Saturday, June 19, 2021

Meet The Censored: Bret Weinstein

Meet The Censored: Bret Weinstein

Authored by Matt Taibbi via TK News,

On May 23, 2017, not so long ago in real time but seemingly an eternity given the extraordinary history we’ve lived through since, a group of 50-odd students at Evergreen State College arrived at the classroom of a biology professor named Bret Weinstein, demanding his resignation. He stepped into the hall to talk, believing he could work things out.

He was wrong. Weinstein’s offense had been to come to work during an event called the “Days of Absence,” in which white students, staff, and faculty were asked to stay home. This was an inverted version of a longstanding Evergreen event of the same name that, based on a Douglas Turner Ward play, invited students of color to stay home voluntarily, to underscore their value to the community. As he would later explain in the Wall Street Journal, Weinstein thought this was a different and more negative message, and refused to comply. When that group of 50 students he’d never met arrived at his door and accused him of being a racist, he assumed he could find common ground, especially when his own students (including students of color) spoke on his behalf.

“I was one of Evergreen’s most popular professors,” he later testified to the House of Representatives. “I had Evergreen’s version of tenure. Did they really think they could force my resignation based on a meritless accusation? They did think that, and they were right.”

Weinstein was a Bernie Sanders supporter who described his politics as unabashedly liberal, even leftist. Like many, he’d grown up steeped in the imagery of sixties protest culture, probably imagined himself on its side, and therefore thought he could find solidarity with protesters. He didn’t realize was that he was the canary in a coal mine for a new movement that understood free speech as a stalking horse for the exercise of institutional power. When Weinstein opened his mouth to defend himself, what the crowd heard was him attempting to exercise authority, and they exercised theirs back.

They’d won over Evergreen’s new president, George Bridges, who refused to intercede in Weinstein’s behalf and later even asked college police to stand down, when protesters began stopping traffic and searching cars for someone, presumably Weinstein. The police told Weinstein they couldn’t guarantee his safety, and ultimately he was, in fact, forced to resign.

Frequently portrayed as the involuntary protagonist of the first of a series of campus free speech crises, in fact Weinstein was one of the first to understand that a rollback of “free speech” in cases like his was incidental to the larger aims of the movement.

“What is occurring on college campuses is about power and control. Speech is impeded as a last resort,” he told the House Oversight Committee.

He described the new movement as like a cult, in which members sincerely believed they were acting to stop oppression, but leaders understood they were simply “turning the tables” on oppression. They were exercising authority to achieve what may be presented as social justice goals, while the actual end is the authority itself, with the teardown of due process and other protections a critical part of the picture. “This committee,” he said, “should take my tale as cautionary.”

Fast forward three years. Weinstein and his wife Heather Heying have become prominent figures in independent media, co-hosting a popular podcast called DarkHorse. Identified in the New York Times as one of the main dramatis personae of the so-called “Intellectual Dark Web,” a group of heterodox intellectuals not aligned with the traditional right or left, he appeared for a time to find a home on YouTube. Maybe he would never go back to academia, but this seemed a more secure replacement. After all it’s one thing to be dependent on the whims of a college president or even a faculty board, but surely there’s safety in subscriber numbers?

Not so fast. As detailed in “Why Has ‘Ivermectin’ Become a Dirty Word?”, Weinstein is on the verge of becoming one of the more prominent casualties to a censorship movement that it’s hard not to see as part of a wider Evergreening of America. He and Heying’s two YouTube channels have been hit with multiple warnings for two brands of speech offenses, and are on the verge of having their business shut down entirely as a result (YouTube has a “three strikes and you’re out” policy). One offense involves interviews with the likes of Dr. Pierre Kory about the potential benefits of the repurposed drug ivermectin, and the other involves interviews with guests like Dr. Robert Malone, inventor of the mRNA vaccine technology used in the Covid-19 vaccines. One video with Malone this week had 587,331 views before it was shut down.

In the years since Weinstein left Evergreen, the American cultural and political establishment has undergone a change in thinking, tracking with the warning Weinstein delivered to congress. The Trump election inspired a loss of faith in democracy, Charlottesville defamed speech rights, and Russiagate was an ongoing argument against due process, with many of the same people who opposed Dick Cheney’s spy state suddenly seeing themselves as aligned with the FBI, the NSA, and the CIA in the war on Trump.

Weinstein in his testimony talked about a movement that targeted the liberal concepts that traditionally bound us together, one being the “marketplace of ideas.” By 2021, the “marketplace of ideas” was regularly being portrayed as a trick, a tool for repression designed to conceal the fact that, as the New York Times put it last year, “good ideas do not always triumph in a marketplace of ideas.”

Thus instead of argument and debate, many now believe we should use force and influence to achieve objectives. This is just what Weinstein described at Evergreen: eschewing argument, accumulating power for its own sake instead. It’s in light of this cultural shift that we’ve seen a movement in favor of censorship, with erstwhile opponents of corporations posturing as libertarians, filling social media with arguments about how private companies should be free to do what they want.

When Facebook, Apple, YouTube and Spotify teamed up to kick Alex Jones off the Internet in the summer of 2018, most of the left cheered. The obvious fear, however, was that moderators would develop mission creep. The DarkHorse incidents show we’re there. Whether or not one agrees with Weinstein about the efficacy of ivermectin, or the idea that the Covid-19 vaccines carry unreported dangers, anyone who follows his show recognizes that his is nearly the opposite of an Alex Jones act. He and Heying’s shows are neither frivolous nor abusive, and they clearly make an effort to be evidence-based, interviewing credentialed authorities, typically about subjects ignored by the corporate press.

This is exactly what independent/alternative media is for: tackling third rail subjects that, for one reason or another, can’t find a home in traditional media. Often, it takes scoops initially dismissed as silly conspiracies by what ABC reporter Jon Karl recently described as “serious people,” a classic example being Gary Webb’s famous CIA cocaine trafficking story.

A Time magazine editor in rejecting that one told reporters on that “if this story were about the Sandinistas and drugs, you’d have no trouble getting it in the magazine,” while Newsweek years later called a U.S. Senator, John Kerry, a “randy conspiracy buff” for saying the Contras in Nicaragua were engaged in drug trafficking. Only years later, in the small San Jose Mercury-News, did the story come out, and even then it took years before the coke-for-guns tale truly broke through in popular media.

With the Covid-19 story, Weinstein and Heying were among the first to openly consider the so-called “lab leak hypothesis” of how the pandemic began. In fact, in the days before people like Dr. Anthony Fauci appeared to change their minds about the theory’s feasibility, and before beloved mainstream figures like Jon Stewart declared that if there was “an outbreak of chocolatey goodness near Hershey, Pennsylvania” you’d know “it’s the fucking chocolate factory,” Weinstein and Heyer were roundly denounced as Covid-19 misinformation peddlers.

In January, after they went on Real Time With Bill Maher, they were blasted for pushing a “Steve Bannon Wuhan Lab Covid Conspiracy” by a Daily Beast writer who mostly seemed upset that Weinstein and Heying had soiled Maher with the ick of unconventional thinking. However, since conventional wisdom on the lab leak theory changed, criticism on that front has died down, especially now that platforms like Facebook have announced they “will no longer remove the claim that COVID-19 is man-made or manufactured from our apps.” Still, the shift in consensus thinking about lab origin has only seemed to accelerate the vigilance about ivermectin and other issues.

This is a significant moment in the history of American media. If a show with the audience that Weinstein and Heying have can be put out of business this easily, it means that independent media going forward will either have to operate outside the major Internet platforms, or give up its traditional role as a challenger of mainstream narratives. There are plenty of people out there who take a sarcastic view of the “Intellectual Dark Web,” just as they roll their eyes at lots of YouTubers or Instagram stars or even the “Substackerati,” but even those critics should realize the seriousness of this moment, not just for this show, but for all media.

I reached out to Weinstein about his fight with YouTube:

TK: Can you sketch out the structure of your media business?

Weinstein: Heather and I have been doing livestreams since March, 2020. They began as bi-weekly and were originally focused on COVID. The topic quickly broadened, and streams were reduced to once a week in September, 2020. We have done 83 livestreams as of June 5th. Livestreams consist of 1-2 hours of presentation and discussion between Heather and Bret, followed by 1-2 hours of audience Q and A.

The remainder of the podcasts are discussions between me, Bret, and one or more guests. Some have been done in studio, others over zoom. The maximum number of guests was The Black Intellectual Round Table with seven guests. All guest discussions have been taped, with two recent exceptions (with Pierre Kory, and Steve Kirsch/Robert Malone), and generally the content is not edited with respect to substance. The main channel has 329,000 subscribers. Revenue on the main channel is generated by YouTube ads at the beginning of the podcast, by Superchat questions, and recently we have done spoken ads for carefully chosen sponsors. Podcasts also drive subscribership on each of our Patreon pages, and channel/podcast merchandise is also available from Teespring linked through YouTube. 

The clips channel was created in July 2020, and consists of clips made by a video editor/producer who watches our podcasts and selects highlights. Subscribership on the clips channel is rapidly growing and stands at 182,000. All revenue on the clips channel is from YouTube ads.

The main livestreams (but not the Q&As), and the podcasts that I have with other guests, are also uploaded to audio-only podcast platforms. Combining YouTube and podcast downloads, episodes tend to get above 200,000 views/listens each. The audio-only podcast has reliably been in the top 10 in Apple’s “Science podcasts” category, and goes in and out of top 100 in “overall” podcasts. Currently it is #77.

TK: Tech company executives have consistently said they intervene on this subject only for safety reasons, to prevent misleading information that might cause someone to avoid a lifesaving treatment. What is your answer to that? Are you an anti-vaxxer? Could a reasonable person infer from your broadcasts that you're recommending that adults not get vaccinated?

Weinstein: We are biologists engaging material that is inherently evolutionary. Our upcoming book is on the problem caused by the interface of people with novel technology for which we are not evolutionarily prepared. No one is trained in even a majority of the disciplines relevant to the COVID Pandemic. Virologists aren’t clinicians, aren’t epidemiologists, aren’t evolutionary biologists, aren’t pharmacologists, aren’t data scientists. We state repeatedly that we are not medical doctors and are not making recommendations, but we are sharing our view of scientific material that we are qualified to analyze.

It is true that some may become hesitant about the Covid vaccines from our discussions. That may cost lives, as we have taken pains to point out repeatedly. We also surely save lives. For example, it is especially likely that DarkHorse viewers who have had COVID would skip being vaccinated, greatly reducing their risk of adverse reactions without increasing their risk of future COVID.

The question is one of net effect. We have been way ahead of official guidance throughout the pandemic, and we have been very sharp in our criticism of those who have treated SARS-CoV2 casually. We have clearly sobered many up about the issue. Our refrain has been that although the case fatality rate from COVID is moderate, the damage to the body from a case of COVID—even if mild—is often substantial and likely implies reduced longevity. And we have given prescient advice on prevention. We were extremely early in recognizing that conducting business outside, opening windows (especially in cars), keeping conversation with strangers brief, wearing masks, removing masks outside, spending time in the sun, supplementing with vitamin-D, all have protective effects.

The best defense of what we have done on DarkHorse is simply to compare our prevention model with the official guidance. It is the low quality and slow improvement in the official model that constitutes the greatest danger. It takes far too long for official guidance to catch up to the evidence.

As to the questions of whether we are vaccinated and/or would get vaccinated again: we (and our children) are more fully vaccinated than most people, in part due to the exposures that our (former) jobs as tropical biologists gave us. We are, for instance, vaccinated against yellow fever, typhoid, and rabies. We are not vaccinated against Covid, and do not intend to get vaccinated against Covid (unless, perhaps, a traditional vaccine were to be produced).

TK: Jon Stewart made the lab-leak hypothesis mainstream last week. You were one of the first media figures to try to bring attention in that direction. What was the response when you raised your own concerns, and what's your reaction now, given the way that discussion has suddenly become permissible?

Weinstein: The lessons of the lab leak are many. Of course, those of us who could see that the official narrative was wildly inconsistent with the evidence were aggressively stigmatized. Many were driven to self silence. And the official narrative could easily have held, causing dissenters to be recorded in history as cranks. This is standard for such a situation. Unfortunately, there is no appetite for extrapolating from the lab leak to other COVID questions. Today Tony Fauci announced a multi-billion dollar initiative to search for new drugs to treat COVID, and Carl Zimmer dutifully reported the story with excitement in the NYT, even as the revelations about Fauci’s apparent corruption and responsibility continue to surface. There was no mention of the danger implied in new drugs and EUAs. The idea of repurposed drugs doing the job safely and cheaply is elided with the baseless assertion that a search for useful existing drugs was essentially fruitless. There is simply no update to the public’s trust in authority based on the lessons of the lab leak, no recognition that officials are often mistaken, or lying or both.

And that’s the core of the problem with YouTube’s policy. Official consensus has been frequently laughable in the context of Covid, often with deadly consequences. If ever there was a moment for scientific generalists to help their audience understand the evidence, this is it.

Consider this bizarre fact. In Sept. 2020, Politifact “fact checked” the lab leak hypothesis and declared it a “pants on fire lie.” Politifact was forced to walk that conclusion back in May 2021. My flow chart had a lab leak at almost 90% as of April 2020. In June of 2021 Politifact “fact checked” the assertion (made on the DarkHorse Podcast by Dr. Robert Malone, inventor of mRNA vaccine technology) that “spike protein is cytotoxic.” They declared it false. How did they end up the arbiter of factual authority in this case? Shouldn’t the presumption be with Dr. Malone, and with DarkHorse?

TK: Don't tech companies and health officials have a responsibility to try to prevent dangerous speech during an emergency like a pandemic? Do you feel that any discussion on a topic like this should be allowed, or do you believe there should be a minimal factual standard? What's the proper way to regulate this dilemma in your opinion?

Weinstein: I don’t think it works this way. Once you create the right to shut down speech for the good of the public, that tool becomes a target of capture and true speech is silenced. Furthermore, humans are stuck with the fact that heterodoxy exists at the fringe with the cranks. No one has a way to sort one from the other, except in retrospect. So if you regulate the cranks out of existence, you also shut down meaningful progress. The price of that is incalculable. Heather had a great piece on this published recently (What If We’re Wrong? In the on-line magazine Areo).

TK: Even if there are serious risks to your business, do you intend to stop talking about the subject? 

Of course not. Lives are on the line. Too many have been lost already. This is an absolute moral obligation. That doesn’t mean we won’t pick battles strategically, but even loss of our channels is acceptable if the madness surrounding COVID treatment and prevention can be stopped. 

Tyler Durden Sat, 06/19/2021 - 21:30


The Courage of Sawsan Gad: a Young Lady Risks Her Future to Speak Against Jab Crow at George Mason University

History will not be kind to people entrusted with power, from politicians, public health officials, opinion leaders and beyond, who made the decision to become enforcers of this insane mass-“vaccination” campaign that we are living through.


‘Urgent’ British report calls for complete cessation of COVID vaccines in humans

An “urgent preliminary report of Yellow Card data” issued by the UK-based Evidence-Based Medicine Consultancy Ltd submitted to the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) states that “the MHRA now has more than enough evidence on the Yellow Card system to declare the COVID-1


Committee to green-light mandatory vaccinations

The National Bioethics Committee is expected to give its approval for the mandatory vaccination of specific social and professional groups, such as health workers, in its report on Friday to Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis.


Questions About the FBI's Role in 1/6 Are Mocked Because the FBI Shapes Liberal Corporate Media

The axis of liberal media outlets and their allied activist groups — CNN, NBC News, The Washington Post, Media Matters — are in an angry uproar over a recent report questioning the foreknowledge and involvement of the FBI in the January 6 Capitol riot.


Friday, June 18, 2021

Ariz., Georgia, Wisconsin, Penn. … the chickens come home to roost



What do we do when it appears, later than we like, that the 2020 election was thrown after all?


The latest story from Just the News is that the Georgia audit documents expose "significant election failures" in the state's largest county.

"Documents that Georgia's largest county submitted to state officials as part of a post-election audit highlight significant irregularities in the Atlanta area during last November's voting, ranging from identical vote tallies repeated multiple times to large batches of absentee ballots that appear to be missing from the official ballot-scanning records," said the story.

This is big. And coupled with Arizona early results of an audit conducted in Maricopa County, Wisconsin, which apparently shows more votes than voters, Pennsylvania's anomalies, Michigan and several other states, it's really looking like Donald Trump won the 2020 election – and probably broke Joe Biden's crooked record.

To put it into perspective, the irregularities in predominantly Democratic Fulton County, Georgia, could impact thousands of ballots in a race that was initially certified by fewer that 12,000 votes.

And the real surprise is that Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger's own private contractor commissioned the report. He probably lied to "60 Minutes" when he claimed Georgia had conducted its most sacred kind of election.

The memos included the handwritten tally sheets for all absentee ballots counted by the county as well as a private report that chronicled seven days of problems and recorded troubling behavior like the mysterious removal of a suitcase of sensitive election data known as polls pads, used to authenticate voters.

The revelations come as a state judge has taken the extraordinary step of ordering absentee ballots in the county unsealed so that a private audit led by lawyer Bob Cheeley can examine the actual papers and resolve discrepancies. Cheeley told Just the News on Wednesday the evidence he has seen so far points to "election tabulation malpractice."

Private experts and state election officials differ on whether the evidence shows a pattern of potential fraud or simply gross incompetence in the county, but they are mostly united for the first time that the top election supervisors in Fulton County should be removed. Some officials are even discussing a dramatic intervention like putting the county's election system in conservatorship so it can be run by state, not local, officials.

"I have continued to call on the elections director to be removed from his position, and the leadership of Fulton County has continued to fail to act," Raffensperger said. "It is no secret that Fulton has had issues in their elections department for decades, which is why I insisted on a state monitor being present to be eyes and ears on the ground. He did not see any evidence of fraud despite having full access, but he saw continued mismanagement, miscommunication, unpreparedness and sloppiness. Georgia voters deserve better."

That's RAFFENSPERGER – a far cry from what he was telling "60 Minutes."

Here's what the record shows:

  • More than 100 batches of absentee ballots – each containing approximately 100 or more ballots — were assigned tracking numbers before being sent to one of the five absentee vote-counting machines in Fulton County but are not subsequently recorded in the handwritten logs showing which batches were scanned and counted, raising concerns the ballots may be missing.
  • More than two dozen batches of absentee ballots were identified as having been double-scanned as actual votes.
  • Five sequential batches of absentee votes each appeared with the exact same vote count of 392 for Biden, 96 for Donald Trump, and three for the libertarian candidate, which defy all odds.
  • Many control sheets for absentee ballot batches counted during the state's audit did not check a box indicating the ballot came from a secure container, raising the possibility that ballots were stored insecurely or that multiple batches of ballots were sealed in a single container.

So what happens next?

Where do we go from here?

I don't know how it will turn out until we know two things: The full story of how the vote really went and how the election was stolen from Donald Trump, not to mention all the down-ballot confusion and suspicion and who really should be controlling Congress today.

Now you know why there was such a rush to certify the votes in Congress … and then to go after all of the "insurrectionists."

Content created by the WND News Center is available for re-publication without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact


The post Ariz., Georgia, Wisconsin, Penn. … the chickens come home to roost appeared first on WND.


Thursday, June 17, 2021

Georgia investigator's notes reveal 'massive' election integrity problems in Atlanta

In a nationally televised interview in January, Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger rattled off an impressive list of measures his state used to ensure the November election count was accurate. "We had safe, secure, honest elections," he declared to "60 Minutes.


Stunning, statistically impossible ‘irregularities' in Fulton County vote audit


A new report from Just the News reveals "significant irregularities" in the 2020 presidential election ballot count from Fulton County, Georgia.

That county was critical to Joe Biden's narrow, 12,000-vote, victory but since has come under scrutiny for several reasons.

Just days ago, an elections official there admitted that some of the legally required forms documenting the chain of custody for the ballots simply were missing.

At the time, the Georgia Star News confirmed that 385 official transfer forms, of an estimated 1,565 that would have been present in Fulton County, are gone.

Now a report at Just the News documents how records suggest "more than 100 batches of absentee ballots in Fulton County could be missing."

Further, there's evidence of "identical vote tallies repeated multiple times" as well as "large batches of absentee ballots that appear to be missing from the official ballot-scanning records," the report said.

The issue in Fulton County, which is mostly Democratic, is that the results could impact the statewide race that Biden took by a tiny margin.

The significance is alarming since Georgia was one of six battleground states that drew charges of election fraud after the 2020 presidential race results were announced. In several, counting on Election Night was suspended with Trump leading. Hours later, after massive ballot dumps that were nearly 100% for Biden, the Democrat took the lead when counting resumed.

Further, in many of those states, officials arbitrarily changed state laws in order to accommodate ballots during the COVID-19 disaster, even though the Constitution requires only state lawmakers to made such changes.

When Georgia admitted that chain-of-custody documented was gone, a report in the Gateway Pundit said that's just like some of the other battleground states.

"For months and again today we’ve reported on over 300,000 missing chain of custody documents in Georgia. Notably, most if not all of these ballots are likely for Biden and Biden was given Georgia by around 12,000 votes which included these bogus ballots," the report said.

"In Arizona, the Maricopa Count Board of Elections has not turned over any chain of custody documentation on any ballots in the county. Any ballots lacking this documentation are invalid. Thousands of ballots reported for Biden fall in this box. In Wisconsin, there were over 140,000 ballots dropped early the morning after the election. Do these all have proper chain of custody documentation? In Pennsylvania, over a million ballots were recorded after Election Day as absentee ballots. Do these all have the proper chain of custody? In Michigan, a white van dropped off thousands of ballots in the early morning after the election. Did these ballots include chain of custody documentation?"

"The memos reviewed by Just the News include the handwritten tally sheets for all absentee ballots counted by the county as well as a private report from a contractor hired by Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger to monitor the Atlanta-area election process. The report, which chronicled seven days of problems, recorded troubling behavior like the mysterious removal of a suitcase of sensitive election data known as polls pads, used to authenticate voters," Just the News reported.

For example, the review discovered that contractor Seven Hills Strategy pointed out that "a stranger just walked out with sensitive election materials" on election night, apparently during the process to set up a "new precinct."

That contractor also found "sensitive election materials" on a "dock at a warehouse without supervision."

The review developed after a judge ordered absentee ballots in the county unsealed for a private audit led by lawyer Bob Cheeley.

He described to Just the News evidence of "election tabulation malpractice."

"Fact-checkers" that come mostly from legacy media organizations have claimed over and over that the 2020 election was perfectly fair, reasonable and open. However, when the Supreme Court had the opportunity to rule on questions that had been raised it refused, drawing comments from several members of the court that it should have at least reviewed the evidence that was offered, but never was considered.

The report from Just the News explained experts and officials "differ on whether the evidence shows a pattern of potential fraud or simply gross incompetence in the county that encompasses Atlanta."

Just the News said it looked at documents collected from Fulton County during a risk-limiting audit conducted last November. That confirmed more than 200 batches of absentee ballots, each with 100 or more ballots, were assigned tracking numbers before being sent to vote-counting machines but are not recorded in the logs showing they were scanned.

Also, more than two dozen batches were double-scanned, and five batches appeared with the identical vote: 392 for Biden, 96 for President Donald Trump.

Two state officials who commented to Just the News confirmed there is no explanation for what happened, and that it "left open the possibility of fraud."

The questions are just the most recent question to be raised about the 2020 presidential election nationwide, and specifically Georgia, one of a handful of swing states where odd election circumstances appeared that were called for Joe Biden, giving him the election victory.

Paul Sperry reported at Real Clear Investigations only days ago the Fulton County poll manager Suzi Voyles found "an alarmingly odd pattern of uniformity in the markings for Joseph R. Biden" on mail-in ballots.

"One after another, the absentee votes contained perfectly filled-in ovals for Biden — except that each of the darkened bubbles featured an identical white void inside them in the shape of a tiny crescent, indicating they'd been marked with toner ink instead of a pen or pencil," Sperry reported. "Adding to suspicions, she noticed that all of the ballots were printed on different stock paper than the others she handled as part of a statewide hand recount of the razor-thin Nov. 3 presidential election. And none was folded or creased, as she typically observed in mail-in ballots that had been removed from envelopes. In short, the Biden votes looked like they’d been duplicated by a copying machine."

A full audit already is nearly finished on the vote in Maricopa County, Arizona, and other states have been facing requests for similar reviews. Several legal actions still are pending, too.

Such fights have been stirring up "fact-checkers" across the political spectrum in recent weeks. They insist that the claims of vote manipulation or fraud are "in dispute." That's because, they say, government officials have claimed there are "safeguards" in place to protect "against fraud, including hand counts and audits."

Here's the War Room's discussion on the Georgia topic:

Content created by the WND News Center is available for re-publication without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact


The post Stunning, statistically impossible ‘irregularities' in Fulton County vote audit appeared first on WND.


Wednesday, June 16, 2021

Fauci goes 'Twilight Zone,' says we've always been open to lab-leak theory


Dr. Anthony Fauci throws out the ceremonial first pitch at a Washington Nationals game in the nation's capital on July 23, 2020. (Wikimedia Commons)

Dr. Anthony Fauci insisted in an interview Wednesday that he's always urged people to be open to the lab-leak theory of the origin of the novel coronavirus pandemic.

But he clearly denounced the theory until shortly after the publishing on May 2 of a breakthrough analysis by Cambridge-educated, former New York Times science reporter Nicholas Wade. And Fauci was personally thanked for dismissing the lab-leak theory by Peter Daszak, the virologist whose controversial research on bat coronaviruses at the Wuhan Institute of Virology was funded by Fauci's National Institute for Allergies and Infectious Diseases, NIAID.

"Look, we've always said people should keep an open mind about the lab-leak theory," Fauci told the CBS show "This Morning" on Wednesday.

But an interview in May 2020 with National Geographic magazine typified his postion over the past year, saying the scientific evidence "is very, very strongly leaning toward this could not have been artificially or deliberately manipulated."

"Everything about the stepwise evolution over time strongly indicates that [this virus] evolved in nature and then jumped species," he told the magazine.

In February 2020, Daszak authored a letter published by the prestigious medical journal The Lancet that mocked anyone who suggested the virus came from the Wuhan lab.

Daszak's letter was widely cited by establishment media and became the last word on the subject.

Two months later, Fauci received an email from Daszak thanking him for backing the natural origin theory.

"I just wanted to say a personal thank you on behalf of our staff and collaborators, for publicly standing up and stating that the scientific evidence supports a natural origin for Covid-19 from a bat-to-human spillover, not a lab release from the Wuhan Institute of Virology," Daszak wrote.

Last month, however, shortly after Wade's analysis was published, Fauci was asked if he was still confident that the virus developed naturally.

"I am not convinced about that, I think we should continue to investigate what went on in China until we continue to find out to the best of our ability what happened," Fauci said.

He added, nevertheless, that "the people who investigated it say it likely was the emergence from an animal reservoir that then infected individuals."

But he said "it could have been something else, and we need to find that out."

"So, you know, that’s the reason why I said I’m perfectly in favor of any investigation that looks into the origin of the virus."

Dr. Fauci on COVID lab leak theory: “We’ve always said ‘keep an open mind and continue to look.’ So I think it’s a bit of a distortion to say that we deliberately suppressed that.”

— The Recount (@therecount) June 16, 2021

In a Jan. 31, 2020, email obtained recently through a Freedom of Information Act request, a top virologist warned Fauci, while he was publicly dismissing the lab-leak theory, that the novel coronavirus had possibly been "engineered". The scientist, Kristian Andersen, noted he and other scientists "all find the genome inconsistent with expectations from evolutionary theory."

Four days later, however, Andersen changed his tune in advance of Daszak's letter in The Lancet.

Andersen, in feedback regarding the letter, called the claims that the virus was engineered "crackpot theories," stating "engineering can mean many things and could be done for basic research or nefarious reasons, but the data conclusively show that neither was done."

Daszak had a clear conflict of interest as the head of a nonprofit that used a $3.4 million grant from Fauci's NIAID to fund gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

Titled "Statement in support of the scientists, public health professionals, and medical professionals of China combatting Covid-19," his letter in The Lancet praised the Chinese "who continue to save lives and protect global health during the challenge of the Covid-19 outbreak."

"We stand together to strongly condemn conspiracy theories suggesting that Covid-19 does not have a natural origin," the letter said. "Conspiracy theories do nothing but create fear, rumours and prejudices that jeopardise our global collaboration in the fight against the virus."

Despite Daszak's conflict of interest, it ended with: "We declare no competing interests."

Jamie Metzl, a former Clinton administration official, questioned how much new data could have arisen in the four days between the email and Andersen's feedback for the letter in The Lancet, NBC News reported.

Metzl believes the scientists likely were reacting to then-President Donald Trump's suggestion that the virus leaked from the Wuhan lab, and they were too quick to dismiss the theory.

Content created by the WND News Center is available for re-publication without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact


The post Fauci goes 'Twilight Zone,' says we've always been open to lab-leak theory appeared first on WND.


High Levels of Toxic ‘Forever Chemicals’ Found in More Than Half of Cosmetics Sold in U.S.


Many cosmetics sold in the U.S. and Canada likely contain high levels of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), a potentially toxic class of chemicals linked to a number of serious health conditions, according to new research from the University of Notre Dame.

Scientists tested more than 200 cosmetics including concealers, foundations, eye and eyebrow products and various lip products. According to the study, 56% of foundations and eye products, 48% of lip products and 47% of mascaras tested were found to contain high levels of fluorine, which is an indicator of PFAS use in the product. The study was recently published in the journal of Environmental Science and Technology Letters.

“These results are particularly concerning when you consider the risk of exposure to the consumer combined with the size and scale of a multibillion-dollar industry that provides these products to millions of consumers daily,” Graham Peaslee, professor of physics at Notre Dame and principal investigator of the study, said. “There’s the individual risk — these are products that are applied around the eyes and mouth with the potential for absorption through the skin or at the tear duct, as well as possible inhalation or ingestion. PFAS is a persistent chemical — when it gets into the bloodstream, it stays there and accumulates. There’s also the additional risk of environmental contamination associated with the manufacture and disposal of these products, which could affect many more people.”

Cosmetic Categories

Previously found in nonstick cookware, treated fabrics, fast food wrappers and most recently, the personal protective equipment used by firefighters across the country, PFAS are known as “forever chemicals,” because the chemical compounds don’t naturally degrade — which means they end up contaminating groundwater for decades after their release into the environment. Use of PFAS in foam fire suppressants has been linked to contaminated drinking water systems, prompting the Department of Defense to switch to environmentally safer alternatives, for example.

Studies have linked certain PFAS to kidney cancer, testicular cancer, hypertension, thyroid disease, low birth weight and immunotoxicity in children.

Peaslee and the research team tested products purchased at retail locations in the U.S. as well as products purchased online in Canada. The study found high levels of fluorine in liquid lipsticks, waterproof mascaras and foundations often advertised as “long-lasting” and “wear-resistant.” Peaslee said this not entirely surprising, given PFAS are often used for their water resistance and film-forming properties.

What is more concerning is that 29 products with high fluorine concentrations were tested further and found to contain between four and 13 specific PFAS, only one of these items tested listed PFAS as an ingredient on the product label.

“This is a red flag,” Peaslee said. “Our measurements indicate widespread use of PFAS in these products — but it’s important to note that the full extent of use of fluorinated chemicals in cosmetics is hard to estimate due to lack of strict labeling requirements in both countries.”

Peaslee’s novel method of detecting PFAS in a wide variety of materials has helped reduce the use of “forever chemicals” in consumer and industrial products.

Following a study from his lab in 2017, fast food chains that discovered their wrappers contained PFAS switched to alternative options. Peaslee continues to receive samples of firefighter turnout gear from fire departments around the world to test for PFAS, and his research has spurred conversations within the firefighter community to eliminate use of “forever chemicals” in various articles of personal protective equipment.

Co-authors of the study include graduate student and lead author Heather D. Whitehead; Emi Eastman, Megan Green, Meghanne Tighe, John T. Wilkinson and Sean McGuinness at Notre Dame; Marta Venier and Yan Wu at Indiana University; Miriam Diamond, Anna Shalin and Heather Schwartz-Narbonne at the University of Toronto; Shannon Urbanik at Hope College; Tom Bruton and Arlene Blum at the Green Science Policy Institute; and Zhanyun Wang at ETH Zurich.

Environment and Climate Change Canada and the Great Lakes Protection Initiative of the National Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada partly funded the study.

Originally published by Notre Dame News.

The post High Levels of Toxic ‘Forever Chemicals’ Found in More Than Half of Cosmetics Sold in U.S. appeared first on Children's Health Defense.


Poll: Most Republicans think 2020 election results will change


Protesters in Guatemala greet Vice President Kamala Harris with the message 'Trump Won' on Monday, June 7, 2021. (Video screenshot)

By Sebastian Hughes
Daily Caller News Foundation

A majority of Republicans believe that reviews of the 2020 election will change the results, according to a Morning Consult/Politico poll released Wednesday.

The poll surveyed 1,994 registered voters and found that 51% of Republicans think state-level efforts to review the 2020 election, such as the ongoing audit in Arizona, could overturn President Joe Biden’s victory. It also showed 74% of Republicans support the reviews, compared to 45% of all registered voters. It had a margin of error of plus or minus 2%.

The poll also found that 59% of Republicans think former President Donald Trump should play a major role in the GOP’s future. Another Morning Consult poll released June 9 showed 29% of Republicans believe Trump will be reinstated as president by the end of the year.

The perception that the election was stolen among Republican voters has conservative strategists worried about the 2022 midterms. One former Senate Republican campaign official who spoke with Morning Consult said Trump’s focus on his loss is a “huge favor” for Democrats in the upcoming elections.

“The danger with him is always that he juices turnout – Democratic turnout, that is – and that he continues to remind people why they turned him out last year,” Scott Jennings, a former campaign strategist for Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, told Morning Consult. “He could also put GOP candidates in awkward positions if he continues to relitigate and make false claims about the 2020 election.”

Another strategist from a contested Senate campaign in Arizona said the best thing Trump could do for GOP candidates is to “admit his loss and take steps to rebuild confidence in elections rather than reiterating talk of a hoax.”

Despite this, reviews of the 2020 election are not slowing down, with Republican members of state legislatures continuing to visit Arizona’s audit facilities and praise their efforts. Republican state Sens. Burt Jones and Brandon Beach of Georgia said their visit to Arizona was to find “a blueprint for a statewide forensic audit,” according to NBC News.

This story originally was published by the Daily Caller News Foundation.

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact


The post Poll: Most Republicans think 2020 election results will change appeared first on WND.


Brain imaging study shows defining traits are forged the moment we’re born

There are still many unsolved mysteries about the human brain and its development. Now, a novel study published in Frontiers in Psychiatry sheds new light on the neurobiological origins of our individual traits.


Tuesday, June 15, 2021

Fauci's NIH Funded Wuhan Military Scientist Who Died Mysteriously After Filing COVID Vaccine Patent

Fauci's NIH Funded Wuhan Military Scientist Who Died Mysteriously After Filing COVID Vaccine Patent

As we move further down the rabbit hole of exactly what in the devil has been going on in China's 'bat labs,' we now turn our attention to one Zhou Yusen - a Chinese military scientist specializing in coronaviruses who collaborated with the Wuhan Institute of Virology's "Bat Woman," Zhengli Shi - with at least one project to geneticially manipulate coronaviruses having been funded by three grants from the National Institutes of Heath (NIH)  - home to Dr. Anthony Fauci - via US universities, according to documents obtained by The Weekend Australian (ostensibly leaked by Aussie intelligence). The previously undisclosed NIH funding of a PLA military scientist is separate from millions in grants awarded EcoHealth alliance, which also collaborated with the WIV.

The revelation shows American money was funding risky ­research on coronaviruses with People’s Liberation Army scientists – including decorated military scientist Zhou Yusen and the Wuhan Institute of Virology’s “Bat Woman”, Shi Zhengli.

Now we learn that Zhou, 54, is dead - three months after filing a patent for a COVID-19 vaccine in Feb. 2020.

Zhou Yusen, Zhengli Shi

According to the report, Zhou's May 2020 death went largely under the radar, despite the fact that he was an award-winning scientist at the PLA's Laboratory of Infection and Immunity at the Beijing Institute of Microbiology and Epidemiology. "There were no reports paying tribute to his life. His death was only mentioned in passing in a Chinese-media report in July and at the end of a December scientific paper. Both had the word ­“deceased” in brackets after his name."

And while Zhou's death may have been suspicious (or he may have simply died of COVID), the revelation that the US government was funding his research with the WIV may provide a clue as to why US officials - Dr. Fauci (backed by the 'scientific community' after his lapdog, EcoHealth Alliance's Peter Daszak, penned a 'natural origin or you're a lunatic' letter in the Lancet) - peddled the CCP's 'natural origin' theory, while any suggestion that it could have been created in and/or leaked from the very lab which received NIH dollars was strictly verboten. 

Emails released under a Freedom of Information request from Buzzfeed this week showed that, in the early days of the pandemic, Dr Fauci was concerned that US funding had gone towards gain-of-function research in China.

In other emails, scientists wrote to Dr Fauci expressing the preliminary view that the SARS-CoV-2 genome appeared “inconsistent with expectations from evolutionary theory” and that it had some features that “potentially look engineered”. -The Weekend Australian

In short, 'conflict of interest' doesn't even begin to explain what Fauci is now going to have to explain the next time Rand Paul has him in the hot seat.

The revelation shows American money was funding risky ­research on coronaviruses with People’s Liberation Army scientists – including decorated military scientist Zhou Yusen and the Wuhan Institute of Virology’s “Bat Woman”, Shi Zhengli.


National security sources said the ties between Zhou and Dr Shi ­supported claims by US intelligence that the Wuhan Institute of Virology was engaged in “secret military activity.” -The Australian

How long was China sitting on the genetic sequence for SARS-CoV-2?


If we're considering the timeline and its implications, Zhou died three months after filing a Feb. 24, 2020 patent application for a COVID-19 vaccine. While this could mean that he was working on a COVID-19 vaccine before the virus became public knowledge in December 2019, keep in mind that Moderna was able to design the sequence for their COVID-19 vaccine just two days after Chinese officials released its genetic sequence on Jan. 11, 2020 - filing for their first related patent in March, two months later.

Also note that Zhou had been working on coronavirus vaccines since at least 2006 in response the original SARS-CoV outbreak - authoring a study which found that "the vaccines containing the (receptor-binding domain) of SARS-CoV S protein may induce sufficient neutralising antibodies and long-term ­protective immunity against SARS-CoV challenge in the ­established mouse model."

So, assuming an expert would need approximately two months to go from genomic sequence to patent application, it implies that China withheld the genetic sequence for a month before its Jan. 11 public release. Or, Zhou may have had more of a 'head start' than that. 

"This is something we have never seen achieved before, raising the question of whether this work may have started much ­earlier," said Nikolai Petrovsky from Flinders University.

(And if one wants to explore the implications assuming SARS-CoV-2 was genetically engineered, Karl Denninger has some thoughts below)

And while we may never know the full extent of Zhou's role in all of this, he and 'bat woman' Zhengli were working on a COVID vaccine right before the pandemic.

Per the Weekend Australian:

Right before the pandemic, Zhou and three other scientists from the PLA-run Beijing Institute of Microbiology and Epidemiology – Yuehong Chen, Lei He and Shishui Sun – partnered with two Wuhan Institute of Virology scientists – Dr Shi and Jing Chen – and eight Chinese scientists now based in the US at the University of Minnesota and the Lindsley Kimball Research Institute, New York Blood Centre. Their paper, titled Molecular Mechanism for Antibody-­Dependent Enhancement of Coronavirus Entry, was submitted to the Journal of Virology on November 27, 2019, and was published on February 14, 2020.

The research examined MERS and SARS coronaviruses as avenues for antibody-based ­antiviral drug therapy to treat coronaviruses.

Their paper had some positive results: “Taken together, our ­results show that RBD-specific neutralising MAbs bind to the same region on coronavirus spikes as viral receptors do, trigger conformational changes of the spikes as viral receptors do, and mediate ADE through the same pathways as viral-receptor-dependent viral entry.”

They found this “novel molecular mechanism for antibody-enhanced viral entry” could “guide future vaccination and ­antiviral strategies”.

This study was conducted “in vitro”, meaning in a petri dish or test tube, using humanised kidney and lung cells. Their last paragraph indicated the next step in a future paper would be to conduct “in vivo” experiments with ­humanised mice or primates. A paper published in Nature ­Reviews Immunology 18 months later, in April this year, would find that “neutralising monoclonal antibodies” could help the treatment of Covid-19.

Meanwhile, Zhou's patent application states: "The invention ­relates to the field of biomedicine, and relates to a Covid-19 ­vaccine, preparation methods and applications. The fusion ­protein provided by the invention can be used to develop the Covid-19 protein vaccine and a drug for preventing or treating the Covid-19."

Yusen Zhou (周育森) (‡)
1. Gain-of-function of viral entry (Shibo Jiang, and Fang Li, search them for more info)
2. Vaccine patent on 2020.02.24 (Wei Chen, Yusen Zhou, Ningyi Jin...)
3. Animal Model (Chuan Qin)
4. The NIH-PLA Network:
left to right = infiltration pathway

— 德意志之鹰 (@dezying) June 4, 2021

What does this all mean now? Karl Denninger has a few thoughts via, and is notably very suspicious of the patent timing (edited for brevity):

So what do we now know?

  • China's military was in fact involved at the Wuhan lab.  It was not just a civilian operation.  This, by the way, has been repeatedly denied over the last year and change.
  • The lab's scientists knew not only the sequencing of the virus but in addition had a patentable way to create an alleged vaccine before the pandemic was public.  It takes time to draft patents and figure them out.  Quite a lot of time, in fact -- not a couple weeks or months.
  • It takes time to prove up patent material, including in the case of a vaccine.  To patent something you must be able to demonstrate it; you cannot patent ideas, only embodiments of ideas.  In that case you would have to prove immunogenicity which isn't instantaneous; it takes weeks or even months to get through original science on this with animals and then humans, which means the date of knowledge was not February 24th it was months or even further before that.
  • That means they were working on this even before that time because to work on a vaccine you have to know you must or would want to work on it in the first place.  This in turn means they knew damn well there was a virulent virus in the wild prior to that date, or they released it or intended to release it into the wild on purpose.  Nobody comes up with a vaccine for a virus you intend to and have confined entirely within a laboratory in animal or cell culture testing; that's worthless.  Without an isolate to create a vaccine for and a virus outside of a lab environment where vaccination becomes a "thing" that might be required and thus have value why would you do the work to create one?

What's the timeline on all this?  Many, many months or even a couple of years.

That means either the virus was "out" for many months to a couple of years before February of 2020 (not a month or two) or the Chinese intended to release it in the fall of 2019.  In either case the evidence is now overwhelming that this was not a virus that "magically appeared" one fine day in late December having come naturally from bats and perhaps pangolins. That is not just improbable anymore -- it is now, on the manifest weight of the evidence, impossible.


Next up is exactly what sort of vaccine patent we're talking about here?

Specifically how is it that the "stiffened" areas in the viral vector and mRNA shots we're using in the US came to be known and proved up?  How did Moderna and Pfizer know they needed to do that?  That sort of study takes months if not years too, not days or weeks, to both come up with it and then prove it actually works as expected.

Remember that Covid-19 has a rather-unique site on the spike called the "furin-cleavage" area which it uses to "fold" and get into the cell; the S1 unit attaches, the cleavage area "folds" and then the second part penetrates the cell wall like a spear.  SARS and MERS both lack this structure so there was no "prior art" to use and in the first couple of months the characterizing of all of this was pretty darn new.

Yet the "official story" is that these folks had a proposed candidate configuration, including the replacement of encodings to "stiffen" that area within days of the publication of the viral RNA sequence for Covid-19.

Is the completed work in that area what the Chinese "gave" us complete with that part of the work already done?  That would explain how it happened that quickly, wouldn't it?  I'd sure like to understand how someone -- anyone -- does that sort of work complete with the lab verification in cell cultures and animals, reachig those conclusions in days.

What are the connections there?  I'd like a full explanation of that please.

*  *  *

As would we.

Tyler Durden Sun, 06/06/2021 - 11:00


COVID early-treatment doc: Politicians are guilty of mass murder



I've known for well over a year now that we had an effective treatment for COVID-19. Hundreds of thousands of Americans could have been saved.

I knew about this simple, safe, inexpensive treatment with remarkable results because I've had a dozen brilliant doctors as guests on my nationally syndicated radio show, "Wayne Allyn Root: Raw and Unfiltered" on USA Radio Network, to talk about their success using hydroxychloroquine on patients sick with COVID-19.

But one stood out over all others. His name is Dr. Vladimir Zelenko. Here is an excerpt from a column I wrote last summer on the alleged efficacy of hydroxychloroquine. It was written as a plea to then-President Donald Trump.

"Mr. President, this is the most important column I've ever written. We have a successful treatment for COVID-19. Now we need an Executive Order from you to put it into play. …

"This brilliant New York doctor (Zelenko) has treated 2,200 COVID-19 patients. He's had a success rate of 100% for low-risk patients … and a success rate of 99.3% for high-risk patients by using hydroxychloroquine, zinc sulfate, plus Z Pak antibiotic. He has named it 'the Zelenko Protocol.' It's the synergy that works. Without zinc and Z Pak, the drug hydroxychloroquine doesn't work as effectively.

"The other key to success is to use this three-part protocol within five days of symptoms appearing. It has to be used early, before the patient winds up in the intensive care unit. That's why several studies of hydroxychloroquine have failed. They never used zinc sulfate and they started the protocol too late.

"Only two out of 2,200 of Zelenko's patients died. Of those two, one already had cancer. The other was very old and already very ill with COVID-19 before using the protocol. By that time, it's almost always too late. …

"We all need to follow Zelenko's regimen. … But we can't. Doctors won't prescribe the so-called Trump drug. Liberals, the media, the Food and Drug Administration, government bureaucrats – none of them wants to give Trump the credit if it works. Politics is killing thousands of Americans.

"Mr. President, we need an Executive Order. Immediately. … Every sick American must have the freedom to choose this 'Zelenko Protocol.' We have a right to choose. We have a right to live."

If only Trump had listened to Zelenko instead of Dr. Anthony Fauci and the corrupt bureaucrats of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the World Health Organization and the Food and Drug Administration. That was a year ago. How many hundreds of thousands of Americans have died needlessly in the past year? Isn't this mass murder?

Have you seen the latest headlines? Multiple studies show that the use of hydroxychloroquine across the globe reduced death and boosted survival rates by 84%, 100% and in one study, 200%. It really works. And that's without what Zelenko calls "the key ingredient" (zinc sulfate). He also recommends another highly effective drug called ivermectin.

Because of Zelenko, I've informed my listeners about hydroxychloroquine, zinc and ivermectin for a year now.

Yet even with all these new studies and factual evidence, YouTube Friday suspended U.S. Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., for promoting a video touting early treatment with hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin. YouTube called it "medical misinformation."

It's time to start asking why treatments for COVID-19 proven in multiple studies around the world to save lives are slandered, censored and banned by social media? Who are they to ban life-saving information? Who are they to label life-saving information as "medical misinformation"? What's in it for them if thousands die needlessly? Somebody clearly is getting filthy rich on this scam.

I asked Zelenko about it on a return visit to my show only days ago. He said: "Pre-hospital treatment of COVID-19 was intentionally suppressed. Life-saving information and medication was intentionally suppressed. … Out of 600,000 dead Americans, we could have saved 510,000. The American people have been brutalized and are the victims of mass murder and crimes against humanity."

I asked Zelenko for his solution to this ongoing tragedy. He said, "Number one, immediately endorse pre-hospital treatment with the Zelenko Protocol, and make it the standard of care. Number two, we must bring these criminals to justice."



The post COVID early-treatment doc: Politicians are guilty of mass murder appeared first on WND.


ALERT! CDC whistleblower charges cover-up of the true toll: 25,800 “vaccine” deaths in the US alone

It’s as if the US government had simply disappeared most of its soldiers killed in Vietnam, instead of counting them as dead.


BREAKING: Fox 26 Reporter Releases Tape of ‘Corruption,’ ‘Censorship’ – Fox Corp Boss Told Her to “Cease & Desist” Posting on Hydroxychloroquine (VIDEO)


The Fox 26 reporter who went mega viral on Monday night for announcing that she went to Project Veritas about the company live on air has been suspended.

Ivory Hecker on Tuesday morning posted audio of the call from her supervisor online.

Later Tuesday, Project Veritas released recording of Fox News Corp supervisor telling Hecker to “cease and desist” posting on Hydroxychloroquine, the life saving drug touted by President Trump.

Via Project Veritas:

  • Hecker obtained recordings of her superiors telling her to prioritize the opinion of the station’s General Manager, and the company’s CEO, above that of the audience.
  • Hecker: “What’s happening within Fox Corp is an operation of prioritizing corporate interests above the viewer’s interest and, therefore, operating in a deceptive way.”
  • She also obtained audio of Fox 26’s VP and News Director, Susan Schiller, telling Hecker to “cease and desist” posting about Hydroxychloroquine on social media.
  • Hecker interviewed Dr. Joseph Varon, MD, Chief of Critical Care and COVID-19 Unit at United Memorial Medical Center in Houston, who told her of his success using Hydroxychloroquine on certain patients.
  • Hecker: “The viewers are being deceived by a carefully crafted narrative in some stories.”
  • Things turned racial behind the scenes, according to Hecker, who recorded her superior, Lee Meier, as they judged the newsworthiness of a story based on specific demographics — on one occasion, a Fox 26 executive said that a “poor African-American audience” wouldn’t care about Bitcoin stories.



BREAKING: Fox 26 Reporter Releases tape of ‘Corruption,’ ‘Censorship.’ Fox Corp Boss told Hecker “cease & desist” posting on Hydroxychloroquine & ‘Poor African-Americans’ don’t care about Bitcoin. “Viewers being Deceived”#Fox26Whistleblower

—🇺🇸 (@EricSpracklen) June 15, 2021

Full video from Project Veritas:

The post BREAKING: Fox 26 Reporter Releases Tape of ‘Corruption,’ ‘Censorship’ – Fox Corp Boss Told Her to “Cease & Desist” Posting on Hydroxychloroquine (VIDEO) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.


Sending your son to college? Is the vaccine risk worth it?



Many young Americans and their parents believe that a college degree is the key to open doors to a successful future. So, when they get a letter from the college administration saying you must get this injection or you are barred from our campus, they rush to comply.

After all, vaccines are "safe and effective," and you've already had dozens of them, so what's one more? Our vigilant and world-renowned scientific and health agencies would never allow an unsafe product to be authorized, would they? The National Institutes of Health (NIH), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) would never miss a safety signal or lie to us, would they? Look at the thousands of regulations they impose on us, and the warning label on everything from plastic bags to table salt. See the signs in the liquor section warning pregnant women not to take a sip lest their baby be harmed.

Now one of the world's most respected and widely published cardiologists, Dr. Peter McCullough, calls attention to the 800 reported cases of post-COVID jab myocarditis (heart inflammation), mostly in young men. "Only" a couple of them have died. Most recovered enough to be discharged from the hospital. How they did at football tryouts we don't know. Dr. McCullough thinks many of them will develop heart failure.

The first response to reports of adverse events following a vaccine or a drug is generally that it is a coincidence or a conspiracy theory, and that association doesn't prove causation. People have heart attacks, strokes and blood clots every day, even young people. So, we get into a statistical discussion of whether the post-jab rate is "significantly" higher than the background rate. It turns out that the rate of myocarditis in these formerly healthy young men is indeed higher than expected.

How many "excess" cases do we actually have, and how many are enough to halt the program?

The best mechanism available at present is the flawed Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), which is being deluged with reports and is very far behind on data entry. Reports of events possibly related to platelet problems in persons injected between Dec 15, 2020, and March 12, 2021, increased from 370 to 6,290 over a couple months, and were continuing to climb in May as data entry clerks worked on the backlog.

Reporting is also incomplete. Doctors don't notice the association, or don't know about VAERS, or are discouraged from reporting. There might be 8,000 cases, or even 80,000.

Only the most severe cases come to attention at first, as the thalidomide disaster shows. Thalidomide was marketed as "safe and effective" for everyone in 1957. In 1961, the same obstetrician who had prescribed it for morning sickness noticed babies being born without limbs. Less serious abnormalities were described later. The drug was taken off the market in 1962 – five years after it was released.

The person who gives you the jab in the parking lot or vaccination center will probably never see you again, unlike that obstetrician, so it will take longer to see connections.

Why hasn't the program been halted already? Where are Nader's "unsafe at any speed" Raiders?

The country has apparently been mesmerized by fear of COVID and by faith that forcing everyone to get injected is the one and only key to release us from lockdowns.

What effect will the recently released 3,000 Fauci emails have? Dr. Anthony Fauci has long sat at the head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease (NIAID), the relevant part of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the dictator of national pandemic policy: 1) devastating lockdowns, 2) NO early treatment with repurposed drugs deemed safe and effective by hundreds or thousands of physicians worldwide, and 3) exclusive reliance on vaccination.

Dr. Fauci calls the furor over his emails "an attack on science." It is rather an attack on our faith in experts who lied about funding genetic engineering research on viruses in China. Should we trust their remedy of genetically engineered products that cause our bodies to make the most dangerous part of the virus – the spike protein?

You might be able to get a college degree with a damaged heart, but the door may be slammed permanently on athletics, military service, or any physically demanding occupation.

Your daughter also is at risk. The heart problems are less frequent in women, but women are not exempt. And where else do those lipid nanoparticles enclosing the instructions for spike protein go? Those college administrators don't know, and if Dr. Fauci knows, he's not telling.

Would putting a hold on your college education be worth it? Is it even worth it to win the lottery if you lose your heart?

Content created by the WND News Center is available for re-publication without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact


The post Sending your son to college? Is the vaccine risk worth it? appeared first on WND.


Doctors challenge CDC claim that COVID kills 'healthy' kids



(Image by Steve Buissinne from Pixabay)

Top medical researchers are demanding that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention present evidence to back its claim that "healthy young children" can die from COVID-19.

Dr. Marty Makary, a prominent Johns Hopkins University professor of medicine and public health, is part of a movement of health-care experts calling for a cost-benefit analysis of COVID-19 vaccines for low-risk populations such as children, Just the News reported.

"In reviewing the medical literature and news reports, and in talking to pediatricians across the country, I am not aware of a single healthy child in the U.S. who has died of COVID-19 to date," he wrote in an article in MedPage Today, a clinical news publisher where he serves as editor in chief.

Until recently, the CDC website said the seasonal flu poses a higher risk of complications for healthy children than COVID-19. However, now the site emphasizes "serious COVID-19 illness resulting in hospitalization and death can occur even in healthy young children."

Makary advises against vaccinating children from birth to 12 who don't have comorbidities. And he believes children who have recovered from COVID-19 infections should not be vaccinated, arguing natural immunity is just as good if not better than vaccine immunity.

"The case to vaccinate kids is there, but it's not compelling right now," Makary wrote.

Makary was among medical professors from institutions such as UCLA, Harvard, Maryland and Texas A&M who signed a letter to the FDA urging the agency to take certain steps before approving any vaccine beyond emergency use authorization.

Among the steps are to have "at least 2 years of follow-up" with participants from the original clinical trials and "substantial evidence of clinical effectiveness that outweighs harms in special populations," including infants, children, adolescents and people who have recovered from infection.

Makary's Johns Hopkins research team partnered with healthcare data provider FAIR Health in research that found "100% of pediatric COVID-19 deaths were in children with a pre-existing condition."

Weighing the risks

Amid growing concern about potential adverse effects of the vaccines, a new study by the prestigious Cleveland Clinic found that the antibodies from COVID-19 infections provide durable immunity.

Dr. Peter McCullough, a prominent cardiologist, internist and professor of medicine has concluded getting the vaccine is too risky, taking into account the fact that most people have a 99% survival rate.

Last Thursday, the FDA's advisory panel met to discuss the rise in cardiac emergencies in healthy young people who have been vaccinated. The rate of myocarditis, inflamation of the heart, so far is more than twice what U.S. authorities anticipated.

A Tufts Medical School professor on the panel warned that "before we start vaccinating millions of adolescents and children, it's so important to find out what the consequences are."

Researchers in Israel found the incidence of myocarditis in vaccinated young men was 25 times the usual rate, and some of them died.

The two biggest vaccine monitoring systems in the U.S. – the Vaccine Adverse Reporting System, or VAERS, and the CDC's Vaccine Safety Datalink – show strikingly high rates of myocarditis in young people who've been vaccinated.

Also on Thursday, Germany's scientific advisory committee on vaccinations recommended that young people under age 18 not receive COVID shots unless they have serious medical conditions that could make the disease riskier to them.

Content created by the WND News Center is available for re-publication without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact


The post Doctors challenge CDC claim that COVID kills 'healthy' kids appeared first on WND.




This is a daily occurrence in San Francisco. Overt theft of under under $950 has been decriminalized. If store security people retain a thief, they can be sued. #DemocratCities

— James Woods (@RealJamesWoods) June 15, 2021


Michael “Big Short” Burry: This Is The Greatest Bubble Of All Time In All Things “By Two Orders Of Magnitude”


Via ZeroHedge

Earlier this year, none other than Michael ‘Big Short’ Burry confirmed BofA’s greatest fears, as he picked up on the theme of Weimar Germany and specifically its hyperinflation, as the blueprint for what comes next in a lengthy tweetstorm cribbing generously from Parsson’s seminal work, warning that:

“The US government is inviting inflation with its MMT-tinged policies. Brisk Debt/GDP, M2 increases while retail sales, PMI stage V recovery. Trillions more stimulus & re-opening to boost demand as employee and supply chain costs skyrocket.”


“The life of the inflation in its ripening stage was a paradox which had its own unmistakable characteristics. One was the great wealth, at least of those favored by the boom..Many great fortunes sprang up overnight…The cities, had an aimless and wanton youth”

“Prices in Germany were steady, and both business and the stock market were booming. The exchange rate of the mark against the dollar and other currencies actually rose for a time, and the mark was momentarily the strongest currency in the world” on inflation’s eve.

“Side by side with the wealth were the pockets of poverty. Greater numbers of people remained on the outside of the easy money, looking in but not able to enter. The crime rate soared.”

“Accounts of the time tell of a progressive demoralization which crept over the common people, compounded of their weariness with the breakneck pace, to no visible purpose, and their fears from watching their own precarious positions slip while others grew so conspicuously rich.”

“Almost any kind of business could make money. Business failures and bankruptcies became few. The boom suspended the normal processes of natural selection by which the nonessential and ineffective otherwise would have been culled out.”

“Speculation alone, while adding nothing to Germany’s wealth, became one of its largest activities. The fever to join in turning a quick mark infected nearly all classes..Everyone from the elevator operator up was playing the market.”

“The volumes of turnover in securities on the Berlin Bourse became so high that the financial industry could not keep up with the paperwork…and the Bourse was obliged to close several days a week to work off the backlog” #robinhooddown

“all the marks that existed in the world in the summer of 1922 were not worth enough, by November of 1923, to buy a single  newspaper or a tram ticket. That was the spectacular part of the collapse, but most of the real loss in money wealth had been suffered much earlier.”

“Throughout these years the structure was quietly building itself up for the blow. Germany’s #inflationcycle ran not for a year but for nine years, representing eight years of gestation and only one year of #collapse.”

His punchline: the above was “written in 1974 re: 1914-1923” and then makes the ominous extrapolation that “2010-2021: Gestation” adding that “when dollars might as well be falling from the sky…management teams get creative and ultimately take more risk.. paying out debt-financed dividends to investors or investing in risky growth opportunities has beaten a frugal mentality hands down.”

And, as if reading from the same playbook, Paul Tudor Jones warned yesterday that things are “bat shit crazy” and if Jay Powell

“The idea that inflation is transitory, to me … that one just doesn’t work the way I see the world.”

All of which led to Burry’s latest tweet warning this morning…

“People always ask me what is going on in the markets. It is simple. Greatest Speculative Bubble of All Time in All Things. By two orders of magnitude. #FlyingPigs360″

In other words: “Brace!”

So what are you going to do about it?

Tudor Jones had some simple advice: “buy commodities, buy crypto, buy gold.”