Tonight President Donald Trump is holding a Great American Comeback Rally and peaceful protest at AvFlight Harrisburg in Middletown, PA. The anticipated start time is 7:00pm ET [Livestream Links Below]
Trump Campaign Livestream – RSBN Livestream Link – Fox News Livestream Link
.
.
“Apart from matters of war and peace, the nomination of a Supreme Court justice is the most important decision an American President can make.” – President Donald J. Trump
THE RIGHT CHOICE FOR THE COURT: Judge Amy Coney Barrett will serve the American people with honor and distinction on the Supreme Court.
* Judge Barrett’s extensive experience as a professor and litigator, record of academic success, and outstanding judicial record make her an excellent choice to serve on the Supreme Court.
+ Judge Barrett is currently serving the American people on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals.
* Judge Barrett has demonstrated a steadfast dedication to upholding the Constitution as written, and not legislating from the bench.
+ Judge Barrett’s excellent judicial record shows she will protect the rights of Americans and defend the rule of law.
* Judge Barrett’s character and work ethic have earned her awards and bipartisan praise from the legal community.
+ Judge Barrett’s colleagues at Notre Dame Law School signed a letter supporting her 2017 nomination, calling her “a model of the fair, impartial and sympathetic judge.”
+ In 2017, a bipartisan group of law professors – including professors from Harvard and Stanford and other law schools around the country – urged the Senate Judiciary Committee to confirm Judge Barrett to the Seventh Circuit, describing her work as “rigorous, fair-minded, respectful, and constructive.”
+ The American Bar Association rated Judge Barrett as “well qualified” in 2017.
EXCEPTIONAL QUALIFICATIONS: Judge Amy Coney Barrett brings a wealth of experience from her time in private practice, academia, and public service.
* Since 2017, Judge Barrett has served on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit after she was nominated by President Trump and confirmed on a bipartisan vote.
* Judge Barrett was appointed by Chief Justice John Roberts to sit on the Advisory Committee on Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, where she served from 2010 to 2016.
* After graduating from law school, Judge Barrett clerked for D.C. Circuit Judge Laurence Silberman and for Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.
* Judge Barrett practiced both trial and appellate litigation in Washington, D.C. at Miller, Cassidy, Larroca, & Lewin, and at Baker Botts.
* Judge Barrett worked for more than 15 years in academia, shaping the next generation of legal minds and supporting the professional development of her students.
PROVEN RECORD OF SUCCESS: Judge Amy Coney Barrett has received numerous awards as a result of her excellence as a legal scholar and professor.
* Judge Barrett graduated summa cum laude from Notre Dame Law School and received the Hoynes Prize for achieving the best record in scholarship, deportment, and achievement.
+ At Rhodes College, Judge Barrett graduated with multiple highly respected honors, including induction into Phi Beta Kappa.
* At Notre Dame Law School, she received the John M. Olin Fellowship for aspiring academics and earned a tenure-track faculty position.
+ Judge Barrett was later awarded the Diane & M.O. Miller, II Research Chair in Law.
* Three graduating classes at Notre Dame Law have selected Judge Barrett as the “Distinguished Professor of the Year.”
* Judge Barrett served as a Visiting Associate Professor of Law at the University of Virginia Law School.
* Judge Barrett’s scholarly work has been published in several prominent journals, including the Columbia Law Review, Virginia Law Review, and Texas Law Review.
Tonight at 5:00pm President Trump is scheduled to announce his pick to fill a vacancy on the Supreme Court following the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Many media outlets are reporting the selection will be Amy Coney Barrett.
UPDATE: WHITE HOUSE – Today, President Donald J. Trump announced his intent to nominate Judge Amy Coney Barrett of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit to fill the Supreme Court vacancy created by the passing of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
Judge Barrett has served as a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit since 2017. Before becoming a judge, she was the Diane and M.O. Miller, II Research Chair in Law and Professor of Law at Notre Dame Law School, where her scholarship focused on constitutional and statutory interpretation and the Federal courts. Judge Barrett has also served as a Visiting Associate Professor of Law at the University of Virginia Law School and the John M. Olin Fellow in Law at George Washington University Law School.
Earlier in her career, she practiced at the prestigious law firms Miller, Cassidy, Larroca & Lewin LLP and Baker Botts LLP. Judge Barrett clerked on the Supreme Court for Justice Antonin Scalia and for Judge Laurence H. Silberman on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. She is a magna cum laude graduate of Rhodes College in Tennessee and a summa cum laude graduate of Notre Dame Law School, where she graduated first in her class. Judge Barrett is known for her keen intellect, piercing legal analysis, and generous spirit. Judge Barrett lives in Indiana with her husband Jesse and their seven children.
White House Livestream – CSPAN Livestream – Fox News Livestream
.
.
.
Arriving at the third state in 12 hours President Donald Trump holds a Great American Comeback rally and peaceful protest at Newport News/Williamsburg International Airport in Newport News, VA. Anticipated Start Time 9:00pm ET. [Livestream Links Below]
Donald Trump Campaign Livestream – RSBN Livestream – Fox News Livestream
.
.
Florida Governor Ron DeSantis has moved the entire state into phase three of the COVID-19 recovery plan. All restrictions against restaurants and businesses are removed by executive order [HERE] and all local mask ordinances are nullified by the same order.
♦ No COVID ordinance may forbid or impede any business from operating.
♦ No COVID ordinance may forbid restaurants to operate below 50% capacity. Any local ordinances against these operational thresholds are nullified.
♦ No local mask ordinances shall carry any weight of enforcement.
♦ No COVID Fines or Penalties may be applied toward any individual or business operating in the State of Florida. (executive order)
Departing Florida, President Trump delivers remarks on ‘Black Economic Empowerment: The Platinum Plan’ in Atlanta, Georgia. The speech is ongoing.
[Video and Transcript to Follow]
.
.
President Trump has said he will announce his nominee for the supreme court tomorrow at 5:00pm. Chief of Staff Mark Meadows appears on Fox News this morning to discuss the anticipated announcement and the predictable political response from the leftists.
COVID-19’s second wave will fail worse than the first. Politicians will use it to justify further tyranny now, but as the second wave recedes it will leave fully exposed the dark heart of evil that runs our lives. Our “leaders” will eventually rue the day they embraced totalitarianism.
If the answer to the title question is yes, the coming “second wave” is an “unexpected consequence” of the lockdown as we were told we’d be “safe” if we agreed to an aggressive response that included shutting schools, parks, and businesses down, quarantining the healthy, and following some sketchy safety guidelines.
We now know beyond any reasonable doubt that the original COVID-19 models were critically flawed, producing alarming projections at odds with reality. That panicked alarm, not the ignored reality, is what spread across the globe like wildfire, and in doing so created the “need” for a strong political response explicitly designed to “save” us.
The politicians who swallowed the COVID Kool aid, which is to say, all of them, leapt into action with liberty shredding decisions to shut down this, lock down that, and coerce abeyance with idiotic “safety” guidelines. Putting on a mask to enter a restaurant only to pull it off at the table, for example, makes no logical sense. It obviously isn’t about safety, which means it must be about the rule, or more specifically, the right to enforce the silly rule.
The entire political response—every rule, regulation, law, mandate, and guideline—was designed to save us from a false perception, not the underlying reality of a greater than 99.9% survival rate. Building solutions based on seriously bad information will always lead to “unexpected” consequences because the problem being solved doesn’t exist. This ignorance ensures policy failure, essentially guaranteeing harsh, negative consequences for us all.
If you prefer images, picture a surgeon removing the wrong limb as an example of bad information driving negative consequences.
It is important to note that many of the first wave lockdown consequences were fully expected, and because of their ferocious impact, were initially sold as a short term, temporary solution. The politicians knew locking everything down would lead to massive job losses, personal and business bankruptcies, misdirected taxpayer resources, a loss of health services, which is a real health crisis, and a gross violation of civil liberties. They knew their decisions would hurt, yet they proceeded without hesitation. They knew then, and they know even better now. And yet?
The media’s second wave reporting has focused heavily on the recent rise in “number of cases” across the country, stoking fears on the assumption of a direct, causal relationship between cases and deaths. This thinking makes sense on the surface as deaths quickly followed the rise in first wave cases, but this case-death correlation doesn’t show up in the second wave statistics, an indicator the virus is struggling to find viable victims.
This hasn’t slowed the media’s frantic fear mongering in the slightest, and they continue to press the idea that further lockdown measures are a political necessity because we face another wave of viral massacre. However, if the second wave rise in cases is an “unexpected” consequence of the first’s mistaken lockdown, something that shouldn’t have occurred, then its value to the decision-making process is also suspect and should be reviewed.
So, is there any evidence that indicates the “second wave” is a negative consequence of misguided “first wave” lockdown policies?
The first two charts compare Daily COVID-19 Deaths between lockdown UK and non-lockdown Sweden, which allows us to explore the impact UK lockdown policies had on deaths. The second two charts add the number of daily cases into the mix, allowing us to evaluate the relationship between cases and deaths for the UK and Sweden in both the first and second waves.
Although the UK and Sweden took different routes, the similarity between the lockdown and non-lockdown death curves is apparent, as is the inference that lockdowns had little effect on the lethality of the virus.
Now, let’s take a peek at the Daily Case numbers.
There is a substantial difference in the Daily Case curves between the UK and Sweden, suggesting that although lockdown policies have little impact on daily deaths, they do have a significant effect on how the virus spreads.
While Sweden’s decision to remain open delayed the peak of their first wave Daily Cases curve, the chart shows deaths peaked and began dropping long before the virus finished spreading at its quickest. The chart shows Sweden’s second wave arrived and departed between August and September without causing a respective rise in deaths. In fact, the Daily Death curve shows no upward bounce at all.
The UK’s Daily Cases, strangely enough, began climbing after their summer mask mandate. However, the “expected” rise in Daily Deaths failed to materialize.
So,
Generally speaking, the purpose of “News” is to inform. It may enhance the value of that information by adding context related analyses but by and large, News occurs after the act has happened and does its best to bring perceptions in line with reality.
Conversely, because Fake News eschews reality, it must lead with a lie of desire rather than follow the truth of events. Its success is determined by how well it is able to convince people to believe things that aren’t true, such as COVID-19 being the worst viral bug since the early 1900s, and then exploiting that belief to force political action, which then “legitimizes” the Fake claim and fuels the next News cycle. From that point there is only one acceptable direction: Forward!
Belief is key, because once set it automatically protects itself by immediately rejecting contradictory facts and figures that would destroy it. How else can we rationalize mask mandates for populations with survival rates over 99.99%, like the 8 provinces not named Quebec and Ontario? How does the call to shut down schools and mask-up children comport with this report showing zero deaths, none, out of over 48,000 cases in US Universities?
The logical disconnect is obvious, but it still isn’t enough to unseat the Fake belief “we’re all gonna die”. This leaves us fearful and exploitable. Share some COVID-19 truths with a masker then sit back and watch. You will often see the alarm grow in their eyes as the cognitive dissonance sets in. Unfortunately, that alarm is typically silenced by rejecting the painful truth and ending the discussion.
Why are western societies across the globe teetering on the brink of totalitarian terror? Because Fake News, evil as it is, works! We either eliminate it from our lives or it will continue to eliminate freedom from ours.
The world really is in an existential battle between good and evil. The rioting, lockdowns, and hatred roiling the globe are not signs of a revolution so much as they are panicked signals the corrupt cabal running things is being systematically exposed. They will get uglier.
The good news? If Trump wins, they won’t be able to stop that great awakening from spreading. Nor will they escape accountability.
PART ONE: THE FAILURE
Peter Doshi, associate editor of the medical journal BMJ, and Eric Topol, Scripps Research professor of molecular medicine, have written a devastating NY Times opinion piece about the ongoing COVID vaccine clinical trials.
They expose the fatal flaw in the large Pfizer, AstraZeneca, and Moderna trials.
September 22, the Times: “These Coronavirus Trials Don’t Answer the One Question We Need to Know”:
“If you were to approve a coronavirus vaccine, would you approve one that you only knew protected people only from the most mild form of Covid-19, or one that would prevent its serious complications?”
“The answer is obvious. You would want to protect against the worst cases.”
“But that’s not how the companies testing three of the leading coronavirus vaccine candidates, Moderna, Pfizer and AstraZeneca, whose U.S. trial is on hold, are approaching the problem.”
“According to the protocols for their studies, which they released late last week, a vaccine could meet the companies’ benchmark for success if it lowered the risk of mild Covid-19, but was never shown to reduce moderate or severe forms of the disease, or the risk of hospitalization, admissions to the intensive care unit or death.”
“To say a vaccine works should mean that most people no longer run the risk of getting seriously sick. That’s not what these trials will determine.”
This means these clinical trials are dead in the water.
(Read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed)
The trials are designed to show effectiveness in preventing mild cases of COVID, which nobody should care about, because mild cases naturally run their course and cause no harm. THERE IS NO NEED FOR A VACCINE THAT PREVENTS MILD CASES.
Now let’s go deeper. Read the next section from the Times piece, and then I’ll make comments.
“The Moderna and AstraZeneca studies will involve about 30,000 participants each; Pfizer’s will have 44,000. Half the participants will receive two doses of vaccines separated by three or four weeks, and the other half will receive saltwater placebo shots. The final determination of efficacy will occur after 150 to 160 participants develop Covid-19…”
Here’s how it works. The vaccine companies are looking for a total of 150 (mild) COVID cases to occur, combined, in the two groups; those receiving the placebo and those receiving the vaccine. How would that happen? The researchers believe ‘the coronavirus is spreading everywhere and it will pounce on some of the volunteers in the clinical trial.’
Let’s say that, during the trial, 100 people receiving the placebo develop mild COVID-19, and only 50 people receiving the vaccine develop mild COVID.
The vaccine companies would say, ‘We just proved the vaccine is 50% effective in preventing COVID, and that’s all we need to do, in order to win authorization from the FDA. Release the vaccine. Inject the world.’
The irrelevant outcomes for 150 people equal ‘let’s shoot up seven billion people.’ That’s staggering.
But it gets even worse. The magic number of 150 COVID cases? How is a COVID case defined? The authors of the Times piece have the answer:
“In the Moderna and Pfizer trials, even a mild case of Covid-19 – for instance, a cough plus a positive lab test – would qualify and muddy the results. AstraZeneca is slightly more stringent but would still count mild symptoms like a cough plus fever as a case.”
But wait. The NY Times itself recently published an article stating that up to 90% of US COVID cases could very well be false positives—-in other words, not cases at all. Why? Because the diagnostic PCR test, as it is performed by many labs, is too sensitive. It registers ‘positive for COVID’ when it shouldn’t.
So, in these vaccine clinical trials, the whole process of determining that ‘150 people developed COVID-19’ is completely unreliable, useless, absurd, and nonsensical.
Other than that, the clinical trials are perfect. Yes, perfectly ridiculous.
There is much more in the Times opinion piece, but I’ll leave it there.
“So the magic number is 150? That’s the number that will decide the immediate fate of the planet?”
“Of course.”
“And these 150 people, who you say develop COVID-19…you really can’t confirm that because the definition of a COVID case is so vague and the PCR test is so unreliable.”
“Correct.”
“And come to think of it, the people receiving the vaccine in the clinical trials could develop symptoms indistinguishable from COVID-19, as a result of the effects of the vaccine.”
“Yes, that’s right.”
“But you’re very confident in the success of the vaccine.”
“Indeed.”
“Why?”
“I have to be confident. If we’re exposed as incompetent frauds, our bottom line will take a huge hit.”
“Thank you, sir. And that’s tonight’s news. Make sure you take the vaccine, everyone. It’s vital. This is Fred J Clown, for CBS-NBC-ABC-CNN-FOX-PBS-AP-Reuters and all official news sources East, West, North, and South. The News, brought to you by Venom-X-2, a medicine that has only 463 adverse effects. Ask your doctor if Venom is right for you.”
Now I’m going to go over the vital information again, but this time I’m going to show you how…
The vaccine companies can use the fatal flaw in their protocol design to…
Actually win approval of their COVID vaccine.
Stick with me. This is big.
Only 150 people are needed to make the major clinical trials of a COVID vaccine look like a success.
Out of 30,000 volunteers in a trial, researchers are waiting for 150 people to “come down with COVID-19.” MILD cases. They assume this will happen because they believe the coronavirus is everywhere, and it’ll infect their volunteers.
Of course, their definition of a mild case of COVID-19 is meaningless. Cough plus fever, and a positive PCR test. The test spits out false positives like a rigged slot machine, and the visible symptoms could result from flu, polluted air, or too many candy bars.
Nevertheless, the researchers are waiting for a total of 150 people to “catch a mild case of COVID.” When that number is reached, everything stops.
Now comes the big moment. How many of those 150 COVID cases occurred in the group that received the vaccine, and how many in the group that received the placebo shot of salt water?
Let’s say only 50 COVID cases occurred in the vaccine group, and 100 in the placebo group. The researchers pop champagne corks. They say, “Look, the vaccine is 50% effective at preventing COVID, and that’s all we need to win authorization from the FDA.”
BUT suppose 70 cases occurred in the vaccine group and 80 in the placebo group? No good. No good at all. No way to call the vaccine effective.
Now comes the “reshaping of the data.”
HERE WE GO.
The researchers say, “Wait. Thirty of the COVID cases in the vaccine group were REALLY just adverse reactions to the vaccine. They weren’t cases of COVID. You see, the vaccine can cause symptoms that are indistinguishable from mild COVID. Cough, fever, chills. ACTUALLY, there were only 40 cases of COVID in the vaccine group. Half as many as in the placebo group. The vaccine IS 50% effective. We don’t really need to wait until we have a total of 150 COVID cases. We’re good. We’re golden. We can get authorization from the FDA right now to shoot up everybody in America!”
Vaccine manufacturers HAVE KNOWN ALL ALONG that they could pull this trick.
Why leave things to chance?
Why risk a few hundred billion dollars of profit on a random distribution of mild COVID cases among the volunteers in their clinical trials?
There is yet a further devious twist. The New York Times article I just analyzed torpedoed the vaccine manufacturers for designing their trial protocols to prevent MILD cases of COVID. Why?
Because no one needs a vaccine that can do that. Mild cases are not a problem or a threat. They cure themselves quickly. No vaccine is necessary in the first place.
BUT the definition of a mild COVID case is EXACTLY what the vaccine manufacturers needed. It enabled them to hatch a plan, to make sure they didn’t fail.
They could pawn off a MILD case of COVID on a vaccine reaction. They could fake that without causing ripples. The FDA would say, “The vaccine reactions aren’t serious. All right, no problem. We’ll approve this vaccine for emergency use.”
However…If the manufacturers designed their clinical trial protocol to prevent serious cases of COVID, they would be waiting to see 150 cases of really sick people to occur. That might never happen.
If it did happen, and the manufacturers had to pull their devious switcheroo trick and blame the vaccine for some of these SERIOUS cases…
They would have to tell the FDA that their vaccine was causing life-threatening pneumonia; and the FDA, under a lot of scrutiny these days, would find it very difficult to overlook that.
FDA: “We can’t approve this vaccine. It could cause a few million cases of dire pneumonia…”
The vaccine companies didn’t make a titanic stupid mistake in their protocol design. In gearing the protocol to prevent MILD COVID cases, they did what they did on purpose. It allows them to “reshape their data” and win FDA approval for their vaccine.
These companies have no intention of failing, starting over, and spending a year recruiting 30,000 new volunteers. They want success and money now. They want to win the race.
And they could win, if the truth isn’t known and shared widely.
(The link to this article posted on my blog is here.)
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!
De Oppresso Liber
A group of Americans united by our commitment to Freedom, Constitutional Governance, and Civic Duty.
Share the truth at whatever cost.
De Oppresso Liber
Uncensored updates on world events, economics, the environment and medicine
De Oppresso Liber
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
Australia's Front Line | Since 2011
See what War is like and how it affects our Warriors
Nwo News, End Time, Deep State, World News, No Fake News
De Oppresso Liber
Politics | Talk | Opinion - Contact Info: stellasplace@wowway.com
Exposition and Encouragement
The Physician Wellness Movement and Illegitimate Authority: The Need for Revolt and Reconstruction
Real Estate Lending
