

Most of Biden’s CFR-vetted nominees supported recent US wars against Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria and Yemen as well as the 2014 regime change in Ukraine. Unsurprisingly, neoconservative Max Boot, the CFR Senior Fellow in National Security Studies and one of the most vocal opponents of the Trump administration, has called Biden’s future cabinet “America’s A-Team”.

Thus, after four years of “populism” and “isolationism”, a Biden presidency will mean the return of the Council on Foreign Relations and the continuation of a tradition of more than 70 years. Indeed, the CFR was founded in 1921 in response to the “trauma of 1920”, when US President Warren Harding and the US Senate turned isolationist and renounced US global leadership after World War I. In 2016, Donald Trump’s “America First” campaign reactivated this 100 year old foreign policy trauma.

Was the 2020 presidential election “stolen”, as some allege? There are certainly indications of significant statistical anomalies in key Democrat-run swing states. Whether these were decisive for the election outcome may be up to courts to decide. At any rate, Joe Biden may well be the first US President known to be involved in international corruption before even entering office.

Why are most US and international media hardly interested in this? Well, why should they?



via IFTTT
InoreaderURL: SECONDARY LINK

INFOGRAPHIC: The Shocking Allegations of Mass Vote Fraud Made by Sidney Powell in Georgia

ORIGINAL LINK

Via Doug Ross

So easy to consume, even Democrats can understand…

Hat tips: Mark Levin and BadBlue.com



via IFTTT
InoreaderURL: SECONDARY LINK

Solomon Islands PM Defends Temporary Facebook Ban 

ORIGINAL LINK
Solomon Islands PM Defends Temporary Facebook Ban  Tyler Durden Thu, 11/26/2020 - 22:40

Last week, the Solomon Islands government approved a temporary block of social media website Facebook across the tiny island nation of 650,000, a move that top government officials said would protect people from cyberbullying and online defamation, according to Australian ABC.

By Monday, Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare doubled-down on his government's temporary measure to block the social media website, "as it was a necessity to preserve national unity." He said Facebook undermines social cohesion. 

"Cyberbullying on Facebook is widespread, people have been defamed by users who use fake names, and people's reputations that have been built up over the years [are destroyed] in a matter of minutes.

"We have [a] duty to cultivate national unity and the happy coexistence of our people … [Facebook] is undermining efforts to unite this country," he said. 

Australian ABC notes the ban has yet to go into effect, though the prospect of the ban has caused an uproar among younger people. Sogavare stands by the new measure, saying it was aimed at protecting the youth from "vile abusive language" and not a way to silence them. 

It's still unclear how the temporary ban will be enforced. The government still needs to determine whether it will use a firewall or utilize some other technique to block Facebook. 

The move to ban the social media website comes as reports began to spread on the platform, accusing the government of misappropriating virus pandemic funds for social programs - prompting calls for an audit of the virus pandemic relief program.  

This isn't the first time a Pacific government has mulled over the idea of blocking Facebook - leaders in Papua New Guinea, Fiji, and Samoa have all considered similar options. 

Besides Facebook, governments in Asia are also blocking Pornhub. Thailand's government banned more than 190 porn sites, including Pornhub, earlier this month, prompting outrage among the younger generation. 



via IFTTT
InoreaderURL: SECONDARY LINK

The dozen belated disclosures that turned the tide in Michael Flynn’s case

ORIGINAL LINK

GettyImages-1074366314.jpg?h=48737aea&it

Long-withheld evidence of innocence revealed the FBI never thought it had a case against former Trump national security adviser.

via IFTTT
InoreaderURL: SECONDARY LINK

In big Virginia school district, middle school students see 300% jump in failing grades

ORIGINAL LINK

GettyImages-sb10069478b-001.jpg?h=119335

Some students who "previously struggled in school" have "continued to do so," district admits.

via IFTTT
InoreaderURL: SECONDARY LINK

Thursday, November 26, 2020

We Haven’t Seen This Much Suffering On Thanksgiving Since The Great Depression Of The 1930s

ORIGINAL LINK

In my entire lifetime, there has never been a Thanksgiving like this.  39 million Americans don’t have enough to eat right now, more than 70 million claims for unemployment benefits have been filed so far during this calendar year, and people are waiting in line for hours at food banks all over the nation just for some Thanksgiving handouts.  If you and your family have plenty of turkey to eat, you should be very thankful, because many Americans can no longer even take Thanksgiving dinner for granted these days.  On Tuesday, vehicles were lined up for hours in New Jersey as people waited to receive prepackaged Thanksgiving meals at a local food bank…

Video obtained by CNN on Tuesday from the Meadowlands entertainment complex in New Jersey showed residents waiting for several hours to obtain prepackaged boxes of meals for the Thanksgiving holiday.

“If it wasn’t for this place, we wouldn’t know where we would get our food,” one distraught woman told CNN of the food bank in East Rutherford, N.J.

Of course we have been seeing similar wait times all over the nation.  At one food bank in Texas, demand for Thanksgiving meals was more than eight times higher than normal

Food bank officials in Dallas, Texas, have also noticed a staggering increase in demand for food assistance. North Texas Food Bank representatives told the Dallas Morning News that they handed out roughly 8,500 meals to local families during a giveaway on Saturday that in years past has seen fewer than 1,000 show up for donations.

You can see a stunning photograph of vehicles lined up for that food distribution event right here.

There are a lot of really nice vehicles in that picture.  Many of those individuals are probably accustomed to living comfortable middle class lifestyles, but just like I warned in my new book they are “suddenly” in need of food because this economic downturn has turned their worlds completely upside down.

Yes, there have always been hungry people in America, but what we are witnessing now is hard to fathom.  According to the U.S. Census Bureau, approximately 12 percent of all Americans did not have enough food to eat between October 28th and November 9th…

As the coronavirus pandemic continues to surge, more Americans are reporting going hungry, a Washington Post analysis found.

In data collected by the Census Bureau between Oct. 28 and Nov. 9, around 12 percent of all American adults reported not having enough food to eat, a figure higher than at any other point since the pandemic began earlier this year.

It is estimated that the current population of the United States is 328 million.

If you take 12 percent of 328 million, you get more than 39 million Americans that are going hungry right now.

And this is just the beginning.  Thanks to the new lockdowns that are being instituted all over the country, the number of Americans that are filing for unemployment benefits is starting to rise again

The number of Americans applying for unemployment benefits rose last week to 778,000, evidence that the U.S. economy and job market remain under strain as coronavirus cases surge and colder weather heighten the risks.

The Labor Department’s report Wednesday said jobless claims climbed from 748,000 the week before. Before the virus struck hard in mid-March, weekly claims typically amounted to roughly 225,000.

Overall, more than 70 million new claims for unemployment benefits have been filed in 2020.

As I discussed yesterday, we have never seen anything like this before in all of U.S. history.

At this point, even Hollywood is conducting mass layoffs.  More job loss announcements just keep rolling in with each passing day, and I expect that to continue all throughout the very dark winter ahead.

Other economic numbers also tell us that the U.S. economy is definitely heading in the wrong direction

The data firm Womply says that 21% of small businesses were shuttered at the start of this month, reflecting a steady increase from June’s 16% rate. Consumer spending at local businesses is down 27% this month from a year ago, marking a deterioration from a 20% year-over-year drop in October, Womply found.

If you think that anyone is going to be able to wave a magic wand and fix this mess, you are just being delusional.

There are millions upon millions of Americans that have already been pushed to the breaking point by this pandemic.  One of those individuals is a 38-year-old California resident named Andrew Lee

“I’ve exhausted all of my unemployment benefits. I’ve had to resort to food stamps and [California’s Medicaid program] for the first time in my life. I’m backdated on my rent and my credit has been ruined,” said 38-year-old Andrew Lee, who lives in a suburb of Los Angeles with his wife and two children.

Lee lost his job as a business development director several months before the pandemic. But once it hit, it became that much harder to find work. And he didn’t initially qualify for any pandemic-related unemployment benefits.

His car has been repossessed and his wife’s car has also been repossessed.

So even if they could find jobs, how are they supposed to get to work?

Lee is just like so many other hurting Americans.  First he ran through all of his savings, and then he started relying on his credit cards.

Now that his unemployment benefits have been exhausted, he is out of options, and his family is a step or two from becoming homeless.

In the months ahead, tens of millions of others will find themselves facing similar scenarios.

This is what an economic collapse looks like.  The United States hasn’t had to face anything like this since the Great Depression of the 1930s, and what we have experienced so far is just the start.

In 2019, I received quite a bit of criticism because the economy was relatively stable and to many people it seemed like an “economic collapse” was not even remotely a possibility.

But now an economic collapse has officially arrived, and all of the things that I have been warning about are starting to happen one right after the other.

The “perfect storm” is upon us, and most Americans still do not understand the horrors that lie ahead.

***Michael’s new book entitled “Lost Prophecies Of The Future Of America” is now available in paperback and for the Kindle on Amazon.***

About the Author: My name is Michael Snyder and my brand new book entitled “Lost Prophecies Of The Future Of America” is now available on Amazon.com.  In addition to my new book, I have written four others that are available on Amazon.com including The Beginning Of The EndGet Prepared Now, and Living A Life That Really Matters. (#CommissionsEarned)  By purchasing the books you help to support the work that my wife and I are doing, and by giving it to others you help to multiply the impact that we are having on people all over the globe.  I have published thousands of articles on The Economic Collapse BlogEnd Of The American Dream and The Most Important News, and the articles that I publish on those sites are republished on dozens of other prominent websites all over the globe.  I always freely and happily allow others to republish my articles on their own websites, but I also ask that they include this “About the Author” section with each article.  The material contained in this article is for general information purposes only, and readers should consult licensed professionals before making any legal, business, financial or health decisions.  I encourage you to follow me on social media on FacebookTwitter and Parler, and any way that you can share these articles with others is a great help.  During these very challenging times, people will need hope more than ever before, and it is our goal to share the gospel of Jesus Christ with as many people as we possibly can.

The post We Haven’t Seen This Much Suffering On Thanksgiving Since The Great Depression Of The 1930s appeared first on The Economic Collapse.



via IFTTT
InoreaderURL: SECONDARY LINK

Sidney Powell sues Georgia officials, alleging massive scheme to rig election for Joe Biden

ORIGINAL LINK

GettyImages-1229757686_0.jpg?h=d1edf523&

Prominent defense lawyer says scheme centered around modern 'ballot stuffing' hidden by voter machine algorithms.

via IFTTT
InoreaderURL: SECONDARY LINK

Belgians Told Police Will Knock On Doors At Christmas To Enforce COVID Rules

ORIGINAL LINK
Belgians Told Police Will Knock On Doors At Christmas To Enforce COVID Rules Tyler Durden Thu, 11/26/2020 - 07:00

Authored by Paul Joseph Watson via Summit News,

Belgians have been told that they can expect a knock on the door from police at Christmas if they are not properly following COVID-19 rules.

Yes, really.

Interior Minister Annelies Verlinden warned citizens that their Christmas parties will be interrupted by authorities if they make too much noise.

“If necessary, if there is a lot of noise, for example, the police will knock on doors,” she said.

Verlinden stopped short of saying police would be allowed to enter homes, but Belgians have been put on notice that they are being watched.

As we previously highlighted, police in the UK also said they wouldn’t hesitate to break up Christmas family gatherings if they thought corona restrictions were being violated.

“If we think there’s large groups of people gathering where they shouldn’t be, then police will have to intervene,” said West Midlands Police and Crime Commissioner David Jamieson.

“If, again, there’s flagrant breaking of the rules, then the police would have to enforce.”

The statement was made despite the fact that under UK law, police can’t enter a home without a warrant.

The only exception is if they see someone behaving as if they are infected with COVID, in which case they can enter and have that person removed.

As we highlighted yesterday, the CDC is also warning Americans not to drink alcohol or engage in singing during their Thanksgiving celebrations.

*  *  *

New limited edition merch now available! Click here. In the age of mass Silicon Valley censorship It is crucial that we stay in touch. I need you to sign up for my free newsletter here. Support my sponsor – Turbo Force – a supercharged boost of clean energy without the comedown. Also, I urgently need your financial support here.



via IFTTT
InoreaderURL: SECONDARY LINK

Wednesday, November 25, 2020

Governor: Schools will grill students about Thanksgiving, then oust children who gathered

ORIGINAL LINK

norman-rockwell-thanksgiving-freedom-fro

The once-innocent question of what students did over their Thanksgiving break will take on a new meaning in Vermont, according to Republican Gov. Phil Scott.

Vermont is among the states that have laid the blame for a rise in coronavirus cases on small gatherings that have flown under the radar of bans on larger groups getting together.

As such, state officials have told residents not to have traditional Thanksgiving dinners that can include multiple generations or families.

In an effort to crack down on anyone celebrating the traditional way, Scott said students will be asked to inform on their families.

"Unfortunately, we know some will still get together and schools have asked for help. [The Vermont Agency of Education] will direct schools to ask students or parents if they were part of multi-family gatherings and if the answer is yes, they'll need to go remote for 14 days or 7 days and a test," he tweeted Tuesday.

"We also advise businesses to consider asking employees to quarantine if they don't adhere to gathering restrictions. This isn't a way around the ban or an excuse to get together. The more we adhere to this policy, the faster we’ll lower case counts & ease up on restrictions," Scott added.

We also advise businesses to consider asking employees to quarantine if they don't adhere to gathering restrictions. This isn't a way around the ban or an excuse to get together. The more we adhere to this policy, the faster we’ll lower case counts & ease up on restrictions. 10/

— Governor Phil Scott (@GovPhilScott) November 24, 2020

As part of his Twitter thread, Scott said every person carries the seeds of potential disaster.

"[Y]ou never know if you’re going to be the domino that leads to a nursing home outbreak or pushes an entire school to remote learning," he tweeted.

When asked about putting students in a position to inform on their parents, Scott on Tuesday defended his edict, according to the Vermont Daily Chronicle.

“This is fair warning. If you’re planning on having gatherings outside your households, if you don’t want to have your kids in remote learning and quarantine for a seven-day period, maybe you should make other plans. I’m not sure it’s ‘tattling’ on anyone," he told reporters.

Some pushed back against Scott.

Using government institutions to convince children to rat out their parents. Where have we seen this happen before?

— Kurt Eckert (@kurtjeckert) November 25, 2020

Vermont schools will grill students on their Thanksgiving celebrations, governor announceshttps://t.co/QJenAGRhB2
This where this is all head. Govt using our children to spy & report back to “authority” figures. The Nazis at least were honest about their nefarious behavior.

— iamtherealRGM (@RGMNumber8) November 25, 2020

Maybe VT could use some of your expertise, as they ask CHILDREN to snitch on their parents/families. As a child of the "iron curtain", where neighbors and family members betrayed each other, I wish I'd had a trigger warning before reading this. https://t.co/6lwzp3LPWx

— Sylvia Fogel MD (@FogelSylvia) November 24, 2020

Other Vermont officials painted Thanksgiving as a potential catastrophe for the state.

"The fact is, Thanksgiving can make things a lot worse for us here in Vermont. The virus doesn't operate any differently just because we want to keep up traditions," Health Commissioner Dr. Mark Levine said, according to NECN.

"As soon as we travel, get together with friends, let down our guard, we actually do risk reopening the floodgates even wider at a time when we really need to keep them closed."

Financial Regulation Commissioner Mike Pieciak noted that nationally, 38 percent of Americans plan to have holiday events that bring together 10 or more people.

If that were to happen in Vermont, he said, there could be as many as 3,800 new coronavirus cases leading to up to 50 hospitalizations.

"These are certainly numbers that are quite stark and quite disturbing," Pieciak said. "This is not a projection. This is not an estimate. This is really a worst-case scenario, and we really need Vermonters to respond so that we don't experience anything like the numbers we just mentioned."

This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.

The post Governor: Schools will grill students about Thanksgiving, then oust children who gathered appeared first on WND.



via IFTTT
InoreaderURL: SECONDARY LINK

YouTube suspends TV network for report about COVID treatment

ORIGINAL LINK

YouTube temporarily suspended the One America News Network from its platform, apparently for posting a report about the successful treatment of COVID-19 patients with the highly politicized drug hydroxychloroquine.

YouTube said Tuesday that OAN violated its "misinformation" policy barring users from posting videos that claim the coronavirus can be "cured."

OAN, which has been touted by President Trump as an alternative to Fox News, was previously warned about violating the policy, Axios reported. And two more violations would result in termination of the account. The network will need to reapply to the YouTube Partner Program to resume making money off its videos.

OAN issued a statement saying the offending video was "unlisted" and viewable only by OAN staff.

The network said it will abide by YouTube's policies with future videos "but will not let YouTube's arbitrary rules infringe upon our First Amendment editorial rights to inform the public," reported City News Service.

"We believe that the opinions of frontline doctors should be heard, regardless if their views agree or differ from the CDC," the statement said. "YouTube requires a warning label if interviewed medical experts deviate from the CDC’s latest thinking, which is frequently subject to change. However, these are actual, practicing doctors who went to medical school and are highly qualified to make medical decisions — much more so than the moderators at YouTube."

City News Service noted OAN claims it has interviewed more than 50 doctors and healthcare professionals who have successfully treated more than 6,000 COVID-19 patients. The channel said it has "highlighted therapeutics — including hydroxychloroquine — recommended by these doctors and that showed evidence of success."

Meanwhile, a peer-reviewed study set to be published in December measuring the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine concluded the drug lowered hospitalizations and mortality rates of coronavirus patients.

In July, a study conducted by the Henry Ford Health System in Michigan found that patients treated with hydroxychloroquine were more likely to survive COVID-19.

Last Thursday, as WND reported, leading epidemiologists who have found hydroxychloroquine to be an effective treatment for COVID-19 and decry its politicization testified to the Senate's Homeland Security Committee.

Get the free "Guide to Home-Based COVID Treatment"

Dr. Harvey Risch, a professor of epidemiology at Yale University, emphasized the drug is "exceedingly safe," having been prescribed for more than 65 years to "hundreds of millions of people" in "10s of billions of doses."

He said there are seven studies on the use of hydroxychloroquine in high-risk patients, and every one has shown reductions of 50% or more in the risk of hospitalization and mortality.

Dr. George Fareed, medical director at Pioneers Health Center in the Imperial Valley in California, told the Senate panel he treated successfully more than 1,000 high-risk patients with a cocktail of hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin and zinc, which was developed by Dr. Zev Zelenko, who told WND in April of his 100% success treating 350 coronavirus patients.

An outspoken proponent of hydroxychloroquine, Dr. Steven Smith of East Orange, New Jersey, expressed in an interview with WND in May his frustration with the politicization of hydroxychloroquine.

Risch, in an interview with Fox News' Laura Ingraham in July, said hydroxychloroquine is "a political drug now, not a medical drug."

He said establishment media and politicians are "basically fighting a propaganda war against the medical facts" that is shaping not only how the population views the drug, but doctors as well."

Risch said he's received "hostile remarks" from doctors who say that "all the evidence is bad for it."

"And in fact, that's not true at all. And it's easy to show that the evidence – all the evidence is actually good for it when it's used in outpatient uses," he said. "Nevertheless, the only people who actually see that are a whole pile of doctors who are actually on the frontlines treating those patients across the country. And they are the ones who are at risk of being forced not to do it."

In a guest column for Newsweek, Risch, who has authored more than 300 peer-reviewed publications and currently hold senior positions on the editorial boards of several leading journals, argued hydroxychloroquine is the key to containing the virus.

In May, he published an article in the the world's leading epidemiology journal, the American Journal of Epidemiology, that analyzed five studies "demonstrating clear-cut and significant benefits" to treating patients with hydroxychloroquine along with other very large studies that demonstrated its safety.

"Physicians who have been using these medications in the face of widespread skepticism have been truly heroic," he wrote in the Newsweek column. "They have done what the science shows is best for their patients, often at great personal risk. I myself know of two doctors who have saved the lives of hundreds of patients with these medications, but are now fighting state medical boards to save their licenses and reputations. The cases against them are completely without scientific merit."

Smith, who briefed President Trump in April on the safety and effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine, pointed out the World Health Organization temporarily halted studying hydroxychloroquine in response to a widely reported observational study published in the medical journal The Lancet that concluded seriously ill COVID-19 patients who were treated with hydroxychloroquine were more likely to die.

But in an embarrassing turn, the premiere journal was forced to withdraw the study after three of the four authors issued an apology, citing concerns about the quality and veracity of the data.

The Lancet study's fatal flaws were immediately apparent to Smith when the study was released in May. Dr. Marc Siegel, associate professor of medicine at the New York University Langone Medical Center, called The Lancet study a "political hit job."

wnd-donation-graphic-2-2019

The post YouTube suspends TV network for report about COVID treatment appeared first on WND.



via IFTTT
InoreaderURL: SECONDARY LINK

Demanding Silicon Valley Suppress "Hyper Partisan Sites" Over MSM News Is Fraud: Greenwald

ORIGINAL LINK
Demanding Silicon Valley Suppress "Hyper Partisan Sites" Over MSM News Is Fraud: Greenwald Tyler Durden Wed, 11/25/2020 - 12:45

Authored by Glenn Greenwald via greenwald.substack.com,

Due in part to a self-interested desire to re-establish their monopoly on discourse by crushing any independent or dissenting voices, and in part by a censorious and arrogant mindset which convinces them that only those of their worldview and pedigree have a right to be heard, they largely devote themselves to complaining that Facebook, Google and Twitter are not suppressing enough speech. It is hall-monitor tattletale whining masquerading as journalism: petulantly complaining that tech platforms are permitting speech that, in their view, ought instead be silenced.

In Tuesday’s New York Times, three of those censorious tech reporters — Kevin Roose, Mike Isaac, and Sheera Frenkel — published an article on Facebook’s post-election deliberations over how to alter its algorithms to prevent the spread of what they deem “misinformation” regarding the election. The most consequential change they implemented, The New York Times explained, was one in which “hyperpartisan pages” are repressed in favor of promoting “a spike in visibility for big, mainstream publishers like CNN, The New York Times and NPR” — a change the Paper of Record heralded as having fostered “a calmer, less divisive Facebook.”

More alarmingly, the NYT suggested (i.e., prayed) that these changes, designed by Facebook as an election-related emergency measure, would instead become permanent. Marvel at these two paragraphs and all of tenuous and self-serving assumptions buried in them:

The conceit that outlets like The New York Times, CNN and NPR are the alternatives to “hyper-partisan pages” is one you would be eager to believe, or at least want to induce others to believe, if you were a tech reporter at The New York Times, furious and hurt that millions upon millions of people would rather hear other voices than your own, and simply do not trust what you tell them. Inducing Facebook to manipulate the algorithmic underbelly of social media to artificially force your content down the throats of citizens who prefer to avoid it, while rendering your critics’ speech invisible — all in the name of reducing “hyper-partisanship,” “divisiveness,” and “misinformation” — is of course a highly desirable outcome for mainstream outlets like the NYT.

The problem with this claim is that it’s a complete and utter fraud, one that is easily demonstrated as such. There are few sites more “hyper-partisan” than the three outlets which the NYT applauded Facebook for promoting. In the 2020 election, over 70 million Americans — close to half of the voting population — voted for Donald Trump, yet not one of them is employed by the op-ed page of the “non-partisan” New York Times and are almost never heard on NPR or CNN. That’s because those news outlets, by design, are pro-Democratic-Party organs, who speak overwhelmingly to Democratic readers and viewers.

It is hard to get more partisan than the news outlets which the NYT tech reporters, and apparently Facebook, consider to be the alternatives to “hyper-partisan” discourse. In April, Pew Research asked Americans which outlet is their primary source of news, and the polling firm found that the audiences of NPR, CNN and especially The New York Times are overwhelmingly Democrats, in some cases almost entirely so:

As Pew put it: “about nine-in-ten of those who name The New York Times (91%) and NPR (87%) as their main political news source identify as Democrats, with CNN at about eight-in-ten (79%).” These outlets speak to Democrats, are built for Democrats, and produce news content designed to be pleasing and affirming to Democrats — so they keep watching and buying. One can say many things about these news outlets, but the idea that they are the alternatives to “hyper-partisan pages” is the exact opposite of the truth: it is difficult to find more hyper-partisan organs than these.

Then there is the question of who does and does not spread “misinformation.” It is rather astonishing that the news outlets that did more than anyone to convince Americans to believe the most destructive misinformation of this generation: that Saddam had WMDs and was in an alliance with Al Qaeda — The New York Times, The Atlantic, NBC and The New Yorker — have the audacity to prance around as the bulwarks against misinformation rather than what they are: the primary purveyors of it.

Over the last four years, they devoted themselves to the ultimate deranged, mangled conspiracy theory: that the Kremlin had infiltrated the U.S. and was clandestinely controlling the levers of American power through some combination of sexual and financial blackmail. The endless pursuit of that twisted conspiracy led them to produce one article after the next that spread utter falsehoods, embraced reckless journalism and fostered humiliating debacles. The only thing more absurd than these hyper-partisan, reckless outlets posturing as the alternatives to hyper-partisanship is them insisting that they’re the only safeguards against misinformation.

Note how insidiously creepy is The New York Times’ description of a censored, regulated internet. They call it “a vision of what a calmer, less divisive Facebook might look like,” and claim an unnamed Facebook employee described it as “a nicer news feed.”

Yes, discourse that is centralized and regulated, where no dissent is tolerated, where alternative voices are silenced, is always “calmer” and “less divisive.” That’s always the core goal of censorsing speech and ideas: to eliminate “divisiveness” and to pacify the population (“calmer” and “nicer”). That is always the result when orthodoxies imposed downward from the most powerful institutions of authority can no longer be meaningfully challenged.

The censorious mentality being peddled with increasing aggression is always chilling and dangerous. That it is media outlets — which ought to be the most vocal champions of free discourse — instead taking the lead in begging and pressuring Silicon Valley to censure the internet more and more is warped beyond belief. The internet should be free and left alone, especially by those with their record of deceit and propaganda.

Indeed, if we are to have it an internet controlled from above by unseen tech overlords in the name of eliminating “hyper-partisanship” and “disinformation” and fostering a “calmer” and “nicer” population, the sites now being artificially and manipulatively promoted are the absolute last ones who can credibly claim entitlement to that benefit.



via IFTTT
InoreaderURL: SECONDARY LINK