Friday, January 31, 2025

Conspiracy Resource

Conspiracy news & views from all angles, up-to-the-minute and uncensored

Archives

The LIABLE Act would end Pfizer’s and Moderna’s free pass | Blaze Media
COVID-19
, ,

The LIABLE Act would end Pfizer’s and Moderna’s free pass | Blaze Media

Should a product that is completely funded, marketed, monopolized, and then mandated by government be less liable than Toyota is for its airbags?

Anyone with a modicum of common sense would understand that the more a product is favored with regulatory shortcuts and other benefits only government can provide, the more the product’s makers should be on the hook for liability if it causes damage. The fact is that the federal government required millions of people — including members of the armed services — to get the jab. We know now that those injections stay in the body indefinitely and potentially alter our DNA.

Giving consumers their day in court will be the perfect way to sort out whether Pfizer’s and Moderna’s products are as safe and effective as they claim.

U.S. Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) has a remedy. The congressman on Tuesday introduced legislation that would hold Pfizer and Moderna liable retroactively for vaccine injury and death.

The LIABLE Act would strip the COVID shot manufacturers of the indemnity they currently enjoy under both the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 (because the CDC recommends them for children) and the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act of 2005.

Ideally, the NCVIA and the PREP Act should be repealed entirely. The 1986 law shields manufacturers from nearly all liability except for willful misconduct and created an extremely limited vaccine injury compensation program.

Meanwhile, the PREP Act indemnifies any “countermeasure” during a declared public health emergency and limits damage payouts to an extremely cumbersome and narrow program called the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program. Only 11 people have been compensated under the CICP — an appallingly low number, especially considering the more than 1.6 million reports of injury to VAERS, including 37,100 deaths, 214,000 hospitalizations, and nearly 70,000 reports of permanent disability.

It’s highly likely that tens of millions of people are currently without recourse for compensation from a product that was fraudulently foisted upon the American people by these companies in collusion with the federal government. Knowing that, Roy’s bill comes as welcome relief.

Although retroactive laws are generally a bad idea, in this case the Big Pharma companies deserve to own the devastation they’ve caused. Given that Roy’s bill would not impose criminal penalties, it would not violate the Constitution’s prohibition of ex post facto laws, so long as it is passed within a reasonable amount of time.

The companies continue to deny all culpability, of course — despite their own documents acknowledging widespread injury. We now have a host of court-released documents showing Pfizer and Moderna knew about injuries during clinical trials and in the early days of the vaccine’s release, yet they lied over and over about safety and efficacy.

We also now know the manufacturers distributed vials that were not used in the clinical trial and lacked the filtration to filter out DNA plasmid contamination, which is suspected of being the culprit for many of the odd disorders that are not fully explained by damage from the shot’s spike protein. Florida Surgeon General Dr. Joseph Ladapo has called on the FDA to take these products off the market simply because of the DNA contamination, never mind the other side effects.

Pfizer documents also show that company officials knew of thousands of serious adverse effects and deaths from day one. The Informed Consent Action Network recently persuaded a federal judge to release Moderna documents that confirm the same problems. A Moderna document written for the FDA titled “CBER Requested Tables” (p. 40) shows that in the clinical trial there was a 17.4% rate of “grade 3 or grade 4 systemic” adverse reactions within seven days among those in the trial group, compared to 3.8% in the placebo group. They knew from the start that serious reactions were not rare, yet they pushed to have it injected in every arm by mandate.

It is absurd for an industry that has more wealth, government support, cultural backing, and ubiquitous lionization from the medical industry to accept less liability than Honda or Toyota. Nonetheless, Roy’s bill is a compromise to repeal indemnity for the worst vaccine of all, which has been proven to endanger every major organ system.

States can also leverage laws against the indemnification. Although the liability issue is federal, states can pass laws barring all vaccine requirements for products that are not on the hook for liability. In South Carolina, Rep. Josiah Magnuson (R) has introduced H. 4907, which would bar mandates for all products that are exempt from liability. The bill would apply to public and private employers. You cannot force a human being to take a product that can never be held accountable in court.

The government never tells you that you must buy a Honda car or lawn mower. It doesn’t market the product for Honda, nor does it have every single cultural and medical association of repute and influence monopolizing the public square with taxpayer funding to promote automobiles. Oh, and cars don’t go in your body.

Giving consumers their day in court will be the perfect way to sort out whether Pfizer’s and Moderna’s products are as safe and effective as they claim. If they truly are safe, then they have nothing to fear.

Of course, we know they have plenty to fear.

Read More
Esteemed molecular biologist warns of ‘smoking gun’ evidence COVID-19 was engineered by researchers at Chinese lab | Blaze Media
COVID-19

Esteemed molecular biologist warns of ‘smoking gun’ evidence COVID-19 was engineered by researchers at Chinese lab | Blaze Media

An esteemed molecular biologist has come forward to warn of “smoking gun” evidence that COVID-19 not only originated from China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology, but it was engineered by researchers at the Chinese lab.

Richard H. Ebright, Ph.D., is a molecular biologist at Rutgers University and is on the Board of Governors Professor of Chemistry and Chemical Biology at Rutgers University and Laboratory Director at the Waksman Institute of Microbiology. The Harvard Junior Fellow earned the Searle Scholar Award, was named a Johnson & Johnson Discovery Research Fellow, was awarded the Walter J. Johnson Prize, was named Infectious Diseases Society of America Fellow, and took home the National Institutes of Health MERIT Award.

Ebright has also served on the National Institutes of Health Molecular Biology Study Section and National Institutes of Health special emphasis panels.

He has more than 175 publications and more than 40 issued and pending patents.

Ebright is also an outspoken critic of the unchallenged narrative of the origins of the COVID-19 virus. Ebright notes that a document from 2018 points to “smoking gun” evidence that COVID-19 was engineered by researchers at a Chinese lab.

Ebright spotlights a March 2018 grant proposal for experiments called “Project DEFUSE.”

American and Chinese virologists lobbied to receive a $14 million grant from the Pentagon’s Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, known as DARPA, for funding to engineer bat viruses related to SARS-CoV-1 to examine how they could jump to human transmission.

According to the Wall Street Journal, “The proposal for Project DEFUSE specified that the viruses’ infectivity would be enhanced by inserting into them a genetic element known as a furin cleavage site. Depending on the starting viruses, this protocol could have produced SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, which has a distinctive furin cleavage site.”

The proposal involved Chinese bat researcher Zhengli Shi, EcoHealth Alliance president Peter Daszak, and Ralph Baric – a University of North Carolina professor, who reportedly collaborated with the Wuhan Institute of Virology on “risky bat-virus research” in 2015.

Commentary noted, “The proposal outlines a joint project between Baric’s UNC lab and a team headed by WIV senior scientist Zhengli Shi, the famous ‘Bat Lady’ of the Wuhan lab. The proposal was drafted under the supervision of Peter Daszak — whose EcoHealth Alliance would funnel the hoped-for grant money to the researchers — and was addressed to the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA).”

The proposal was ultimately denied by DARPA.

However, Project DEFUSE may have been funded by the Chinese government and executed by researchers at the Wuhan Lab of Virology.

The Washington Times reported, “Nonetheless, speculation persists about whether the research may have proceeded with support from the Chinese government. Project DEFUSE also suggested modifications to bat coronavirus spike proteins, introducing ‘human-specific cleavage sites.’ Notably, these techniques are similar to those some biologists surmise could have played a role in crafting the coronavirus responsible for the global health crisis.”

Nicholas Wade – a former science editor of the New York Times – wrote in the WSJ, “Viruses made according to the DEFUSE protocol could have been available by the time COVID-19 broke out, sometime between August and November 2019. This would account for the otherwise unexplained timing of the pandemic along with its place of origin.”

Dr. Filippa Lentzos – an associate professor of science and international security at King’s College London – has also urged the world to acknowledge that the COVID pandemic may have originated from research by scientists.

“We have to acknowledge the fact that the pandemic could have started from some research-related incident,” Lentzos said in a United Nations speech.

“Are we going to find that out? In my view, I think it’s very unlikely that we will,” she stated. “We need to do better in future. We are going to see more ambiguous events.”

“There will be an outbreak, and we won’t know if it’s natural, deliberate, or accidental, and as an international community we need to find ways in which we can investigate that,” Lentzos warned. “For our purposes what is important we need to acknowledge that it could have been, and so what should your responses be.”

As Blaze News reported on Saturday, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recently announced new guidelines regarding COVID-19 that are in stark contrast to previous recommendations by the health agency.

The CDC now says people who test positive for COVID-19 no longer need to quarantine from others for at least five days, advised treating coronavirus in the same manner as the flu, and to gather outside to prevent sickness.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Read More
VAERS chart shows a shocking result of COVID vaccines | Blaze Media
COVID-19
, ,

VAERS chart shows a shocking result of COVID vaccines | Blaze Media

For the longest time, anyone – including medical professionals and scientists – who dared to challenge the effectiveness of the COVID vaccine was censored, silenced, and banished to the realm of crazy anti-vaxxers.

However, now the tides are turning as more and more evidence surfaces about the reality of the rapidly developed COVID vaccine. The same companies that once shoved the vaccine down our throats, swearing that it was 100% safe and effective, are now backtracking.

“Last week we talked about the Pfizer scientists admitting the heart disease coming from the vaccine. This week the biggest study so far ever done on the global safety of the vaccine has just been released, and [the CDC] too is now admitting to severe illness, death, and lingering long symptoms,” says Pat Gray.

No longer can these companies deny that the vaccine is “causing problems neurologically … blood problems, and heart-related conditions.”

“I’ve got a chart here that’s going to blow your mind, Pat,” says Keith Malinak before displaying the following data from VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System), managed by the CDC and the FDA.

“These are VAERS’ reported deaths by vaccine between the years 1988 and 2021 … over thirty years of data,” says Keith. “All of the deaths from vaccines (not the COVID one) are on the left,” while the COVID vaccine “accounts for half the deaths” even though by 2021, it had only been in circulation for one year.

What’s perhaps most upsetting is that despite this data, the CDC continues to tell people “to go get it,” says Pat.

To hear more, watch the clip below.

Want more from Pat Gray?

To enjoy more of Pat’s biting analysis and signature wit as he restores common sense to a senseless world, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Read More
Blood clots, neurological disorders, and swollen hearts: Multinational study on COVID vaccines paints a damning picture | Blaze Media
COVID-19
,

Blood clots, neurological disorders, and swollen hearts: Multinational study on COVID vaccines paints a damning picture | Blaze Media

Those skeptical of the assertion that COVID-19 vaccines were altogether safe and
effective — a claim long advanced by once-trusted government agencies, pharmaceutical companies, and the media amidst a historic censorship campaign targeting dissenters and critics — appear to have had their doubts once again validated.

A damning new peer-reviewed multinational study examining data from nearly 100 million people has not only affirmed the
well-documented link between the COVID-19 vaccines and increased risk of heart conditions but has also highlighted troubling links between the AstraZeneca, Moderna, and Pfizer vaccines and medical conditions such as Guillain-Barré syndrome, brain and spinal cord inflammation, Bell’s palsy, and convulsions.

The study was conducted by the Global COVID Vaccine Safety Project — a Global Vaccine Data Network initiative supported by both the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Department of Health and Human Services — and
published last week in the esteemed journal Vaccine, the official journal of the Japanese Society for Vaccinology.

Lead author Kristýna Faksová of the Department of Epidemiology Research at the Danish State’s Serum Institute was joined by researchers from various other countries including Argentina, Australia, Canada, Finland, New Zealand, and Scotland in assessing whether there was a greater risk of 13 neurological, blood, and heart-related medical conditions occurring following the receipt of a COVID-19 vaccine.

According to the observed versus expected rates study, which included data on 99 million people vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 across eight countries, “the risk up to 42 days after vaccination was generally similar to the background risk for the majority of outcomes; however, a few potential safety signals were identified.”

“Bell’s palsy had an increased OE ratio after a first dose of [Pfizer’s] BNT162b2 and [Moderna’s] mRNA-1273,” said the study. “There were also increased OE ratios for febrile seizures following a first and second dose of mRNA-1273 … and for generalized seizures following first mRNA-1273 dose and fourth BNT162b2 dose.”

The researchers observed a trend of Guillain-Barré syndrome and cerebral venous sinus thrombosis — a type of blood clot in the brain — cases after viral vector vaccines such as the Oxford-AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine, which Canada and European nations
ditched in spring 2021 over reports of dangerous blood clots.

The researchers specifically found a “statistically significant increase in GBS cases within 42 days after a first ChAdOx1 dose.” Whereas they expected to find 76 GBS “events,” they found well over twice as many.

The University of Auckland, which hosts the Global Vaccine Data Network,
noted that the researchers found possible “safety signals for transverse myelitis (inflammation of part of the spinal cord) after viral vector vaccines and acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (inflammation and swelling in the brain and spinal cord) after viral vector and mRNA vaccines.”

However, the paper cautioned that “although some case reports have suggested a possible association between COVID-19 vaccination and ADEM, there was no consistent pattern in terms of vaccine or timing following vaccination, and larger epidemiological studies have not confirmed any potential association.”

The study did however confirm
previously established safety signals for myocarditis and pericarditis following mRNA vaccination, highlighting “significantly higher risks of myocarditis following the first, second and third doses of BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 as well as pericarditis after the first and fourth dose of mRNA-1273, and third dose of ChAdOx1, in the 0–42 days risk period.”

According to the study, “Potential underreporting across countries may have led to an underestimation of the significance of potential safety signals” for viral vector and mRNA vaccines alike.

“The size of the population in this study increased the possibility of identifying rare potential vaccine safety signals,” Faksová
said in a statement. “Single sites or regions are unlikely to have a large enough population to detect very rare signals.”

The researchers claimed that the “safety signals identified in this study should be evaluated in the context of their rarity, severity, and clinical relevance.”

Additionally, they noted the “overall risk–benefit evaluations of vaccination should take the risk associated with infection into account, as multiple studies demonstrated higher risk of developing the events under study, such as GBS, myocarditis, or ADEM, following SARS-CoV-2 infection than vaccination.”

Blaze News
reported earlier this month that a peer-reviewed study published Jan. 24 in the Springer Nature Group journal Cureus suggested the COVID-19 vaccines were a rushed product with an “unacceptable harm-to-reward ratio.”

The study noted that the kinds of serious adverse events that would be factored into a risk-benefit comparison “have often been wrongly ascribed to COVID-19 rather than to the COVID-19 mRNA vaccinations.”

“Misattributions of SAEs to COVID-19 often may be due to the amplification of adverse effects when mRNA injections are followed by SARS-CoV-2 subvariant infection,” said the study. “Injuries from the mRNA products overlap with both [post-acute COVID-19 syndrome] and severe acute COVID-19 illness, often obscuring the vaccines’ etiologic contributions.”

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Read More
WHO director is upset ‘conspiracy theories’ may derail his global pandemic treaty | Blaze Media
Conspiracy

WHO director is upset ‘conspiracy theories’ may derail his global pandemic treaty | Blaze Media

WHO director general Tedros Ghebreyesus traveled to Dubai last week to hype “Disease X,” the yet-to-be-released sequel to COVID-19 that is supposed to scare nations around the world into embracing an internationally binding pandemic treaty.

Although Ghebreyesus has fear-mongered about the hypothetical pestilence for several weeks, it appears he has finally let questions and concerns over his proposed remedies get under his skin.

In his Feb. 12 address, entitled, “A Pact with the Future: Why the Pandemic Agreement Is Mission-Critical for Humanity,” Ghebreyesus lashed out at critics who have suggested his proposed “collective action” amounts to an affront to national sovereignty, suggesting that “conspiracy theories” put “the health of the world’s people at risk.”

Ghebreyesus painted himself as a prophet in the speech, noting that years ahead of the pandemic, he warned that the world would be ill prepared should a virus sweep the land.

“Six years ago, I stood on this stage and said the world was not prepared for a pandemic and expressed my concern at the time that a pandemic can happen any time,” said Ghebreyesus. “Less than two years later, in December 2019, COVID-19 pandemic struck. And indeed the world was not prepared.”

The WHO general director glossed over how the world was unprepared and in the dark largely on account of his organization and China. While Beijing
covered up the spread of the virus, putting the world behind in taking action, Ghebreyesus reportedly provided smoke cover for Beijing’s deceit at the outset; told the nations of the world not to restrict travelers from China or close their borders even though China had domestically; and then later granted Beijing a veto over the WHO’s COVID-19 origins report.

In his address, Ghebreyesus noted that some “progress” has been made since the pandemic in the way of internationalist schemes and collective action, such as “improvements in surveillance, pandemic fund, and also the establishment of the
pathogen sharing app and building capacities in vaccine production. … Still the world is not prepared for a pandemic.”

“History teaches us that the next pandemic is a matter of when, not if. It may be caused by an influenza virus or a new coronavirus,” continued the bureaucrat.

Blaze News
reported last month that amidst elites’ talk of “Disease X,” Chinese scientists crafted a coronavirus variant called GX_P@V that kills humanized mice 100% of the time, usually with late-stage brain infections. The scientists from the country on which Ghebreyesus has lavished much praise and little criticism said their mutant virus “underscores a spillover risk of FX_P2V into humans.”

“Or it may be caused by a new pathogen we don’t even know about yet or what we call ‘Disease X,'” said Ghebreyesus, whose largely American-funded organization warned of an “infodemic” or a “an overabundance of information” in 2020.

The WHO leader suggested “Disease X” is not a novel term but indicated it has instead been used as a placeholder term since 2018 to describe pathogens that have yet to be discovered.

“COVID-19 was a Disease X,” said Ghebreyesus. “There will be another Disease X or a Disease Y or a Disease Z. And as things stands, the world remains unprepared for the next Disease X.”

The bureaucrat’s preferred solution to this viral alphabet is the
WHO Pandemic Preparedness Treaty: a legally binding pact “under the Constitution of the World Health Organization to strengthen pandemic prevention, preparedness and response.”

Ghebreyesus is scrambling to get the treaty finalized ahead of a May 27 vote by the World Health Assembly. In the meantime, critics are pointing out the treaty’s apparent flaws.

Rep. Chris Smith (R-N.J.)
noted at a press conference earlier this month that the so-called pandemic treaty suffers from “a slew of significant issues surrounding the proposed treaty — including lack of transparency, the back-room negotiations, WHO overreach and infringement on U.S. sovereignty, unknown financial obligations for U.S. taxpayers, threats to intellectual property rights and free speech, funding for abortion, and how the treaty will benefit China at the expense of the United States.”

“Throughout the COVID-19 Pandemic, the WHO caved to the Chinese Communist Party rather than following the science,” said Rep. Brad Wenstrup (R-Ohio), chairman of the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus. “Now, the WHO wants to infringe upon our national sovereignty with their proposed ‘pandemic treaty.'”

At the same press conference, Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, suggested, “This is a global power grab using any future emergency as a justification to use that power.”

Ghebreyesus claimed in Dubai that a “major barrier” to the successful implementation of his pandemic treaty is “the litany of lies and conspiracy theories about the agreement — that it’s a power grab by the World Health Organization; that it will cede sovereignty to WHO; that it will give WHO power to impose lockdowns or vaccine mandates on countries; that it’s an attack on freedom; that WHO will not allow people to travel; and that WHO wants to control people’s lives.”

“If these lies weren’t so dangerous, these lies would be funny,” said Ghebreyesus. “But they put the health of the world’s people at risk, and that is no laughing matter.”

“These claims are utterly, completely, categorically false,” added the WHO head.

After suggesting that the internationalist scheme bolstered individual nations’ sovereignty and would not empower the WHO to intervene in the domestic choices of various countries, Ghebreyesus underscored, “We cannot allow this historic agreement, this milestone in global health, to be sabotaged by those who spread lies, either deliberately or unknowingly.”

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Read More
Trump likely won the 2020 election after all
2020 Election
,

Trump likely won the 2020 election after all

According to the legacy news networks, social media platforms, various deep state actors, and other corrupt institutions, the 2020 election was the safest and most secure in history and anyone who questioned Joe Biden’s victory was a wacky “election denier.”

That has been the dominant narrative for the past three years, which has produced a chilling effect and caused many to forgo conducting a deep dive concerning whether the 2020 election really was as safe and secure as we have been told it was.

It is incumbent upon the 50 states to ensure that their voting systems are as safe and secure as possible. We still have time to make necessary changes.

In reality, the 2020 election was most likely marred by widespread mail-in voting fraud. And even worse, the extensive mail-in voter fraud almost certainly tipped the election in favor of Joe Biden.

In other words, had rampant mail-in voter fraud been prevented in the 2020 election, Donald Trump would have won the Electoral College and been re-elected to a second term.

At this point, you may be wondering how I can be so sure that the 2020 election was tainted by mail-in voter fraud. The answer is simple: The voters have told us so.

In late 2023, the Heartland Institute and Rasmussen Reports conducted a simple survey to gauge the degree of voter fraud in the 2020 election. We asked 1,085 voters who participated in the 2020 election about their voting behaviors three years prior. To our surprise, the results showed that at least one in five mail-in voters admitted to committing ballot fraud in the 2020 election.

Our findings caused quite a stir in the media, especially among those who suspected the 2020 election was not completely secure due to the dubious changes to voting rules state officials unconstitutionally imposed under the cover of COVID-19.

Shortly after the poll was released, former President Trump called it “the most important poll released in the last 20 years” and “the biggest story of the year.”

Eventually, we began to wonder if we could apply the poll results to publicly available election data to determine whether mail-in voter fraud impacted the outcome of the election. This was no easy task.

After extensive analysis using the raw survey data provided by Rasmussen coupled with state-based and other reputable sources documenting mail-in vote totals, we concluded that mail-in voter fraud almost certainly changed the 2020 election outcome in all six of the crucial swing states.

This is all laid out in great detail in the Heartland Institute’s latest policy study, aptly titled “Who Really Won the 2020 Election?” (Spoiler alert: not Joe Biden.)

Here are just a few of the main takeaways:

Upon further analysis of the Rasmussen survey data, we found that more than one in four mail-in voters (28.2%, to be precise) admitted to committing at least one kind of election fraud in the 2020 election.

Under multiple scenarios, with differing rates of mail-in voter fraud taken into account, our results indicate that Trump would have won the Electoral College in the 2020 election had fraudulent mail-in ballots not been counted.

Even if the level of fraud detected in the Heartland/Rasmussen survey substantially overstated mail-in voter fraud by multiple orders of magnitude, Trump would likely still have won the 2020 election.

According to the official 2020 election results, Biden defeated Trump in the Electoral College 306 to 232. The national vote tally was similarly lopsided, with Biden receiving approximately 81 million votes to Trump’s 74 million votes.

In almost all the hypothetical scenarios we lay out, Trump would have won enough Electoral College votes to defeat Biden soundly.

But the 2020 election, like most recent national elections, was ultimately decided in the swing states.

In 2020, Biden won each of the six swing states by fewer than 20,000 votes, a tiny margin in the context of the overall vote.

But here’s the rub: When we extrapolated for mail-in voter fraud in the six crucial swing states, using state-specific mail-in voter data and accounting for a variety of fraud rates (from the 28% level all the way down to the 1% level), the Electoral College vote changed considerably.

In almost all the hypothetical scenarios we lay out, Trump would have won enough Electoral College votes to defeat Biden soundly. In other words, Biden’s Electoral College victory, although seemingly large, was predicated on razor-thin margins in all six of the swing states.

We know for a fact that each of the six swing states changed its election rules in the months leading up to the 2020 election to allow for mass mail-in voting based on inaccurate state voter registration rolls. We also know that several of these states made it easy for mail-in voting fraud to be committed by eliminating common-sense guardrails like signature verification and permitting shady election practices to take place like ballot harvesting.

So it stands to reason that these unprecedented last-minute changes to voting procedures likely resulted in a flood of fraudulent ballots being counted. It also stands to reason that widespread mail-in voter fraud in the 2020 election disproportionately benefitted Joe Biden, seeing that he received more than twice as many mail-in votes as Trump.

When considering all these factors, it seems obvious that Biden’s 2020 victory was aided and abetted by rampant mail-in voter fraud. But as they say, what’s done is done. It does no good to cry over spilled milk or shady elections.

With less than nine months before the 2024 presidential election, however, we must ensure that this does not happen again. It is incumbent upon the 50 states to ensure that their voting systems are as safe and secure as possible. We still have time to make necessary changes.

Going forward, will enough states do the right thing? Or, like so many other things in today’s upside-down world, is the quaint American tradition of free and fair elections a vestige of the past?

Read More
Study claims harms of COVID-19 vaccines ‘profoundly outweighed’ benefits; calls for moratorium on mRNA shots | Blaze Media
COVID-19
, ,

Study claims harms of COVID-19 vaccines ‘profoundly outweighed’ benefits; calls for moratorium on mRNA shots | Blaze Media

A new peer-reviewed study in a Springer Nature Group journal has painted a damning picture of the global COVID-19 vaccination campaign along with the novel mRNA products at its core — vaccines millions of Americans were compelled to take if they wanted to
keep their jobs, eat in public, stay in school, remain in uniform, or visit their loved ones.

According to the
study, published on Jan. 24 in the PubMed-listed open access journal Cureus, standards were dropped, corners were cut, and red flags were missed in the testing, authorization, and ultimate deployment of the COVID-19 vaccines. The result: a product with an “unacceptable harm-to-reward ratio.”

Impurities

Extra to hinting at possible ulterior motives driving the decision to rush out the vaccines in a fraction of the time conventionally figured appropriate, epidemiologist M. Nathaniel Mead and his co-authors — including Texas cardiologist
Peter McCullough — wrote that the vaccines “evaluated in the trials were not the same products eventually distributed worldwide.”

Whereas the mRNA products from “clinical batches” in the registration trials were ostensibly free of process-related impurities, the doses made with “a method much more suitable for mass production known as Process 2 … showed significantly reduced mRNA integrity,” claimed the researchers.

“All of the COVID-19 mRNA products released to the public were produced via Process 2 and have been shown to have varying degrees of DNA contamination,” said the study. “The failure of regulatory authorities to heretofore disclose process-related impurities (e.g., SV40) has further increased concerns regarding safety and quality control oversight of mRNA vaccine manufacturing processes.”

Florida Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo
noted the detection of “Simian Virus 40 (SV40) promoter/enhancer DNA” in the vaccines in a Dec. 6 letter to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Peter Marks, director of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research,
said in reply, “No SV40 proteins are encoded for or are present in the vaccines,” and emphasized that the shots were safe and effective.

The European Medicines Agency, which regulates vaccines in the EU, indicated that “non-functional” fragments of SV40’s DNA sequence are used in the manufacture of the COVID-19 vaccine,
reported the Associated Press.

Pfizer indicated the SV40 sequence is commonly used in developing vaccines.

Regardless of whether elements of SV40 were specifically of any consequence, Mead and his coauthors underscored that the mRNA vaccines were not as advertised.

Harms and unintended consequences

“Re-analysis of the Pfizer trial data identified statistically significant increases in serious adverse events (SAEs) in the vaccine group,” wrote Mead and the other researchers. “Numerous SAEs were identified following the Emergency Use Authorization (EUA), including death, cancer, cardiac events, and various autoimmune, hematological, reproductive, and neurological disorders.”

According to the study’s authors, many of these serious SAEs “have often been wrongly ascribed to COVID-19 rather than to the COVID-19 mRNA vaccinations.”

“Misattributions of SAEs to COVID-19 often may be due to the amplification of adverse effects when mRNA injections are followed by SARS-CoV-2 subvariant infection,” said the study. “Injuries from the mRNA products overlap with both [post-acute COVID-19 syndrome] and severe acute COVID-19 illness, often obscuring the vaccines’ etiologic contributions.”

The study suggested not only that the vaccines are likely responsible for a host of devastating side effects that have been conveniently blamed on the virus but also that boosters have actually had a paradoxical impact.

“Multiple booster injections appear to cause immune dysfunction, thereby paradoxically contributing to heightened susceptibility to COVID-19 infections with successive doses,” wrote the researchers.

The researchers suggested further that the vaccines are perpetuating the emergence of new variants.

“Mass mRNA inoculations result in the natural selection of highly infectious immune-evading SARS coronavirus variants that successfully bypass vaccine-induced immunity, leading to a dramatic rise in the prevalence of these variants,” said the study.

On the basis of their review, the researchers concluded that for most adults under the age of 50, “the perceived benefits of the mRNA boosters are profoundly outweighed by their potential disabling and life-threatening harms. Potential harms to older adults appear to be excessive as well.”

In addition to calling for COVID-19 vaccines to be removed from the childhood immunization schedule along with the suspension of boosters, the researchers urged “governments to endorse and enforce a global moratorium on these modified mRNA products until all relevant questions pertaining to causality, residual DNA, and aberrant protein production are answered.”

Regarding possible conflicts of interests, the authors indicated that no financial support was afforded them by any organization for the study.

Stephanie Seneff, one of the authors, nevertheless declared a grant from Quanta Computer Inc., a Taiwan-based computer manufacturer. Entrepreneur Steve Kirsch, another author, noted that he is the founder of the Vaccine Safety Research Foundation but “receives no income from this entity.” McCullough, who supervised the study, highlighted his employment and stock options from the Wellness Company.

McCullough was involved in another troubling study that was recently published.

His
peer-reviewed study published last month in the pharmacotherapy journal Therapeutic Advances in Drug Safety stressed that “COVID-19 vaccination is strongly associated with a serious adverse safety signal of myocarditis, particularly in children and young adults resulting in hospitalization and death.”

“COVID-19 vaccines induce an uncontrolled expression of potentially lethal SARS-CoV-2 spike protein within human cells, have a close temporal relationship of events, and are internally and externally consistent with emerging sources of clinical and peer-reviewed data supporting the conclusion that COVID-19 vaccines are deterministic for myocarditis, including fatal cases,” claimed the study.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Read More
Study: COVID-19 vaccination is ‘strongly associated with a serious adverse safety signal of myocarditis’ | Blaze Media
COVID-19
, , ,

Study: COVID-19 vaccination is ‘strongly associated with a serious adverse safety signal of myocarditis’ | Blaze Media

The U.S. government,
the mainstream media, and so-called experts long downplayed the possibility of a link between heart inflammation and COVID-19 vaccines. Elements of the medical establishment and social media companies worked to shut up those who dared to press the issue.

Health officials and their stenographers in the media later admitted an elevated risk of myocarditis among mRNA COVID-19 vaccinees, especially among boys and young men. Despite
belated advisories to this effect from the Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, little changed in the way of the prevailing narrative: the supposed benefits of the vaccines outweighed the risks, which allegedly remained mild and rare.

A new peer-reviewed
study published Saturday in the pharmacotherapy journal Therapeutic Advances in Drug Safety has thrown some more cold water on that persistent narrative, indicating that “COVID-19 vaccination is strongly associated with a serious adverse safety signal of myocarditis, particularly in children and young adults resulting in hospitalization and death.”

“COVID-19 vaccines induce an uncontrolled expression of potentially lethal SARS-CoV-2 spike protein within human cells, have a close temporal relationship of events, and are internally and externally consistent with emerging sources of clinical and peer-reviewed data supporting the conclusion that COVID-19 vaccines are deterministic for myocarditis, including fatal cases,” the study claims.

The study is the result of an effort on the part of Texas cardiologist
Peter McCullough, biologist Jessica Rose, and researcher Nicolas Hulscher to further explore links between COVID-19 vaccination and heart inflammation using the vaccine adverse events report system.

On the basis of data in VAERS — a system created and implemented by the FDA and CDC in 1990 — the researchers examined the frequency of myocarditis reports in the aftermath of COVID-19 vaccination and compared their findings with past reports from other vaccines that have been rolled out over the years.

The researchers found that upon the massive rollout of the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in 2021, there was a significant spike in the number of myocarditis reports, “far higher than the reports from all other vaccines combined over the previous 30 years. This side effect was mostly reported in young individuals, especially males.”

The spike represented a 2,500% increase in the “absolute number of reports in the first year of the campaign when comparing historical values prior to 2021.”

Contrary to governmental claims of mildness, the study found that most of those who reported myocarditis required emergency medical care or hospitalization, and 92 individuals reportedly succumbed to the apparently vaccine-induced affliction.

The study highlighted that the COVID-19 vaccines, which were rushed through safety and efficacy trials inside a 10-month period as opposed the years-long process that novel genetic products customarily undergo,
continue to be recommended to everyone 6 months of age and older. The researchers suggested this recommendation should be axed, at the very least for children.

“Children have a negligible risk for COVID-19, and yet they are a high-risk group for myocarditis from COVID-19 vaccination,” wrote the researchers. “The World Health Organization’s current vaccination advice states that healthy young people ages 6 months to 17 years are a ‘low priority group’ and that vaccinating this group has limited impact on public health.”

The researchers stressed further in their paper that “myocarditis resulting in hospitalization and death attributable to the COVID-19 vaccines may be viewed as an excess risk of the injection program” because,
despite claims to the contrary, the vaccines never stopped transmission and there “are no prospective, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trials of COVID-19 injectable products demonstrating reductions in COVID-19 hospitalizations and deaths as primary or secondary endpoints.”

“We believe COVID-19 vaccination may pose more harm to children than theoretical benefit. This corroborates actions taken by Sweden, Norway, and Finland in 2021 when health officials suspended the use of Moderna injections in young people due to the detection of safety signals for an increased risk of myocarditis,” added the researchers.

Europeans are not the only ones who have spared their children from the novel vaccines. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’ administration has
recommended against COVID-19 vaccination for children and young men since March 2022.

McCullough
said of his study, “If vaccines cannot demonstrate acceptable safety profiles or be modified to improve safety, they must be removed from the market. Don’t accept ‘unavoidable harms’ and freedom from liability for the manufacturers. These data demonstrate COVID-19 vaccines are not safe.”

Dr. Jordan Peterson responded to the study on X,
writing, “I think it’s about time to lay some criminal charges.” He added in a subsequent message, “This is utterly terrible.”

Katy Faust, the head of the children’s rights group Them Before Us,
tweeted, “The pressure to vaccinate my teenagers was overwhelming. From schools, from doctors, from friends, from public establishments that shut them out. A pox on all the medical professionals who pushed this at the risk of children’s lives and long-term health.”

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Read More
Bombshell report finds Chinese lab mapped COVID-19 virus weeks before China notified the world | Blaze Media
COVID-19

Bombshell report finds Chinese lab mapped COVID-19 virus weeks before China notified the world | Blaze Media

Chinese researchers reportedly identified and mapped the COVID-19 virus weeks before China notified the world, according to a new bombshell report. The alarming findings raise serious concerns about China’s transparency regarding the initial coronavirus outbreak.

According to documents obtained by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, a Chinese researcher uploaded a nearly complete sequence of the COVID-19 virus structure to a U.S. database run by the National Institute of Health on Dec. 28, 2019 – two weeks before China officially notified the world about the deadly virus to the world.

The Chinese researcher has been named as Dr. Lili Ren – a virologist at the Institute of Pathogen Biology of the Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences in Beijing.

The House Energy and Commerce Committee noted that the Institute of Pathogen Biology of Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences has ties to the Chinese Communist Party and People’s Liberation Army. The Republican lawmakers also noted that Ren is a “current subgrantee of non-profit EcoHealth Alliance on the same National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease (NIAID) grant as the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), which has been debarred from receiving NIH grants for ten years for failing to provide laboratory records requested by NIH and for conducting research that ‘did lead or could lead to health issues or other unacceptable outcomes.'”

Ren reportedly tried to publish the genetic sequence of the SARS-CoV-2 virus to GenBank – a comprehensive database of genetic sequences that is publicly available and operated by the U.S. National Institutes of Health.

However, GenBank reportedly notified Ren via email three days later that her submission was incomplete and that she needed to provide additional annotations. After Ren did not provide the annotations, GenBank deleted Ren’s genetic sequencing from its processing queue on Jan. 16, 2020, according to the Washington Post.

Interestingly enough, a different team of Chinese researchers submitted a “nearly identical” genetic sequence of SARS-CoV-2 to GenBank that was published on Jan. 12, 2020, according to a letter sent to the House Energy and Commerce Committee leaders from Melanie Anne Egorin – a senior official at the HHS.

China didn’t officially notify the World Health Organization about the COVID-19 sequence until Jan. 12, 2020.

Before the virus was identified as a novel coronavirus, Beijing had maintained the outbreak was a cluster of cases of pneumonia “of unknown cause” in Wuhan, Hubei Province. Chinese officials linked the outbreak to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market in Wuhan.

“The existence of a SARS-CoV-2 sequence days before the CCP acknowledged an outbreak, and more than two weeks before the China CDC release their sequence, calls into question how early the CCP knew about the virus and how long they withheld this information from the world, resulting in more deaths and wasting critical time to develop vaccines and treatments,” said Republicans on the House Energy and Commerce Committee.

Republicans said the Biden administration, the NIH, and HHS have “obstructed and delayed Congressional investigations into the origins of SARS-CoV-2” and “refused to produce this sequence for over seven months.”

The sequence was only released to the House Energy and Commerce Committee after it had threatened subpoenas.

Committee Chair Reps. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.), Brett Guthrie (R-Ky.), and Morgan Griffith (R-Va.) said, “This significant discovery further underscores why we cannot trust any of the so-called ‘facts’ or data provided by the CCP and calls into serious question the legitimacy of any scientific theories based on such information.”

“The American people deserve to know the truth about the origins of SARS-CoV-2, and our investigation has uncovered numerous causes for concern, including how taxpayers’ dollars are spent, how our government’s public health agencies operate, and the need for more oversight into research grants to foreign scientists,” the Republican representatives stated on Wednesday. “In addition to equipping us to better prepare for the next pandemic, this investigation’s findings will help us as policymakers as we work to strengthen America’s biosafety practices and bolster oversight of research grants.”

The Wall Street Journal reported, “Having the virus information two weeks earlier ‘would have helped in the early stages of the outbreak,’ particularly with putting a more effective testing regimen in place, said Richard Ebright, a microbiologist at Rutgers University.”

Jesse Bloom – a virologist at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center in Seattle – told the Washington Post, “That two weeks would have made a tangible difference in quite a few people’s lives.”

There have been an estimated 7 million COVID-19 deaths.

The Chinese Embassy told the WSJ, “China has kept refining our COVID response based on science to make it more targeted. China’s COVID response policies are science-based, effective, and consistent with China’s national realities. They can stand the test of history.”

Ren did not respond to a request for comment from the Wall Street Journal.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Read More
‘They never said you won’t get COVID!’ Howie Mandel challenges RFK Jr. on vaccine efficacy | Blaze Media
COVID-19
, ,

‘They never said you won’t get COVID!’ Howie Mandel challenges RFK Jr. on vaccine efficacy | Blaze Media

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. had a lively exchange with television host and podcaster Howie Mandel surrounding claims in the media that were made about the efficacy of COVIID-19 vaccines. Mandel argued that the messaging was not as misleading as Kennedy was making it out to be.

On Mandel’s “Howie Mandel Does Stuff” podcast, Kennedy attempted explained that the claims that were made after clinical COVID-19 vaccine trials were not transparent.

Mandel acknowledged that there was an at-risk group of obese, ill, or older people who were more likely to need vaccination.

Kennedy described Pfizer’s clinical trial.

“The clinical trial study, you had 22,000 people who took the vaccine and 22,000 people got the placebo, and what the result was after six months, they had to hand that data to FDA in order to get the emergency use authorization,” Kennedy began. “That data showed that in the vaccine group there was one COVID death of 22,000 people over six months; in the unvaccinated group there were two COVID deaths of 22,000 people, so that allowed the company to tell the public the vaccine is 100% effective.”

“That’s a misnomer,” Mandel quickly replied. “100% effective in as far as … because I saw people on the news going ‘well, I got the vaccine, I still got COVID.’ They never said you won’t get COVID; they just said that it’ll kind of pull back the severity of it.”

Kennedy then reiterated, “What they’re saying, out of 22,000 people there was one COVID death among the vaccinated and there was two COVID deaths on the unvaccinated 22,000 people, and that allowed them to claim it’s 100% effective.”

“Effective for what? You can’t use the word effective,” Mandel exclaimed.

“You remember they kept saying it’s 100% effective?” Kennedy asked.

“No, they just said it will negate the severity. … The word ‘effective’ didn’t say you won’t get [it], I never heard ‘you won’t get COVID,'” Mandel added.

“It’s not 100% effective, okay, because if that’s the metric, what they really should have been telling us is that to prevent one COVID death, they need to give 22,000 vaccines.”

Mandel later summarized his position by explaining that many of the decisions made by the establishment were rushed due to panic.

“I believe a lot of mistakes were made, but we were panicked, and you know, we made decisions based on the amount of information that we had at the moment,” he said, adding that guidance evolved as more information came to fruition.

The TV-panel judge also plainly asked Kennedy if he was “anti-vaccine,” to which the politician replied, “If you show me a vaccine that was safe and effective, that did what it was supposed to do, I would have no problem with it.”

Mandel, a longtime comedian, has continually stepped out of his typical element in recent months to support free speech and open commentary.

In December 2023 Mandel appeared on the popular comedy podcast “Kill Tony” and praised the show for its free speech mentality.

“There’s no such thing as political correctness; it’s comedy! And now I live in L.A. and it’s it’s tough. I can’t say what I want to say,” he explained. “Only you give people a platform to do it right. It’s funny, it’s raw, [the audience isn’t] recording it, you can say anything on this show!” he yelled.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Read More