Seeking Truth in a World of Propaganda. Links do not necessarily indicate agreement with stories or perspectives.
“Those who are able to see beyond the shadows and lies of their culture will never be understood, let alone believed, by the masses.” - Plato
The National Mall is seen at night Sunday, April 18, 2021, as President Joe Biden and First Lady Jill Biden fly aboard Marine One from Wilmington, Delaware, to the White House. (Official White House photo by Adam Schultz)
The looming report on the manipulation of the nation's legal system by those in the Barack Obama administration to pursue the now-debunked "Russia collusion" allegations against President Trump has those in the Beltway "rattled," according to an analysis by constitutional expert Jonathan Turley.
"For good reason," noted the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University.
For two years, Durham, a former U.S. attorney, has been investigating what happened that allowed those in the establishment, inside the government in Washington, to manipulate evidence, as one FBI already has confessed, and more, to pursue the campaign against Trump.
The DOJ's inspector general already has released a long list of offenses that were committed during the Obama administration's work, and the FISA court, which was convinced to authorize spying on the Trump campaign with evidence that apparently was made up, has rescinded some of his authorizations.
Turley noted a report from Friday that Durham was "presenting evidence against FBI agents and possibly others in the use of false information or tips at the start of the Russia investigation in 2016."
"Those 'others,'" he said, "could include a virtual who’s who of Washington politics, and even if they are not indicted, Durham could implicate some of the most powerful figures in politics in his final report, expected in the coming months."
He said evidence that has come to light in just the last few months – even though the apparent conspiracy and Steele-dossier triggered campaign to destroy Trump's candidacy – and then presidency – began years ago.
"It was disclosed in October, for instance, that President Obama was briefed by his CIA director, John Brennan, on July 28, 2016, on intelligence suggesting that Hillary Clinton planned to tie then-candidate Donald Trump to Russia as 'a means of distracting the public from her use of a private email server.' The date was significant because the Russia investigation was initiated July 31, 2016, just three days later," Turley explained.
Of course it was the Steele dossier, funded in party by Hillary Clinton, that alleged Trump was in collusion with Russia.
"Throughout the campaign, the Clinton campaign denied any involvement in the creation of the so-called Steele dossier’s allegations of Trump-Russia connections. However, weeks after the election, journalists discovered that the Clinton campaign hid payments for the dossier made to a research firm, Fusion GPS, as 'legal fees' among the $5.6 million paid to the campaign’s law firm," Turley noted.
And John Podesta, Clinton's campaign chairman, claimed to Congress that there was no contractual agreement with Fusion GPS.
And, he said, "It was later revealed that American intelligence viewed Steele as unreliable and believed his dossier was used by Russian intelligence to plant disinformation. Later reports show that Steele shopped the information to any reporters who would listen before the election and that there was an effort to get the information to trusted figures in the Justice Department."
Then there were the situations involve Bruce Ohr, a DOJ official, and his wife, Nellie, who worked for Fusion GPS on Trump's "purported" connections to Russia, he said.
"For many individuals, the statute of limitations may have passed on any alleged crimes," Turley said. "But the truth brought to light in any final report could result a public indictment of sorts."
He said the final fight could be over the release of the report itself, because "many in Congress and the media may not want it to see the light of day since it is likely to be an indictment not just of the FBI but of the establishment and an enabling media."
The Journal report said Durham was presenting evidence to a grand jury, which could be a sign he's considering additional criminal charges.
Last year, Durham brought a charge against former FBI lawyer Kevin Clinesmith, who admitted altering an email about Trump campaign aide Carter Page, a target of FBI surveillance. Clinesmith agreed to a plea deal and was sentenced to probation.
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 licensing@wndnewscenter.org.
SUPPORT TRUTHFUL JOURNALISM. MAKE A DONATION TO THE NONPROFIT WND NEWS CENTER. THANK YOU!
The post Constitutional expert warns looming Durham report has Beltway 'rattled' appeared first on WND.
This article was originally published by Jon Miltimore at The Foundation for Economic Freedom.
By refusing to track most vaccine breakthrough cases, the CDC arrived at the strange conclusion that collecting and providing less public health information is in the public’s interest. Over a recent 12-day period the Milwaukee Brewers had nine players test positive for COVID-19.
While we don’t know the vaccination status of all the players, the team disclosed that most of the players were vaccinated for COVID-19, including former MVP Christian Yelich, who tested positive after experiencing mild flu-like symptoms.
“He did the right thing and reported those mild symptoms,” Brewers GM David Stearns said when it was announced Yelich was heading to the disabled list. “We got him a test ….The test returned positive and we got a confirmation test, which also came back positive.”
The Brewers are not an isolated example of Major League Baseball teams experiencing a rash of vaccination breakthroughs. Teams across the league have experienced similar problems, including the New York Yankees, who saw nine vaccinated players sidelined in May with COVID-19.
“This is the vaccine working,” CDC director Dr. Rochelle Walensky told ABC’s George Stephanopoulos at the time, adding that those who tested positive didn’t get a severe infection.
Walensky is correct that data show vaccinated individuals are far less likely to die or become hospitalized with COVID-19 than unvaccinated individuals.
Yet breakthrough cases also appear to be more common than the CDC, media, and public health officials suggest.
CNN says the breakthrough rate is less than one percent, while CBS News reports that 99.7 percent of new COVID cases involve unvaccinated people. The Hill, meanwhile, agrees that CDC data show less than one percent of fully vaccinated people get COVID.
How does this data mesh with anecdotal evidence that suggests many vaccinated people are contracting COVID? To be sure, it’s not just Major League Baseball teams who are seeing spikes of COVID cases among vaccinated individuals.
A recent outbreak in Provincetown, Massachusetts, for example, found that the vast majority of COVID cases involved vaccinated individuals.
“Overwhelmingly, the affected individuals have been fully vaccinated for COVID-19,” Town Manager Alex Morse told NBC.
The outbreak, attributed to the rise of the Delta variant, was serious enough to prompt the CDC—which published a report on the outbreak—to reverse its recommendation that vaccinated individuals needn’t wear masks indoors.
But that wasn’t all. The CDC’s study also found the Washington Post noted, individuals “carried as much virus in their noses as unvaccinated individuals.”
“High viral loads suggest an increased risk of transmission and raised concern that, unlike with other variants, vaccinated people infected with Delta can transmit the virus,” Walensky said.
All of this data suggests two important things.
First, COVID cases among vaccinated individuals appear to be higher than the “less than 1 percent” many claim. Two, vaccinated individuals appear quite capable of transmitting the virus to others, as Walensky states. Indeed, viral loads in nasal passages suggest they could transmit the virus at rates similar to unvaccinated carriers.
In the world today, we often hear that data is king. The problem is, the data have been a total mess throughout the pandemic. COVID, the New York Times recently observed, has shown the CDC is utterly broken.
Perhaps because of this, I decided to see how the CDC tracks and defines breakthrough cases.
“As of May 1, 2021, CDC transitioned from monitoring all reported vaccine breakthrough cases to focus on identifying and investigating only hospitalized or fatal cases due to any cause,” a statement says. “This shift will help maximize the quality of the data collected on cases of greatest clinical and public health importance.”
The fact that almost no one noticed the CDC simply stopped tracking/reporting the vast majority of vaccine breakthrough cases (any not involving hospitalization of death) is pretty wack.
How is public health better served with *less* data? pic.twitter.com/FIntWHl6PE
— Jon Miltimore (@miltimore79) August 13, 2021
Does this mean the CDC isn’t tracking breakthrough cases anymore unless someone is hospitalized or dies? I asked the CDC for clarification. I didn’t hear back from them.
But if one goes to the CDC site, you’ll find information on vaccine breakthroughs that includes only hospitalizations and deaths. The figure—as of August 2—stands at 7,525, which is below the 9,245 breakthrough infections the CDC had documented as of April 26. (The CDC noted the true rate was higher, due to a lack of surveillance and testing.) Since then, three and a half months have eclipsed and nearly 70 million more people have been vaccinated—and the Delta variant has arrived in force.
Unfortunately, what the actual breakthrough rate is, nobody knows—because the CDC stopped collecting and publishing the data, choosing instead “to focus on identifying and investigating only hospitalized or fatal cases.”
In making this decision, the CDC arrived at the strange conclusion that public health would be better served by providing the public with less information.
Because of this, the media are left guessing what the breakthrough rate is.
CNN points out that roughly half of US states report data on breakthroughs, and in those states, official statistics put the COVID infection rate of vaccinated people at less than 1 percent, “ranging from 0.01% in Connecticut to 0.9% in Oklahoma.”
A highly cited Kaiser report similarly puts the breakthrough rate at “well below” 1 percent.
An NBC News analysis covering 38 states, meanwhile, found 125,682 breakthrough cases, which represents about 0.08 percent of the 164 million vaccinated Americans.
The actual breakthrough rate appears to be much higher than .08 percent based on anecdotal evidence, however, and a more careful perusal of state data.
Let’s start with Major League Baseball. There are about 750 professional ballplayers on 30 MLB teams. Applying that rate (0.08%) to MLB baseball players would mean we could expect less than one player (0.6) to experience a breakthrough case. A rate of 1 percent would mean 7 or eight players. But as previously mentioned, the New York Yankees alone had nine breakthroughs in May, and many other teams racked up breakthrough cases.
One could argue that perhaps Major League ballplayers, for some reason we may not yet understand, are more likely to contract the virus after being vaccinated, but plenty of other examples can be found, including the six vaccinated Texas Democrats who tested positive for COVID after taking a charter plane to Washington, DC. Ask yourself this: how many people do you personally know who contracted the virus after being vaccinated? (I know many.)
A thorough review of the evidence strongly suggests breakthrough cases are far likelier than the claims in headlines. A New York Times story published Wednesday exploring the Delta variant—which now accounts for more than half of COVID cases in the US—hinted at this.
The paper noted that the CDC “does not tally national figures on breakthrough infections that don’t result in hospitalization or death,” so the precise incidence “is unknown” even though the CDC says breakthroughs are “extremely rare.”
Seeking comment, the Times received a vague response from Walensky in reply to an email inquiring on breakthrough incidence.
“A modest percentage of people who are fully vaccinated will still get Covid-19 if they are exposed to the virus that causes it,” Dr. Walensky said in reply to a Times email.
But infectious disease experts hinted that breakthrough cases are more likely than the current data suggest. “I think that if we started to test people just randomly on the street, we would find a lot more people who test positive,” Dr. Abraar Karan, an infectious diseases fellow at Stanford, told the newspaper.
On Thursday, New York magazine published an article under the headline “Don’t Panic, But Breakthrough Cases May Be a Bigger Problem Than You’ve Been Told.”
Journalist David Wallace-Wells, who spoke to scientists at Harvard and Scripps’s, said public health officials may be “overstating the vaccine effect on transmission and understating the scale and risk of breakthrough infections.”
“The message that breakthrough cases are exceedingly rare and that you don’t have to worry about them if you’re vaccinated — that this is only an epidemic of the unvaccinated — that message is falling flat,” Harvard epidemiologist Michael Mina told Wallace-Wells.
Eric Topol, an American cardiologist, and author was more blunt, saying he estimated the vaccines’ efficacy against symptomatic transmission had fallen to roughly 60 percent for the Delta variant.
“The breakthrough problem is much more concerning than what our public officials have transmitted,” Topol said.
Wallace-Wells notes it’s impossible to estimate the true breakthrough rate because the CDC stopped tracking and reporting most breakthroughs in May, but the data he assembled paint a much different picture.
“In Delaware, between July 1 and July 22, ‘breakthrough’ cases were 13.8 percent of the total,” he writes. “In Michigan, between June 15 and July 30, the figure was 19.1 percent. In this period, there were 2,369 breakthrough cases and 12,409 in total. In Utah, 8 percent of new cases were breakthroughs in early June, but by late July, as Delta grew, the share grew, too, to 20 percent (even while the total number of cases almost doubled).”
None of this is to say Americans shouldn’t get vaccinated. Evidence suggests it significantly reduces one’s chances of dying of or becoming hospitalized with COVID-19. A New York Times analysis of 40 states found that fully immunized people accounted for less than 6 percent of COVID deaths and less than 5 percent of hospitalizations. (Other data is even more promising, including statistics Dr. Fauci cited in June which claimed 99.2 percent of COVID deaths involved unvaccinated individuals.)
A close loved one of mine was vaccinated this week after I suggested it was a good idea; the same day, I encouraged several other loved ones to get the vaccine. This is not about being “pro-vax” or “anti-vax”; it’s about the CDC not being forthright on vaccine breakthroughs.
Choosing to not count vaccinated people who tested positive for COVID as breakthrough cases is little different than choosing to not count positive COVID cases as actual cases. Imagine how much lower US numbers would be if the CDC stopped tracking cases, and instead only counted deaths and hospitalizations.
The great American writer Mark Twain popularized a well-known saying on stats.
“There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics,” Twain said. (Twain and others attributed the quote to British prime minister Benjamin Disraeli, but it’s unclear if Disraeli ever said this.)
We’ve seen throughout the pandemic how authorities have manipulated statistics to serve their own agendas—most notably New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who changed public health reporting to cover up the number of New Yorkers who died in nursing homes because of his policies.
By only tracking breakthrough infections that result in hospitalization and death, the CDC is depriving the public of crucial information on the efficacy of vaccines and fueling the vaccine wars. Increasingly, these wars are a bipartisan chorus of vaccinated voices who paint the unvaccinated as either crazy people—there are no microchips in it, Times columnist Charles Blow recently quipped—or filthy creatures who are prolonging the pandemic because of their selfishness.
“It’s time to start blaming the unvaccinated folks,” Alabama’s Republican Governor Kay Ivey said in July.
Ivey was echoing sentiments President Joe Biden had expressed days earlier.
“Look, the only pandemic we have is among the unvaccinated,” Biden had said while speaking to reporters on the White House lawn.
This chorus has had its desired effect. A recent Axios-Ipsos poll found that 80 percent of Americans blame the unvaccinated for rising cases—even though the US has one of the highest vaccination rates in the world—which has fueled efforts to force Americans to get vaccinated by requiring “vaccine passports” to travel or do business.
Blaming the unvaccinated for the drawn-out pandemic may be popular and politically convenient, but as the Times points out, the CDC’s own data suggest that “vaccinated people can carry as much virus in their nose and throat as unvaccinated people.” Moreover, breakthrough transmissions appear to be more common than the CDC has let on—which is undoubtedly why they stopped tracking most breakthrough cases.
The CDC’s effort to hide breakthrough cases not involving death or hospitalization from the public eye might serve its presumed goal—getting more Americans vaccinated—but it undermines the truth and further erodes public trust in government, which is already at historic lows.
The silver lining in the story is that a full analysis of the science of vaccination makes an even stronger case that the decision of whether to vaccinate or not should be made by one person: the individual getting the vaccine.
The post What Is the True Vaccine Breakthrough Rate? The CDC Doesn’t Want You to Know first appeared on SHTF Plan - When It Hits The Fan, Don't Say We Didn't Warn You.
Quartermaster 3rd Class Jordan Boucher, from Worcester, Massachusetts, uses a sextant to verify the ship's position aboard USS Rafael Peralta during Exercise Talisman Sabre 21 in the Coral Sea, July 29, 2021. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 3rd Class Daniel Serianni)
The Pentagon's decision to require all personnel to be vaccinated compromises national security, contends a career Navy officer.
Revolver News reported Commander J.H. Furman wrote in a memo that the "forced vaccination of all military personnel with the present COVID-19 vaccines may compromise U.S. national security due to the unknown extent of serious vaccine complications."
Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin announced Monday the Pentagon will require a COVID-19 vaccination for all servicemembers by mid-September or before then if the FDA grants approval for the experimental vaccines, which are now administered under emergency use authorization.
Court martials, prison time and less-than-honorable discharge are possible consequences for those who do not comply.
But Furman contends that further study is needed "before committing the Total Force to one irreversible experimental group."
"Initial reports leave more concern for the COVID-19 vaccinations than the virus itself for the (at present) exceptionally healthy military population," he wrote.
Furman, Revolver News reported, is a career United States naval officer, naval aviator and foreign area officer with extensive experience advising senior military, diplomatic and international organization leadership.
He has served throughout Africa, Asia, Europe and the Middle East. He holds a Master of Arts in security studies from the Naval Postgraduate School.
Furman has four main points:
EDITOR'S NOTE: Americans are increasingly realizing that much of what they thought they knew about the COVID-19 pandemic has been a lie. At the same time, the reality of safe, effective, inexpensive and readily available medications that can both treat and prevent COVID infection – successfully used all over the world, and by many people in the U.S. – has been ruthlessly suppressed at every turn. But the truth is finally emerging, and is explored in-depth in a special issue of WND's acclaimed Whistleblower magazine, titled "ENDING THE PANDEMIC: How vaccine mania and lust for power led to the all-out suppression of proven safe-and-effective COVID treatments." Though sold out in its print edition due to overwhelming demand from WND readers, "ENDING THE PANDEMIC" is available in Whistleblower’s popular, state-of-the-art digital form! Or SUBSCRIBE TO WHISTLEBLOWER (print edition) and get 12 powerful issues mailed to you – plus you'll get three FREE digital special issues, including "ENDING THE PANDEMIC"!
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 licensing@wndnewscenter.org.
SUPPORT TRUTHFUL JOURNALISM. MAKE A DONATION TO THE NONPROFIT WND NEWS CENTER. THANK YOU!
The post Navy commander: Mandatory military vaccination a 'national security threat' appeared first on WND.
Why are the top virologists, epidemiologists, medical scientists, medical researchers and Nobel Prize winners ad nauseam, regarded the world over as the best of the best, now being de-platformed, censored and stripped of their ability to practice? Is it because their dire warnings are the truth, or is it because governments and their minions are lying and must silence truth-tellers lest the government/health cabal be exposed?
Why is the Biden-Fauci-medical cabal, which includes Mitch McConnell Republicans, pressuring, intimidating and bribing people to take a drug that has quantifiable horrific, life-threatening, permanent side effects, not least of which is death, for a flu that has a survival rate of between 98.6 and 99.7%, all groups combined?
Why are social platforms such as Facebook and Twitter censoring posts that offer medically vetted opinions and freezing accounts? Why are the finest and heretofore most respected medical professionals on the planet being permanently removed from social sites? When did the free flow of factual information become dangerous to the public? Or is that the free flow of peer-reviewed information is a seismic threat to the pernicious calumniators using the courts and government in their evil plot to force nationwide compliance?
How many more men, women and children must die before the Biden-Fauci cabal is recognized as an existential threat to the foreseeable future of America? What is the Biden-Fauci cabal's plan, if the horrific "vaccine" side effects we are witnessing this early explode exponentially within the next two years?
Americans (and the world), are being lied to and intentionally misled into voluntarily having an experimental drug injected into them. Only fools believe otherwise.
While I was chairman of a Capitol Hill think tank, we worked to prevent Obamacare. But, despite all evidence to the contrary, Obama's lapdog media and sycophants demonized everyone who factually warned that Obamacare was a planned disaster that would destroy health care. Many of us were called liars right up to and until Jonathan Gruber arrogantly let the proverbial cat out of the liar's bag.
In my syndicated op-ed dated Nov. 18, 2014, I wrote:
"What many of us argued was the case from the very beginning has now been confirmed by Jonathan Gruber, one of Obama's top architects of Obamacare. Tapes have surfaced of Gruber boasting at a 2013 forum at Washington University in St. Louis. Gruber called the American people 'stupid' saying: 'Lack of transparency is a huge political advantage … and basically, call it the stupidity of the American voter or whatever, but basically that was really, really critical for the thing to pass. Look, I wish … that we could make it transparent, but I'd rather have this law than not.' … The New York Post reported that, 'Gruber also pointed to deliberate efforts by the administration and congressional backers to include mandates and subsidies for insurance rather than levying what might be called a "tax."'
"Obama's lies that we could keep our doctors, that our rates wouldn't go up, that we could keep our policies if we liked them, not to mention his lies of purposeful omission are all on record for anyone to find with a simple interne search. He lied to the public, he lied to Congress, and he had his lawyers lie to the courts." (Read the full article.)
The only things different with this global coup being perpetrated upon the people are the lengths the Biden-Fauci cabal and Big Tech are willing to go to ensure every single person is infected with these poisonous drugs.
As I was writing this piece, a dear acquaintance contacted me to share that three friends had received the experimental drug and died. That's three people in this person's sphere of personal association who received the drug and died after being injected!
In August 2010, I explained to Fox Business' Neil Cavuto that in the next 20 years 80 million baby boomers, that's a rate of over 10,000 per day, were going to be retiring. (Keep in mind I explained that to Cavuto in 2010.) Based on the decreasing number of persons paying into Social Security, the amount pilfered by Congress, and the projected number of retirees, "the day will arrive very quickly that those retiring would either not receive what they were supposed to receive on Social Security or receive no Social Security benefits at all." I further explained that was the scheme behind Obamacare. It was a cheap Ponzi scheme to bolster Social Security. Neil pointed out that the dirty little secret behind Obamacare was that, "It was to save Medicaid from going belly up by laying over it a system that hides that reality."
I raise the question that begs an answer: If the dirty little secret of Obamacare was an attempt to save Medicaid from going belly up, as Neil Cavuto and I discussed on his show, what is this flu-demic and the deadly toxins being promoted as vaccines for a flu that isn't a threat designed to conceal?
What if the population-control crowd, like Bill Gates et al. isn't in it for the money or personal gain? What if they are perpetrating genocide on the gullible public for a much more nefarious reason?
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 licensing@wndnewscenter.org.
SUPPORT TRUTHFUL JOURNALISM. MAKE A DONATION TO THE NONPROFIT WND NEWS CENTER. THANK YOU!
The post The Biden-Fauci cabal should answer my question appeared first on WND.
