thelibertybeacon--2020-07-11--Has the NHS been saved or emasculated?

Has the NHS been saved or emasculated?

As you will see , the following statement is anonymous for very good reasons .
Anonymous statements are hard , of course , to verify but this one has sufficient ring of truth to it and gels sufficiently with other known aspects of the Coronavirus psyop for us to think it worth publishing for your consideration and for you to make of what you will .
In our view what all this amounts to is that the People have had foisted on them a deception , a con job of staggering scale and devastating impact , a deception that has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cynically and with malice aforethought emasculated it , a deception that has fear-mongered an illness into an epidemic , shattered the economy , ruined businesses and lives and , through the withholding of medical care , has – far from saving lives -condemned an as yet unknown number of our fellow human beings to death These are the actions of an enemy , an enemy evidently close to or infiltrated into our own government and aided and abetted by propaganda masquerading as mainstream “ news ” .
This whole debacle amounts to crimes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , crimes that MUST be investigated and the instigators , perpetrators and their collaborators and accomplices brought to justice .
This person ’ s statement suggests that at some time in the future we will see an explosion as the suppressed truth of what the NHS is going through reaches the surface and busts through into the light .
We have added a few emphases and edited the grammar in a few places but other than that , this statement is as it came to our attention .
This declaration should be read @ @ @ @ @ @ @ surgeon and whistleblower Dr Dr Mohammad Iqbal Adil which we featured in Organisation with something to hide persecutes honest surgeon An anonymous statement from an A & E consultant in Surrey .
I am a consultant at a major , regional hospital in Surrey .
By “ major ” you can take that to indicate that we have an A & E department .
I had agreed to give an interview to an anti lockdown activist in which I would have revealed my identity .
I have since changed my mind and only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
I have changed my mind simply because all staff , no matter what grade , at all hospitals have been warned that if they give any media interviews at all or make any statements to either the Main Stream Press or smaller , independent press /social media we may immediately be suspended without pay .
I have a family , dependents and I simply cant do it to them .
I therefore can not reveal my identity at this time but wish to state as follows : In my opinion , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there has been no Covid Pandemic , certainly not in the Surrey region and I have heard from other colleagues this picture is the same throughout the country .
Our hospital would normally expect to see around 350,000 out patients a year .
Around 95,000 patients are admitted to hospital in a normal year and we would expect to see around a similar figure , perhaps 100,000 patients pass through our A & E department .
In the months from March to June ( inclusive ) we would normally expect to see 100,000 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to hospital and perhaps 30,000 pass through A & E .
This year ( and these figures are almost impossible to get hold of ) we are over 95 % down on all those numbers .
In effect , the hospital has been pretty much empty for that entire period .
At the start , staff that questioned this were told that we were being used as ‘ redundant ’ capacity , kept back for the ‘ deluge ’ we were told would come .
It never did come , and when staff @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ‘ for the greater good ’ and to ‘ protect the NHS ’ came down from above .
Now it ’ s just along the lines of , ‘ Shut up or you don ’ t get paid ’ .
The few Covid cases that we have had get repeatedly tested and every single test is counted as a new case .
This means that the figures reported back to ONS/PHE ( Office for National Statistics & Public Health England ) were almost exponentially inflated .
It could be that Covid cases @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 10x higher than the real number of cases .
There has been no pandemic and this goes a long way to explain why figures for the UK are so much higher than anywhere else in Europe .
The trust has been running empty ambulances during lockdown and is still doing it now .
By this I mean ambulances are driving around , with their emergency alert systems active ( sirens & / or lights ) with no job to go to .
This , I believe , has been to give the impression @ @ @ @ @ @ @ demand for ambulances than there actually is .
Staff only wear face coverings/masks & social distance when facing the public , As soon as they are out of public view , the masks come off and social distancing is not observed .
Indeed , jokes are made about the measures , and I have heard staff express amazement that despite warnings on packets and at points of sale , telling people masks are totally ineffective and dangerous , the public still buy them , because a politician has told them to .
We @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and , of these , ALL elective surgery has been cancelled .
( That ’ s surgery that has been pre planned / waiting list ) .
Non-elective Surgery ( this tends to be emergency surgery or that which is deemed urgent ) has been severely curtailed .
The outcome of this is simple .
People are at best being denied basic medical care and at worst , being left to die , in some cases , in much distress and pain .
All staff that are responsible for this have been encouraged @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reason for death , even though the patient may have been asymptomatic and also not even tested for Covid .
I feel this simply amounts to fraudulently completed death certificates and has been responsible for grossly inflating the number of Covid deaths .
The fact is that regardless of what you actually die of in hospital , it is likely that Covid-19 will feature on your death certificate .
I have included with my statement the detailed published guidance from the Government on Death Certification which shows how Covid-19 , as a factor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a death certificate [ UKR note – we do not currently have this documentation ] .
Remember , Covid-19 itself can not kill .
What kills is complications from the virus , typically pneumonia-like symptoms .
These complications are in reality incredibly rare but have featured and a large amount of death certificates issued in recent months .
As long as Covid-19 appears on a death certificate , that death is counted as Covid-19 in the figures released by the ONS and PHE .
I genuinely believe that many death certificates , especially @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fraudulently completed so as to be counted as Covid-19 deaths when in reality Covid-19 complications did not cause the death .
There have been Thursday nights when I stood , alone in my office and cried as I heard people cheering and clapping outside .
It sickens me to see all the ‘ Thank You NHS ’ signs up everywhere and the stolen rainbow that for me now says one word and one word only : Fear .
There are many good people in the NHS and whilst I do not plead forgiveness @ @ @ @ @ @ @ them .
Most are on low pay , they joined for the right reasons as I did and have been bullied and threatened that if they don ’ t ‘ stay on message ’ they don ’ t eat .
I know that if a way could be found to assure staff within the NHS of safety against reprisals , there would be a tsunami of whistle blowers , which I have no doubt would help end this complete and brutal insanity .
I am finding it increasingly hard to live with what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ am sorry this has happened .
To end , I would simply say this .
Politicians haven ’ t changed , the country has just made a fatal mistake and started trusting them without question.
” The above article is from UK Reloaded Disclaimer : TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner .
We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “ fair use ” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes .
If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “ fair use ” you must request permission from the copyright owner .

by Jon Davy
As you will see, the following statement is anonymous for very good reasons. Anonymous statements are hard, of course, to verify but this one has sufficient ring of truth to it and gels sufficiently with other known aspects of the Coronavirus psyop for us to think it worth publishing for your consideration and for you to make of what you will.
In our view what all this amounts to is that the People have had foisted on them a deception, a con job of staggering scale and devastating impact, a deception that has not “saved” the NHS but cynically and with malice aforethought emasculated it, a deception that has fear-mongered an illness into an epidemic, shattered the economy, ruined businesses and lives and, through the withholding of medical care, has – far from saving lives -condemned an as yet unknown number of our fellow human beings to death
These are the actions of an enemy, an enemy evidently close to or infiltrated into our own government and aided and abetted by propaganda masquerading as mainstream “news”. This whole debacle amounts to crimes against the People on a massive scale, crimes that MUST be investigated and the instigators, perpetrators and their collaborators and accomplices brought to justice.
This person’s statement suggests that at some time in the future we will see an explosion as the suppressed truth of what the NHS is going through reaches the surface and busts through into the light.
We have added a few emphases and edited the grammar in a few places but other than that, this statement is as it came to our attention.
This declaration should be read bearing in mind the experiences of NHS surgeon and whistleblower Dr Dr Mohammad Iqbal Adil which we featured in
Organisation with something to hide persecutes honest surgeon
and
UK NHS surgeon exposes COVID 19 hoax
An anonymous statement from an A&E consultant in Surrey. Released 08/07/20:
I am a consultant at a major, regional hospital in Surrey. By “major” you can take that to indicate that we have an A&E department. I had agreed to give an interview to an anti lockdown activist in which I would have revealed my identity. I have since changed my mind and only feel able to give an anonymous statement. I have changed my mind simply because all staff, no matter what grade, at all hospitals have been warned that if they give any media interviews at all or make any statements to either the Main Stream Press or smaller, independent press /social media we may immediately be suspended without pay. I have a family, dependents and I simply cant do it to them. I therefore can not reveal my identity at this time but wish to state as follows: In my opinion, and that of many of my colleagues, there has been no Covid Pandemic, certainly not in the Surrey region and I have heard from other colleagues this picture is the same throughout the country. Our hospital would normally expect to see around 350,000 out patients a year. Around 95,000 patients are admitted to hospital in a normal year and we would expect to see around a similar figure, perhaps 100,000 patients pass through our A&E department. In the months from March to June (inclusive) we would normally expect to see 100,000 out patients, around 30,000 patients admitted to hospital and perhaps 30,000 pass through A&E. This year (and these figures are almost impossible to get hold of) we are over 95% down on all those numbers. In effect, the hospital has been pretty much empty for that entire period. At the start, staff that questioned this were told that we were being used as ‘redundant’ capacity, kept back for the ‘deluge’ we were told would come. It never did come, and when staff began to question this, comments like, ‘for the greater good’ and to ‘protect the NHS’ came down from above. Now it’s just along the lines of, ‘Shut up or you don’t get paid’. The few Covid cases that we have had get repeatedly tested and every single test is counted as a new case. This means that the figures reported back to ONS/PHE (Office for National Statistics & Public Health England) were almost exponentially inflated. It could be that Covid cases reported by hospitals are between 5 to 10x higher than the real number of cases. There has been no pandemic and this goes a long way to explain why figures for the UK are so much higher than anywhere else in Europe. The trust has been running empty ambulances during lockdown and is still doing it now. By this I mean ambulances are driving around, with their emergency alert systems active (sirens & / or lights) with no job to go to. This, I believe, has been to give the impression to the public that there is more demand for ambulances than there actually is. Staff only wear face coverings/masks & social distance when facing the public, As soon as they are out of public view, the masks come off and social distancing is not observed. Indeed, jokes are made about the measures, and I have heard staff express amazement that despite warnings on packets and at points of sale, telling people masks are totally ineffective and dangerous, the public still buy them, because a politician has told them to. We have cancelled the vast majority of operations and, of these, ALL elective surgery has been cancelled. (That’s surgery that has been pre planned / waiting list). Non-elective Surgery (this tends to be emergency surgery or that which is deemed urgent) has been severely curtailed. The outcome of this is simple. People are at best being denied basic medical care and at worst, being left to die, in some cases, in much distress and pain. Regarding death certification. All staff that are responsible for this have been encouraged where possible to put Covid-19 complications as reason for death, even though the patient may have been asymptomatic and also not even tested for Covid. I feel this simply amounts to fraudulently completed death certificates and has been responsible for grossly inflating the number of Covid deaths. The fact is that regardless of what you actually die of in hospital, it is likely that Covid-19 will feature on your death certificate. I have included with my statement the detailed published guidance from the Government on Death Certification which shows how Covid-19, as a factor is encouraged to at least feature on a death certificate [UKR note – we do not currently have this documentation]. Remember, Covid-19 itself can not kill. What kills is complications from the virus, typically pneumonia-like symptoms. These complications are in reality incredibly rare but have featured and a large amount of death certificates issued in recent months. As long as Covid-19 appears on a death certificate, that death is counted as Covid-19 in the figures released by the ONS and PHE. I genuinely believe that many death certificates, especially amongst the older 65+ demographic have been fraudulently completed so as to be counted as Covid-19 deaths when in reality Covid-19 complications did not cause the death. There have been Thursday nights when I stood, alone in my office and cried as I heard people cheering and clapping outside. It sickens me to see all the ‘Thank You NHS’ signs up everywhere and the stolen rainbow that for me now says one word and one word only: Fear. There are many good people in the NHS and whilst I do not plead forgiveness for myself, I do plead for them. Most are on low pay, they joined for the right reasons as I did and have been bullied and threatened that if they don’t ‘stay on message’ they don’t eat. I know that if a way could be found to assure staff within the NHS of safety against reprisals, there would be a tsunami of whistle blowers, which I have no doubt would help end this complete and brutal insanity. I am finding it increasingly hard to live with what I have been involved in and I am sorry this has happened. To end, I would simply say this. Politicians haven’t changed, the country has just made a fatal mistake and started trusting them without question.”
The above article is from UK Reloaded
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.


thelibertybeacon--2020-07-11--Remdesivir: is the European Medicines Agency endangering our health?

ANALYSIS : The approval of remdesivir or Veklury® ( trade name ) by the European Medicines Agency ( EMA ) is questionable on many levels .
The study , which is pivotal to this approval , includes enough bias that a complete new analysis is required .
The National Medicines Safety Agency ( ANSM ) can not in any way be satisfied with the recommendations of the EMA without requesting a new complete analysis with the data , as well as the elements of toxicity of this drug .
The rest of this article is fairly technical in order to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conclusions .
Remdesivir is the first drug approved by the EMA under the name Veklury® for the treatment of SARS-CoV-2 .
Here is the CHMP text dated June 25 , 2020 giving a favourable opinion : Detailed recommendations for the use of this product are described in the product information ( PI ) , which is published in English .
The European public assessment report ( EPAR ) will be published after the European Commission has granted marketing authorization and will be available in all official languages of the European Union .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ CHMP refers to the study published in the New England Journal of Medicine ( NEJM ) on May 22 , 2020 , which concludes that remdesivir aka Veklury® would reduce hospital stay by 15 days in the placebo group , by 11 days in the remdesivir group or for severe cases respectively from 18 days to 12 days with an improvement ratio ( recovery rate ratio ) of 1.37 .
The appendix to the study report provides more detailed information about the clinical trial as well as some of the side effects .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ which the EMA decision is based is important , as it reveals many inconsistencies .
* This study is carried out in multiple sites ( 60 ) and several countries ( 10 ) making delicate [ sic ] an equivalent follow-up of patients and information even if it gives the impression of being much more serious than the study criticized by The Lancet .
Hospitals are mentioned in the study , but form such a long list that it would prove tedious .
On the contrary here , the proliferation of detail of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ suggests that the patients exist .
We recall the comment by Martin Landray , co-investigator of the British study Recovery , on the cost of Gilead ’ s studies 20 to 50 times higher than their study .
* The study protocol first interested us because it had been modified during the study and that the main objective had been changed after the start of the inclusions and had become the reduction of the time of hospitalization .
* In terms of statistical modelling , the study results have not been corrected for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ could have pointed to many other irregularities , but more important elements caught our attention .
* Side effects are only taken into account after the 5th occurrence .
In addition , it is specified that the patients did not receive the same treatments .
* By reading the appendix and the main text of the study , we can recompose the following table : The ‘ delta ’ line of the table above shows information given in the table in figure 1 on unspecified adverse events or withdrawals of consent .
These @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the analysis since this represents 10 % of the sample of each arm .
In the detail of the totals , there are 49 patients in the remdesivir arm and 53 patients in the placebo arm which are not found in the analysis .
* The report shows a significant difference between the remdesivir group and the placebo group .
The proportion of cured patients in the total sample is 62 % in the remdesivir group and 52 % in the placebo group , and this result is statistically significant .
However @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of 1.32 , it is very different from the calculated ratio , probably here for rounding errors .
In addition , in patients with mild forms of the disease , there are no significant effects , with more than 80 % of patients recovering ; the impact on healing is greatest in severely ill patients .
However , this analysis will have to be adjusted in the light of the patients for whom we have no information .
With nearly 60 % of cured patients in the remesivir arm , 40 % of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who have died .
It is therefore fundamental to understand what happened to the 32.3 % of patients , especially in terms of side effects .
No information on this group is available .
Likewise , the report describes this improvement in healing ratio which must take up the above elements before any conclusions can be drawn .
* Looking at the ratio of patients receiving less than 10 doses and cured , we see that this represents 31 % of the remdesivir arm and 23 % of the placebo arm .
Conversely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ treatment of 10 doses , this represents 33 % of the remdesivir arm and 36 % of the placebo arm .
Since some patients in the placebo arm did not receive the full treatment , it seems essential to correct this bias since it would be difficult to conclude that it was the treatment that had an effect since it did not not been followed to the end .
* In addition , the trial specifies that patients treated for other illnesses continued to take their treatment .
Some patients will therefore not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ adds a significant bias in the cause and effect relationship of the drug and cross-effects with other molecules .
This analytical bias is as important or more important than the analysis of side effects which are only measured when there are 5 occurrences .
* However , the most surprising analysis concerns the mortality rate in severely affected cases .
By redoing the calculations , there is already a significant difference between the calculated mortality rate ( 5.95 % remdesivir arm and 10.36 % placebo arm ) versus what is reported in Table @ @ @ @ @ @ @ A difference of 16 % and 13 % of measurement .
Rounding offs maybe ?
The fact remains that if this difference is due to a rounding error , we are entitled to ask questions about the overall quality of the analysis .
We tried to recalculate this figure without success from figure 1 of the study ( Inclusion and randomization of patients ) .
This is the basis of any study – to be able to recalculate the exact figures at any time for reasons of transparency .
Of course , one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the 14th day mortality , which is probably put forward only to mask the results at 28 days .
The study therefore tries to highlight mortality at 14 days , the time of treatment without taking into account the side effects in order to influence the reader .
This difference in measurement is therefore not reported , because it lacks general information on mortality at term .
But why not talk about mortality at 28 days ( secondary criterion ) ?
Several hypotheses come to mind , but the main one is that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , it will not be noted that it is not the overall mortality ( subterfuge ) .
We will have to analyse the causes of mortality and look in detail at the side effects .
It is therefore also essential to look at the cases that have taken less than 10 doses in order to understand the causes of the discontinuation of treatment , and the duration of treatment .
However , the term mortality still remains to be calculated , which would take into account all the side effects .
And it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ never will be .
We tried to reach the EMA to ask questions about it .
Such an important decision must be fully analysed .
We contacted EMA President Christa Wirthumer-Hoche to answer these questions , and she replied that she was not the right person for this , without referring us to the “ right people ” .
We also tried to reach the CHMP members without success .
Enlightening comments from one of our readers , who raises many points .
Here is a summary ( the whole is attached in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ support study is unambiguous : * The difference in mortality is not statistically significant “ and , understands , * Gilead , announces “ an improvement for patients with moderate symptoms ” , problem , in the study there are only 120 patients “ moderate ” ( less than patients where data is missing ) and the curves of the study are only on the entire sample and the most severe cases .
On “ moderate ” cases : laugh , see by difference a harmful result of remdesivir .
* Recall that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ severe ” patients with administration of remdesivir for 5 days or 10 days without placebo ) and on ( 600 “ moderate ” patients with administration of remdesivir for 5 days and 10 days and placebo ) .
* Finally , coincidence , this study appeared on May 22 , as the study removed from The Lancet by Dr. Mehra .
* And an additional coincidence , the commenter in the June 1 official Gilead study announcement , works at Brigham & Women Hospital and Harvard as Dr. Mehra .
Would the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ modification of the main objective of the protocol being tested ?
Recall that the main objective was amended on April 2 , 2020 from “ recovery of health points ( return to a general condition score of 1 to 3 on a scale of 8 ) ” to “ duration of hospitalization ” .
The official reason given for this amendment is that Covid19 lasts longer than originally anticipated .
In general , such a modification is not acceptable .
In addition , among the secondary criteria is included the 28-day mortality , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Could this be one of the reasons why unwanted events are only taken into account after the 5th occurrence ?
There are therefore many important biases not taken into account by the CHMP and it is for this reason that we consider that the CHMP has not done complete audit work , and that the emergency situation invoked by the pandemic does not justify the negligence which could endanger the health of patients , and this all the more so as the preliminary French pharmacovigilance data alerted on renal insufficiencies with , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in patients on remdesivir .
With this analysis , we can not therefore conclude with certainty that remdesivir has a positive effect on the number of days spent in hospital without looking in detail at the subsets and especially the causes of cures of patients who stopped treatment before the 10 doses .
This recommendation from the EMA is therefore biased to such an extent that it would be desirable for the French National Authority to at least request additional information on the analyses before concluding .
The health of the French can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this recommendation without thorough scientific and medical verification .
Primum Non Nocere ” Above All , Do No Harm !
” .
Two other questions arise , about the patient monitoring system to assess the toxicity of this molecule , and how far will the lobbying of the company Gilead go ?
APPENDIX : Analysis of the chronology of Gilead ’ s press releases and of the study * February 26 , 2020 Gilead press release : From the start , the objective is to evaluate remdesivir as a 5-day vs 10-day treatment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( 60 % of the panel ) , without placebo on patients “ Severe ” ( 40 % of the panel ) .
* April 10 , 2020 Gilead press release : So April 10 Gilead says : “ the results for severe patients for the end of April and for moderate patients for May ” knowing that on severe patients will not come from China .
“ Gilead is conducting two phase 3 clinical trials of remdesivir in countries with a high prevalence of COVID-19 .
Data from the SIMPLE study in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ month , followed by data from the SIMPLE study in patients with moderate illness in May .
In addition , Gilead supports several clinical trials conducted by other organizations , including two studies conducted in Hubei Province , China .
Gilead was informed that the study in China in patients with severe illness was terminated prematurely due to low enrolment .
The study in China on patients with mild to moderate illness is underway .
A global study on remdesivir led by NIAID continues to recruit patients and data from this study is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 29 , 2020 Gilead press release : On April 29 ( see announcement of April 9 ) we have an announcement about the study on “ severe ” boxes on the effect of the treatment duration of 5 or 10 days where we can understand no placebo simply comparison between 2 dosages of the treatment !
!
!
We can read 2 versions : “ the 5 day treatment is better than the 10 day treatment ” where “ the 5 day treatment is less worse than the 10 day treatment ” .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ severe ” cases , a priori 400 patients out of 1,000 patients from the start , there is no placebo , we just studied the treatments over 5 days versus 10 days .
And on the 600 others , there are 3 branches : remdesivir 5 days or 10 days , or nothing .
“ Gilead announces the results of the Phase 3 trial of the experimental antiviral remdesivir in patients with severe COVID-19 .
The study shows similar efficacy with dosing times of 5 and 10 days of Remdesivir – Gilead Sciences @ @ @ @ @ @ @ SIMPLE open phase 3 trial evaluating the 5 and 10 day dosing times of the antiviral remdesivir investigation in hospital patients with severe manifestations of COVID-19 .
The study demonstrated that patients receiving 10 days of remdesivir treatment achieved a similar improvement in clinical status compared to those receiving 5 days of treatment ( 0.75 [ 95 % CI 0.51 – 1.12 ] on the 14th day ) .
No new safety signals were identified with remdesivir in the two treatment groups .
Gilead plans to submit the complete data for publication in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
” * May 22 – June 1 : the results are published in the NEJM , and in a press release .
However , according to the April 9 , 2020 announcement , the results were due to be released in late May only .
From Gilead ’ s perspective , the results are favourable for “ moderate ” patients only .
“ Gilead announces results of phase 3 trial of remdesivir in patients with moderate COVID-19 – Study shows 5-day treatment of remdesivir resulted in significantly greater clinical improvement compared to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ announced today the results of the Phase 3 SIMPLE trial in hospital patients with moderate COVID-19 pneumonia .
This open study evaluated the 5 and 10 day courses of experimental antiviral remdesivir plus standard of care , compared to standard of care alone .
The study demonstrated that patients in the 5-day remdesivir treatment group were 65 % more likely to have clinical improvement on day 11 compared to those in the standard care group ( OR 1.65 [ 95 % CI 1 , 09-2.48 ] ; p = 0.017 ) .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 10-day treatment of remdesivir compared to standard of care were also favourable , tending towards , but not reaching statistical significance ( OR 1.31 [ 95 % CI 0 , 88-1.95 ] ; p = 0.18 ) .
No new safety signals were identified with remdesivir in the two treatment groups .
Gilead plans to submit the complete data for publication in a peer-reviewed journal in the coming weeks .
” The study was released the same day as that of Dr. Mehra ’ s in The Lancet .
We discovered that Dr. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the official announcement of Gilead , works at Brigham & Women ’ s Hospital and at Harvard like Professor Mehra .
They leave [ sic ] their 2 studies the same day .
Who will believe in a coincidence … “ Our understanding of the spectrum of severity of SARS-CoV-2 infection and presentations of COVID-19 continues to evolve , ” said Francisco Marty , MD , infectious disease physician at Brigham and Women ’ s Hospital and associate professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School GILEAD specifies that its conclusion only concerns “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ However when we look at the study , we don ’ t see the same thing : * The majority of patients ( 943 ) are in the “ severe disease ” category while GILEAD announces that REMDESIVIR 5 days a little “ moderate ” patients ( 120 patients ) on whom the study says nothing .
* On the contrary , the difference would be more in cases 4 and 5 , which could imply that in groups 1,2,3 ( moderate patients ) , there is no difference .
The patients were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 8 with moderate patients from 1 to 3 .
The key point : the study clearly says that remdesivir has no effect on deaths on day 11 and nothing after day 11 , and superb understatement , the placebo group on day 11 is not subject to a statistically degraded situation compared to the two remdesivir groups , or with 500 patients in each group , if there is really a slight difference , it would appear with a significant probability .
In addition we do not even talk about the branch of @ @ @ @ @

ANALYSIS: The approval of remdesivir or Veklury® (trade name) by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) is questionable on many levels.
The study, which is pivotal to this approval, includes enough bias that a complete new analysis is required. The National Medicines Safety Agency (ANSM) cannot in any way be satisfied with the recommendations of the EMA without requesting a new complete analysis with the data, as well as the elements of toxicity of this drug.
The rest of this article is fairly technical in order to highlight the approximations that lead to questionable conclusions.
Situation
Remdesivir is the first drug approved by the EMA under the name Veklury® for the treatment of SARS-CoV-2. Here is the CHMP text dated June 25, 2020 giving a favourable opinion:
On June 25, 2020, the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) adopted a favourable opinion, recommending the granting of a conditional marketing authorization for the medicine Veklury®, intended for the treatment of SARS-CoV-2 , a new coronavirus responsible for a respiratory disease known as coronavirus disease 2019, or COVID-19. The sponsor of this medication is Gilead Sciences Ireland UC.
Detailed recommendations for the use of this product are described in the product information (PI), which is published in English . The European public assessment report (EPAR) will be published after the European Commission has granted marketing authorization and will be available in all official languages of the European Union.
In its report on the drug, the CHMP refers to the study published in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) on May 22, 2020, which concludes that remdesivir aka Veklury® would reduce hospital stay by 15 days in the placebo group, by 11 days in the remdesivir group or for severe cases respectively from 18 days to 12 days with an improvement ratio (recovery rate ratio) of 1.37.
Table 3 – NEJM Remdesivir study
The appendix to the study report provides more detailed information about the clinical trial as well as some of the side effects.
ANALYSIS
The analysis of the NEJM study on which the EMA decision is based is important, as it reveals many inconsistencies.
* This study is carried out in multiple sites (60) and several countries (10) making delicate [sic] an equivalent follow-up of patients and information even if it gives the impression of being much more serious than the study criticized by The Lancet. Hospitals are mentioned in the study, but form such a long list that it would prove tedious. On the contrary here, the proliferation of detail of information and names of the doctors involved suggests that the patients exist. We recall the comment by Martin Landray, co-investigator of the British study Recovery, on the cost of Gilead’s studies 20 to 50 times higher than their study.
* The study protocol first interested us because it had been modified during the study and that the main objective had been changed after the start of the inclusions and had become the reduction of the time of hospitalization.
* In terms of statistical modelling, the study results have not been corrected for the various possible sampling biases. We could have pointed to many other irregularities, but more important elements caught our attention.
* Side effects are only taken into account after the 5th occurrence. In addition, it is specified that the patients did not receive the same treatments.
* By reading the appendix and the main text of the study, we can recompose the following table:
NEJM study sample on remdesivir (Veklury®)
The ‘delta’ line of the table above shows information given in the table in figure 1 on unspecified adverse events or withdrawals of consent. These elements should have been taken into account in the analysis since this represents 10% of the sample of each arm.
In the detail of the totals, there are 49 patients in the remdesivir arm and 53 patients in the placebo arm which are not found in the analysis.
* The report shows a significant difference between the remdesivir group and the placebo group. The proportion of cured patients in the total sample is 62% in the remdesivir group and 52% in the placebo group, and this result is statistically significant. However, when we recalculate the observed ratio of 1.32, it is very different from the calculated ratio, probably here for rounding errors. In addition, in patients with mild forms of the disease, there are no significant effects, with more than 80% of patients recovering; the impact on healing is greatest in severely ill patients. However, this analysis will have to be adjusted in the light of the patients for whom we have no information. With nearly 60% of cured patients in the remesivir arm, 40% of patients are not cured, including those who have died. It is therefore fundamental to understand what happened to the 32.3% of patients, especially in terms of side effects. No information on this group is available. Likewise, the report describes this improvement in healing ratio which must take up the above elements before any conclusions can be drawn.
Analysis of cured NEJM study on remdesivir (Veklury®)
* Looking at the ratio of patients receiving less than 10 doses and cured, we see that this represents 31% of the remdesivir arm and 23% of the placebo arm. Conversely, for those who received the complete treatment of 10 doses, this represents 33% of the remdesivir arm and 36% of the placebo arm. Since some patients in the placebo arm did not receive the full treatment, it seems essential to correct this bias since it would be difficult to conclude that it was the treatment that had an effect since it did not not been followed to the end.
* In addition, the trial specifies that patients treated for other illnesses continued to take their treatment. Some patients will therefore not have received the same treatment, which adds a significant bias in the cause and effect relationship of the drug and cross-effects with other molecules. This analytical bias is as important or more important than the analysis of side effects which are only measured when there are 5 occurrences.
NEJM study dosages on remdesivir (Veklury®)
* However, the most surprising analysis concerns the mortality rate in severely affected cases. By redoing the calculations, there is already a significant difference between the calculated mortality rate (5.95% remdesivir arm and 10.36% placebo arm) versus what is reported in Table 7.1% and 11.9% respectively. A difference of 16% and 13% of measurement. Rounding offs maybe? The fact remains that if this difference is due to a rounding error, we are entitled to ask questions about the overall quality of the analysis. We tried to recalculate this figure without success from figure 1 of the study (Inclusion and randomization of patients). This is the basis of any study – to be able to recalculate the exact figures at any time for reasons of transparency.
Of course, one point to note is that this is the 14th day mortality, which is probably put forward only to mask the results at 28 days. The study therefore tries to highlight mortality at 14 days, the time of treatment without taking into account the side effects in order to influence the reader. This difference in measurement is therefore not reported, because it lacks general information on mortality at term.
Mortality NEJM study on remdesivir (Veklury®)
But why not talk about mortality at 28 days (secondary criterion)?
Several hypotheses come to mind, but the main one is that by putting forward the 14-day mortality rate, it will not be noted that it is not the overall mortality (subterfuge). We will have to analyse the causes of mortality and look in detail at the side effects. It is therefore also essential to look at the cases that have taken less than 10 doses in order to understand the causes of the discontinuation of treatment, and the duration of treatment.
However, the term mortality still remains to be calculated, which would take into account all the side effects. And it just isn’t done and probably never will be.
We tried to reach the EMA to ask questions about it.
Such an important decision must be fully analysed. We contacted EMA President Christa Wirthumer-Hoche to answer these questions, and she replied that she was not the right person for this, without referring us to the “right people”. We also tried to reach the CHMP members without success.
Enlightening comments from one of our readers, who raises many points. Here is a summary (the whole is attached in the Appendix)
The conclusion of the support study is unambiguous:
* The difference in mortality is not statistically significant “and, understands,
“There is no statistically significant difference on a” deterioration “of the placebo group vs remdesivir”
* Gilead, announces “an improvement for patients with moderate symptoms”, problem, in the study there are only 120 patients “moderate” (less than patients where data is missing) and the curves of the study are only on the entire sample and the most severe cases. On “moderate” cases: laugh, see by difference a harmful result of remdesivir. * Recall that the initial study focused on (400 “severe” patients with administration of remdesivir for 5 days or 10 days without placebo) and on (600 “moderate” patients with administration of remdesivir for 5 days and 10 days and placebo). * Finally, coincidence, this study appeared on May 22, as the study removed from The Lancet by Dr. Mehra. * And an additional coincidence, the commenter in the June 1 official Gilead study announcement, works at Brigham & Women Hospital and Harvard as Dr. Mehra.
Conclusion
Would the undesirable effects be the reason for the modification of the main objective of the protocol being tested?
Recall that the main objective was amended on April 2, 2020 from “recovery of health points (return to a general condition score of 1 to 3 on a scale of 8)” to “duration of hospitalization”. The official reason given for this amendment is that Covid19 lasts longer than originally anticipated. In general, such a modification is not acceptable. In addition, among the secondary criteria is included the 28-day mortality, which is nowhere reported in the study.
Could this be one of the reasons why unwanted events are only taken into account after the 5th occurrence?
There are therefore many important biases not taken into account by the CHMP and it is for this reason that we consider that the CHMP has not done complete audit work, and that the emergency situation invoked by the pandemic does not justify the negligence which could endanger the health of patients, and this all the more so as the preliminary French pharmacovigilance data alerted on renal insufficiencies with, in certain cases, necessity of dialysis in patients on remdesivir.
With this analysis, we cannot therefore conclude with certainty that remdesivir has a positive effect on the number of days spent in hospital without looking in detail at the subsets and especially the causes of cures of patients who stopped treatment before the 10 doses.
This recommendation from the EMA is therefore biased to such an extent that it would be desirable for the French National Authority to at least request additional information on the analyses before concluding. The health of the French cannot be put into the hands of this recommendation without thorough scientific and medical verification. Primum Non Nocere ” Above All, Do No Harm!”.
Two other questions arise, about the patient monitoring system to assess the toxicity of this molecule, and how far will the lobbying of the company Gilead go?
******
APPENDIX: Analysis of the chronology of Gilead’s press releases and of the study
* February 26, 2020 Gilead press release: From the start, the objective is to evaluate remdesivir as a 5-day vs 10-day treatment with placebo on “moderate” patients (60% of the panel), without placebo on patients “Severe” (40% of the panel).
* April 10, 2020 Gilead press release: So April 10 Gilead says: “the results for severe patients for the end of April and for moderate patients for May” knowing that on severe patients will not come from China. “Gilead is conducting two phase 3 clinical trials of remdesivir in countries with a high prevalence of COVID-19. Data from the SIMPLE study in patients with severe illness are expected this month, followed by data from the SIMPLE study in patients with moderate illness in May. In addition, Gilead supports several clinical trials conducted by other organizations, including two studies conducted in Hubei Province, China. Gilead was informed that the study in China in patients with severe illness was terminated prematurely due to low enrolment. The study in China on patients with mild to moderate illness is underway. A global study on remdesivir led by NIAID continues to recruit patients and data from this study is expected in May. ”
* April 29, 2020 Gilead press release: On April 29 (see announcement of April 9) we have an announcement about the study on “severe” boxes on the effect of the treatment duration of 5 or 10 days where we can understand no placebo simply comparison between 2 dosages of the treatment !!!
We can read 2 versions: “the 5 day treatment is better than the 10 day treatment” where “the 5 day treatment is less worse than the 10 day treatment”. It should be noted that in “severe” cases, a priori 400 patients out of 1,000 patients from the start, there is no placebo, we just studied the treatments over 5 days versus 10 days. And on the 600 others, there are 3 branches: remdesivir 5 days or 10 days, or nothing.
“Gilead announces the results of the Phase 3 trial of the experimental antiviral remdesivir in patients with severe COVID-19. The study shows similar efficacy with dosing times of 5 and 10 days of Remdesivir –
Gilead Sciences announced today the preliminary results of the SIMPLE open phase 3 trial evaluating the 5 and 10 day dosing times of the antiviral remdesivir investigation in hospital patients with severe manifestations of COVID-19 . The study demonstrated that patients receiving 10 days of remdesivir treatment achieved a similar improvement in clinical status compared to those receiving 5 days of treatment (0.75 [95% CI 0.51 – 1.12] on the 14th day). No new safety signals were identified with remdesivir in the two treatment groups. Gilead plans to submit the complete data for publication in a peer-reviewed journal in the coming weeks. ”
* May 22 – June 1: the results are published in the NEJM, and in a press release. However, according to the April 9, 2020 announcement, the results were due to be released in late May only. From Gilead’s perspective, the results are favourable for “moderate” patients only.
“Gilead announces results of phase 3 trial of remdesivir in patients with moderate COVID-19 – Study shows 5-day treatment of remdesivir resulted in significantly greater clinical improvement compared to treatment with only standard of care – announced today the results of the Phase 3 SIMPLE trial in hospital patients with moderate COVID-19 pneumonia. This open study evaluated the 5 and 10 day courses of experimental antiviral remdesivir plus standard of care, compared to standard of care alone. The study demonstrated that patients in the 5-day remdesivir treatment group were 65% more likely to have clinical improvement on day 11 compared to those in the standard care group (OR 1.65 [95% CI 1 , 09-2.48]; p = 0.017). The odds of improvement in clinical status with 10-day treatment of remdesivir compared to standard of care were also favourable, tending towards, but not reaching statistical significance (OR 1.31 [95% CI 0 , 88-1.95]; p = 0.18). No new safety signals were identified with remdesivir in the two treatment groups. Gilead plans to submit the complete data for publication in a peer-reviewed journal in the coming weeks. ”
The study was released the same day as that of Dr. Mehra’s in The Lancet. We discovered that Dr. Fransisco Marty, who is involved in the official announcement of Gilead, works at Brigham & Women’s Hospital and at Harvard like Professor Mehra. They leave [sic] their 2 studies the same day. Who will believe in a coincidence …
“Our understanding of the spectrum of severity of SARS-CoV-2 infection and presentations of COVID-19 continues to evolve,” said Francisco Marty, MD, infectious disease physician at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and associate professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School
GILEAD specifies that its conclusion only concerns “moderate” patients on day 11.
However when we look at the study, we don’t see the same thing:
* The majority of patients (943) are in the “severe disease” category while GILEAD announces that REMDESIVIR 5 days a little “moderate” patients (120 patients) on whom the study says nothing.
* On the contrary, the difference would be more in cases 4 and 5, which could imply that in groups 1,2,3 (moderate patients), there is no difference. The patients were divided into 8 groups of 1 to 8 with moderate patients from 1 to 3.
The key point: the study clearly says that remdesivir has no effect on deaths on day 11 and nothing after day 11, and superb understatement, the placebo group on day 11 is not subject to a statistically degraded situation compared to the two remdesivir groups, or with 500 patients in each group, if there is really a slight difference, it would appear with a significant probability. In addition we do not even talk about the branch of treatment over 10 days.


thelibertybeacon--2020-07-11--Phoenix Mayor Lied About Morgues & ‘Refrige Trucks’ To Store Overflow COVID Bodies [Video]

Phoenix Mayor Lied About Morgues Bringing In ‘ Refrigerator Trucks ’ To Store Overflow COVID Bodies As the number of hospitalized COVID-19 patients in Maricopa County climbed to new highs late this week , Phoenix Mayor Kate Gallego appeared on MSNBC Friday morning [ Video below ] for an interview with Chuck Todd and Katy Tur to discuss the situation in the state , which has moved to close bars , and rollback other reopening measures to combat the outbreak .
During the interview , Gallego claimed that the county ’ s public health agency had just put in an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ running out of space in the morgue .
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate , and for this we are grateful and excited !
But we must also be practical .
For 7 years we have not asked for any donations , and have built this project with our own funds as we grew .
We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent .
So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask @ @ @ @ @ @ @ them .
Nothing is too small .
We thank you for all your support and your considerations … ( TLB ) Comment Policy : As a privately owned web site , we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam , advertising , vulgarity , threats of violence , racism , or personal/abusive attacks on other users .
This also applies to trolling , the use of more than one alias , or just intentional mischief .
Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators .
Repeat offenders @ @ @ @ @ @ @ prior warning .
Disclaimer : TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner .
We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “ fair use ” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political , health , economic and social issues .
The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes .
If you wish to use copyrighted material @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” you must request permission from the copyright owner .

Phoenix Mayor Lied About Morgues Bringing In ‘Refrigerator Trucks’ To Store Overflow COVID Bodies
Tyler Durden
As the number of hospitalized COVID-19 patients in Maricopa County climbed to new highs late this week, Phoenix Mayor Kate Gallego appeared on MSNBC Friday morning [Video below] for an interview with Chuck Todd and Katy Tur to discuss the situation in the state, which has moved to close bars, and rollback other reopening measures to combat the outbreak.
During the interview, Gallego claimed that the county’s public health agency had just put in an order for refrigerated trucks because they were running out of space in the morgue.
“Maricopa County, which is our county public health agency, just announced that they’re going to be getting refrigerated trucks because the Abrazo health care system has run out of morgue beds,” Gallego said.
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.


thelibertybeacon--2020-07-11--Bank settlement could provide Roadmap to Epstein collaborators

If federal prosecutors are looking to punish more than the socialite Ghislaine Maxwell for the late Jeffrey Epstein ’ s alleged underage sex ring , New York regulators ’ settlement this month with Epstein ’ s former bank may provide an intriguing roadmap .
Buried in documents attached to Deutsche Bank ’ s $ 150 million penalty agreement with the New York State Department of Financial Services is a long list of suspect activities , including withdrawals of money by lawyers , payments to Russian models and other women , and financial transactions with people previously identified by federal authorities @ @ @ @ @ @ @ plea deal on charges of prostitution with a minor more than a decade ago .
The story still being unraveled now by federal and state prosecutors is how Epstein managed to allegedly keep his sex empire going after becoming one of America ’ s most famous registered sex offenders .
Experts say the extensive documentation made public with the bank case , including a consent order , places a bullseye over transactions and players in Epstein ’ s orbit now facing new legal exposure .
And it could augment a list of names @ @ @ @ @ @ @ book ” of contacts that investigators have possessed for years .
The New York state case followed just days after federal prosecutors in the Southern District of New York unsealed an indictment against Maxwell , a longtime associate of Epstein who is now charged with aiding and abetting the late mogul ’ s sexual escapades with underage girls .
Epstein , the government contends , was the paymaster before he committed suicide after being jailed last year .
Prosecutors portray Maxwell as one of the key recruiters of young victims .
Deutsche Bank @ @ @ @ @ @ @ least an unwitting and negligent financial facilitator .
And now , the question that the world awaits to be answered is whether any powerful or mighty figures who were clients , facilitators or conspirators in Epstein ’ s escapades will also be brought to justice .
“ The investigation appears to be extremely thorough , resulted in the production and examination of hundreds of thousands of records , and identified many people in the United States and abroad , ” he told Just the News .
“ What those people know , what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they believe it ’ s in their interests to come forward before being arrested or investigated will unfold quickly.
” The consent order was released in conjunction with the announcement of the first regulatory enforcement action taken against a bank associated with Epstein .
Deutsche Bank was slammed with a $ 150 million penalty for “ mistakes and sloppiness ” with their former client , Epstein .
When Epstein opened up his Deutsche Bank accounts in 2013 , he was a Tier 3 registered sex offender .
That alone should have served as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bank official .
In law enforcement and judicial circles , Tier 3 registered sex offenders translate into serial offenders , who usually repeat their crimes .
“ Immediately following Epstein ’ s arrest we contacted law enforcement and offered our full assistance with their investigation , ” Deutsche Bank explained in a statement .
But that was only after Deutsche Bank terminated its relationship with Epstein a few months earlier .
Epstein was arrested for sex trafficking charges on July 6 , 2019 in New Jersey after he returned from Paris .
Weeks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his cell in the Manhattan Correctional Center .
Following his death , Attorney General William Barr vowed to get to the bottom of the Epstein investigation and hold the perpetrators accountable .
Deutsche Bank had accepted Epstein as a high-risk client on Aug. 19 , 2013 , but by December 21 , 2018 , the bank terminated its relationship with Epstein a month after the Miami Herald published a series on Epstein .
In a statement released on Tuesday , Linda Lacewell , the superintendent of the New York State Department of Financial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ paid out “ millions of dollars of suspicious transactions ” that Deutsche Bank “ inexcusably failed to detect or prevent.
” • None payments to individuals publicly alleged to have been Epstein ’ s co-conspirators connected to his 2007 non-prosecution agreement ; • None settlement payments to law firms totaling over $ 7 million , as well as dozens of payments to law firms totaling over $ 6 million for what appear to have been the legal expenses of Epstein and his co-conspirators ; • None payments to Russian models , payments for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and rent expenses , and payments directly to numerous women with Eastern European surnames ; • None periodic suspicious cash withdrawals by one of his agents , totaling more than $ 800,000 over approximately four years ; • None “ The Butterfly Trust ” account that paid the co-conspirators and other parties ; Maxwell , whom many victims refer to as Epstein ’ s madam , was arrested last week in New Hampshire , and now awaits a July 14 bail hearing in New York .
The U.S .
Marshals transported her from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on Monday .
The consent order states , “ Some articles reported that COCONSPIRATORS 1 and 2 had invoked their Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination , and others reported that CO-CONSPIRATOR 3 had allegedly recruited underage girls to give Mr. Epstein ‘ massages.
’ The names of these women and several other alleged co-conspirators were publicly known by 2013.
” Although Deutsche “ properly classified ” Epstein as a high-risk client , the consent order states , “ The Bank failed to scrutinize the activity in the accounts for the kinds of activity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s past.
” “ Despite this knowledge , the Bank did little or nothing to inquire into or block numerous payments to named co-conspirators , ” who had been identified in the media , “ or to inquire how Mr. Epstein was using , on average , more than $ 200,000 per year in cash , ” states the Order .
The current records call such transactions suspect .
Now prosecutors must determine their true intent : hush money , continued trafficking , or some other reason yet to be discovered .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ paper jumpsuit , far from luxurious life of past ( TLB ) published this article with permission of John Solomon at Just the News Some emphasis and pictorial content added by ( TLB ) Click Here to read about the staff at Just the News Disclaimer : TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner .
We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “ fair use ” in an effort to advance a better understanding of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ issues .
The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes .
If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “ fair use ” you must request permission from the copyright owner .

Bank settlement could provide prosecutors roadmap to punishing Epstein’s collaborators
‘Anyone connected to Jeffrey Epstein’s sex trafficking and abuse activity should be extremely concerned by the New York State Department of Financial Services’ investigation,’ a sex crimes experts tells Just the News.
By Christine Dolan
If federal prosecutors are looking to punish more than the socialite Ghislaine Maxwell for the late Jeffrey Epstein’s alleged underage sex ring, New York regulators’ settlement this month with Epstein’s former bank may provide an intriguing roadmap.
Buried in documents attached to Deutsche Bank’s $150 million penalty agreement with the New York State Department of Financial Services is a long list of suspect activities, including withdrawals of money by lawyers, payments to Russian models and other women, and financial transactions with people previously identified by federal authorities as co-conspirators in Epstein’s prior plea deal on charges of prostitution with a minor more than a decade ago.
The story still being unraveled now by federal and state prosecutors is how Epstein managed to allegedly keep his sex empire going after becoming one of America’s most famous registered sex offenders.
Experts say the extensive documentation made public with the bank case, including a consent order, places a bullseye over transactions and players in Epstein’s orbit now facing new legal exposure. And it could augment a list of names contained in Epstein’s “black book” of contacts that investigators have possessed for years.
“It seems as if anyone connected to Jeffrey Epstein’s sex trafficking and abuse activity should be extremely concerned by the New York State Department of Financial Services investigation that was announced on Monday,” said J. Robert Flores, a former federal prosecutor and assistant district attorney in Manhattan who specialized in sex crimes and reviewed the settlement documents at the request of Just the News.
The New York state case followed just days after federal prosecutors in the Southern District of New York unsealed an indictment against Maxwell, a longtime associate of Epstein who is now charged with aiding and abetting the late mogul’s sexual escapades with underage girls.
Epstein, the government contends, was the paymaster before he committed suicide after being jailed last year. Prosecutors portray Maxwell as one of the key recruiters of young victims. Deutsche Bank’s admissions make it at the least an unwitting and negligent financial facilitator.
And now, the question that the world awaits to be answered is whether any powerful or mighty figures who were clients, facilitators or conspirators in Epstein’s escapades will also be brought to justice.
Flores sees the outlines of a prosecutorial roadmap in the bank investigation, and expects some with exposure to possibly seek early deals with prosecutors.
“The investigation appears to be extremely thorough, resulted in the production and examination of hundreds of thousands of records, and identified many people in the United States and abroad,” he told Just the News. “What those people know, what records they may have, and whether they believe it’s in their interests to come forward before being arrested or investigated will unfold quickly.”
The consent order was released in conjunction with the announcement of the first regulatory enforcement action taken against a bank associated with Epstein.
Deutsche Bank was slammed with a $150 million penalty for “mistakes and sloppiness” with their former client, Epstein.
When Epstein opened up his Deutsche Bank accounts in 2013, he was a Tier 3 registered sex offender.
That alone should have served as the most important red flag to any bank official.
In law enforcement and judicial circles, Tier 3 registered sex offenders translate into serial offenders, who usually repeat their crimes.
“Immediately following Epstein’s arrest we contacted law enforcement and offered our full assistance with their investigation,” Deutsche Bank explained in a statement.
But that was only after Deutsche Bank terminated its relationship with Epstein a few months earlier.
Epstein was arrested for sex trafficking charges on July 6, 2019 in New Jersey after he returned from Paris. Weeks later, he was found dead in his cell in the Manhattan Correctional Center.
Following his death, Attorney General William Barr vowed to get to the bottom of the Epstein investigation and hold the perpetrators accountable.
Deutsche Bank had accepted Epstein as a high-risk client on Aug. 19, 2013, but by December 21, 2018, the bank terminated its relationship with Epstein a month after the Miami Herald published a series on Epstein.
In a statement released on Tuesday, Linda Lacewell, the superintendent of the New York State Department of Financial Services, said Epstein’s accounts paid out “millions of dollars of suspicious transactions” that Deutsche Bank “inexcusably failed to detect or prevent.”
The investigation findings included:
payments to individuals publicly alleged to have been Epstein’s co-conspirators connected to his 2007 non-prosecution agreement;
settlement payments to law firms totaling over $7 million, as well as dozens of payments to law firms totaling over $6 million for what appear to have been the legal expenses of Epstein and his co-conspirators;
payments to Russian models, payments for women’s school tuition, hotel and rent expenses, and payments directly to numerous women with Eastern European surnames;
periodic suspicious cash withdrawals by one of his agents, totaling more than $800,000 over approximately four years;
“The Butterfly Trust” account that paid the co-conspirators and other parties;
a Gratitude America account.
Maxwell, whom many victims refer to as Epstein’s madam, was arrested last week in New Hampshire, and now awaits a July 14 bail hearing in New York. The U.S. Marshals transported her from New Hampshire to a Brooklyn detention center on Monday.
The consent order states, “Some articles reported that COCONSPIRATORS 1 and 2 had invoked their Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination, and others reported that CO-CONSPIRATOR 3 had allegedly recruited underage girls to give Mr. Epstein ‘massages.’ The names of these women and several other alleged co-conspirators were publicly known by 2013.”
Although Deutsche “properly classified” Epstein as a high-risk client, the consent order states, “The Bank failed to scrutinize the activity in the accounts for the kinds of activity that were obviously implicated by Mr. Epstein’s past.”
“Despite this knowledge, the Bank did little or nothing to inquire into or block numerous payments to named co-conspirators,” who had been identified in the media, “or to inquire how Mr. Epstein was using, on average, more than $200,000 per year in cash,” states the Order.
One of Epstein’s attorneys was withdrawing $7,500 two or three times a month, totaling almost $800,000 in cash over the four years that Epstein was a Deutsche Bank client, the records state.
The current records call such transactions suspect. Now prosecutors must determine their true intent: hush money, continued trafficking, or some other reason yet to be discovered.
_________
Related
_________
The Facts Inside Our Reporter’s Notebook
*********
(TLB) published this article with permission of John Solomon at Just the News
Some emphasis and pictorial content added by (TLB)
Click Here to read about the staff at Just the News
••••
Stay tuned to …
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.


thelibertybeacon--2020-07-11--Russiagate: Trump commutes sentence of Roger Stone

US President Donald Trump has commuted the ‘ Russiagate ’ sentence of Roger Stone , a political operative who briefly worked on his 2016 campaign , just as Stone was ordered to report to prison to serve time behind bars .
Judge Amy Berman Jackson sentenced Stone in February to 40 months in prison for obstruction of justice , another 18 months for witness tampering , and 12 months for making false statements to Congress – but the sentences are to run concurrently , so the maximum time Stone would have spent behind bars is three-and-a-half years .
The charges @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Robert Mueller , who failed to find any evidence of the Trump campaign ’ s “ collusion ” with Russia in the 2016 presidential election , but managed to lock up several campaign aides on process crimes and unrelated charges .
Mueller ’ s prosecutors not only charged Stone with process crimes arising “ solely from their own improper investigation , ” the White House added , but “ took pains to make a public and shameful spectacle of his arrest , ” tipping off CNN so it could film a pre-dawn raid @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is not a pardon , which would have erased the conviction , and lets Stone continue the appeals process .
Attorney General Bill Barr has said the conviction and sentence seemed appropriate to him .
Stone admitted he had promoted WikiLeaks revelations of emails obtained from Hillary Clinton campaign chair John Podesta ’ s private account , saying they were important to the election , but denied having any inside knowledge of the data dump or its contents .
Earlier this week , Facebook banned Stone ’ s account for “ inauthentic behavior.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ infamously issued a “ gag order ” that prevented Stone from defending himself in the media .
She also denied his motion for a new trial on grounds of bias , after it emerged that the jury foreperson was a Democrat activist .
In an interview with Fox News this week , Stone said that either a pardon or a commutation would have the effect of saving his life , given that he would be exposed to the coronavirus in prison .
The 67-year-old veteran political operative said he was “ praying ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his lawyers not to contact the White House .
General Flynn , Trump ’ s first national security adviser , was the first casualty of ‘ Russiagate , ’ forced to resign after less than two weeks on the job over media claims that he had lied to the FBI about his contacts with the Russian ambassador to Washington .
He was later charged by Mueller with lying to the FBI , and despite overwhelming evidence of FBI and prosecutorial misconduct that has since emerged , his case remains open as the federal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Department motion to drop the charges .
New evidence shows FBI knew General Flynn was not ‘ agent of Russia ’ but prosecuted him anyway Facebook bans accounts linked to Roger Stone , Proud Boys & Brazil ’ s Bolsonaro in fight against ‘ coordinated inauthentic behavior ’ ( TLB ) published this article from RT-USA News with our appreciation for the coverage .

RT-USA News
© Reuters / Jim Bourg
US President Donald Trump has commuted the ‘Russiagate’ sentence of Roger Stone, a political operative who briefly worked on his 2016 campaign, just as Stone was ordered to report to prison to serve time behind bars.
.
Judge Amy Berman Jackson sentenced Stone in February to 40 months in prison for obstruction of justice, another 18 months for witness tampering, and 12 months for making false statements to Congress – but the sentences are to run concurrently, so the maximum time Stone would have spent behind bars is three-and-a-half years.
The charges stemmed from the investigation by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, who failed to find any evidence of the Trump campaign’s “collusion” with Russia in the 2016 presidential election, but managed to lock up several campaign aides on process crimes and unrelated charges.
“Roger Stone is a victim of the Russia Hoax that the Left and its allies in the media perpetuated for years in an attempt to undermine the Trump Presidency,” the White House press secretary said in a statement on Friday evening.
Mueller’s prosecutors not only charged Stone with process crimes arising “solely from their own improper investigation,” the White House added, but “took pains to make a public and shameful spectacle of his arrest,” tipping off CNN so it could film a pre-dawn raid on Stone’s house.
Commutation is not a pardon, which would have erased the conviction, and lets Stone continue the appeals process. Attorney General Bill Barr has said the conviction and sentence seemed appropriate to him.
Stone admitted he had promoted WikiLeaks revelations of emails obtained from Hillary Clinton campaign chair John Podesta’s private account, saying they were important to the election, but denied having any inside knowledge of the data dump or its contents.
Earlier this week, Facebook banned Stone’s account for “inauthentic behavior.” During the trial, Judge Jackson infamously issued a “gag order” that prevented Stone from defending himself in the media. She also denied his motion for a new trial on grounds of bias, after it emerged that the jury foreperson was a Democrat activist.
In an interview with Fox News this week, Stone said that either a pardon or a commutation would have the effect of saving his life, given that he would be exposed to the coronavirus in prison. The 67-year-old veteran political operative said he was “praying” for Trump to intervene but had asked his lawyers not to contact the White House.
Trump has “an incredible sense of fairness,” Stone added. “He is aware that the people trying to destroy Michael Flynn, now trying to destroy me, are the people trying to destroy him.”
General Flynn, Trump’s first national security adviser, was the first casualty of ‘Russiagate,’ forced to resign after less than two weeks on the job over media claims that he had lied to the FBI about his contacts with the Russian ambassador to Washington. He was later charged by Mueller with lying to the FBI, and despite overwhelming evidence of FBI and prosecutorial misconduct that has since emerged, his case remains open as the federal judge refuses to agree with the Justice Department motion to drop the charges.
_________
More from RT
*********
(TLB) published this article from RT-USA News with our appreciation for the coverage.
Pictorial content and emphasis added by (TLB) editors
••••
••••
Stay tuned to …