thelibertydaily--2020-11-29--CNN Fake News: Trump’s Call for Unity and Togetherness ‘Could Put Vulnerable People at Risk’

President Donald Trump ’ s Thanksgiving proclamation triggered those working at CNN , leading the activist organization to ramp up its coronavirus fear-mongering .
Trump , in a proclamation issued on Wednesday , bucked the official narrative being pushed by the establishment media and some elected Democrats .
Amid a reported surge in coronavirus cases , the establishment media ’ s peddling of pandemic fear has spiked .
In conjunction with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention , the media and its allies in the Democratic Party worked to essentially cancel Thanksgiving .
But Trump issued a proclamation defying @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Cop Out of the Blue , Officer Opens Cruiser Door and Lets 'Lee ' Handle Him Trump recognized early Americans as well as soldiers , first responders and everyday Americans who have sacrificed so much amid the pandemic .
He also asked Americans to celebrate the holiday together .
“ I encourage all Americans to gather , in homes and places of worship , to offer a prayer of thanks to God for our many blessings , ” Trump wrote .
One could argue that it also perhaps called for unity .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ loathe unity and optimism , attempted a takedown of the Trump Thanksgiving proclamation .
CNN ’ s Maegan Vasquez authored a Thanksgiving day web story that was headlined , “ White House Thanksgiving proclamation calls for Americans to ‘ gather ’ even as Covid-19 surges.
” “ Public health experts are warning that Thanksgiving could be ‘ the mother of all superspreader events.
’ And the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends against traveling for Thanksgiving as a means to preventing further spread of the coronavirus , ” Vasquez argued .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ public health officials warn that family gatherings like Thanksgiving , which are often indoors and multi-generational , could put vulnerable people at risk.
” The CNN reporter went on to note how many people are dead or sick , before noting , “ Trump has frequently flouted public health warnings.
” Vasquez did not criticize those who gathered after her network and others prematurely called the 2020 election for Democrat Joe Biden earlier this month .
The CNN report also did not disparage other gatherings of leftists , such as riots , which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gatherings , we have to assume , are not places where the coronavirus can spread , as the media gave them their tacit endorsement .
But Thanksgiving is a day when Americans traditionally come together to see family and to share blessings with one another .
Thanksgiving , like attending religious services , can be a unifying experience .
So CNN worked to squash it , as it did with Trump ’ s message for unity on the holiday .
Ironically , Democrats and the leftist establishment media began talking about unity shortly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the election .
We know what unity for Democrats looks like : Trump ’ s message urging Americans to come together for one special day was delivered with quite the unifying tone .
But for CNN , that kind of unity is dangerous .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

President Donald Trump’s Thanksgiving proclamation triggered those working at CNN, leading the activist organization to ramp up its coronavirus fear-mongering.
Trump, in a proclamation issued on Wednesday, bucked the official narrative being pushed by the establishment media and some elected Democrats.
Amid a reported surge in coronavirus cases, the establishment media’s peddling of pandemic fear has spiked.
In conjunction with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the media and its allies in the Democratic Party worked to essentially cancel Thanksgiving.
But Trump issued a proclamation defying them all.
Trump recognized early Americans as well as soldiers, first responders and everyday Americans who have sacrificed so much amid the pandemic.
He also asked Americans to celebrate the holiday together.
“I encourage all Americans to gather, in homes and places of worship, to offer a prayer of thanks to God for our many blessings,” Trump wrote.
The proclamation carried a tone of optimism.
Did you spend your Thanksgiving with family? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 86% (939 Votes) No: 14% (151 Votes)
One could argue that it also perhaps called for unity.
But the activists at CNN, who apparently loathe unity and optimism, attempted a takedown of the Trump Thanksgiving proclamation.
CNN’s Maegan Vasquez authored a Thanksgiving day web story that was headlined, “White House Thanksgiving proclamation calls for Americans to ‘gather’ even as Covid-19 surges.”
US President Trump’s annual Thanksgiving proclamation calls for Americans to “gather” for the holiday, even though federal public health officials have explicitly warned against it https://t.co/O4lKpCOlxB — CNN International (@cnni) November 26, 2020
“Public health experts are warning that Thanksgiving could be ‘the mother of all superspreader events.’ And the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends against traveling for Thanksgiving as a means to preventing further spread of the coronavirus,” Vasquez argued.
“Coronavirus cases are surging, and public health officials warn that family gatherings like Thanksgiving, which are often indoors and multi-generational, could put vulnerable people at risk.”
The CNN reporter went on to note how many people are dead or sick, before noting, “Trump has frequently flouted public health warnings.”
Vasquez did not criticize those who gathered after her network and others prematurely called the 2020 election for Democrat Joe Biden earlier this month.
Crowd of people gathered near the White House is celebrating after the election was called for Biden. pic.twitter.com/CrEcD5U3uB — W.G. Dunlop (@wgdunlop) November 7, 2020
The CNN report also did not disparage other gatherings of leftists, such as riots, which have occurred throughout the year.
Those gatherings, we have to assume, are not places where the coronavirus can spread, as the media gave them their tacit endorsement.
I thought this was disinformation when I saw the screenshots; It’s not. A CNN reporter is genuinely stood in front of a burning neighbourhood telling viewers that violent riots were in fact ‘mostly peaceful protests’, after the shootings, of course! ? MSM is a parody of itself pic.twitter.com/ZNioZXf8Zi — Calvin Robinson (@calvinrobinson) August 27, 2020
But Thanksgiving is a day when Americans traditionally come together to see family and to share blessings with one another.
Thanksgiving, like attending religious services, can be a unifying experience.
So CNN worked to squash it, as it did with Trump’s message for unity on the holiday.
Ironically, Democrats and the leftist establishment media began talking about unity shortly after they crowned Biden the winner of the election.
These four years of chaos are almost behind us. Soon we’ll be led by leaders who will focus on what unites us and heal our nation. — The Democrats (@TheDemocrats) November 17, 2020
The election is over. It’s time to put aside the partisanship and the rhetoric designed to demonize one another. We have to come together. — Joe Biden (@JoeBiden) November 24, 2020
Our trust has been broken – in our leaders, institutions and even some of our friends. Now more than ever we need to listen, to learn from one another, and to rebuild our bonds. Because when we can trust one another, we can truly achieve great things. #trustmatters pic.twitter.com/HJ5BSZyp55 — CNN Communications (@CNNPR) November 8, 2020
We know what unity for Democrats looks like:
Tonight I’m calling for the eventual prosecution of donald trump and his enablers for their many crimes against the United States. pic.twitter.com/LJGvzLqQ35 — Bill Pascrell, Jr. (@BillPascrell) November 18, 2020
PROSECUTE. THEM. ALL. I applaud Biden’s desire to heal. But if illegal acts aren’t prosecuted they CEASE TO BE ILLEGAL. Trump is still attempting a coup. He and Pence are guilty of mass negligent homicide. Barr. Miller. All. Prosecute! O vs T: https://t.co/rKpV6EkDu4
In brief: pic.twitter.com/RVlXbaUjay — Keith Olbermann (@KeithOlbermann) November 24, 2020
After Trump leaves, and he will, to repair the damage he has caused Democracy, it will be imperative that a non partisan commission be formed to investigate him for Federal Crimes. It will be the only way we can restore faith in our Constitution and the Rule of Law. — Rob Reiner (@robreiner) November 20, 2020
Trying to figure out how to permanently social distance from 74 million people for the rest of my life without selling my house. — John Pavlovitz (@johnpavlovitz) November 21, 2020
Trump’s message urging Americans to come together for one special day was delivered with quite the unifying tone.
But for CNN, that kind of unity is dangerous.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


thelibertydaily--2020-11-29--Biden Pick For Homeland Security Had Over 15 Whistleblower Complaints For ‘Improperly’ Favoring Dem-

Biden Pick For Homeland Security Had Over 15 Whistleblower Complaints For ‘Improperly’ Favoring Dem-Connected Investors For Visas

Joe Biden is gearing up for a move into the White House , but his administration picks are not without controversy .
Biden announced Alejandro Mayorkas for the Homeland Security chief position , but reports show he “ improperly ” intervened to “ help Democrat-connected foreign investors ” get visas while serving in the Obama administration , reports Just the News .
Mayorkas was President Obama ’ s acting deputy homeland secretary when he was “ flagged in 2015 by the agency ’ s internal watchdog ” because as many as 15 whistleblowers reported his behavior .
Then-Homeland Security Inspector @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the 15 whistleblowers from inside the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service ( USCIS ) who came forward were “ courageous.
” Roth wrote in his statement at the time of the whistleblower complaints , “ Each conveyed the same factual scenario : certain applicants and stakeholders received preferential access to DHS leadership and preferential treatment in either the handling of their application or petition or regarding the merits of the application or petition.
” Specifically , Mayorkas was forcibly intervening inappropriately in the EB-5 work visa program in order to push @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The “ IG report sharply rebuked Mayorkas for creating the ‘ appearance of favoritism and special access ’ by intervening in three EB-5 visa matters involving companies that ‘ were prominent or politically connected ’ to Democrats ” reports Just the News .
“ Staff witnessed Mr. Mayorkas inserting himself in unprecedented ways into an adjudicative process governed by statute , regulation , and USCIS policy ” stated the report .
Therefore , “ as a result of his deviation from the normal process , applicants and stakeholders with whom he had just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” The IG report praised those who came forward , stating , “ being a whistleblower is seen to be hazardous in the Federal Government and a typical investigation would have one or perhaps two .
That so many individuals were willing to step forward and tell us what happened is evidence of deep resentment about Mr. Mayorkas ’ actions related to the EB-5 program.
” In summation , the report reprimanded Mayorkas for creating the “ appearance of favoritism and special access ” by intervening in EB-5 visa matters involving companies that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to Democrats .

Joe Biden is gearing up for a move into the White House, but his administration picks are not without controversy. Biden announced Alejandro Mayorkas for the Homeland Security chief position, but reports show he “improperly” intervened to “help Democrat-connected foreign investors” get visas while serving in the Obama administration, reports Just the News.
Mayorkas was President Obama’s acting deputy homeland secretary when he was “flagged in 2015 by the agency’s internal watchdog” because as many as 15 whistleblowers reported his behavior. Then-Homeland Security Inspector General John Roth wrote in a report that the 15 whistleblowers from inside the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (USCIS) who came forward were “courageous.”
Roth wrote in his statement at the time of the whistleblower complaints, “Each conveyed the same factual scenario: certain applicants and stakeholders received preferential access to DHS leadership and preferential treatment in either the handling of their application or petition or regarding the merits of the application or petition.”
Specifically, Mayorkas was forcibly intervening inappropriately in the EB-5 work visa program in order to push through visas for Democrat-connected foreign investors. The “IG report sharply rebuked Mayorkas for creating the ‘appearance of favoritism and special access’ by intervening in three EB-5 visa matters involving companies that ‘were prominent or politically connected’ to Democrats” reports Just the News.
“Staff witnessed Mr. Mayorkas inserting himself in unprecedented ways into an adjudicative process governed by statute, regulation, and USCIS policy” stated the report. Therefore, “as a result of his deviation from the normal process, applicants and stakeholders with whom he had just been in contact received a specific benefit.”
The IG report praised those who came forward, stating, “being a whistleblower is seen to be hazardous in the Federal Government and a typical investigation would have one or perhaps two. That so many individuals were willing to step forward and tell us what happened is evidence of deep resentment about Mr. Mayorkas’ actions related to the EB-5 program.”
In summation, the report reprimanded Mayorkas for creating the “appearance of favoritism and special access” by intervening in EB-5 visa matters involving companies that “were prominent or politically connected” to Democrats.


thelibertydaily--2020-11-29--Democrat Dictator Tim Walz Gets Thankgiving Patriots Having Dinner Outside His House

A group of Minnesotans gathered outside the governor ’ s residence Thursday for their Thanksgiving dinner in protest of Gov @ @ @ @ @ coronavirus mandates .
“ Since Papa Walz won ’ t let us gather in our @ @ @ @ @ we decided to gather at his , ” Hold the Line Minnesota , which organized @ @ @ @ @ an advertisement .
Under an executive order from Walz , Minnesotans weren ’ t allowed @ @ @ @ @ household in their homes for Thanksgiving — a restriction that will remain in place until @ @ @ @ @ the Line Minnesota has been holding “ stop the steal ” protests outside Walz ’ @ @ @ @ @ the election , and plans to continue doing so .

"Since Papa Walz won't let us gather in our own homes for Thanksgiving, we decided to gather at his."
A group of Minnesotans gathered outside the governor’s residence Thursday for their Thanksgiving dinner in protest of Gov. Tim Walz’s coronavirus mandates.
“Since Papa Walz won’t let us gather in our own homes for Thanksgiving, we decided to gather at his,” Hold the Line Minnesota, which organized the event, said in an advertisement.
Under an executive order from Walz, Minnesotans weren’t allowed to have anyone from another household in their homes for Thanksgiving — a restriction that will remain in place until at least mid-December.
Hold the Line Minnesota has been holding “stop the steal” protests outside Walz’s home every Saturday since the election, and plans to continue doing so.
Alpha News Staff


thelibertydaily--2020-11-29--2-4 Hour Lines Outside Supermarkets Due to Democrat New Mexico Gov’s Unconstitutional Lockdown

New Mexico Gov .
Michelle Lujan Grisham ( D ) has put immense pressure on businesses with her “ abrupt ” lockdown order – forcing “ nonessential ” businesses to close and creating what has been dubbed “ modern breadlines ” — with people waiting 2-4 hours to enter essential retailers , former GOP Senate candidate Elisa Martinez explained during an appearance on Breitbart News Saturday .
Martinez , a former U.S. Senate candidate and Trump campaign surrogate , said that there has been a lot of downward pressure on the economy and people of New Mexico due to “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , imposing some of the “ strictest lockdowns ” in the country .
Martinez discussed the governor ’ s “ abrupt ” November 13 announcement , which put residents under another lockdown , closing businesses deemed nonessential .
The lockdown , which went into effect November 16 , created a “ huge rush to all of the stores , ” which Martinez said was “ very counterintuitive if the idea is to stop the in-person contact.
” The governor ultimately capped capacity in retail stores to 75 people , regardless of size .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2-4 hour lines outside in the cold — some areas of the state it ’ s snowing , raining , ” she said .
“ I had an elderly woman contact me .
She was waiting in line for two hours to get their meds — to get their , you know , essential medicine .
So it ’ s making a public health emergency worse in my opinion for the people of New Mexico , especially leading up to Thanksgiving , ” she said : The issues were further compounded , she @ @ @ @ @ @ @ she also declared that if you have four rapid response coronavirus tests that came back in one of these essential businesses , that the whole business , the whole store , had to shut down.
” That resulted in at least 12 stores across the state closing “ in these smaller communities.
” She added that it is “ all up to the whims of the governor to declare what is essential and not.
” Lujan Grisham ’ s order ultimately put pressure on mom and pop stores , she continued , explaining @ @ @ @ @ @ @ empires like Amazon and Walmart.
” All the while , Hollywood productions are allowed to take place in the state .
“ We have video of an actual production crew at work here in the state that took place after the lockdown orders .
And my understanding is that there ’ s a special agreement that the film industry gets to operate outside of the public health order based on their own agreement with unions .
It ’ s really a slap in the face to the people of New Mexico who are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in these lines , ” she said .
The “ fearmongering about this virus never stops from the governor , but the film industry , somehow , is exempt from the virus and exempt from the lockdown order , ” Martinez said , adding that the hypocrisy is “ off the charts ” in the state .
Lujan Grisham ’ s office responded to the backlash by proclaiming that the state is “ not forcing anyone to stand in a crowded line.
” A spokesperson for the governor added that the chatter over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a “ Republican talking point.
” Breitbart News Saturday airs on SiriusXM Patriot 125 from 10:00 A.M. to 1:00 P.M. Eastern .

New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham (D) has put immense pressure on businesses with her “abrupt” lockdown order – forcing “nonessential” businesses to close and creating what has been dubbed “modern breadlines” — with people waiting 2-4 hours to enter essential retailers, former GOP Senate candidate Elisa Martinez explained during an appearance on Breitbart News Saturday.
Martinez, a former U.S. Senate candidate and Trump campaign surrogate, said that there has been a lot of downward pressure on the economy and people of New Mexico due to “ridiculous mandates” pushed by the governor, imposing some of the “strictest lockdowns” in the country. Martinez discussed the governor’s “abrupt” November 13 announcement, which put residents under another lockdown, closing businesses deemed nonessential.
LISTEN:
The lockdown, which went into effect November 16, created a “huge rush to all of the stores,” which Martinez said was “very counterintuitive if the idea is to stop the in-person contact.”
The governor ultimately capped capacity in retail stores to 75 people, regardless of size.
“So now we’re experiencing 2-4 hour lines outside in the cold — some areas of the state it’s snowing, raining,” she said.
“I had an elderly woman contact me. She was waiting in line for two hours to get their meds — to get their, you know, essential medicine. So it’s making a public health emergency worse in my opinion for the people of New Mexico, especially leading up to Thanksgiving,” she said:
Across the state, the elderly & sick are in these lines. Don’t be so naive to think that government & @GovMLG is interested in your health & well being. Or “science” for that matter. If that were the case this wouldn’t be happening.. ⬇🙄 #nmpol #nmleg pic.twitter.com/qkT7Jbh0DC — Elisa Martinez (@elisa1121) November 23, 2020
In addition to outdoor breadlines, Biden’s potential HEALTH SECRETARY @GovMLG has created a public health disaster in New Mexico. #NMpol Where is the media? https://t.co/ku8vTanUJJ — Elisa Martinez (@elisa1121) November 28, 2020
The issues were further compounded, she said, “by the fact that she also declared that if you have four rapid response coronavirus tests that came back in one of these essential businesses, that the whole business, the whole store, had to shut down.”
That resulted in at least 12 stores across the state closing “in these smaller communities.” She added that it is “all up to the whims of the governor to declare what is essential and not.”
Lujan Grisham’s order ultimately put pressure on mom and pop stores, she continued, explaining that Democrat governors are “enriching corporate empires like Amazon and Walmart.” All the while, Hollywood productions are allowed to take place in the state.
“We have video of an actual production crew at work here in the state that took place after the lockdown orders. And my understanding is that there’s a special agreement that the film industry gets to operate outside of the public health order based on their own agreement with unions. It’s really a slap in the face to the people of New Mexico who are truly struggling, who are waiting outside in these lines,” she said.
The “fearmongering about this virus never stops from the governor, but the film industry, somehow, is exempt from the virus and exempt from the lockdown order,” Martinez said, adding that the hypocrisy is “off the charts” in the state.
Lujan Grisham’s office responded to the backlash by proclaiming that the state is “not forcing anyone to stand in a crowded line.” A spokesperson for the governor added that the chatter over the long lines is nothing more than a “Republican talking point.”
Breitbart News Saturday airs on SiriusXM Patriot 125 from 10:00 A.M. to 1:00 P.M. Eastern.


thelibertydaily--2020-11-29--Should You Skip the Chi-Com Virus Vaccine?

The new Covid vaccines will make billions of dollars for the big pharmaceutical companies , but here ’ s what they won ’ t do : • The vaccines will not cure Covid • The vaccines will not prevent people from contracting Covid • The vaccines will not prevent Covid-related hospitalizations • The vaccines will not prevent Covid-caused deaths Now , I know what you ’ re thinking .
You ’ re thinking , “ If the vaccine does not protect me from getting Covid ( or dying from Covid ) , then why should I take it ?
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shouldn ’ t .
It makes no sense at all , especially in view of the fact that new vaccines pose considerable risks to one ’ s health and well-being .
“ Risks , ” you say ?
“ No one said anything about risks .
I thought this wonderful new Covid cure was entirely risk-free ; just take the jab and– Presto– life goes back to normal.
” Wrong .
There are risks , significant risks that the media and the medical establishment have papered-over with their ridiculous Happy Talk about “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this is just public relations hype designed to hoodwink people into injecting themselves with a dubious substance that does NOT do what it ’ s supposed to do , and which DOES pose serious long-term risks to one ’ s health .
So , let ’ s dig a little deeper into this question of risks and see what are the experts saying .
Check out this excerpt from an “ Open Letter From : UK Medical Freedom Alliance To : The Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunization… for COVID-19 in the UK.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ recent Parliamentary discussions seem to not attach proper weight to any concern about vaccine risks and the right to informed consent , while focusing solely on strategies to increase the uptake of vaccines in the general population .
Inadequate Assessment of the Public Health Risk from a Covid Vaccine In a recent letter to the British Medical Journal ( BMJ ) , physician Arvind Joshi warned against the disaster that could result from this misguided policy and outlined the serious risks involved to the public and other serious issues that are being taken @ @ @ @ @ @ @ without thorough and adequate safety and efficacy testing : âAdverse effects like Subacute Sclerosing Pan Encephalitis , Ascending Polyneuritis , Myopathies , Autoimmune Diseases , and rarer chance of triggering development of malignancies are most dreaded possibilities.â ... âThe rush for the Vaccines should not lead to disaster.
” ( Note : There is a more comprehensive list of potential ‘ bad outcomes ’ in the link to the article . )
Virus-vectored and genetically engineered vaccines could undergo recombination or hybridization with unpredictable outcomes.…Previous attempts to develop coronavirus and other vaccines e.g.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ hampered by the problem of âantibody dependent enhanced immunityâ ( ADEI ) , which has led to severe illness and deaths in the animals and human subjects involved in the trials28 .
This phenomenon only becomes apparent after vaccination , when the subject is exposed to wild virus at some point in the future .
Worryingly , the Covid Vaccine trials have not been conducted in a way to exclude the possibility of this serious sequalae occurring months or years after vaccination ... Late onset adverse vaccine effects such as Subacute Sclerosing Pan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Myopathies , Autoimmune Diseases , Infertility and Cancers can not be ruled out with short duration trials.
” ( “ Open Letter From : UK Medical Freedom Alliance To : The Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunization… for COVID-19 in the UK.
” ) It ’ s all very technical , but the truth is plain to see : There are serious risks associated with taking the Covid-19 vaccine .
Most vaccine recipients will experience only minor aches and pains but some will undoubtedly get quite ill and permanently damage their health @ @ @ @ @ @ @ because there have been no long-term trials .
The Covid vaccine has been fast-tracked from Day 1 .
So , the question is : Do the benefits outweigh the risks .
And , in this case , they clearly don ’ t .
The chances of getting violently sick or dying from Covid are very slight , ( IFR is 1 in 400 ) while the ( potential ) adverse effects from the vaccine are spelled out above .
Why would anyone roll the dice on a vaccine that does not prevent one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one from hospitalization , and will not prevent one from dying ?
That ’ s just not a good tradeoff .
Here ’ s more from an article at Forbes : Can you see what ’ s going on ?
“ Prevention ” is not even a primary objective .
The standard for success in these trials is whether the vaccine mitigates Covid symptoms in people who test positive .
But who cares about symptoms ?
What people care about is dying .
That ’ s why people are so eager to get @ @ @ @ @ @ @ eliminate the threat of dying .
This is a critical point , and one that is well worth mulling over .
Because it helps to illustrate how the vaccine campaign is built on a foundation of lies and deception .
For example , when the drug companies boast that their product is “ 95 % effective ” , it does NOT mean that– if you get vaccinated– you will be immune to Covid .
It doesn ’ t even mean that you won ’ t get violently ill and die .
All it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ symptoms of some of the people in the trials who tested positive .
Did you know that ?
Of course , you didn ’ t .
You thought that if you took the vaccine , you ’ d be protected from Covid , because that is the logical assumption that anyone would make .
Most people equate vaccines with immunity .
The drug companies know that which is why they ’ re exploiting people ’ s ignorance and deliberately obfuscating the truth .
They want people to continue to believe that vaccination is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from sickness and death .
But it ’ s not .
It ’ s a bunch of baloney .
Bottom line : Vaccine “ effectiveness ” is not measured in terms of “ preventing infection ” .
It relates to the vaccine ’ s impact on symptoms .
Here ’ s more from Forbes : “ One of the more immediate questions a trial needs to answer is whether a vaccine prevents infection .
If someone takes this vaccine , are they far less likely to become infected with the virus ?
These @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Covid-19 , and not infections themselves… .
It appears that all the pharmaceutical companies assume that the vaccine will never prevent infection .
Their criteria for approval is the difference in symptoms between an infected control group and an infected vaccine group .
… A greater concern for the millions of older people and those with preexisting conditions is whether these trials test the vaccine ’ s ability to prevent severe illness and death .
Again , we find that severe illness and death are only secondary objectives in these trials .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ hospitalization as a critically important barrier… .
These protocols do not emphasize the most important ramifications of Covid-19 that people are most interested in preventing : overall infection , hospitalization , and death .
It boggles the mind and defies common sense that the National Institute of Health , the Center for Disease Control , the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease , and the rest would consider the approval of a vaccine that would be distributed to hundreds of millions on such slender threads of success .
It appears that these @ @ @ @ @ @ @ possible barrier of success.
” ( “ Covid-19 Vaccine Protocols Reveal That Trials Are Designed To Succeed “ , Forbes ) The author is right , isn ’ t he ?
If the vaccine doesn ’ t prevent infection , it ’ s not worth taking .
Period .
And yet , all these high-falutin organizations are on-board with this farce .
It ’ s a disgrace .
We ’ re not even talking about a “ low bar ” for success here .
We ’ re talking about “ no bar ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , they ’ d be better off taking an aspirin and leaving it at that .
There ’ s no need to inject themselves with some hybrid cocktail that no one has the slightest idea of what the long-term effects might be .
That ’ s just reckless .
Like we said earlier , the real issues are being cleverly concealed by the people in charge who are hyping the “ 95 % effective ” nonsense to hoodwink people into cooperating .
It ’ s blatantly dishonest .
And here ’ s something @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we really know about these miraculous vaccines that are supposed to lead us out of our “ public health crisis ” ?
Not much .
We know that they ’ re being rushed to market .
We know that they were delayed for political reasons .
We know the science is being shaped by the politics .
We know that vaccine development typically takes 10 years , and that “ rushed ” vaccine development takes 3 years , and that the upcoming batch of dubious vaccines will have taken roughly 8 months .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ that make you want to push your way to the front of the line on Vaccine Day ?
And are you surprised that a large sampling of medical professionals has decided they aren ’ t going to take the vaccine until it ’ s been out for at least a year ?
?
And here ’ s another thing : The pharmaceutical giants don ’ t even know if their vaccines will stop transmission or not .
I ’ m not kidding , they really don ’ t know .
So– along with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ provide immunity– it also will not stop the spread of the infection which means , the pandemic will continue .
Don ’ t you think the public is entitled to know this ?
And let ’ s not forget that these so called “ vaccines ” don ’ t really fit the traditional definition of vaccine at all .
The CDC defines a vaccine as : “ A product that stimulates a personâs immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease , protecting the person from that disease.
” And the CDC @ @ @ @ @ @ @ A process by which a person becomes protected against a disease through vaccination .
This term is often used interchangeably with vaccination or inoculation.
” Well , we ’ ve already shown that the new vaccines do not necessarily provide immunity , so the question is whether they actually “ stimulate a personâs immune system ” or if the “ vaccine ” moniker was simply preserved as a promotional device to dupe the public ?
Here ’ s some background from an article at RT : “ The type of vaccine being developed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , outside of Ebola .
Some people feel that they should not really be called vaccines , because they are completely different from anything that has gone before .
Up to now , vaccination has meant injecting a dead virus ( or bacteria ) , or one that has been weakened and can only poorly replicate , or parts of the virus , or suchlike .
Once inside the body , the immune system spots this âalienâ material , and creates a response against it , which will hopefully be remembered for years @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dangerous virus appears , the body will use the immune memory of something very similar , to wipe out the virus ( or bacteria ) at high speed , giving it no chance to do damage Now , we have a thing called a messenger RNA vaccine ( mRNA ) .
RNA is , effectively , a single strand of DNA â the double helix that sits within our cells and makes up our genetic code .
Many viruses are made up of a single strand of RNA , surrounded by a protein @ @ @ @ @ @ @ take over the replication systems , make thousands of copies of themselves , then exit the cell .
Sometimes killing the cell as they do so , sometimes exiting more gently .
Covid19 ( Sars-Cov2 ) is an RNA virus .
Knowing this , rather than attempting to create a weakened virus , which can take years , or break the virus into bits , the v accine researchers decided to use Sars-Cov2âs RNA against itself .
To do this , they isolated the section of RNA which codes for the âspikeâ protein @ @ @ @ @ @ @ uses as a âkeyâ to enter cells… These spike proteins then leave the cell â somehow or other , this bit is unclear .
The immune system comes across them , recognizes them as âalienâ and attacks .
In doing so , antibodies are created , and the immune memory system kicks into action .
If , later on , a Sars-Cov2 virus gets into the body , the immune system fires up and attacks the remembered spike protein .
Hopefully killing the entire virus.
” ( “ As a doctor , people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a new Covid vaccine “ , RT ) It ’ s all very complicated and cutting-edge , but what ’ s clear is that “ Messenger RNA ” and “ spike ’ protein ” are a far-cry from plain-old dead virus which has worked just fine for decades .
It ’ s hard to understand why the drug companies decided to reinvent the wheel in trying to settle on an antidote for Covid .
Even so , this new state-of-the-art technology does have its drawbacks as was pointed out in the letter by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Here ’ s what they said : The point is , the effects of injecting a hybrid concoction into one ’ s body could be quite serious .
We just don ’ t know what the long-term effects will be , and we probably won ’ t know because the vaccine is going to be rushed into distribution before those trials can be conducted .
This is not a sensible strategy for dealing with the virus .
It is needlessly reckless and , perhaps , lethal .
Here ’ s more from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ âThere is a race to get the public vaccinated , so we are willing to take more risks , â Tal Brosh , head of the Infectious Disease Unit at Samson Assuta Ashdod Hospital , told The Jerusalem Post….. âWe will have a safety profile for only a certain number of months , so if there is a long-term effect after two years , we can not know , â Brosh said , adding that we could wait two years to discover them , âbut then we would have the coronavirus for two @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there are unique and unknown risks to messenger RNA vaccines , including local and systemic inflammatory responses that could lead to autoimmune conditions….. An article published by the National Center for Biotechnology Information , a division of the National Institutes of Health , said other risks include the bio-distribution and persistence of the induced immunogen expression ; possible development of auto-reactive antibodies ; and toxic effects of any non-native nucleotides and delivery system components… Great , so the “ professor of biological chemistry ” isn ’ t going to take the vaccine , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people like you and me ?
?
Give me a break .
Professor Linial ’ s reluctance is a tacit admission that the vaccine is not safe .
What else could it mean ?
Here ’ s more from the same article : Well , that ’ s just dandy .
We know the vaccines won ’ t prevent infection , hospitalization or death .
We also know they are “ are completely different from anything that has gone before ” .
We also know they won ’ t stop transmission , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in doubt .
Even so , our leaders– who lie to us about virtually everything– want us to click our heels and submissively take “ the jab ” whether we want to or not .
In my opinion , the risks of vaccination far outweigh the benefits .
I would rather trust my own auto-immune system ( and the new treatments , medications and therapies ) then be guinea pig in Big Pharma ’ s sinister lab experiment .

“The world has bet the farm on vaccines as the solution to the pandemic, but the trials are not focused on answering the questions many might assume they are.”
Peter Doshi, associate editor of the British Medical Journal and assistant professor of pharmaceutical health services research at the University of Maryland School of Pharmacy “The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits.”
Albert Einstein
The new Covid vaccines will make billions of dollars for the big pharmaceutical companies, but here’s what they won’t do:
The vaccines will not cure Covid The vaccines will not prevent people from contracting Covid The vaccines will not prevent Covid-related hospitalizations The vaccines will not prevent Covid-caused deaths
Now, I know what you’re thinking. You’re thinking, “If the vaccine does not protect me from getting Covid (or dying from Covid), then why should I take it?”
And the answer is: “You shouldn’t. It makes no sense at all, especially in view of the fact that new vaccines pose considerable risks to one’s health and well-being.
“Risks,” you say? “No one said anything about risks. I thought this wonderful new Covid cure was entirely risk-free; just take the jab and– Presto– life goes back to normal.”
Wrong. There are risks, significant risks that the media and the medical establishment have papered-over with their ridiculous Happy Talk about “miracle” vaccines. But all of this is just public relations hype designed to hoodwink people into injecting themselves with a dubious substance that does NOT do what it’s supposed to do, and which DOES pose serious long-term risks to one’s health.
So, let’s dig a little deeper into this question of risks and see what are the experts saying. Check out this excerpt from an “Open Letter From: UK Medical Freedom Alliance To: The Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunization… for COVID-19 in the UK.”:
“It is worrying that recent Parliamentary discussions seem to not attach proper weight to any concern about vaccine risks and the right to informed consent, while focusing solely on strategies to increase the uptake of vaccines in the general population. Inadequate Assessment of the Public Health Risk from a Covid Vaccine In a recent letter to the British Medical Journal (BMJ), physician Arvind Joshi warned against the disaster that could result from this misguided policy and outlined the serious risks involved to the public and other serious issues that are being taken if a Covid Vaccine is rushed out without thorough and adequate safety and efficacy testing: “Adverse effects like Subacute Sclerosing Pan Encephalitis, Ascending Polyneuritis, Myopathies, Autoimmune Diseases, and rarer chance of triggering development of malignancies are most dreaded possibilities.“...“The rush for the Vaccines should not lead to disaster.” (Note: There is a more comprehensive list of potential ‘bad outcomes’ in the link to the article.) Virus-vectored and genetically engineered vaccines could undergo recombination or hybridization with unpredictable outcomes.…Previous attempts to develop coronavirus and other vaccines e.g., RSV and dengue, have been hampered by the problem of ‘antibody dependent enhanced immunity’(ADEI), which has led to severe illness and deaths in the animals and human subjects involved in the trials28. This phenomenon only becomes apparent after vaccination, when the subject is exposed to wild virus at some point in the future. Worryingly, the Covid Vaccine trials have not been conducted in a way to exclude the possibility of this serious sequalae occurring months or years after vaccination... Late onset adverse vaccine effects such as Subacute Sclerosing Pan Encephalitis (SSPE),Ascending Polyneuritis, Myopathies, Autoimmune Diseases, Infertility and Cancers cannot be ruled out with short duration trials.” (“Open Letter From: UK Medical Freedom Alliance To: The Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunization… for COVID-19 in the UK.”)
It’s all very technical, but the truth is plain to see: There are serious risks associated with taking the Covid-19 vaccine. Most vaccine recipients will experience only minor aches and pains but some will undoubtedly get quite ill and permanently damage their health. No one really knows for sure because there have been no long-term trials. The Covid vaccine has been fast-tracked from Day 1. So, the question is: Do the benefits outweigh the risks. And, in this case, they clearly don’t. The chances of getting violently sick or dying from Covid are very slight, (IFR is 1 in 400) while the (potential) adverse effects from the vaccine are spelled out above. Why would anyone roll the dice on a vaccine that does not prevent one from contracting Covid, does not protect one from hospitalization, and will not prevent one from dying? That’s just not a good tradeoff. Here’s more from an article at Forbes:
“Prevention of infection must be a critical endpoint…(But) Prevention of infection is not a criterion for success for any of these vaccines. In fact, their endpoints all require confirmed infections and all those they will include in the analysis for success, the only difference being the severity of symptoms between the vaccinated and unvaccinated. Measuring differences amongst only those infected by SARS-CoV-2 underscores the implicit conclusion that the vaccines are not expected to prevent infection, only modify symptoms of those infected“… “We all expect an effective vaccine to prevent serious illness if infected. Three of the vaccine protocols…do not require that their vaccine prevent serious disease only that they prevent moderate symptoms which may be as mild as cough, or headache.” (“Covid-19 Vaccine Protocols Reveal That Trials Are Designed To Succeed”, Forbes)
Can you see what’s going on? “Prevention” is not even a primary objective. The standard for success in these trials is whether the vaccine mitigates Covid symptoms in people who test positive. But who cares about symptoms? What people care about is dying. That’s why people are so eager to get vaccinated, because they think it will eliminate the threat of dying.
This is a critical point, and one that is well worth mulling over.
Why?
Because it helps to illustrate how the vaccine campaign is built on a foundation of lies and deception. For example, when the drug companies boast that their product is “95% effective”, it does NOT mean that– if you get vaccinated– you will be immune to Covid. It doesn’t even mean that you won’t get violently ill and die. All it means is that the vaccine reduced the symptoms of some of the people in the trials who tested positive.
Did you know that?
Of course, you didn’t. You thought that if you took the vaccine, you’d be protected from Covid, because that is the logical assumption that anyone would make. Most people equate vaccines with immunity. The drug companies know that which is why they’re exploiting people’s ignorance and deliberately obfuscating the truth. They want people to continue to believe that vaccination is a protective shield that will save them from sickness and death. But it’s not. It’s a bunch of baloney.
Bottom line: Vaccine “effectiveness” is not measured in terms of “preventing infection”. It relates to the vaccine’s impact on symptoms. Here’s more from Forbes:
“One of the more immediate questions a trial needs to answer is whether a vaccine prevents infection. If someone takes this vaccine, are they far less likely to become infected with the virus? These trials all clearly focus on eliminating symptoms of Covid-19, and not infections themselves…. It appears that all the pharmaceutical companies assume that the vaccine will never prevent infection. Their criteria for approval is the difference in symptoms between an infected control group and an infected vaccine group. … A greater concern for the millions of older people and those with preexisting conditions is whether these trials test the vaccine’s ability to prevent severe illness and death. Again, we find that severe illness and death are only secondary objectives in these trials. None list the prevention of death and hospitalization as a critically important barrier…. These protocols do not emphasize the most important ramifications of Covid-19 that people are most interested in preventing: overall infection, hospitalization, and death. It boggles the mind and defies common sense that the National Institute of Health, the Center for Disease Control, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease, and the rest would consider the approval of a vaccine that would be distributed to hundreds of millions on such slender threads of success. It appears that these trials are intended to pass the lowest possible barrier of success.” (“Covid-19 Vaccine Protocols Reveal That Trials Are Designed To Succeed“, Forbes)
The author is right, isn’t he? If the vaccine doesn’t prevent infection, it’s not worth taking. Period. And yet, all these high-falutin organizations are on-board with this farce. It’s a disgrace. We’re not even talking about a “low bar” for success here. We’re talking about “no bar”. If people are concerned about symptoms, they’d be better off taking an aspirin and leaving it at that. There’s no need to inject themselves with some hybrid cocktail that no one has the slightest idea of what the long-term effects might be. That’s just reckless.
Like we said earlier, the real issues are being cleverly concealed by the people in charge who are hyping the “95% effective” nonsense to hoodwink people into cooperating. It’s blatantly dishonest.
And here’s something else to think over: What do we really know about these miraculous vaccines that are supposed to lead us out of our “public health crisis”?
Not much. We know that they’re being rushed to market. We know that they were delayed for political reasons. We know the science is being shaped by the politics. We know that vaccine development typically takes 10 years, and that “rushed” vaccine development takes 3 years, and that the upcoming batch of dubious vaccines will have taken roughly 8 months.
8 months!
Do you find that reassuring? Does that make you want to push your way to the front of the line on Vaccine Day? And are you surprised that a large sampling of medical professionals has decided they aren’t going to take the vaccine until it’s been out for at least a year??
And here’s another thing: The pharmaceutical giants don’t even know if their vaccines will stop transmission or not. I’m not kidding, they really don’t know. So– along with the fact that the vaccine will not provide immunity– it also will not stop the spread of the infection which means, the pandemic will continue.
Don’t you think the public is entitled to know this?
And let’s not forget that these so called “vaccines” don’t really fit the traditional definition of vaccine at all. The CDC defines a vaccine as: “A product that stimulates a person’s immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease, protecting the person from that disease.”
And the CDC defines “immunization” as:
“A process by which a person becomes protected against a disease through vaccination. This term is often used interchangeably with vaccination or inoculation.”
Well, we’ve already shown that the new vaccines do not necessarily provide immunity, so the question is whether they actually “stimulate a person’s immune system” or if the “vaccine” moniker was simply preserved as a promotional device to dupe the public? Here’s some background from an article at RT:
“The type of vaccine being developed against Covid-19 has never been used before, outside of Ebola. Some people feel that they should not really be called vaccines, because they are completely different from anything that has gone before. Up to now, vaccination has meant injecting a dead virus (or bacteria), or one that has been weakened and can only poorly replicate, or parts of the virus, or suchlike. Once inside the body, the immune system spots this ‘alien’ material, and creates a response against it, which will hopefully be remembered for years and years. The next time the dangerous virus appears, the body will use the immune memory of something very similar, to wipe out the virus (or bacteria) at high speed, giving it no chance to do damage Now, we have a thing called a messenger RNA vaccine (mRNA). RNA is, effectively, a single strand of DNA – the double helix that sits within our cells and makes up our genetic code. Many viruses are made up of a single strand of RNA, surrounded by a protein sphere. They enter the cell, take over the replication systems, make thousands of copies of themselves, then exit the cell. Sometimes killing the cell as they do so, sometimes exiting more gently. Covid19 (Sars-Cov2) is an RNA virus. Knowing this, rather than attempting to create a weakened virus, which can take years, or break the virus into bits, the v accine researchers decided to use Sars-Cov2’s RNA against itself. To do this, they isolated the section of RNA which codes for the ‘spike’ protein – which is the thing the virus uses as a ‘key’ to enter cells… These spike proteins then leave the cell – somehow or other, this bit is unclear. The immune system comes across them, recognizes them as ‘alien’ and attacks. In doing so, antibodies are created, and the immune memory system kicks into action. If, later on, a Sars-Cov2 virus gets into the body, the immune system fires up and attacks the remembered spike protein. Hopefully killing the entire virus.” (“As a doctor, people ask me if it’s safe to take a new Covid vaccine“, RT)
It’s all very complicated and cutting-edge, but what’s clear is that “Messenger RNA” and “spike’ protein” are a far-cry from plain-old dead virus which has worked just fine for decades. It’s hard to understand why the drug companies decided to reinvent the wheel in trying to settle on an antidote for Covid. Even so, this new state-of-the-art technology does have its drawbacks as was pointed out in the letter by the researchers in the Medical Freedom Alliance. Here’s what they said:
“Several Covid Vaccines involve the use of a completely new technology -mRNA vaccination -whose large-scale use in healthy human subjects is unprecedented and long-term effects unknown. Exogenous mRNA is inherently immunostimulatory, and this feature of mRNA could be beneficial or detrimental. In addition, a study found evidence of molecular mimicry … Virus-vectored and genetically engineered vaccines could undergo recombination or hybridisation with unpredictable outcomes….Previous attempts to develop coronavirus and other vaccines e.g., RSV and dengue, have been hampered by the problem of ‘antibody dependent enhanced immunity’(ADEI), which has led to severe illness and deaths in the animals and human subjects involved in the trials. This phenomenon only becomes apparent after vaccination, when the subject is exposed to wild virus at some point in the future. Worryingly, the Covid Vaccine trials have not been conducted in a way to exclude the possibility of this serious sequalae occurring months or years after vaccination.” (“Open Letter From: UK Medical Freedom Alliance To: The Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunization… for COVID-19 in the UK.”)
The point is, the effects of injecting a hybrid concoction into one’s body could be quite serious. We just don’t know what the long-term effects will be, and we probably won’t know because the vaccine is going to be rushed into distribution before those trials can be conducted. This is not a sensible strategy for dealing with the virus. It is needlessly reckless and, perhaps, lethal. Here’s more from an article at the Jerusalem Post:
“There is a race to get the public vaccinated, so we are willing to take more risks,” Tal Brosh, head of the Infectious Disease Unit at Samson Assuta Ashdod Hospital, told The Jerusalem Post….. “We will have a safety profile for only a certain number of months, so if there is a long-term effect after two years, we cannot know,” Brosh said, adding that we could wait two years to discover them, “but then we would have the coronavirus for two more years.”… (Brosh) acknowledged that there are unique and unknown risks to messenger RNA vaccines, including local and systemic inflammatory responses that could lead to autoimmune conditions….. An article published by the National Center for Biotechnology Information, a division of the National Institutes of Health, said other risks include the bio-distribution and persistence of the induced immunogen expression; possible development of auto-reactive antibodies; and toxic effects of any non-native nucleotides and delivery system components… (Michal) Linial ( a professor of biological chemistry at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, ) expressed similar sentiments: “Classical vaccines were designed to take 10 years to develop. I don’t think the world can wait for a classical vaccine.”….But when asked if she would take the vaccine right away, she responded: “I won’t be taking it immediately – probably not for at least the coming year,” she told the Post. “We have to wait and see whether it really works.” (“Could mRNA COVID-19 vaccines be dangerous in the long-term?“, The Jerusalem Post)
Great, so the “professor of biological chemistry” isn’t going to take the vaccine, but it’s okay for ordinary people like you and me??
Give me a break. Professor Linial’s reluctance is a tacit admission that the vaccine is not safe. What else could it mean? Here’s more from the same article:
“In order to receive Food and Drug Administration approval, the companies will have to prove there are no immediate or short-term negative health effects from taking the vaccines. But when the world begins inoculating itself with these completely new and revolutionary vaccines, it will know virtually nothing about their long-term effects.” (The Jerusalem Post)
Well, that’s just dandy. We know the vaccines won’t prevent infection, hospitalization or death. We also know they are “are completely different from anything that has gone before”. We also know they won’t stop transmission, and that their long-term safety is very much in doubt. Even so, our leaders– who lie to us about virtually everything– want us to click our heels and submissively take “the jab” whether we want to or not.
In my opinion, the risks of vaccination far outweigh the benefits. I would rather trust my own auto-immune system (and the new treatments, medications and therapies) then be guinea pig in Big Pharma’s sinister lab experiment.
“Thanks, but no thanks”.


thelibertydaily--2020-11-29--In a Real Pandemic, Shouldn’t Overall Death Rates Be Increasing?

Using statistical analysis , a senior lecturer from Johns Hopkins University ( JHU ) has demonstrated that COVID-19 has resulted in no excess deaths , yet the university has censored the article online .
Dr. Genevieve Briand , the “ Assistant Director for MS in Applied Economics , ” gave a video lecture in which she examined the deaths due to COVID-19 and deaths overall in the U.S .
Her findings were compiled in an article in the JHU newsletter , penned by Yanni Gu , which has since been removed by the university .
In a tweet , JHU @ @ @ @ @ @ @ because it “ was being used to support false and dangerous inaccuracies about the impact of the pandemic .
We regret that this article may have contributed to the spread of misinformation about COVID-19.
” In the lecture , using data drawn from the Centers for Disease Control ( CDC ) website , Briand noted that the deaths of “ older people stayed the same before and after COVID-19.
” This finding was contrary to expectation : “ Since COVID-19 mainly affects the elderly , experts expected an increase in the percentage of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , this increase is not seen from the CDC data .
In fact , the percentages of deaths among all age groups remain relatively the same.
” Presenting data from February to September , she noted that each week , before and after the impact of the virus , “ an average of over 60,000 individuals die per week .
So 50,000 to 70,000 deaths per week is normal , it is to be expected.
” The latest weekly report from the CDC notes that in week 46 of 2020 , only “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an underlying or contributing cause of death.
” Comparing deaths from 2014 to 2020 , Briand then demonstrated that whilst the data recorded a slight spike in 2020 , there were only 11,292 more deaths than 2018 .
Thus the COVID spike was found to be consistent with both seasonal and historical trends .
Taking 2018 as an example , Briand pointed out that “ the pattern of seasonal increase in the total number of deaths is a result of the rise in deaths by all causes , ” with “ heart disease @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” being the three leading causes of death .
Yet when examining 2020 ’ s data in the seasonal period , she found that “ COVID-19-related deaths exceeded deaths from heart diseases , ” which was unusual , since heart disease “ has always prevailed as the leading cause of deaths.
” Comparing the 2020 figures to the corresponding period in 2018 , they showed that in 2020 , “ instead of the expected drastic increase across all causes , there was a significant decrease in deaths due to heart disease .
Even @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deaths is observed for all other causes.
” The JHU newsletter article stated that the “ trend is completely contrary to the pattern observed in all previous years.
” It also observes that “ the total decrease in deaths by other causes almost exactly equals the increase in deaths by COVID-19.
” Hence , according to Dr. Briand , “ the COVID-19 death toll is misleading … deaths due to heart diseases , respiratory diseases , influenza and pneumonia may instead be recategorized as being due to COVID-19.
” In the weeks in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deaths , the rise in COVID deaths almost exactly mirrored the decrease in the leading causes of deaths .
She concluded with a number of summary statements : “ By the CDC ’ s own account , in this pandemic , deaths of children have been less than in each of the last five flue seasons.
” “ For three of the four weeks where COVID-19 deaths , where reported , have been higher than heart disease deaths , the number of deaths due to heart disease , influenza , and pneumonia , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” she added .
“ All this points to the reason we have a higher number of reported COVID-19 deaths among older individuals than younger individuals , is simply because every day in the U.S. older individuals die in higher numbers than younger individuals.
” Briand further commented : “ The data doesn ’ t show that older individuals are dying in a higher proportion to total deaths than usual .
We also found evidence that COVID-19 death numbers were misleading .
We found evidence some deaths caused by diseases of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , flu and pneumonia , and more , were simply reclassified as COVID-19 deaths.
” The American Institute for Economic Research commented on the finding , saying that the “ accounting error regarding Covid deaths … has caused mass hysteria and misinformed public policy .
Closing down communities to fight a virus that according to the data , has had no significant contribution to total deaths , reduces our overall capacity to build a healthy society.
” “ All of this points to no evidence that COVID-19 created any excess deaths .
Total @ @ @ @ @ @ @ numbers .
We found no evidence to the contrary , ” Dr. Briand concluded .
This article was republished with permission from LifeSiteNews .

The claim that COVID-19 has caused no excess deaths in the United States was disputed Tuesday by two fact-checking organizations.
Correction: The claims in this article were disputed by Science Feedback, a non-profit dedicated to improving the credibility of scientific information online. Their fact-check found that Briand’s claims are inaccurate.
Science Feedback said that “the article’s report that Briand’s analysis showed no increase in deaths compared to previous years, based on data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, is inaccurate.”
“Briand had attempted to examine whether the pandemic had led to an increased amount of deaths by comparing changes in the proportion of deaths among different age groups from early February to early September 2020,” said the outlet. “However, this method obscured the increases in the raw number of deaths, because more deaths can occur without any marked changes in the proportion of deaths among different age groups.”
Additionally, the claims were found inaccurate by a fact-check from Lead Stories.
“Experts in mortality data say her analysis completely ignores seasonal patterns and doesn’t address the overall data showing 300,000 more deaths this year than would have been consistent with past years, most of them caused by COVID-19,” their fact-check said.
– – –
Using statistical analysis, a senior lecturer from Johns Hopkins University (JHU) has demonstrated that COVID-19 has resulted in no excess deaths, yet the university has censored the article online.
Dr. Genevieve Briand, the “Assistant Director for MS in Applied Economics,” gave a video lecture in which she examined the deaths due to COVID-19 and deaths overall in the U.S.
Her findings were compiled in an article in the JHU newsletter, penned by Yanni Gu, which has since been removed by the university. In a tweet, JHU stated that the article was deleted, because it “was being used to support false and dangerous inaccuracies about the impact of the pandemic. We regret that this article may have contributed to the spread of misinformation about COVID-19.”
In the lecture, using data drawn from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) website, Briand noted that the deaths of “older people stayed the same before and after COVID-19.” This finding was contrary to expectation: “Since COVID-19 mainly affects the elderly, experts expected an increase in the percentage of deaths in older age groups. However, this increase is not seen from the CDC data. In fact, the percentages of deaths among all age groups remain relatively the same.”
Presenting data from February to September, she noted that each week, before and after the impact of the virus, “an average of over 60,000 individuals die per week. So 50,000 to 70,000 deaths per week is normal, it is to be expected.” The latest weekly report from the CDC notes that in week 46 of 2020, only “1,260” had COVID–19 “listed as an underlying or contributing cause of death.”
Comparing deaths from 2014 to 2020, Briand then demonstrated that whilst the data recorded a slight spike in 2020, there were only 11,292 more deaths than 2018. Thus the COVID spike was found to be consistent with both seasonal and historical trends.
Taking 2018 as an example, Briand pointed out that “the pattern of seasonal increase in the total number of deaths is a result of the rise in deaths by all causes,” with “heart disease, respiratory diseases, influenza and pneumonia” being the three leading causes of death.
Yet when examining 2020’s data in the seasonal period, she found that “COVID-19-related deaths exceeded deaths from heart diseases,” which was unusual, since heart disease “has always prevailed as the leading cause of deaths.”
Comparing the 2020 figures to the corresponding period in 2018, they showed that in 2020, “instead of the expected drastic increase across all causes, there was a significant decrease in deaths due to heart disease. Even more surprising … this sudden decline in deaths is observed for all other causes.”
The JHU newsletter article stated that the “trend is completely contrary to the pattern observed in all previous years.”
It also observes that “the total decrease in deaths by other causes almost exactly equals the increase in deaths by COVID-19.”
Hence, according to Dr. Briand, “the COVID-19 death toll is misleading … deaths due to heart diseases, respiratory diseases, influenza and pneumonia may instead be recategorized as being due to COVID-19.”
In the weeks in April with the highest reported number of deaths, the rise in COVID deaths almost exactly mirrored the decrease in the leading causes of deaths.
She concluded with a number of summary statements: “By the CDC’s own account, in this pandemic, deaths of children have been less than in each of the last five flue seasons.”
“For three of the four weeks where COVID-19 deaths, where reported, have been higher than heart disease deaths, the number of deaths due to heart disease, influenza, and pneumonia, chronic respiratory disease and more, decreased,” she added.
“All this points to the reason we have a higher number of reported COVID-19 deaths among older individuals than younger individuals, is simply because every day in the U.S. older individuals die in higher numbers than younger individuals.”
Briand further commented: “The data doesn’t show that older individuals are dying in a higher proportion to total deaths than usual. We also found evidence that COVID-19 death numbers were misleading. We found evidence some deaths caused by diseases of the heart, chronic lower order respiratory diseases, flu and pneumonia, and more, were simply reclassified as COVID-19 deaths.”
The American Institute for Economic Research commented on the finding, saying that the “accounting error regarding Covid deaths … has caused mass hysteria and misinformed public policy. Closing down communities to fight a virus that according to the data, has had no significant contribution to total deaths, reduces our overall capacity to build a healthy society.”
“All of this points to no evidence that COVID-19 created any excess deaths. Total death numbers are not above normal death numbers. We found no evidence to the contrary,” Dr. Briand concluded.
– – –
This article was republished with permission from LifeSiteNews.
LifeSiteNews Staff


thelibertydaily--2020-11-29--Science-Hating Democrat Tyrant Jay Inslee: We Must ‘Invent a Way’ to Eat With a Mask On

As Washington hospitals are filling up , and daily averages of new cases and deaths continue to rise statewide , Governor Jay Inslee spoke with KIRO Radio ’ s Dave Ross this week about the state ’ s response to the pandemic .
Among other topics , Ross asked about COVID transmission at restaurants , pointing out that there ’ s been pushback from both Republicans and Democrats about the impact the new rules and closures will have on businesses .
Group of Democrats side with hospitality association on indoor dining ban While Gov .
Inslee has made it clear @ @ @ @ @ @ @ happens on tribal lands , casinos are open with reduced capacity and other restrictions .
According to the Washington Indian Gaming Association website , there have been no major outbreaks linked to tribal casinos in the state .
So if they ’ re open with gaming and dining , Ross asks , why can ’ t other businesses be trusted to do the same ?
“ Well , it ’ s not a matter of trust , ” Inslee said .
“ The vast number of restauranteurs are trying to do the right @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hard at bringing hygiene , they ’ re cleaning their tables , they ’ re spreading out to the extent humanly possible .
So it ’ s not a matter of trust.
” “ It ’ s just that transmissions are taking place in every dining facility .
We know this .
This is a scientific fact , ” he added .
The governor said it ’ s not possible to trace every outbreak or case , not only because it ’ s too many cases but there ’ s also no way @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at all times .
“ We only do contact tracing for the employees because that ’ s the only people we really know who are there at that moment , ” he said .
When contact tracing has been done , the number one place for outbreaks that are in non health care facilities are restaurants , Inslee explained .
“ Now , that ’ s not a surprise because this is the place that the virus does its dirty work , which is any time we ’ re close to each other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for an hour , hour and a half , and that ’ s a restaurant , ” he said .
“ It ’ s also our own dining room tables , and the same thing happens when we have friends over for dinner in our own homes.
” “ So this is nothing to knock restaurants , ” he added .
“ It ’ s just the nature of the environment.
” Gov .
Inslee says there are a number of international studies that show that there are transmissions of COVID-19 in restaurants @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , shows that people who test positive for COVID are twice as likely to have gone to a restaurant .
“ As I ’ ve indicated , of the non health care facilities , the number one place that we have shown outbreaks are restaurants , so we just know it ’ s a significant transmission risk , ” he said .
“ That is a scientific certainty .
And that ’ s no matter where the restaurants are , no matter where you are dining.
” He knows it ’ s difficult @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which is why he ’ s hoping $ 135 million will make an impact .
“ But , by the way , we ’ ve got to help more than the businesses , ” he added .
“ We ’ ve got to help the employees of the restaurants , and that ’ s why we have to find a way to make up for the failure of the federal government to extend unemployment compensation and the pandemic unemployment benefit that run out at the end of this year .
That ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” “ And if they do not , we ’ ve got to figure out a way , in my book , to try to replace some or all of that for these beneficiaries , ” he added .
Ross asked if restaurants could get a COVID-19 safety inspection similar to health inspections to say they ’ re safe to operate since casinos seem to have proved it ’ s possible to be open safely .
“ I do not have the ability and the state of Washington does not have the ability @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not have the ability , legally , under the U.S. Constitution , to close dining rooms in Indian and tribal reservations , ” he said .
“ … I may do it if I had the power , but I don ’ t have the power , so … that ’ s not an option .
I can ’ t do that .
Now , tribes could make the decision on their own , but that ’ s not something I control .
So that ’ s not a legitimate reason to expose @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Just because outbreaks have not been traced in large numbers to restaurants or casinos , Inslee says , does not mean that transmission is not taking place there .
“ You ’ ve heard the term , the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence ?
That ’ s the situation here when you talk to the epidemiologists , ” Gov .
Inslee said .
“ It is a scientific fact … that when you sit at a table talking to someone , without a mask , it is a high @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that has evaluated it has made that conclusion .
I believe it .
And it is common sense.
” Inslee added that you can not make these environments completely safe .
“ The restaurants , I want to tip my hat to them , they have made efforts to do a variety of things — clean the tables , spread some of the tables out , employees themselves wearing masks .
Those are good things , ” he said .
“ But until they invent a way somebody can eat with a mask @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this risk.
” “ It ’ s not their fault , ” the governor added .
“ It ’ s a reality that we have to take our masks off to eat .
That ’ s what creates the risk .
It can not be avoided , unless you go outside and eat outside , and that is allowed , as is takeout .
And I encourage everyone to use takeout as much as humanly possible to support these hard working businesses .
That ’ d be a good thing to do over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of this interview between KIRO Radio ’ s Dave Ross and Gov .
Inslee on the COVID-19 Seattle podcast here , or by texting COVID to 98973 .

As Washington hospitals are filling up, and daily averages of new cases and deaths continue to rise statewide, Governor Jay Inslee spoke with KIRO Radio’s Dave Ross this week about the state’s response to the pandemic. Among other topics, Ross asked about COVID transmission at restaurants, pointing out that there’s been pushback from both Republicans and Democrats about the impact the new rules and closures will have on businesses.
Group of Democrats side with hospitality association on indoor dining ban
While Gov. Inslee has made it clear before that he does not govern what happens on tribal lands, casinos are open with reduced capacity and other restrictions. According to the Washington Indian Gaming Association website, there have been no major outbreaks linked to tribal casinos in the state. So if they’re open with gaming and dining, Ross asks, why can’t other businesses be trusted to do the same?
“Well, it’s not a matter of trust,” Inslee said. “The vast number of restauranteurs are trying to do the right thing. They’ve worked really hard at bringing hygiene, they’re cleaning their tables, they’re spreading out to the extent humanly possible. So it’s not a matter of trust.”
“It’s just that transmissions are taking place in every dining facility. We know this. This is a scientific fact,” he added.
The governor said it’s not possible to trace every outbreak or case, not only because it’s too many cases but there’s also no way of knowing who was in which restaurant at all times.
“We only do contact tracing for the employees because that’s the only people we really know who are there at that moment,” he said.
When contact tracing has been done, the number one place for outbreaks that are in non health care facilities are restaurants, Inslee explained.
“Now, that’s not a surprise because this is the place that the virus does its dirty work, which is any time we’re close to each other, unmasked, breathing on each other for an hour, hour and a half, and that’s a restaurant,” he said. “It’s also our own dining room tables, and the same thing happens when we have friends over for dinner in our own homes.”
“So this is nothing to knock restaurants,” he added. “It’s just the nature of the environment.”
Gov. Inslee says there are a number of international studies that show that there are transmissions of COVID-19 in restaurants. One famous one, he explains, shows that people who test positive for COVID are twice as likely to have gone to a restaurant.
“As I’ve indicated, of the non health care facilities, the number one place that we have shown outbreaks are restaurants, so we just know it’s a significant transmission risk,” he said. “That is a scientific certainty. And that’s no matter where the restaurants are, no matter where you are dining.”
He knows it’s difficult for restaurants and small businesses right now, which is why he’s hoping $135 million will make an impact.
Gov. Inslee announces $135M in economic relief for businesses, families
“But, by the way, we’ve got to help more than the businesses,” he added. “We’ve got to help the employees of the restaurants, and that’s why we have to find a way to make up for the failure of the federal government to extend unemployment compensation and the pandemic unemployment benefit that run out at the end of this year. That’s why we need Congress to act.”
“And if they do not, we’ve got to figure out a way, in my book, to try to replace some or all of that for these beneficiaries,” he added.
Ross asked if restaurants could get a COVID-19 safety inspection similar to health inspections to say they’re safe to operate since casinos seem to have proved it’s possible to be open safely.
“I do not have the ability and the state of Washington does not have the ability, and the Washington State Legislature does not have the ability, legally, under the U.S. Constitution, to close dining rooms in Indian and tribal reservations,” he said. “… I may do it if I had the power, but I don’t have the power, so … that’s not an option. I can’t do that. Now, tribes could make the decision on their own, but that’s not something I control. So that’s not a legitimate reason to expose people to this pandemic in non-tribal restaurants.”
Just because outbreaks have not been traced in large numbers to restaurants or casinos, Inslee says, does not mean that transmission is not taking place there.
“You’ve heard the term, the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence? That’s the situation here when you talk to the epidemiologists,” Gov. Inslee said. “It is a scientific fact … that when you sit at a table talking to someone, without a mask, it is a high transmission risk. Every international medical authority that has evaluated it has made that conclusion. I believe it. And it is common sense.”
Inslee added that you cannot make these environments completely safe.
“The restaurants, I want to tip my hat to them, they have made efforts to do a variety of things — clean the tables, spread some of the tables out, employees themselves wearing masks. Those are good things,” he said. “But until they invent a way somebody can eat with a mask on, you can’t eliminate this risk.”
“It’s not their fault,” the governor added. “It’s a reality that we have to take our masks off to eat. That’s what creates the risk. It cannot be avoided, unless you go outside and eat outside, and that is allowed, as is takeout. And I encourage everyone to use takeout as much as humanly possible to support these hard working businesses. That’d be a good thing to do over this weekend.”
Hear an extended version of this interview between KIRO Radio’s Dave Ross and Gov. Inslee on the COVID-19 Seattle podcast here, or by texting COVID to 98973.
Follow @http://twitter.com/Mynorthwest