Posted originally on the conservative tree house on January 25, 2023 | Sundance
While these remarks are cast against the backdrop of House Speaker Kevin McCarthy refusing to seat Adam Schiff (D-CA) and Eric Swalwell (D-CA) on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI), the larger point within his remarks about the intelligence community need to be emphasized. {Direct Rumble Link}
While claiming McCarthy has no right to stop himself or Swalwell from participating in the 118th Congress HPSCI, Schiff claims the larger intelligence community will no longer share information about national security matters with the committee if he is not present. Essentially, without Schiff in attendance to politicize the intelligence information, the larger intelligence community will not cooperate.
Additionally, and somewhat in direct alignment with CTH predictions about the House Subcommittee on the Weaponization of Government, Schiff declares the intelligence agencies of the United States government will not cooperate with the subcommittee. Again, as the argument is made, if democrats are not positioned to defend the Deep State, the Deep State will not cooperate. WATCH:
Nothing within these remarks should come as a surprise to CTH readers; however, the open hostility within the prediction by Adam Schiff should serve as a stark underline for the challenge the House subcommittee will face.
Posted originally on the CTH on January 25, 2023 | Sundance
The Biden administration is pushing the United States into war against Russia to protect Washington DC’s political and financial interests in Ukraine. None of this is a surprise as both Republican and Democrat politicians in DC continue to use Ukraine as a money laundering operation for key U.S. stakeholders.
Today Joe Biden announced he is sending 31 ‘Abram Tanks’ from the U.S. arsenal into Ukraine to further push the United States into direct conflict with Russia. The potential for direct U.S. military engagement in Ukraine is now just a matter of formality, as the Abram’s tanks will be accompanied by military advisors, trainers, and the processes to sustain and maintain them on the battlefield. WATCH:
[Transcript] – […] “today, I’m announcing that the United States will be sending 31 Abram tanks to Ukraine, the equivalent of one Ukrainian battalion.
Secretary Austin has recommended this step because it will enhance the Ukraine’s capacity to defend its territory and achieve its strategic objectives.
The Abrams tanks are the most capable tanks in the world. They’re also extremely complex to operate and maintain, so we’re also giving Ukraine the parts and equipment necessary to effectively sustain these tanks on the battlefield.
And we begi- — we’ll begin to train the Ukrainian troops on these issues of sustainment, logistics, and maintenance as soon as possible. Delivering these tanks to the field is going to take time, time that we’ll see — we’ll use to make sure the Ukrainians are fully prepared to integrate the Abram tanks into their defenses.
We also closely coordinated this announcement with our Allies. (read more)
We are being pushed into a war that few Americans want.
This is getting out of hand mostly because the Russians are defeating Ukraine in the war. Without the U.S. operators and material involved, Ukraine cannot win. However, the Biden administration view Ukraine as a U.S. proxy in Europe, and as such all of the corrupt DC systems are in alignment to continue escalating this conflict.
This is happening against the backdrop of Ukraine officials being caught stealing money given to Ukraine to fight the war.
None of this is good, and it is likely to get worse.
WASHINGTON DC – […] The decision to provide the tanks marks a stunning reversal for the Biden administration, which had previously argued they would be of little benefit to Ukraine.
But the decision to send the Abrams tanks helped get Germany to move forward with a separate effort to provide Leopard tanks to Ukraine, which the U.S. had seen as benefitting Kyiv.
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz announced Wednesday that Berlin would send Leopard tanks to Ukraine and allow for other European nations to also send the German-made tanks to Kyiv. (more)
Posted originally on the CTH on January 22, 2023 | Sundance
West Virginia Senator Joe Manchin appears with his good friend Chuck Todd for an interview about ongoing political events to include the debt ceiling.
As Manchin and Todd finish each other’s sentences, the discussion hits on the upcoming debt ceiling battle. Manchin surprisingly pulls out the purple card and states the super-secret thing that no one in DC will admit. The last federal budget was signed into law September 2008, for fiscal year 2009. From that moment forward, there has been nothing except continuing resolutions and omnibus spending bills [SIDENOTE: this approach was by design by Obama/Pelosi].
This 12-year timeline includes the entire tenure of House Speaker Paul Ryan, former Budget Committee Chair, who now uses the absence of the budget as a tool to advance his outside impression that DC is fiscally reckless, insert pearl clutching here. I digress. Manchin is positioning himself as the ‘purple’ option for 2024. WATCH (or read):
[Transcript] – CHUCK TODD: And joining me now is Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia. Senator Manchin, welcome back to Meet the Press.
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Chuck, it’s always good to be with you.
CHUCK TODD: Look, I want to get into the debt ceiling. I want to get into all this stuff. But I — we got some developments overnight with those classified documents, an FBI search — the White House said it was coordinated with the FBI. But we’ve now had an FBI search of former President Trump. Now we have an FBI search into President Biden’s residence. What’s your assessment of how the president has handled the situation?
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Well, I mean, it’s just hard to believe that in the United States of America, we have a former president and a current president that are basically in the same situation. How does this happen? You know, only thing I can tell you, Chuck, is when I go into the SCIF with the secure documents, they always ask, “Are you clean?” when you walk out. They want to make sure you’re not carrying anything out. You know, and it might be a mistake. You might just put it in your other papers, but you double-check right there. To be held accountable and responsible is what we all are. And to put those in unsecured spaces is irresponsible.
CHUCK TODD: Do you see similarities, or do you see more differences in how President Trump versus how President Biden —
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: I’m not going to make —
CHUCK TODD: — has handled this?
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: — that decision, but I think that Merrick Garland did the right thing by putting the special counsel.
CHUCK TODD: You do?
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: And I think that we should wait until the special counsel, rather than making this a political circus. Let them find out the facts. What — was one more damaging? Are they both about the same, did not cause any problem, or is one more reckless and irresponsible than the other? I can’t answer that question, but I think the special counsel will do a better job than the politicians and the political circus that is going to follow.
CHUCK TODD: President Biden said he had no regrets in how he handled this. Do you have any advice for him on how he should handle this going forward?
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Oh, I think he should have a lot of regrets. Yeah. I would —
CHUCK TODD: What are those —
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: I would think that. I said, “Whoever’s responsible.” I mean, if I hold people accountable, and I use — whether my chief of staff or, you know, my staff, who, that were doing this, that I’m looking at, then I’m going to hold someone accountable. But basically, the buck stops with me.
CHUCK TODD: So you think he should be out there, “Look, I mess — I messed up –”
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: That’s all. Just say —
CHUCK TODD: “Maybe I didn’t do it.” Just say it —
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: — “I made a mistake.”
CHUCK TODD: Just fall on your sword here?
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: We’re all human.
CHUCK TODD: Yeah.
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: We make mistakes. I can tell you I don’t think anyone intended, he sure didn’t intend for it to fall in wrong hands and use it against our country. I know they didn’t intend that to happen. Could it have happened? I don’t know. And yeah, you just might as well say, “Listen, it’s irresponsible. It was something we should’ve had a better check and balance on.”
CHUCK TODD: Now, former President Trump defied a subpoena. So in that sense, the, the way each has handled it is different.
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Yes.
CHUCK TODD: Do you acknowledge that?
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Absolutely. Much different than the other. One’s saying, “Okay, I hope I didn’t make any mistakes.
CHUCK TODD: Right.
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: — I hope no one’s compromised. I hope we didn’t hurt our country.” And the other one says, “Ugh, no. I know it didn’t. Believe me.” Well, you know what? What they said, verify? You have to verify.
CHUCK TODD: Trust but verify?
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Trust but verify. Let’s find out. And that’s what the special counsel’s —
CHUCK TODD: And that’s what you want here? Both special counsels to sort of resolve this?
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: First of all, every one of us, in our life, have to be held accountable and responsible for our actions because people want accountability. And they want basically when you’re held accountable, are you responsible or not? If you are, would you — can you fix that? Did you make a mistake? Fine. You’re, you know —
CHUCK TODD: And that’s what you think – the president needs to get out there and just get in front of this?
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Cicero, Cicero said, “To err is human.” You’re a human being. You’re going to make mistakes. Did you intend to make it? Did you intend to harm somebody? Did you intend to basically do an irresponsible thing? I don’t think — hopefully, neither one of them did.
CHUCK TODD: Right.
SEN. JOE MANCHIIN: But it sure turned out to be irresponsible.
CHUCK TODD: Let’s talk about the debt ceiling. You’re — as always, you’re trying to find a compromise, middle ground.
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Yeah.
CHUCK TODD: I know your instinct here. But why should Republicans get the benefit of the doubt on the debt ceiling here, considering that it’s a — that they’re sort of manufacturing a crisis that’s a bit unnecessary right now?
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Well, first of all, if one side thinks that the other one’s more responsible for the debt at $31.4 trillion, that’s, that is totally not accurate and it’s deceptive. We’re all responsible. We’ve got a $31.4 trillion debt. It’s a runaway debt, and no one’s holding themselves accountable. And basically, I think you said it, use the budget process. I’ve been here 12 years. We haven’t had a budget yet.
CHUCK TODD: Yeah. I — that’s what I don’t get here.
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: We haven’t had a budget yet.
CHUCK TODD: And that’s what I question —
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Yeah, you should.
CHUCK TODD: — you want to do this special committee here.
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: I’m —
CHUCK TODD: And I’m sitting here going, “Why add more “bureaucracy?” We have a budget committee. We have two budget committees. We have a Joint Committee on Taxation. We have all these different committees that have already been created to deal with this process. Why can’t we use the congressional bureaucracy that exists?
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: We have 12 appropriations committees —
CHUCK TODD: They’re —
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: They’re supposed to do their job. Why don’t you basically put a time certain on —
CHUCK TODD: Right.
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: — what you can do and what you can’t and when you do it? I can’t speak for that. I was a former governor of the state of West Virginia.
CHUCK TODD: Right.
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: I was responsible for a balanced budget amendment and basically staying within the realms of my Constitution. So, you know, I met every week. Every week like clockwork they walked in my office on a Tuesday or Wednesday and sit down and go over it. You’re either going to be — have to make some cuts now, make some adjustments now, so we end the year with a balanced budget or a surplus. There’s nothing that holds us accountable. Nothing at all. We can say, “Oh, we’re going to do it.” As I’ve said before, 12 years, haven’t had a budget. That’s ridiculous.
CHUCK TODD: So, let me — you want to do this sort of, that you and Senator Romney, to have committee that deals with the trust fund issues. But right now, neither party wants to touch – I mean, in that sense, Donald Trump came out, and certainly Democrats, nobody wants to touch Social Security or Medicare.
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Well, first of all —
CHUCK TODD: So how do you separate those two out and deal with our fiscal problems?
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Why would you scare the bejesus out of people that are basically going to say — in West Virginia, I’ve got 60% of my population that that’s all they have is Medicare and Social Security. You think I’m going to go down that path and put them in jeopardy? No. But there are so much other things, the basically wasteful spending, that can be corralled in without scaring the bejesus, depending on what political side you’re on.
CHUCK TODD: Let me ask you about wasteful spending, because one of the three most hypocritical words I hear are “waste, fraud and abuse.” Right. Everybody says, “Oh, waste, fraud, and abuse.”
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: And it’s all there. It’s all there.
CHUCK TODD: Okay, but waste, fraud, and abuse aren’t going to balance the budget, ok? At the end of the day, there are going to have to be choices that have to be made. What is something that ought to be on, on, in the decision of, “You know, maybe we’re spending too much”?
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Well, we know we’re spending too much because we’re not balancing our budget and —
CHUCK TODD: But on what?
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: — we have more debt. The bottom line is, it’s in the eyes of the beholder. That’s the problem that we have. Five-hundred-and-thirty-five people said, “Well, yeah. What you’re doing is wasteful, Chuck. I think you ought to cut that.” And you’re going to say, “Okay, Joe. How about yours?”
CHUCK TODD: But your, your spending that you think is mandatory, another person thinks is wasteful or abuse.
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Yeah. Just think, for every dollar, just get it down, break it down to the dollar. Is there any savings within that dollar you think that is wasteful or abuse that we could at least have a target to set? Is it a penny? Is it five pennies? Is it a nickel? Where is it?
CHUCK TODD: But here’s what gets lost here, is nobody will put anything on the table. Everybody says, “We’ve got to cut spending.” Well, what? And nobody wants to articulate —
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Well, the process —
CHUCK TODD:– the what.
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Chuck, you hit it dead on the head. The process isn’t working. How come we’re not held accountable to have – to have the appropriation bills done at a certain time before the end of the fiscal year?
CHUCK TODD: You tell me.
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Well, that’s what I —
CHUCK TODD: I mean –
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: You know –
CHUCK TODD: – what does Chuck Schumer say? What does Mitch McConnell
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: You know what happens? It rolls over into an omnibus bill at the end and everything’s thrown into it. “Okay. Here we got it, guys. That’s it.” It makes no sense.
CHUCK TODD: So what should – it sounds like you actually think the debt ceiling is a moment we should use to focus on —
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Well, if you’re going to use the debt ceiling for anything except for theatrics, okay, which is what probably might happen for a while, we’re going to pass the debt ceiling. You are exactly correct.
CHUCK TODD: Right.
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: It has to pass. You know, we have the currency of it, you know – the good faith of the United States dollar and the currency of the world. You just can’t let it default and basically hold us in jeopardy from where we stand in the world, world order. With that being said, is how do you get to it? Do you use this moment? Do you come to a reason – responsibility? What are we paying for interest now? For ten years, it was zero. It was funny money. Were not – you know, it doesn’t put any burden. We’re just raising debt, but we’re not basically harming how we have to meet that debt through our interest payments. Now we’re talking real money on an interest basis. We’re almost, up to what our defense budget is, paying in interest.
CHUCK TODD: I guess I come back to, and I don’t think you have the answer either, which is what is the moment to force this conversation?
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: This is a moment if, if Kevin McCarthy coming in – coming in new says, “Okay, this is – it’s serious,” and he takes it from the standpoint. And he knows —
CHUCK TODD: What does he need to do that you would take him seriously in this?
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Well, you know, Chuck —
CHUCK TODD: Do you know what I mean by that? Like, how do you know when he’s being serious, and how do you when he’s paying politics?
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Well, the bottom line is he has a hell of a – heck of a political hand that’s not, not very good right now. He’s not holding a lot, if you will. And he has ten or 12 that’s pretty much out there. He has to make a decision how he wants to govern and how he ought to these next two years in this 118th Congress. You know – I just – it was amazing. I just saw that the Ohio legislature, I don’t know if you paid any attention to that —
CHUCK TODD: I did. Yeah.
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: The Ohio legislature, which is Republican-controlled –
CHUCK TODD: Yeah.
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: – basically chose their new speaker, a Republican, with as many, if not more votes, from the Democrats because they wanted someone they can work with. That’s a coalition. Why can’t we put coalitions together here?
CHUCK TODD: Well, that’s —
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: The moderate, centrist Democrats coming over and working, whoever’s the majority, and saying, “You don’t have to bow and cow-tail to the extremes.”
CHUCK TODD: Yeah. You don’t have to worry about primaries. A lot of your colleagues have to worry about primaries. Isn’t that why this —
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Let me tell you —
CHUCK TODD – doesn’t happen?
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: – one more thing. I’ve got to be honest with you, Chuck. If it’s all about the election, the next election, you know, that’s the worst thing that could happen to us.
CHUCK TODD: You just came from Davos.
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Yeah.
CHUCK TODD: There’s a moment, I don’t know if you realized, that went viral between you and Senator Sinema. I want to show the moment here. I want to ask you about it. You guys are high-fiving. I think we’ll show it again here. It was right after she was talking about the filibuster.
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Yeah.
CHUCK TODD: Is that what you were high-fiving about?
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Yeah, that was – I think, you know, after that. I saw her hand go up and I said, “Sure” because here, the two of us are committed to protecting the filibuster, which I think protects checks and balances on the executive branch. So if you have a Democrat, Democrat, Democrat – president, House and Senate – and you have a strong president, basically leader of the party, then you don’t have a check and balance because I can guarantee you the House and Senate will roll wherever the president wants. I – and I’ve said this before. I appreciate the Republican senators and the leadership of the minority leader at that time, McConnell, majority leader at that time – with Donald Trump every day beating on him, “Get rid of the filibuster.” You’ve got 53, 54 Republicans, and he would not. And I appreciate that. And I told Harry Reid we should not have done it when we did it in 2013. But to come back now, the checks and balances aren’t there. It makes and forces them to work together. Think what we’ve accomplished in the 117th, the most divided Congress we’ve ever had, and we did more substantial bills, I think that’s going to be transformational.
CHUCK TODD: You think those first two years of Biden and this Democratic Congress is going to be historic?
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: I think it’s going to be transformational and historical, yes, because here you had a bipartisan infrastructure bill we haven’t done for years.
CHUCK TODD: Yeah.
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: You had then on top of that the CHIPS Act, which will bring manufacturing back so we don’t have supply chains that we’re depending on that aren’t loyal and trustworthy. And then we have the Inflation Reduction Act, which is going to give us – it’s been misaligned because this administration basically said it’s environmental, environmental, environmental. That bill is designed to be energy security, Chuck. And energy security is exactly what we need.
CHUCK TODD: And you’re frustrated that the White House won’t say the phrase “energy security”?
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: They will not use the word, and they haven’t. I’m begging you all, please. Energy security. We have to have fossil. We do it better and cleaner than anywhere in the world. And we can be energy secured for ten years, and also be able to invest in technology of the future.
CHUCK TODD: Is this an agenda you can run for reelection on in West Virginia?
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Oh, most certainly because we’re seeing right now, I’ve got a battery plant coming in. I’ve got basically hydrogen coming in that direction. We’ve got expansion. And we’re raising our coal with carbon capture sequestration. We’ve got basically methane capturing using gas. We have people that are fighting continuously. And you have to have the pipeline to move this product. And it’s going to be needed. If not, you’re going to end up like Europe. And that’s where I didn’t want to rub it into them, but Europe took an approach that they’re going to say, “We’re going to have cap-and-trade.” And we’re going to be basically charging you a carbon tax.” I’ve said, “I’m not going to support that and vote for it because I think it doesn’t work.” So I took the approach, and basically we wrote this bill with incentives. And it was working. And that’s why they were all upset. That’s why the chancellor and that’s why presidents of other countries were very upset on this bill and concerned about it.
CHUCK TODD: If you run for office in 2024, are you going to run as a Democrat?
SEN. JOE MANCHIN: Chuck, I haven’t made a decision what I’m going to do in 2024. I’ve got two years ahead of me now to do the best I can for the state and for my country.
CHUCK TODD: What are – what’s on the table? Is reelection on the table?
Posted originally on the CTH on January 22, 2023 | Sundance
CTH has predicted the most significant political revelation in 2023 will be the exposure of the Washington DC UniParty, and one of the largest moments for this sunlight is going to come with the “debt ceiling” extension.
The background to understand this level of sunlight, comes specifically because 20 House Republicans have taken a stand with bold contrast. Whenever there is a bold contrast situation, the UniParty is exposed because the lavender hues where red and blue overlay is not possible. The House20 have created a situation where Speaker Kevin McCarthy cannot hide, and there are enough MAGA Republicans to expose how the conniving UniParty apparatus really works.
Within the CBS political discussion, Robert Costa puts the upcoming ‘debt ceiling’ discussion into context while revealing how the White House is approaching the issue. Costa is a vested weasel, but what he says in this segment is accurate. Joe Biden will work with Mitch McConnell in the Senate to subvert the House of Representatives, because the House -as structured by the MAGA coalition- is now viewed as the enemy to both the White House and Senate republicans.
OMG, guys, like how lucky are we right now?
You don’t have to guess if Costa is correct on this, because the evidence is already in place. What Costa is describing is exactly how and why the 2023 Omnibus spending bill was put together by the White House, Mitch McConnell and Chuck Schumer before the Republican control of the House took place. Senate Republicans, led by Mitch McConnell, are structurally aligned with Democrats against the House Republicans.
The CBS panel is essentially having a conversation saying, ‘How lucky are we’ that Mitch McConnell is a Democrat right now? And this is the truest nature of the UniParty in action.
[Transcript, video at 02:21] – MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, I’m glad you bring that up, because the other thing that the departure of the chief of staff raises questions about is this looming policy and political conversation about the debt ceiling.
Who runs point on that? Obviously, the Treasury secretary has a huge role. But in terms of talking to the Hill and the negotiations, who’s doing that if the chief of staff is leaving?
ROBERT COSTA: What I’m told from people inside the West Wing is that President Biden himself has a relationship with Mitch McConnell, the Senate Republican leader, of course, with Chuck Schumer, the Senate Democratic leader.
They are in some ways going to try to cut out Speaker Kevin McCarthy and the House Republicans. There’s not an appetite among Democrats to put spending cuts on the table at all. They would like to see a clean debt limit extension. And Jim Clyburn, one of the top Democrats in the House, recently told me he could see a scenario where centrist House Republicans band together with House Democrats for a clean debt limit extension.
[…] ROBERT COSTA: Privately, I’m told President Biden and Senator McConnell have chuckled behind the scenes with longtime friends about how at this stage in divided government, it’s these two men who have long been friends who are being counted upon to perhaps cut a deal.
I remember, when I first started covering Congress a decade ago, I would remember Vice President Biden was the one…
MARGARET BRENNAN: Yes.
ROBERT COSTA: … who came to the Capitol to meet with Senator McConnell to cut a deal on that so-called fiscal cliff way back then.
So, they have that history, and they were recently in Kentucky together, showing at least, not political solidarity, but in terms of a personal relationship, there’s a real rapport.” Video Prompted:
Posted originally on thr CTH on January 19, 2023 | Sundance
Tucker Carlson Outlines the Intersection of the Unelected Administrative State and The Fourth Branch of Government
Posted originally on the CTH on January 19, 2023 | Sundance
The fourth branch of government is the superseding national security apparatus or intelligence branch. That system actually existed for decades as the unelected intelligence apparatus built out its capabilities while We The People slept.
Then 9-11 happened, and the intelligence surveillance system was retooled under the Patriot Act. The Legislative Branch came with the big assist. Then Obama came into office, and all the basic tools were in place to fine tune that surveillance and targeting mechanism. So here we are. Enter, Tucker Carlson:
When I was in the Army and after a lot of training becoming a Green Beret I found myself in Vietnam in 1967, we took anti-malaria pills which were an older version of today’s Hydroxychloroquine. Obviously, we did not die from taking it and even today, it’s still taken in the regions where malaria is prevalent. .
In 2020 after the SARS-COVID-2 pandemic started I had just finished reading a book on the 1918 pandemic written by John M. Barry titled “The Great Influenza.” So when the COVID Task Force medical team recommended lock downs to slow the spread and banned the use of Hydroxychloroquine as dangerous I knew something was off and I started do more research on pandemics.
One of the reasons beside what was in the previous paragraph was in my prior research in the mid 90’s about the Vietnam war I was in where I found how badly it was bunged by the Federal Government. So I had a distrust of things governmental from that point on.
Continuing, there was a lot of medical information on pandemics besides the book I just read and every Doctor in that field was saying that lock downs and masks will not work. Most all of those links quickly disappeared. Then the use of Ivermectin was also banded despite being used by Front Line doctors successfully as a prophylactic.
The CDC and NIH claimed that studies showed that neither Hydroxychloroquine nor Ivermectin were of any help in treating the COVID virus. So both were banded from use and Doctors could lose their medical license if they prescribed it.
I was involved in a major project that was outdoors in 2020 which required me to be there and so based on none of what the government was saying was true and I never got the flue I almost never got the annual flu shot. But as a precaution, I did buy a UV/HEPA filter device to circulate the air in by home to kill the virtues, if it got in. While working outside I did not wear a mask and only did so if a place I was going into required it. I was also able to purchase some Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin just in case, I caught the COVID.
Continuing the story, Dr. Fauci was very against the use of Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin as a prophylactic and was a promoter of the use of masks. This made no sense to me. Why would the government be preventing the use of Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin when they both worked if started when the first signs of the COVID started?
The reason was that Dr. Fauci was working with big pharma on a new treatment an mRNA experimental drug and all efforts were to get this approved as quickly as possible so we could stop the pandemic. By running tasks in parallel instead of sequential, the development time was shortened and the first batches of the experimental drug were coming out. And it was quickly made mandatory to get the experimental drug, now called the Jab. Oh and I need to add that that the CDC changed the definition of a Vaccine so they could call the experiments gene therapy a Vaccine.
As the “vaccine” roll out preceded the method used also made no sense. Since by now we knew that it was really only a problem for the elderly or others with existing comorbidity issues like being overweight. Other than those people, a large number of people that got the COVID were sick for a few days and then were fine. Note these people then had “natural” immunity to COVID which is superior to the JAB.
The question now is in 2023 why was this experimental Gene therapy mandated, why were the drug companies given immunity by the federal government, Why were, now well know, problems with the Jab hidden and lastly why were the methods used to try and vaccinate everyone the worst possible method to use according to almost all the world’s top researchers, in this filed, including the inventor of the mRNA process.
We now know that there is a host of problems with the COVID “vaccine” and that these problems are so great, many resulting in death that it are getting hard to hide them. It seems clear to me that “mandating” the use of this mRNA experimental drug is a clear violation of the Nuremberg Code that resulted from the German doctors during WW II experimenting on persons detained by the Nazis. These experiments were such that death of the subject was often the result. The key point was that it was not ethical to force a person to take an experimental drug or any other substance or procedure. The Nuremberg Code was developed and issued in August 1947. However, it wasn’t until much later that it was officially adopted. From Wikipedia we have the following.
However, the Code is considered by some to be the most important document in the history of clinical research ethics, because of its massive influence on global human rights. In the United States, the Code and the related Declaration of Helsinki influenced the drafting of regulations promulgated by the United States Department of Health and Human Services to ensure ethical treatment of human research subjects, known as the Common Rule, which is now codified in Part 46 of Title 45 of the Code of Federal Regulations. These regulations are enforced by Institutional Review Boards (IRBs). In 1966, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights was adopted by the United Nations, and after enough nations had ratified the Covenant, it came into force on 23 March 1976. Article Seven prohibits experiments conducted without the “free consent to medical or scientific experimentation” of the subject. As of September 2019, the Covenant has 173 states parties.
This now brings us to Dr. Fauci, who blocked the use of Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin because he claimed they did not work and were of no help in treating the COVID virus. So both were banded from use and Doctors could lose their medical license if they prescribed it.
The question then is why was this done since both are, generic drugs used all over the world for many things. The normal procedure when there is no treatment for a new illness is for the treating doctors to use their knowledge to try existing drugs to see if they work.
After reading Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s book “The real Anthony Fauci”, I found the reason. The reason was that to use an experimental Drug of any kind on the public, there could not be any other possible treatment available. The mRNA experimental drug was worse than a normal new drug or process it was something that has never been used before on Humans. And on rats, they all died when exposed to the outside environment.
Now since Fauci knew that he couldn’t use the mRNA if there was a treatment so he he had to block the use of Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin with the threat losing you medical license if you did. So given that Fauci knew the mRA should not have been used and especially mandated. That bock of a viable treatment cost the lives of millions of people which are a clear crime against humanity; he probably has more blood on his hands than anyone else that ever lived.
Closing Note
I did eventually get a variant of the SARS-COVID-2 in the spring of 2022, After taking the Ivermectin for 7 days is was gone and there were only a couple of days where I was uncomfortable I was 81 years old at the time.
COMMENT: I know you saved Mercedes making back their $1 billion lost all because they listened to the fake news about how the pound and the dollar would crumble in the face of the euro. I read the 2011 Barron’s article on your forecast. It was OK to publish that when they thought you would be wrong. Where is the follow-up when you proved to be the only one who was correct? The same can be said of the New York Times and especially Bloomberg. It is obvious that they will not report on the success of your forecasts because they are leading society at the direction of the Deep State.
Keep up the good work. We need someone independent in this time of darkening clouds.
JWN
REPLY: Let me explain something. All the hype about Bernie Madoff is also FAKE NEWS. On December 10th, 2008, Madoff’s sons Mark and Andrew covered themselves most likely at their father’s direction, and told authorities that their father had confessed to them that the asset management unit of his firm was a massive Ponzi scheme. They even supposedly told them it was “one big lie”. The next day, agents from the FBI arrested Madoff and charged him with one count of securities fraud. There was no possible way the FBI would arrest someone like that without an independent investigation.
The Securities and Exchange Commission had previously conducted numerous investigations into his business practices. Vere did ANY audit uncover such a massive fraud. It was then on March 12th, 2009, when Bernie Madoff simply pleaded guilty to 11 federal felonies and admitted to turning his wealth management business into a massive Ponzi scheme. He was not even indicted. He pled simply to what is known as an “information” so nothing was even presented to a grand jury. That is UNPRECEDENTED!
The banks all claimed that they had “no idea.” Before he died, Madoff did an interview where the headline was that the Banks had to have known. There is ABSOLUTELY no way that the banks were NOT involved or had no idea. That is legally impossible. As a client of a bank of that size especially, the bank must fill its files with KNOWN YOUR CLIENT rules.
In my case, we had companies set up for each note in Turks & Caicos. The bank actually sent someone down there to audit the legal structure behind every account. There is simply no way a bank can even claim it had no idea. That was a serious RED FLAG that the Madoff case was not what it appeared.
Everyone just skipped over the fact that the SEC conducted multiple audits and found nothing. That included looking at bank accounts and positions on hand. That did NOT add up to a PONZI scheme where you are taking money from one person to pay another which is the actual structure of Social Security. The current generation’s contributions are tasked to pay the previous generation.
Add to that, HSBC, which has been itself indicted for money laundering more than once, stood out as the largest “victim” of Madoff’s scheme – $1.5 billion. HSBC pays countless fines for every scandal they seem to be in the middle of.
In my case, the Bank said they had no idea where the money was after they stole it. How does $1 billion leave a bank without a withdrawal of some sort? Had it not been for my clients standing with me and doing what I told them to do and then sued HSBC, they would have gotten nothing, the government would have claimed I lost it all and the ban was not responsible. The government then put a gag order on me to stop me from helping my clients against the bank! If the bank was not trying to take my client’s money to cover their losses in Russia, then why put a gag order on me if the bank did not do anything wrong?
Then to hide my profits, the receiver handed the notes we issued to HSBC for them to redeem for $606 million pocketing $400 million profit stolen from my company. A former employee bumped into a former HSBC official and he asked what the hell went on. The bankers bluntly told him, the deal offered by the government was too good to pass up. When I asked a NY lawyer why no banker ever is charged or goes to jail, he laughed and said: “You don’t shit where you eat!”
Remember the 1995 collapse of the British Barings Bank because of a “rogue” trader? Nicholas William Leeson was an English former derivatives trader whose claimed fraudulent, “unauthorized and speculative trades” resulted in the 1995 collapse of Barings Bank, the United Kingdom’s oldest merchant bank. Leeson was convicted of financial crime in Singapore court and served over four years in Changi Prison. At the time, I owned a Brokerage House I was asked to bail out by the Japanese government. At our Hong Kong office, Barings wanted to open an account to trade with Leeson in charge.
I knew the corruption of the banks and if the trade went wrong, they would claim he was not authorized. That was the standard operational procedure. Knowing the inside of the industry out, I insisted on a letter from the Board of Directions expressly laying out the credit line for Leeson they requested from my company. I got the letter. So when Leeson supposedly went belly up, guess what. I was quietly paid when everyone else it was said Leeson was a rogue trader.
The New York Post journalist Isabel Vincent who wrote Gilded Lilly, the wife of Edmond Safra, had called me and asked that since I had said that Republic National Bank, Edmond Safra’s, had been illegally trading in my accounts, did I think they were laundering money for the Russian mafia “as they were doing in Madoff’s?” I said I did not know. All I could tell was there were countless errors constantly being put into my accounts and then backed out. At first, I assumed they were “parking trades” in my accounts to use my cash for their margin. Of course, if the “error” was backed out to a different account, they indeed, they were engaging in money laundering.
The court-appointed forensic accountant even wrote to the court about the unprecedented errors in the accounts. The government refused to provide account information to allow them to audit what was going on. The court-appointed counsel, David Cooper, I believe was doing everything he could to help the government cover everything up. The forensic accountant then sent letters to the Judge, and he took no action.
You now have the FTX scandal. You will see that there will NEVER be a trial that would expose all the money laundering where the Democrats had Zelensky, which supposedly needed money to defend his country and fee starving Ukrainians, hand the money to FTX who then happened to be the #2 donor to the Democrats for the midterms. Guess what! Sam Bankman-Fried was charged in the most corrupt court in the nation – the Southern District of New York. The Court of Appeals admitted on page 97 of US v Ziccehtello, that judges are altering transcripts and changing the very words spoken in court. That is 20 years in prison if you or I alter court documents. They do it all the time. When I confronted Judge Richard Owen about this practice, so many people showed up in court to see what would happen. The lawyers said you can’t accuse a federal judge of committing a crime. I said you all say they do it. They responded. Yes, but you cannot accuse them of doing it. The judge got scared and admitted it in public but claim it wasn’t material.
All the press was there AP, New York Times, Bloomberg, NT Post, you name it. NOT a single member of the press reported what took place that day. OMG! Exposing the federal courts corruption? Impossible!
If a case is a high profile, you will NEVER see the truth in the media.
COMMENT: I think fake news is global and it definitely appears to be some sort of international manipulation of society. Here in Germany, it might be worse than there across the pond. We have fake news over COVID, now hiding the vaccine injury crisis. The press has its agenda. I guess they are like the North Korean military. They get free food so they lie and oppress everyone else.
I don’t see this is going to ever change. You are right. We simply have to crash and burn for these people will never report the truth. It always comes down to them against us. You are the legend and you have paid the price for that title.
Best wishes, always.
Hans
PS Dubai may be the only place we can all get together again. Think about it!
As pointed out by Norman Fenton and Martin Neil, The LANCET appears to have lost its reputation for independence and joined the crowd over COVID and fake news. As they pointed out in this article, on May 6th, 2021 “The Lancet published a blatantly flawed study of the effectiveness of the Pfizer covid vaccine on the population of Israel, claiming it was 95% effective.” Then on May 17th, 2021, Fenton and Neil submitted a rapid response 250-word letter explaining why the study was flawed. The LANCET refused to even publish their letter to the editor.
I did not get vaccinated BECAUSE I have worked with governments around the world. I have been called into just about every crisis since 1985 BECAUSE I understand the game, which is all wordsmithing. Once the government began pushing the COVID vaccines and locked down the world, knowing how politics works, I decided to hunker down and refused to get vaccinated for ONE MAJOR REASON! Once the government crossed that line and became authoritarian using COVID, I knew that there would NEVER be any accountability whatsoever. Now that people have been seriously injured by these vaccines, the government will continue to call it a conspiracy theory for they will NEVER admit a mistake or that they were bribed.
I was NEVER anti-Vax. My children got all the normal vaccines. Once in a while, I would take the flu shot. I know someone who thought he was getting a flu shot and they gave him the COVID vaccine and he became seriously ill. A lawyer I know took the vaccine so he could travel, got the blood clots, and now cannot fly. Now as the elite fly to DAVOS, they want only pilots who were NOT vaccinated.
The major medical industry has failed society. My doctor retired and a new younger doctor took over his practice. He asked me if I was vaccinated. I responded resoundingly – NO! He responded GOOD!. I suggest if your doctor just follows the crowd and the government, get someone else.
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
Centinel2012 