Re-Posted from the Canada Free Press By Barry Shaw —— Bio and Archives—April 15, 2020

The biased hypocrisy of the #MeToo Movement was blatantly obvious when Tara Reade stepped forward to complain about being sexually assaulted by Democratic Presidential nominee, Joe Biden.

Result? Total silence.

Remember the MeToo cry “Believe All Women!”

The alleged assault took place in his Senate office in 1993. Reade put her complaint on record at the Senate. Her complaint was ignored.  She also complained about Biden’s assault to friends and family.

It is interesting to compare how the Democrats, their compliant media, and the #MeToo activists responded to this complaint and how they acted in their fiery outrage against Trump nominee, Judge Brett Kavanagh.

Remember the MeToo cry “Believe All Women!” when a false complaint was brought about him over some vague event decades before?

What happened to that slogan when it came to Biden’s accuser? Well, nothing.

The biased shoe, it seems, is on the other foot when a leading Democrat is the abuser.

Lara Reade must go the way of Juanita Broderick, Paula Jones, Kathleen Willey, Gennifer Flowers and all the other women raped or sexually molested by another high profile Democrat, President Bill Clinton.

In the Kavanagh case, the media had a field day attacking him and his family mercilessly.

Biden, on the other hand, is protected by a media that will be rock solid behind his 2020 candidacy.

When unsubstantiated rumors were brought against a college-period Kavanagh, Jason Johnson, the political editor of The Root said on MSNBC, in September 2019, “I never heard of a one-time rapist.”

This TV jerk called Judge Kavanagh a “gang rapist,” based on no evidence whatsoever.

There was no evidence that Kavanagh ever met his accuser at the time and place she mentioned. There is clear evidence of the working relationship between Reade and Biden.

Is Johnson now prepared to go back onto MSNBC and say the same about Joe Biden? I doubt it.

Biden deserves due process, but Lara Reade’s complaint also deserves the same respect and due diligence that was afforded to Christine Blassey Ford.

If that was an essential step in the process of affirming Kavanagh onto the Supreme Court, how much more essential is it to thoroughly investigate charges against a Presidential nominee, Joe Biden, in advance of the November election?

The New York Times led the charge against Brett Kavanagh in large part because of their political bias. Kavanagh was the nominee of President Trump, therefore in their eyes worthy of persecution and prosecution.

Biden’s penchant of sliding up to women and fondling them

This bias clearly warped their coverage against Lara Reade’s complaint against their 2020 champion, Joe Biden.

Their double standard and their botched up job at all levels was truly jaw dropping.

The story of Joe Biden’s impropriety had been brewing for over a week and the NYT had to print something. Lara Reade’s complaint was graphically explicit and required a response.

Part of the NYT’s coverage of the incident on April 12 included a startling sentence.

“The Times found no pattern of sexual misconduct by Mr. Biden, beyond the hugs, kisses and touching that women previously said made them uncomfortable.”

Perhaps inadvertently, the Times has opened up a history of Biden’s penchant of sliding up to women and fondling them.

This leads to the necessity of examining in detail Biden’s strange sexual behavior over the years.

Does America was another Democratic President touching and fondling women?

Where is #MeToo when you need them most? Missing in action.

The big boss of NYT didn’t think it was a factual mistake that Biden fondles women, or worse

This section of the NYT article was removed following a call from Biden’s campaign team, showing clear evidence of media compliance by a news outlet in an election period.

Then the big shoe fell.

NYT Executive Director, Dean Basquet, opened his mouth and put his foot in it.

“I think that the campaign thought that the phrasing was awkward and made it look like there were other instances in which he had been accused of sexual misconduct.”

Then he seemed to emphasize Biden’s strange pathology with women.

“We didn’t think it was a factual mistake. I thought it was an awkward phrasing issue that could be read different ways and that it wasn’t something factual we were correcting.”

The big boss of NYT didn’t think it was a factual mistake that Biden fondles women, or worse.

The Biden election team find it awkward to deal with their clients’  sexual proclivities

This should have been one of the biggest political stories in an election year. It certainly would have been based on the lies that were printed about a Trump non-event with hookers in a Moscow hotel prior to the election four years ago.

But to Basquet, this was “just a different news judgment moment.”

Yes, it was. Basquet’s judgment was to dilute the story at the request of the Biden squad, a courtesy he did not afford Donald Trump in 2016.

The Biden election team find it awkward to deal with their clients’  sexual proclivities.

The double standard is open and amazing. It goes deeper than sexual misconduct.

Biden seems to have gotten away with a history of nepotism with his family’s get rich quick schemes by following or escorting their father/brother/father-in-law around the world and then personally signing multi-million dollar deals in his wake.

Now the media and his party are covering up a history of sexual abuse.

Surely Americans want these issues investigated before they place their vote?

Re-Posted From The Canada Free Press By Judi McLeod —— Bio and Archives—April 14, 2020

Former President Barack Obama formally endorsed Joe Biden – his vice president and running mate through two terms and presidential campaigns – in the looming race against President Trump, stepping off the sidelines after withholding support for any candidate for months. (Fox News, April 14, 2020)

Does any one out there believe that hide-y-hole Obama was “keeping his distance”

“Multiple sources familiar with the situation confirmed to Fox News that an endorsement video from Obama will be released later Tuesday.

“Another source told Fox News, “Stay tuned,” when asked about a looming endorsement for Biden.”

Notice how “multiple sources” and “another source” somehow never get named in the Fox story?

“Obama’s past reluctance to back Biden even as the former vice president came closer to the nomination had raised awkward questions about their relationship, but those close to the former president had suggested he was keeping his distance so as not to meddle in the primary process.” (Fox News)

Does any one out there believe that hide-y-hole Obama was “keeping his distance so as not to meddle in the Democrat primary process”?

Those who do may qualify for keeping the doctor they like, the insurance plan they like and a free phone, to boot.

“A Democratic strategist close to Obama’s inner circle told Fox News last week that “at the beginning of the primary process, President Obama made clear that in order for the Democratic Party to be successful in November, Democratic voters would have to select their nominee.” (Fox News)

“But now that Biden is the presumptive Democratic nominee, Obama is entering the political ring anew.”

How could anyone claim that self-appointed “Resistance” leader Obama is entering the political ring “anew”?

“The source emphasized that the former president made it clear at the start of the primary process that once it was over, he would “campaign vigorously in the general election.” (Fox News)

“The expected video comes a day after Sen. Bernie Sanders, who was Biden’s last remaining primary rival until he dropped out last week, officially endorsed the former vice president.

“The backing by Sanders—the democratic socialist firebrand from Vermont—will help Biden as he tries to win over Sanders’ legions of younger and progressive supporters.

Fox News describes Commie Sanders as “the democratic socialist firebrand from Vermont

Fox News describes Commie Sanders as “the democratic socialist firebrand from Vermont”!

“Fox News confirmed recently that Obama and Biden have held several conversations in the past couple of weeks. And Biden gave details on one of those conversations – telling donors at a virtual fundraiser earlier this month that he had recently asked his old boss for advice on choosing a running mate. (Fox News)

“So I called President Obama, not as to who but how soon you have to start,” the former vice president shared.

“The backing by Obama will also help Biden as he tries to unite a fractious party, as he prepares to challenge Trump in the general election. According to most recent polls of the former president, Obama remains extremely popular among Democrats.

“Obama, Biden, Sanders, and Democratic Party leaders are all trying to avoid a repeat of the 2016 election, when Sanders endorsed nominee Hillary Clinton in July of that year after a long and bitter primary battle. But plenty of his supporters either stood on the sidelines or voted for a different candidate in November, helping Trump to upset Clinton and win the White House.

Barack Obama is not as the Fox story suggests “returning” to political life, because the truth is he never left it

“Now that the primary season is over, President Obama can play the role of unifier-in-chief within the Democratic Party,” said Mo Elleithee, the founding executive director of Georgetown University’s Institute of Politics and Public Service and a Fox News contributor.

“Elleithee, a senior spokesman for Hillary Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign who later served as communications director for the Democratic National Committee, said that Obama’s also “an important voice during these tumultuous times. As polling shows that President Trump’s handling of this crisis is sliding, President Obama can help make the case for Joe Biden’s very different approach.”

DNC stalwarts as Fox News contributors remain all over election coverage at the the once fair and balanced Fox News.

First came two-time former DNC chair Donna Brazile.  Now it’s Mo Elleithee.

Barack Obama is not as the Fox story suggests “returning” to political life, because the truth is he never left it.

The coming release of the ex-president’s official Biden endorsement video coincides with Michelle Obama throwing her ‘non-partisan’  When We All Vote initiative behind Democrat legislation seeking to expand access to mail-in voting—and early voting amid the coronavirus outbreak in the U.S.

“Americans should never have to choose between making their voices heard and keeping themselves and their families safe,” Obama said in a statement. “Expanding access to vote-by-mail, online voter registration and early voting are critical steps for this moment—and they’re long overdue.” (CNN, April 13, 2020)

We don’t yet know where the virus came from, how far it will go, but we certainly know who it’s being used against

“The effort backed by the former first lady comes as Democrats increase their calls for states to expand mail-in and early voting, while some Republicans have echoed President Donald Trump’s opposition to expanding the practice amid the coronavirus pandemic. The crisis has caused scores of large gatherings to be canceled or postponed, including primary contests, several of which have been pushed into the summer.

“As the calls have increased, Trump has repeatedly dismissed the notion of a nationwide vote-by-mail system and falsely claimed that mail-in voting is the source of widespread voter fraud.

Are Doctors Tony Fauci and Deborah Birx coronavirus “mitigation” charts really helping to mitigate a Trump 2020 victory to a Democrat one?

We don’t yet know where the virus came from, how far it will go, but we certainly know who it’s being used against.

While the president is trashed daily by the Democrats, Hollywood, the media including the White House Press Corps, both Obamas, via Fox News are working to steal Election 2020.

Re-Posted from the Canada Free Press By Cliff Kincaid —— Bio and Archives—April 14, 2020

With food shortages looming, President Trump is moving to reopen the U.S. economy. This has to be done, and anybody who wants America to survive as a superpower, rather than a banana republic, knows it.

Trump realizes that if the advice of the health “experts” is followed to its logical conclusion, bananas won’t even be available on our dinner tables. The “experts” want to eradicate a disease even if it means eradicating the people who might get it. That is unacceptable. America can do better.

In the name of saving the nation from coronavirus, the health “experts” have jeopardized our food supply, as one of the largest pork processing facilities in the U.S., representing four to five percent of U.S. pork production, has closed in South Dakota.

Kenneth M. Sullivan, president and chief executive officer, for Smithfield Foods, said,

“The closure of this facility, combined with a growing list of other protein plants that have shuttered across our industry, is pushing our country perilously close to the edge in terms of our meat supply. It is impossible to keep our grocery stores stocked if our plants are not running. These facility closures will also have severe, perhaps disastrous, repercussions for many in the supply chain, first and foremost our nation’s livestock farmers. These farmers have nowhere to send their animals.”

Let’s face it: the lockdown never really made sense, as food production and supplies had to continue for the sake of the many. Now, even that is in jeopardy, which is why Trump has to act.

Under the scenario being pushed by the liberal media opponents of Trump, the economy will be destroyed to the point where people will be dying of starvation rather than the virus. In fact, America may face the worst of two bad options – more deaths from the virus, and more deaths from food shortages and starvation.

In the fact of this threat, which New York Governor Andrew Cuomo understands, he assembled a group of governors to reopen their economies on their terms. But that’s not good enough. There has to be a plan for the entire nation.

Trump’s bold action is bad news for Trump’s opponents in the Democratic Party, who are counting on chaos to elect Joe Biden in November. Left-wing writer Jeff Faux fears that Trump will run for reelection “as champion of the people’s need to get back to work” while Democrats will be cast as obstructionists.

Faux, a Trump critic and well-known writer on economics, understands that Trump has the upper hand against the presumed Democratic Party nominee Joe Biden, whose “age is showing,” has “little charisma, often misspeaks and is not a strong debater.” In short, Biden will look weak, and Trump will look strong.

Appropriately enough, the Jeff Faux piece appears in a publication called “The Globalist.” From the start, Trump has threatened the global dreams of the “progressives” that are turning into nightmares for the American people. Their coddling and buildup of China has put us in this precarious position.

America’s existence as a nation based on the concept of economic and political freedom hangs in the balance

The president declared at his Monday briefing that he could and would, if necessary, override state and local officials who stand in the way of reopening America and keeping food on the dinner table. The media acted alarmed by the prospect that Trump would use the same kind of executive authority used in the past by such presidents as Abraham Lincoln and FDR. But these are extraordinary times and America’s existence as a nation based on the concept of economic and political freedom hangs in the balance.

Trump promised to provide legal justification for his actions, but it is not really necessary. A famous book in political science, Constitutional Dictatorship by Clinton Rossiter, provides the framework. The word “dictatorship” sounds ominous, but the fact is that, under national emergency declarations, the president has the complete and total authority to save the nation from an external or internal threat. Trump has to act and he knows it. He has all the emergency powers he needs. They were given to him by Congress.

Rossiter, an American historian and political scientist at Cornell University, was an acknowledged expert on the Constitution who wrote 20 books. Lincoln used emergency powers to win the Civil War and FDR used them to wage World War II and rebuild America’s industrial capacity.

We are today involved in our own civil war

We are today involved in our own civil war, in terms of a polarized electorate, but the real danger, as Trump knows, is that the source of the coronavirus, Communist China, stands to gain geopolitically if America goes down the drain.

At the Monday briefing, crazed liberal reporters confronted Trump, with one asking what he was doing about China, if indeed China had covered-up the nature of the virus when it emerged last year. Everybody knows that China lies and cheats, and that it did so in this case, using the U.N.’s World Health Organization as a front.

Trump replied that he didn’t have to tell her, and that she would be the last to know anyway. The reply was an indication that things are happening behind-the-scenes that many of us don’t know about. For obvious reasons, Trump will not discuss publicly at this time what has to be done about the China threat. The immediate need is to save the Republic.

We do know the situation is dire and the president is acting to avert a catastrophe.

Re-Posted from the Canada Free Press By Jon Rappoport —— Bio and Archives—April 14, 2020

Ihave already written about the currency reset and other features of a technocratic future waiting in the wings. —-New levels of visible surveillance, social credit scores, universal guaranteed income, Internet of Things, energy-use quotas, smart cities.

—-Events can move in several directions, going forward.  In this article, I explore one of those directions.

The occasion is this fake pandemic; the big hammer is the vaccine against the phony COVID.

DNA vaccine: PERMANENTLY alter the genetic makeup of the recipient

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)

As Fauci mentioned a couple of months ago, it could be a DNA vaccine—-new technology—-which means it is really gene therapy.  Synthesized genes are injected into the body.  They purportedly set up immunity.  Actually, they PERMANENTLY alter the genetic makeup of the recipient.

As you can imagine, this creates the opportunity to put many different genes into humans.  To try to invent “new humans.”

The so-called immunity certificates Fauci is now talking about?  They would be issued to people who test positive on the new antibody tests for COVID-19—-which is an interesting turnaround, because, since 1984, positive tests results have generally been taken to mean “infected.”  Why the shift?

Because there is a need for these immunity certificates—-as an INTRO to condition the population to an IDEA.

If and when the COVID vaccine arrives, the certificates would be used to signify immunity for all those who take the shot.

It would function as a license.  Your passport into the Brave New World.  You’re “immune,” so you’re allowed to move out of fear mode.  And circulate and travel and enter schools…

For DNA vaccines, the reference is the New York Times, 3/15/15, “Protection Without a Vaccine.” It describes the frontier of research. Here are key quotes that illustrate the use of synthetic genes to “protect against disease,” while changing the genetic makeup of humans. This is not science fiction:

“By delivering synthetic genes into the muscles of the [experimental] monkeys, the scientists are essentially re-engineering the animals to resist disease.”

“‘The sky’s the limit,’ said Michael Farzan, an immunologist at Scripps and lead author of the new study.”

“The first human trial based on this strategy – called immunoprophylaxis by gene transfer, or I.G.T. – is underway, and several new ones are planned.”  [That was five years ago.]

“I.G.T. is altogether different from traditional vaccination. It is instead a form of gene therapy. Scientists isolate the genes that produce powerful antibodies against certain diseases and then synthesize artificial versions. The genes are placed into viruses and injected into human tissue, usually muscle.”

Synthetic gene is incorporated into the recipient’s own DNA

Here is the punchline:

“The viruses invade human cells with their DNA payloads, and the synthetic gene is incorporated into the recipient’s own DNA. If all goes well, the new genes instruct the cells to begin manufacturing powerful antibodies.”

Read that again: “the synthetic gene is incorporated into the recipient’s own DNA.”

Alteration of the human genetic makeup.

Not just a “visit.” Permanent residence.

The Times article taps Dr. David Baltimore for an opinion:

“Still, Dr. Baltimore says that he envisions that some people might be leery of a vaccination strategy that means altering their own DNA, even if it prevents a potentially fatal disease.”

Yes, some people might be leery. If they have two or three working brain cells.

New CRISPR gene-editing: the extreme dangers

This is genetic roulette with a loaded gun.

And the further implications are clear.  Vaccines can be used as a cover for the injections of any and all genes, whose actual purpose is unannounced.

The vaccine masters have a problem.  They know their genetic technology is far from perfect. Plans to re-engineer the human race are not a simple one two three.

For example, consider the latest and greatest genetic tool, called CRISPR.

Here is a backgrounder I wrote a year ago.

New CRISPR gene-editing: the extreme dangers

Technologynetworks[dot]com (6/26/17):

“CRISPR gene editing is taking biomedical research by storm. Providing the ultimate toolbox for genetic manipulation, many new applications for this technology are now being investigated and established. CRISPR systems are already delivering superior genetic models for fundamental disease research, drug screening and therapy development, rapid diagnostics, in vivo editing and correction of heritable conditions and now the first human CRISPR clinical trials.”

All hail.

It’s called CRISPR, a much faster, more precise, and cheaper technique for editing genes.  Researchers are in love with it.  You can find hundreds of articles and studies fawning over the innovation.

At phys[dot]org, however, we have this, ahem, warning note (5/29/17):

”…a new study published in Nature Methods has found that the gene-editing technology can introduce hundreds of unintended mutations into the genome.”

Oops.

“In the new study, the researchers sequenced the entire genome of mice that had undergone CRISPR gene editing in the team’s previous study and looked for all mutations, including those that only altered a single nucleotide.”

“The researchers determined that CRISPR had successfully corrected a gene that causes blindness, but Kellie Schaefer, a PhD student in the lab of Vinit Mahajan, MD, PhD, associate professor of ophthalmology at Stanford University, and co-author of the study, found that the genomes of two independent gene therapy recipients [mice] HAD SUSTAINED MORE THAN 1500 SINGLE-NUCLEOTIDE MUTATIONS AND MORE THAN 100 LARGER [GENE] DELETIONS AND INSERTIONS. None of these DNA mutations were predicted by computer algorithms that are widely used by researchers to look for off-target effects.”  (Emphasis is mine.)

“‘Researchers who aren’t using whole genome sequencing to find off-target effects may be missing potentially important mutations,’ Dr. Tsang says.  ‘Even a single nucleotide change can have a huge impact’.”

Genetic roulette is alive and well

Genetic roulette is alive and well.

Spin the wheel, see what numbers come up.  Good effects, bad effects, who knows?  Step right up and take your chances.

Of course, researchers who admit these tremendous problems remain optimistic.  They look forward to “refining the method.”  That’s a cover for: “we really don’t know what we’re doing right now.”

Unfortunately, much science operates in this fashion.  Launch a new technology, and turn a blind eye to the consequences.  For example, place mercury, a devastating neurotoxin, in vaccines.  What harm could result—-aside from the destruction of children’s brains.

Here is more gushing PR, otherwise known as throwing stuff at the wall and seeing what sticks: “There are weekly press releases and updates on new advances [in CRISPR] and discoveries made possible with this technology; the first evidence is now emerging that CRISPR-Cas9 could provide cures for major diseases including cancers and devastating human viruses such as HIV-1.” (technologynetworks[dot]com)

The train has left the station.

Taking a stand against mandatory vaccines—-any and all vaccines—-is more important than ever

And just in case you think only the most careful and competent leading lights of the genetic research community would be permitted to get within a mile of CRISPR, here is more from technologynetworks[dot]com:

“CRISPR-Cas9 systems, tools and basic methodology are very accessible as ready to go toolkits that anyone with lab space and an idea can pick up and start working with…In response to a growing need, companies such as Desktop Genetics have developed open access software to accelerate CRISPR experimentation and analysis.”

That’s good to know.  “Anyone with lab space and an idea” can jump on board and have at it.

Do your own cross breeding of the pregnant phrases, “What could possibly go wrong,” and “Nothing to see here, move along,” and you’ve summarized the situation.

“They say they cured my anemia, but now I turn green and purple and I keep falling down.”

If all this isn’t enough to make you see the dangers of CRISPR, consider this statement about engineering human immune cells (T-cells) in a “safer” way.  From statnews[dot]com (June 23, 2013):

“The experiment would alter the immune system’s T cells only after they’re removed from a patient. That gives scientists the chance to screen the CRISPR’d cells to make sure only the three intended genes, all involved in making T cells find and destroy tumor cells, are altered. But after those T cells are infused back into a patient to fight melanoma, sarcoma, or myeloma, the CRISPR system can keep editing DNA, and tracking such edits becomes like following a polar bear in a snowstorm.”

Not very comforting.  Once set in motion, even under the most protected and limited conditions, CRISPR can keep on working, scrambling genes in unknown ways.

So…when it comes to DNA vaccines, aka gene therapy, a plan to precisely re-engineer humans could quite easily descend into uncontrolled chaos.

And the controllers and elite funders of the vaccine know that.

What to do?

With the global population as their guinea pigs, perhaps they would start small.  Introduce the slightest possible gene-alteration, stand back and see what happens.  Try out a gene that would ordinarily—-hopefully—-achieve next to nothing.  Try to measure the results.

Viewed from one angle, the whole fake epidemic is a set-up for the vaccine, and for mandatory vaccines.

I have written about the special exemption from liability recently issued by the US Dept. of Health and Human Services.  Basically, anyone associated with pharmaceutical strategies undertaken “against the coronavirus” cannot be sued, regardless of “adverse effects” of medicines or vaccines.

Taking a stand against mandatory vaccines—-any and all vaccines—-is more important than ever.