First up, two pieces of evidence which bolster our contention the ChiCom-created-COVID-19 charade has gone on long enough, in fact far too long. So, if it please the court…i.e., you, our readers…we’d like the following marked as “People’s Exhibit ‘A'”:
We personally checked both links, and the figures are correct, at least for the 2018 flu fatalities; as we all know, the numbers of deaths due to the Wuhan virus have been, in many if not most cases,…”inflated“. Truth is, if today a man jumps off the Empire State Building or is hit by a train, and the corpse was found to contain the faintest traces of the Peking pathogen, his death will be ruled as Wuhan-related. Why, inquiring minds want to know? Because, in the case of…
In other words, there are lies, damned lies, anything Joe Biden says, and then there are statistics…or at least statistics which could somehow justify this criminally tyrannical decree courtesy of Walt Meisen.
Next, courtesy of our friend Mark K., we’d like the following item marked as “People’s Exhibit ‘B'”, as AIER‘s Jeff Tucker highlights how…
“In my lifetime, there was another deadly flu epidemic in the United States. The flu spread from Hong Kong to the United States, arriving December 1968 and peaking a year later. It ultimately killed 100,000 people in the U.S., mostly over the age of 65, and one million worldwide.
Lifespan in the US in those days was 70 whereas it is 78 today. Population was 200 million as compared with 328 million today. It was also a healthier population with low obesity. If it would be possible to extrapolate the death data based on population and demographics, we might be looking at a quarter million deaths today from this virus. So in terms of lethality, it was as deadly and scary as COVID-19 if not more so, though we shall have to wait to see.
“In 1968,” saysNathaniel L. Moir in National Interest, “the H3N2 pandemic killed more individuals in the U.S. than the combined total number of American fatalities during both the Vietnam and Korean Wars.”
And this happened in the lifetimes of every American over 52 years of age.
I was 5 years old and have no memory of this at all. My mother vaguely remembers being careful and washing surfaces, and encouraging her mom and dad to be careful. Otherwise, it’s mostly forgotten today. Why is that? (We have one idea!)
Nothing closed. Schools stayed open.All businesses did too. You could go to the movies. You could go to bars and restaurants.John Fund has a friend who reports having attended a Grateful Dead concert. In fact, people have no memory or awareness that the famous Woodstock concert of August 1969 – planned in January during the worse period of death – actually occurred during a deadly American flu pandemic that only peaked globally six months later. There was no thought given to the virus which, like ours today, was dangerous mainly for a non-concert-going demographic.
Stock markets didn’t crash. Congress passed no legislation. The Federal Reserve did nothing. Not a single governor acted to enforce social distancing, curve flattening (even though hundreds of thousands of people were hospitalized (Why was there no a shortage of ventilators, and why weren’t ICUs overwhelmed?!?)), or banning of crowds. No mothers were arrested for taking their kids to other homes. No surfers were arrested.No daycares were shut even though there were more infant deaths with this virus than the one we are experiencing now. There were no suicides, no unemployment, no drug overdoses.
Media covered the pandemic but it never became a big issue.
As Bojan Pancevski in the Wall Street Journalpoints out, “In 1968-70, news outlets devoted cursory attention to the virus while training their lenses on other events such as the moon landing and the Vietnam War, and the cultural upheaval of the civil-rights movements, student protests and the sexual revolution.”
The only actions governments took was to collect data, watch and wait, encourage testing and vaccines, and so on. The medical community took the primary responsibility for disease mitigation, as one might expect. It was widely assumed that diseases require medical not political responses.
It’s not as if we had governments unwilling to intervene in other matters. We had the Vietnam War, social welfare, public housing, urban renewal, and the rise of Medicare and Medicaid. We had a president swearing to cure all poverty, illiteracy, and disease. Government was as intrusive as it had ever been in history. But for some reason, there was no thought given to shutdowns. (Let alone anyone contemplating the complete destruction of the American economy.)
Which raises the question: why was this different? We will be trying to figure this one out for decades.
Was the difference that we have mass media invading our lives with endless notifications blowing up in our pockets? Was there some change in philosophy such that we now think politics is responsible for all existing aspects of life? Was there a political element here in that the media blew this wildly out of proportion as revenge against Trump and his deplorables?
Or did our excessive adoration of predictive modelling(Thank you, anthropogenic global warming alarmists!) get out of control to the point that we let a physicist with ridiculous models frighten the world’s governments into violating the human rights of billions of people?
Maybe all of these were factors…”
Perhaps, at least to some extent; but again, we’re of the unalterable opinion there remains only one, overarching reason:
Everything else has been, and will continue to be, a minor contributor at best. They want The Donald, and they’re more than willing to destroy the future of every American to get him.
“A January, 1970, report in TheNew York Times said “scientists suspect that at least three of the recent pandemics of influenza began in mainland China”. An excerpt from the story reads: Dr Chang Wai-kwan of Hong Kong’s Queen Mary Hospital, was quoted as telling an international conference: “The Asian flu of 1957 apparently originated in the central mainland of the People’s Republic of China and the epidemic of 1968 possibly could have come from the same source.”
China, rather than Spain, was also now believed to have been the source of the deadliest 20th century flu epidemic, the report said.“
Allow us to translate: the Wuhan virus was…
Here’s the juice: as our EMT eldest and his ER-nurse wife recently observed, while any death is a tragedy, the probability a minimal number of lives will be lost due to seatbelts isn’t sufficient grounds for not mandating their use. Likewise, knowing it’s inevitable some number of otherwise healthy individualsunder the age of 65 will die as a direct result of the Wuhan virus no matter WHAT we do should lead us to quarantine only the obese and elderly (particularly those with underlying health conditions, the vast majority of who don’t work anyway) while the rest of us restart the economy, thus ensuring the availability of future funding for the care of the quarantined!!!
Or does that make too much sense?!?
Turning from that which makes too much sense to what makes perfect sense, NRO‘s Andy McCarthy offers his insight into how and why…
“Michael Flynn was not the objective. He was the obstacle.
Once you grasp that fundamental fact, it becomes easier to understand the latest disclosures the Justice Department made in the Flynn case on Thursday. They are the most important revelations to date about the FBI’s Trump–Russia investigation, code-named Crossfire Hurricane.
The new disclosures, in conjunction with all we have learned in the last week, answer the all-important whyquestion: Why was Flynn set up?
The answer to the what question has been clear for a long time: The FBI set a perjury trap for Flynn, hoping to lure him into misstatements that the bureau could portray as lies. In the frenzied political climate of the time, that would have been enough to get him removed from his new position as national security adviser (NSA), perhaps even to prosecute him.On that score, the new disclosures, startling as they are to read, just elucidate what was already obvious.
But why did they do it?That has been the baffling question. Oh, there have been plenty of indications that the Obama administrationcould not abide Flynn. The White House and the intelligence agencies had their reasons, mostly vindictive. But while that may explain their gleefulness over his fall from grace, it has never been a satisfying explanation for the extraordinary measures the FBI took to orchestrate that fall.
To understand what happened here, you have to understand what the FBI’s objective was, first formed in collaboration with Obama-administration officials. That includes President Obama, Vice President Biden, and Flynn’s predecessor, national-security adviser Susan Rice, with whom then-Acting Attorney General Sally Yates and then-FBI director James Comey met at the White House on January 5, 2017 — smack in the middle of the chain-of-events that led to Flynn’s ouster. Recall Rice’s CYA memo about the meeting: “President Obama said he wants to be sure that, as we engage with the incoming team, we are mindful to ascertain if there is any reason that we cannot share information fully as it relates to Russia” (emphasis added). Rice wrote those words on January 20, at the very time the FBI was making its plan to push Flynn out.
The objective of the Obama administration and its FBI hierarchy was to continue the Trump–Russia investigation, even after President Trump took office, and even though President Trump was the quarry. The investigation would hamstring Trump’s capacity to govern and reverse Obama policies.Continuing it would allow the FBI to keep digging until it finally came up with a crime or impeachable offense that they were then confident they would find. Remember, even then, the bureau was telling the FISA court that Trump’s campaign was suspected of collaborating in Russia’s election interference. FBI brass had also pushed for the intelligence community to include the Steele dossier — the bogus compendium of Trump–Russia collusion allegations — in its report assessing Russia’s meddling in the campaign.
But how could the FBI sustain an investigation targeting the president when the president would have the power to shut the investigation down?
The only way the bureau could pull that off would be to conceal from the president the fullness of the Russia investigation — in particular, the fact that Trump was the target.
That is why Flynn had to go.
President Trump was a political phenomenon but a novice when it came to governance. He was not supported by the Republican foreign-policy and national-security clerisy, which he had gone out of his way to antagonize in the campaign. The staff he brought into the government consisted mainly of loyalists. There were some skilled advisers, too, but their experience was not in the national-security realm.
The exception was Flynn. The former head of the Defense Intelligence Agency knew how the spy agencies worked. He knew where and how they kept secrets. He had enough scars from tangles with the intelligence bureaucracy that he knew how the game was played — how intelligence officials exploited information, or selectively withheld it.
Someone as smooth as Director Comey might be able to dissuade President Trump from inquiring too deeply into the Russia investigation. Trump would be satisfied as long as Comey kept assuring him not to worry because the bureau was not investigating him personally — even though it was. The unseasoned Trump staff would also be easy to brush back: Just tell them that the FBI was rigorously independent, and that if the White House poked around too much, Trump staffers would be accused of political meddling. The staff was green enough to be bullied into minding its own business even about the FBI’s counterintelligence mission, in which the bureau is supposed to serve the White House, not the other way around.
But Flynn was different…”
Thus, like Julius Caesar, and indeed The Donald himself, Flynn had to go. Which meant, as in the wake of the release of names on a Hillary witness list, you just…
For more on the subject of prejudiced Progressives, we highly recommend this forward from Daniel Francis Feeney containing the latest from Mollie Hemingway writing at The Federalist, as she reminds us…
“The Washington Post has a problem. The newspaper led the massive effort against the nomination of Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh by publishing and relentlessly hyping a completely unsubstantiated allegation of sexual assault against him.
Now, the paper is leading Democrats’ efforts to bury a similar, if stronger, allegation of sexual assault against Joe Biden. To accomplish this dramatic turnabout, the paper is collectively trying to rewrite history, pretending the allegation against Kavanaugh had more basis than it did while also pretending that the allegation against Biden has less basis than it does.
The Post’s anti-Kavanaugh operation had powerful divisions in both the news and opinion departments. It’s worth looking at both…”
In a related item via Speed Mach, The Hill reports the…
Which brings us, appropriately enough, to The Lighter Side:
Then there’s these five memes from Balls Cotton…
…one from Ed Hickey…
…and three from Speed Mach…
…along with this lengthy string of comic Conservative consciousness from James Nichols:
The last one was definitely our favorite…but more on that to follow in Wednesday’s Video of the Day.
Finally, we’ll call it a wrap with yet another sordid story straight from the pages of The Crime Blotter, courtesy today of Big Brother, Hawaiian Style, as…
“A California couple who allegedly refused to sign a coronavirus quarantine acknowledgment after checking into a Hawaii hotel for their honeymoon found themselves on the wrong side of the law. Borice Leouskiy, 20, and Yuliia Andreichenko, 26, were arrested after leaving their Waikiki-area hotel by special agents for the Department of the Hawaii Attorney General on Thursday.
“We appreciate the vigilance and cooperation of the hotel staff, and staff at other hotels, in helping maintain the health and safety of visitors and residents,” state Attorney General Clare Connors said in a statement. “It is important that everyone flying into Hawaii at this time, abide by our mandatory rules.”
Connors’ office did not name the hotel…”
We can only hope either Mr. or Mrs. Leouskiy will. In the meantime, we’ll hazard a guess: the Hotel 1984?
Or, as Herr Hitler might have observed (with a little help from Speed Mach)…
Loading ...
You must be logged in to post a comment.