Tuesday, March 10, 2026

Conspiracy Resource

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

Archives

COVID-19

Pfizer mRNA jab leaves 1 in 3 recipients with ‘unintended immune response’: Cambridge study

A peer-reviewed University of Cambridge
study published Wednesday in the scientific journal Nature has revealed the Nobel Prize-winning technique that paved the way for synthetic messenger ribonucleic acid vaccines is far from flawless.

To trick the body into allowing cellular interventions by synthetic mRNA-based therapeutics, scientists discovered they first had to make chemical modifications to the building blocks of the mRNA. Researchers indicated this week that encounters with repeat base modifications often lead to cellular miscommunications, which ultimately trigger immune flare-ups in vaccine recipients.

Since the mRNA technology rushed to market during the pandemic is now being used to treat various cancers and diseases, the researchers stressed the urgency of addressing this issue.

Anne Willis, a co-author of the study and biochemist from the University of Cambridge’s Medical Research Council Toxicology Unit, said it is “essential that [mRNA] therapeutics are designed to be free from unintended side effects.”

What’s the background?

Katalin Karikó and Drew Weissman were
awarded the 2023 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in October for their discoveries that enabled the development of “effective mRNA vaccines” against COVID-19.

The duo observed that the body treated synthetic mRNA — genetic material designed to tell cells in the body how to make specific proteins, such as the “spike” protein — as a foreign invader. Faced with this invader, the body would undergo an inflammatory response. This reaction proved troublesome for potential therapeutics as the body’s natural response to the synthetic material hindered its efforts to enter cells and exert its effects,
according to the University of Cambridge.

Karikó and Weissman discovered that by chemically modifying its uridine RNA base, the synthetic mRNA could steal past the body’s defenses and issue its protein schematics.

The Telegraph
reported that it was widely believed until now that the modification to uridine was unproblematic. However, it’s now clear that these covert genetic operations leave an undesired mark on a significant portion of patients subjected to the gene therapy.

Cellular miscommunication

Researchers with the MRC Toxicology Unit set out to analyze whether there were any safety issues linked to mRNA-based therapeutics. They found that “the cellular machinery that ‘reads’ mRNAs ‘slips’ when confronted with repeats of a chemical modification commonly found in mRNA therapeutics,” the university indicated in a release.

The aforementioned “cellular machinery” is called a ribosome. The ribosome reads and translates mRNA code, providing the body with instructions on how to make antibodies. When confronted with a chemical base modification of mRNA called “N1-methylpseudouridine,” ribosomes apparently slip around 10% of the time, according to Anne Willis and immunologist James Thaventhiran.

These so-called slips result in the production of unintended proteins, which set off an “unintended immune response.”

The Cambridge researchers, collaborating with scientists at other English universities, tested for evidence of the production of “off-target” proteins in vaccine recipients, specifically those who took the mRNA Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine. Sure enough, they “found an unintended immune response occurred in one third of the 21 patients in the study who were vaccinated.”

mRNA is also utilized in the Moderna vaccine, but the scientists did not report testing it for slips.

Despite the immune responses and the small sample size, the researchers claimed there were no “ill effects” as the unintended proteins produced were not viable in the body.

“The safety concern for future mRNA medicines is that misdirected immunity has huge potential to be harmful, so off-target immune responses should always be avoided,” said Thaventhiran.

The Cambridge team determined that the mRNA sequences could be redesigned to ensure the production of the intended protein and thereby avoid such unintended immune responses.

Thaventhiran, senior author of the study, issued the necessary declaration that COVID-19 vaccines are safe, then added, “We need to ensure that mRNA vaccines of the future are as reliable. Our demonstration of ‘slip-resistant’ mRNAs is a vital contribution to future safety of this medicine platform.”

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
COVID-19

Florida Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo notes ‘DNA fragments detected in mRNA COVID shots’

Florida Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo, who notes that DNA fragments have been detected in mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, has issued a letter asking questions related to the issue.

“On today’s episode of: What the FDA… I asked @DrCaliff_FDA to address the DNA fragments detected in mRNA COVID shots & how they are hitchhiking into human cells. DNA integration into the human genome & oncogenesis are known risks, even acknowledged by @US_FDA in ’07,” Ladapo tweeted when sharing his letter to FDA Commisoner Robert Califf. CDC Director Mandy Cohen is also included on the letter.

In a letter earlier this year, Ladapo accused Califf and then-CDC Director Rochelle Walensky of ignoring many of the risks related to mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. In his new letter dated December 6, 2023, he noted that “no response has been received.”

“In addition to my previous letter, I am writing to you to address the recent discovery of host cell DNA fragments within the Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 mRNA vaccines,” Ladapo noted in his new letter.

“This raises concerns regarding the presence of nucleic acid contaminants in the approved Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, particularly in the presence of lipid nanoparticle complexes, and Simian Virus 40 (SV40) promoter/enhancer DNA. Lipid nanoparticles are an efficient vehicle for delivery of the mRNA in the COVID-19 vaccines into human cells, and may therefore be an equally efficient vehicle for delivering contaminant DNA into human cells. The presence of SV40 promoter/enhancer DNA may also pose a unique and heightened risk of DNA integration into host cells,” he noted.

Ladapo pressed for answers to several questions, including one which reads, “Considering the potentially wide biodistribution of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines and DNA contaminants beyond the local injection site, have you evaluated the risk of DNA integration in reproductive cells with respect to the lipid nanoparticle delivery system?”

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
Vaccines

DHS deletes video encouraging people to report family members for spreading COVID ‘disinformation’ online: Report

The Department of Homeland Security’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency quietly deleted a video posted in June 2021 that encouraged Americans to report their family members to social media platforms for spreading “disinformation” online regarding COVID, a Tuesday report from the Foundation for Freedom Online revealed.

The FFO, which archived a copy of the “dystopian” video, accused the DHS’ CISA of attempting to hide evidence that it supports censorship in online discourse.

The now-deleted, animated video featured a teacher providing a lesson on “Countering Disinformation: Cybersecurity 101.”

“Since 2020, there has been a lot of false and inaccurate information about COVID-19,” the video stated.

The CISA’s instructional video depicted a cartoon version of a social media feed from the perspective of a made-up character named Susan.

“Consider this post from Susan’s feed: It’s from her Uncle Steve, who claims everybody knows COVID is no worse than the flu,” the video continued.

In the fictional scenario, Susan’s uncle is accused of using unreliable sources, including a “fake news story,” to back up his claims about COVID. Meanwhile, Susan argues her stance and is praised in the video for using the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention website, which the video described as a “trustworthy” and “fact-based” source “due to large government funding.”

The video concludes with Susan reporting her uncle’s statement on social media as “disinformation.”

“You can’t win every argument online, but you can protect yourself from disinformation. You can stop it from spreading, too,” the video stated.

In 2022, Tucker Carlson covered the CISA’s video during a Fox News segment alongside United States Senate candidate Republican Blake Masters. He explained that the cartoon-formatted video appeared to be targeted toward children.

“By definition, if you’re trying to separate children from their parents, break apart the family so that you can have more control over the country – that’s the very definition of authoritarianism,” Carlson said.

According to the FFO, the video was removed from the CISA’s YouTube account sometime between April 9 and May 9 of this year, leading up to the landmark Missouri v. Biden censorship lawsuit that the Supreme Court is set to hear.

The CISA was formed in 2018 to combat threats of foreign cyberattacks, the FFO report noted. However, the DHS subdivision orchestrated two “switcheroos,” including changing the meaning of “cybersecurity” to include online so-called disinformation and expanding its focus from foreign attacks to domestic, the report added.

FFO Executive Director Mike Benz told the Daily Caller News Foundation, “DHS now has no defense to a Supreme Court injunction prohibiting them from future domestic censorship activity. If DHS is deleting evidence of its past behavior today, it should have no problem with a court order today barring such activity in the future.”

The CISA did not respond to a request for comment from the DCNF.

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
COVID-19

Natural immunity provides better protection against COVID than vaccines – even against hospitalization, new study finds

People with natural immunity to COVID-19 have better protection against the respiratory disease than those who received mRNA vaccines, according to a new study.

A group of researchers from Estonia took a pool of 329,496 adults between Feb. 26, 2020, and June 25, 2021.

The analysis was based on data from 246,113 individuals who qualified as one of four categories. The scientists categorized the individuals as those with no immunity against COVID, those with natural immunity from previously being infected, those who had vaccine-induced immunity, and those who had both natural immunity and who were vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2.

“Natural immunity conferred substantial protection against COVID-19 hospitalization,” the authors of the study wrote. “Our study showed that natural immunity offers stronger and longer-lasting protection against infection, symptoms, and hospitalization compared to vaccine-induced immunity.”

The Epoch Times reported, “People who received a vaccine were nearly five times as likely as the naturally immune to test positive for COVID-19 during the Delta era and 1.1 times as likely to test positive for COVID-19 during the Omicron era, researchers in Estonia found.”

Individuals who were vaccinated against COVID were seven times as likely to be hospitalized during the Delta variant era, and two times when the Omicron variant was spreading, according to the outlet.

The study declared that hospitalization due to COVID was “extremely rare” for those with hybrid immunity. The researchers discovered that hybrid immunity had “substantially lower rates of reinfection” than those with natural immunity. However, the protection was diminished during the Omicron period.

The Estonian researchers noted, “Studies on the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines suggest that protection against SARS-CoV-2 decreases over time, waning considerably after six months.”

The authors concluded, “Our findings suggest that the risk of infection (and of developing severe disease) is affected not only by age and comorbidities but also by personal history of immunity-conferring events and by the viral variant responsible for the epidemic. Therefore, personalized risk-based vaccination strategies could be both effective and cost-effective.”

The study was published on Nov. 21 in Scientific Reports – a peer-reviewed journal that is part of the Nature Portfolio and covers natural sciences, psychology, medicine, and engineering.

In February, a study was published that declared that natural immunity provides “at least as high, if not higher” levels of protection against COVID-19 as two doses of an mRNA vaccine. The research analyzing 65 studies from 19 different countries was published in The Lancet – one of the oldest and most respected medical journals in the world.

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
Great Reset

Bill Gates is buying up land from small farmers to monopolize food supply — not to save the planet, author claims

Bill Gates is attempting to monopolize the nation’s food supply by backing efforts to bankrupt small independent farmers, then buying up big swaths of their land, author Seamus Bruner claimed in his recently released book, “Controligarchs.”

Bruner’s new book accused Gates of lining his pockets by spearheading an effort to move away from traditional farming under the guise of saving the planet. A chapter about the “war on farmers” explains how Gates and other technology industry moguls are attempting to take over the country’s food supply to elevate their net worth.

The Microsoft cofounder has supported bans on traditional crop nutrients and fertilizers “after Gates and his buddies had secured the intellectual property for the replacement fertilizers,” Bruner stated. He accused Gates of “targeting the fertilizer industry” for over a decade while simultaneously “buying up large swaths of American farmland.” Farming restrictions and the more costly alternative fertilizers have bankrupted some small independent farmers.

Gates has also invested in Upside Foods, a company creating lab-grown meats, touted as the first synthetic meat company to receive approval from the FDA. Gates, who claimed that cow flatulence contributes significantly to climate change, also invested in other companies creating synthetic food alternatives, including Beyond Meat and Impossible Foods. The two companies have over two dozen product patents and more than 100 pending.

In 2021, Gates stated, “I do think all rich countries should move to 100% synthetic beef. You can get used to the taste difference, and the claim is they’re going to make it taste even better over time. Eventually, that green premium is modest enough that you can sort of change the [behavior of] people or use regulation to totally shift the demand.”

Gates has reportedly spent over $1 billion on hundreds of thousands of acres of American agricultural land, which has sparked concerns. Earlier this year, he was asked about the purchases and whether he thought there was “a problem with billionaire wealth and how much you can disproportionally acquire?”

“I own less than 1/4000 of the farmland in the U.S. I have invested in these farms to make them more productive and create more jobs. There isn’t some grand scheme involved — in fact, all these decisions are made by a professional investment team,” Gates responded.

Bruner explained that Gates “is not just buying the land” but also “the rights to water below ground.”

“In addition to farms (and the irrigation) and fertilizer, Gates has been hunting for sizable interests in water and water treatment — a crucial component when seeking to control the agricultural industry,” he stated.

Bruner told Fox News Digital, “First, it was patented seeds and patented fertilizers, and now they are patenting meat alternatives. Banning cattle would grant effective monopolies to the alternative protein companies and benefit investors such as Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg and even BlackRock. Fake meats are about controlling the food market, not saving the planet.”

The Gates Foundation did not respond to a request for comment, Fox News Digital reported.

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
Elections

Secure elections are the bedrock of our constitutional republic

The bedrock upon which America’s constitutional republic is built is our free and fair elections. It’s part of what has allowed America to become the greatest nation in the world. But the security of our elections is under attack by forces that seek to undermine our republic and cheapen the vote of every American citizen.

Americans are increasingly concerned about the security of our elections. Reasonable doubts about the integrity of our election system serve to diminish trust in elected officials and further divide our nation.

This issue is especially relevant to the Houston, Texas, area, which includes the most populous county in Texas and third-most populous county in the country. Why? It’s well documented that where there are more people, there is a greater propensity for voter fraud, placing Texas on the front lines of the election integrity issue.

The recent release of Harris County’s 2022 election review underscores voter concerns about election integrity. While there is no quick fix for such a complex issue, I believe there are several steps that can reasonably be taken to increase the security of and public confidence in our elections.

In America, every dollar bill created and distributed by the government has a unique serial number to identify it and certify its authenticity. Similarly, every ballot should be printed with a unique serial number to identify it and certify its authenticity. This would ensure that we know exactly what ballots are being used in every election and that every ballot is genuine. Election judges would be expected to follow the law as they review contested ballot serial numbers. The United Kingdom has such a system.

In addition to verifying ballot authenticity, we also need to verify voter authenticity. I’ve spent years cleaning up voter rolls in Texas and have witnessed firsthand the sad reality of years-deceased citizens remaining on voter rolls. This problem exists because county governments don’t communicate effectively with each other. When citizens die outside their home counties, their deaths are often not shared with their home county election authorities, causing their names to remain on the voter rolls.

While this shouldn’t matter because a dead person can’t vote, we live in a time when far too many ballots are being mailed out indiscriminately and with little or no way of verifying who is receiving that ballot and ultimately casting that vote. There should never be an opportunity for a deceased person to have a vote cast in his name.

Another easy safeguard would be to use jury summons responses to clean up voter rolls. Many people dodge jury summonses by reporting that they are noncitizens and thus ineligible to serve on a jury. Obviously, those people would also be ineligible to vote in our elections — so their names should be purged from voter rolls per their own assurances to the county that they are not citizens. If they really are citizens, they can reverify their eligibility to vote — but then must face the consequences of lying about their citizenship to dodge jury duty.

If a person has previously responded to a jury summons stating he is a noncitizen but has also voted in an election, we should be tracking who is registering such self-proclaimed noncitizen voters so we can put a stop to it. Noncitizens voting in our elections cheapens the vote of every legal citizen in Texas, in the country, and on both sides of the aisle.

On top of these pre-emptive safeguards, we should allow attorneys general to investigate and prosecute voter fraud. In Texas, the bought-and-paid-for Republicans in the state House want to farm out voter fraud investigations to unconcerned Soros-backed district attorneys rather than grant Attorney General Ken Paxton concurrent jurisdiction to investigate these cases.

While I’m saddened that our own representatives would prevent our elected attorney general from working to secure state elections, I’m not surprised. These shills for Austin special interests and corporate corruption don’t want the country’s most tenacious and effective Republican attorney general to investigate because he might actually find something.

Rather than ignoring allegations and sitting on our hands, Texas should allow voter fraud cases to be fully investigated to assure the public of the integrity of our electoral process and hold accountable any and all who seek to undermine it.

Election integrity is a multifaceted problem with no quick or easy fix, which is probably why politicians focused on playing politics have failed to address the issue in any meaningful way. We need to start taking common-sense steps to increase election integrity and therefore prevent citizens’ votes from being cheapened.

We must restore public trust in both the process and the duly elected public servants. We must ensure that every citizen can vote and that his vote counts. After all, it is the bedrock upon which Texas and nation are founded.

Read More
Elections

Mark Meadows reportedly granted immunity by special counsel on election probe (UPDATED)

UPDATE posted at 9:00 PM EST:

Meadow’s attorney issued a statement about the ABC News report.

George Terwilliger told The Independent that any idea his client would enter a guilty plea was “complete bulls***” but did not address the matter of immunity.

He also gave a brief statement to Catherine Herridge of CBS News.

“I told ABC that their story was largely inaccurate. People will have to judge for themselves the decision to run it anyway,” the statement read.

Original story below:

Mark Meadows, the former chief of staff under former President Donald Trump, was reportedly granted immunity and told special counsel Jack Smith that he had told Trump at the time that election fraud claims were without merit.

ABC News reported the development Tuesday based on sources familiar with the investigation.

Meadows has said in a book published after Trump left the Oval Office that the election was stolen and that Trump actually won the presidential contest.

Those claims are contradicted by what he told the special counsel, according to the ABC News report.

Meadows is said to have met with the special counsel team three times to discuss his time as Trump’s final chief of staff. The former congressman reportedly told them that he said to Trump numerous times in the weeks after the election that claims of voter fraud were baseless.

He also reportedly told the special counsel team that Trump was being “dishonest” when he publicly claimed there was election fraud hours after the results were reported.

“Obviously, we didn’t win,” Meadows reportedly said to investigators.

Meadows previously turned over about 6,000 documents relating to the election to the congressional committee investigating the rioting at the Capitol on Jan. 6. Some of those texts showed Fox News hosts calling on Meadows to tell Trump to tell protesters to go home.

“Mark, the president needs to tell people in the capitol to go home,” read a text from Laura Ingraham to Meadows. “This is hurting all of us. He is destroying his legacy.”

Initially, ABC News said an attorney for declined to comment about the report.

A spokesperson for the Trump presidential campaign released a statement about the report.

“Wrongful, unethical leaks throughout these Biden witch-hunts only underscore how detrimental these empty cases are to our Democracy and System of Justice and how vital it is for President Trump’s First Amendment rights to not be infringed upon by un-Constitutional gag orders. Transparency and free speech are the only way to combat murky gossip,” the statement read.

“President Trump will not be deterred by Crooked Joe Biden’s election interference and will continue to focus on winning back the White House and Making America Great Again,” the statement concluded.

Also on Tuesday, Trump’s former attorney, Jenna Ellis, pleaded guilty to one felony count of aiding and abetting false statements and writings and promised to testify against the other codefendants in the case.

In addition to investigating Trump’s role in efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election, special counsel Jack Smith is investigating accusations that the former president improperly handled classified White House documents.

This story has been updated with additional information

Here’s more about Meadows’ reported immunity:


Mark Meadows Given Immunity To Testify About Trump And 2020 Election, Report Says

www.youtube.com

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
COVID-19

THESE recently obtained Fauci emails may put him in JAIL

What should be done with Anthony Fauci?

Senator Rand Paul thinks jail time might be sufficient — but not likely.

“We referred him twice to the Department of Justice; we haven’t gotten a lot of action. We barely can even get a letter back saying they’ve received the referral,” the senator tells Dave Rubin.

However, the referral sent was a criminal referral for lying to Congress, which is a felony. Fauci could face up to five years in prison for that.

“I think he deserves that, but above and beyond that, he also deserves the culpability basically for funding the research that became the pandemic. And this is a big deal. This is no small mistake that he made,” Rand says.

“It may be one of the worst mistakes made in modern history.”

And why did that mistake happen?

“Because Dr. Fauci’s opinion is that, even if a pandemic were to occur, gain of function — this juicing up of viruses research — is worth it,” Rand says.

Rand doesn’t believe that the millions of Americans who died or whose family members died would agree that it was worth it.

“I think you’d find that most American families, and frankly, worldwide, would be upset, you know, that this actually came from government-funded projects at the behest of Anthony Fauci,” he says.

However, the American people might be more distrusting next time around, especially considering the recent release of damning emails from January 2020.

In these emails, Fauci’s tenor reflects that he’s concerned not only about the origin of the virus, but that the origins could “boomerang and come back” and that he would be exposed as the one who approved the funding that created it.

“We know, for one thing, Fauci allowed this research to happen in communist China without any review by the safety committee. That alone is malfeasance, and he should be punished for it as well,” Rand adds.

While the pile of evidence for Fauci’s betrayal of the American people is stacked astoundingly high, the mainstream media doesn’t seem to care — at all.

Rand is ultimately in disbelief, as there’s never “been a cover-up so thoroughly exposed and caught and delivered by their own emails,” and “yet not one person from the mainstream media has reported on this at all.”

Want more from Dave Rubin?

To enjoy more honest conversations, free speech, and big ideas with Dave Rubin, ” target=”_blank”>subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

Read More
Elections

Weekend essay: For America’s elites, normal politics is no longer enough

We have heard the refrain repeatedly from the mainstream media’s many-headed hydra that Donald Trump represents an unprecedented tidal wave breaching every well-established and deeply rooted norm of politics and political discourse. But while Trump undoubtedly marches to his own drummer — one with a penchant for heart-stopping cymbal crashes — what these pundits and crusading journalists miss is the manner in which they themselves have done the very thing of which they accuse him. They have jettisoned well-worn conventions because of this elite class’s animal rage at Trump and the unapologetically unrefined, fine-china-shattering, working-class consciousness to which he gives voice.

There is no escaping the conclusion that for America’s elites, traditional politics — fundraising and campaigning to convince a majority of voters you’re the best candidate for the job — is no longer enough. For all their farcical talk of “going high” when the other side goes low, they are hard at work shooting holes in our collective hull, turning our nation into a tragic Titanic sinking lower day by day.

It began in the 2016 election cycle, when journalists violated the long-standing norm against calling politicians out-and-out liars. With the once-reputable New York Times leading the way, calling Trump a liar on its front page on September 16, 2016, the ever-tenuous guardrail of journalistic objectivity came crashing down. Those of us who recall George H.W. Bush’s “read my lips” vow, “Slick Willie” Clinton’s affair with Monica Lewinsky, or George W. Bush’s concoction of “weapons of mass destruction” to justify trillions of dollars and many lives wasted on our misadventure in Iraq know that politicians have never been models of honesty and integrity.

But even if a case could be made that Trump broke the mold, the problem when media start engaging in active name-calling, taking it upon themselves to decide who is or isn’t a liar, is that journalists, with their well-documented left leanings — Democrat journalists went from near parity with Republican journalists in the 1970s to outnumbering Republican journalists by a 4-1 margin today — cannot be trusted to apply any standard evenhandedly.

Many no longer even aspire to evenhandedness. While 76% of the general public believes that the media should always give both sides equal coverage, that view is shared by only 44% of journalists, with 55% — including a still more disturbing 63% of journalists ages 18-29 — having the opposite view.

It should surprise no one, then, that although Joe Biden tells lies practically every time he has a microphone in hand, often involving thoroughly outlandish claims such as his son Beau dying in Iraq, or how he got student loan forgiveness passed through Congress, or that he never discussed his son Hunter’s business dealings, or that gas prices went down after he took office, or that he’d been arrested for taking part in civil rights demonstrations, the media, nonetheless, never brand Biden a “liar,” the way they do on a dime when it comes to Trump.

Shortly after Trump won the 2016 presidential election, the media turned up the dial farther still. They concocted the Russian collusion hoax to question the legitimacy of his election, while casting a long shadow over his presidency and miring Trump and his staff in years of debilitating, relentless coverage, including the notorious Robert Mueller special counsel investigation. The New York Times’ obsessive coverage of these doings won the paper a Pulitzer Prize.

But the Times’ prize-winning journalism did not extend to uncovering anything even remotely approaching the truth behind these events, which was revealed to us by independent journalists, such as Matt Taibbi. What really happened, in a nutshell, is that the Clinton campaign, with Hillary Clinton’s personal knowledge and consent, fed fake “research” about Trump’s alleged collusion with Russia to the FBI, which used such research as a pretext to initiate surveillance of Trump aide Carter Page and anyone connected with him. That, in turn, set off a chain of events that led to years of breathless “breaking news” pushed by Clinton and her operatives and perpetuated by their gullible or dishonest media lapdogs.

Years later, at the cost of millions of taxpayer dollars and an untold number of American minds plunged into the depths of Trump derangement syndrome, the Trump-Russia connection fizzled out completely, the infamous Chistopher Steele “pee tape” proved a total hoax, and the allegedly Russia-connected, Trump-promoting fake Twitter accounts that were alleged to have helped Trump steal the 2016 election turned out to belong, for the most part, to actual, Trump-supporting Americans. For the press, the allegations were simply too good to check.

But no one was punished for partaking in this truly incredible disinformation and election delegitimization campaign. The media proved less than eager to hold their own feet to the fire for their dereliction of duty, which is why the New York Times didn’t relinquish its unearned Pulitzer Prize and why most Americans remain in the dark about what really occurred.

Instead, the role allegedly played by the “Russians” on Twitter in swaying the election to Trump prompted waves of congressional and media pressure for social networks to rein in “right-wing” “disinformation.”

This, in turn, played into the next round of flagrant norm-flouting by the anti-Trump left when, in 2020, not only was free (and, in many cases, accurate) speech questioning COVID’s origins or the safety and efficacy of experimental vaccines shut down by social media working in direct coordination with government actors, but also, social media directly enabled Joe Biden’s electoral victory. First, in May 2020, Twitter, for the first time ever, flagged a presidential tweet with a “fact-check” warning. In a May 26, 2020, tweet, Trump had questioned the reliability of mail-in voting, to which Twitter had appended its then-shocking alert:

Those clicking on the warning would be directed to Twitter’s own “what you need to know” page, in which Twitter’s internal Ministry of Truth had taken it upon itself to proclaim that Trump had “falsely claimed mail-in ballots would lead to ‘a Rigged Election’” and, further, that “fact-checkers say there is no evidence that mail-in ballots are linked to voter fraud.”

The extraordinary thing about Twitter’s warning was that, strictly speaking, there was no fact to check. Trump had not stated a fact but rather had made a prediction about what the likely outcome of mail-in voting would be. His contention that there is “no way” mail-in ballots won’t be “substantially fraudulent” is, in that respect, akin to a tweet stating there is “no way the Bears beat the Packers on Sunday” or, for that matter, “no way” Trump loses the next election.

In any event, Trump’s prediction was not quite as baseless and unsupported as the powers that be on Twitter would have had their users believe. Although the 2020 version of the New York Times published a series of stories touting the reliability of mail-in voting, the very same newspaper in October 2012 ran a story headlined “Error and Fraud at Issue as Absentee Voting Rises.”

“Votes cast by mail are less likely to be counted, more likely to be compromised and more likely to be contested than those cast in a voting booth, statistics show,” the Times reported. “Election officials reject almost 2 percent of ballots cast by mail, double the rate for in-person voting.”

After Twitter had crossed the Rubicon, flagging speech by a sitting president and giving itself the role of arbiter of truth instead of letting the electorate sort it out, the social media mullahs grew still more emboldened, flagging Trump’s tweets repeatedly. In an especially egregious instance, when Trump, in the context of the Black Lives Matter riots of June 2020, warned in a June 23 tweet that if the rioters tried to turn D.C. into an “autonomous zone” (the way they had been allowed to do with impunity in Seattle), they “will be met with serious force,” Twitter flagged the tweet as “abusive behavior”:

The idea that a president using a nonspecific threat of force as a deterrent to potential chaos and violence could be flagged for “abusive behavior” is, naturally, unprecedented and outrageous. Yet it is also, just as naturally, only a small speed bump on the slippery slope down which the left’s corporate and media elites were allowing our nation to careen.

The absolute nadir of Twitter’s election interference efforts came in October 2020, on the eve of the 2020 election, when the New York Post published its exposé, based on the contents of Hunter Biden’s abandoned laptop, of what has now become the ever-growing influence-peddling scandal involving Joe Biden.

Defying every convention of free speech and the free press, Twitter and Facebook baselessly censored the story as “misinformation,” resulting in its being similarly labeled or else ignored by sources in the mainstream media. Nearly four in five survey respondents believe that the story, had it not been censored, could have swung the outcome of the closely contested 2020 election to President Trump. For reasons like this, one does not even have to buy into Trump’s claims of voter fraud in order to conclude that the 2020 presidential election was, indeed, stolen.

But not content with their unprecedented role in potentially swaying the outcome of the 2020 presidential election, the emboldened organs of the leftist media and commentariat have taken their norm-flouting campaign up several more notches in anticipation of what is, as of now, likely to be a Trump-Biden rematch in 2024.

First, of course, while continuing to do their best to downplay the increasingly credible allegations of Biden’s corrupt dealings on behalf of his ne’er-do-well son Hunter, these forces have done their best to validate and normalize the four separate indictments brought by leftist prosecutors against Donald Trump. These have been the subject of endless press coverage in recent months and weeks, so no need to discuss them at length here. Let it suffice to say, regardless of how one personally feels about the strength of each of the individual cases, it is hard to dispute that the indictments have further divided an already polarized nation. It would be a gross error in judgment and an extremely dangerous precedent to charge the most prominent representative of one of the nation’s two major political parties with marginal crimes that are the subject of widespread political disagreement.

In that light, the fantastically overbroad Georgia indictment, complete with mug shot, promises to be a televised show trial, and the New York indictment for paying hush money to a porn star, elevated into a strained felony by the febrile imagination of a far-left prosecutor, is pure absurdity. But most obviously appalling are the two separate banana republic-style federal indictments in which a sitting president’s Justice Department is actively persecuting his foremost political rival — the one case concerning retention of classified government documents, a victimless crime for which hardly anyone ever gets prosecuted, and the other one stemming from the events of January 6, 2021.

The January 6 affair is especially concerning, because what has been histrionically and repeatedly framed by Democratic politicians and the mainstream media as an armed “insurrection” against democracy is, in reality, little more than a political protest that turned violent, the sort of thing that happened on a far greater scale during the Black Lives Matter riots of 2020, largely without consequences. There is, moreover, very strong evidence — largely ignored and/or knowingly concealed by the same press that has been serving as the current government’s de facto propaganda arm — that then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, in coordination with others, deliberately acted to delay any substantial enforcement response to the riots. She opted instead to allow the rioters to breach the Capitol in order to manufacture a cause célèbre against Trump, despite the fact that he had expressly called for peace, telling his supporters to march to the Capitol “peacefully and patriotically.” After the violence began, Trump implored them, “Please support our Capitol Police and Law Enforcement. They are truly on the side of our Country. Stay peaceful!” and “We have to have peace. So go home.”

Because these transparently political indictments have predictably failed to convince many voters that Trump is a criminal, as opposed to the target of political persecution, and may even be bolstering his support among Republican voters, the Trump-hating elites have trotted out their most outrageous and unprecedented gambit to date. Despite the fact that Trump has been convicted of no crime and, more than that, has been acquitted of the charge of inciting an insurrection by the U.S. Senate, an unhinged plot has begun to take shape among the leftist elites and like-minded elites on the #NeverTrump right to disqualify Trump under section three of the 14th Amendment. That section disqualifies from public office those who have “engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the United States” and was intended to prevent Confederate rebels from holding office in the reconstituted postwar nation.

The wacky suggestion has been made — with the Atlantic graciously playing host to a widely circulated article normalizing this call to banditry — that officials in each of the 50 states could invoke this mechanism on their own and thereby bounce Trump off their official ballots, notwithstanding the will of actual voters. It would then be up to the judiciary to deal with the fallout of what is certain to be a constitutional crisis that will ultimately find its way to the Supreme Court.

At its essence, the 14th Amendment gambit amounts to nothing less than a frontal assault on the democratic process, a brazen attempt to strip voters of the power to choose their own leaders. And these — invoking and misusing an obscure, Civil War-era legalism to try to throw a popular leader off the ballot — are the ironic lengths to which our elites are willing to go to defend our democracy against itself.

Abandoning all pretense to journalistic objectivity to brand Trump a liar; pushing a fake Russia conspiracy to question the legitimacy of his election and his presidency; flagging his speech on social media; censoring true stories reporting on his opponent’s corruption on the eve of the 2020 election; indicting him four times (and counting?) in the midst of a new election cycle on highly questionable charges; and now, hatching, as a fail-safe, a wacky scheme to kick him off state ballots using legalistic chicanery: There are no lengths to which Trump’s enemies will not go, no depths to which they will not sink.

In the name of defending “norms,” the norm of journalistic diligence and evenhandedness has been abandoned, the norm of free speech and the free press trampled, the norm of the media and social media playing purely neutral roles in the midst of an election mocked, the norm of judicious use of prosecutorial discretion shredded, and the norm of free and fair elections decided by the people without interference from elites grasping the reins of power utterly demolished.

This much is certain: In a nation already on the brink, their reckless scramble is going to wreak political havoc for years to come, bringing on waves of tit-for-tat retaliation as we come to understand that the battle for political supremacy is a bare-knuckle brawl, where nothing is off the table, the courts and the media are merely pawns to be played in a winner-take-all game, and no blow is too low, no trick too dirty to be tried, when absolutely everything is at stake.

Alexander Zubatov is a practicing attorney in New York specializing in general commercial litigation. He is also a writer of poetry, fiction, drama, essays, and polemics.

Read More
COVID-19

Rand Paul offers his theories for Dr. Fauci’s alleged secret visit to CIA headquarters: ‘Further the cover-up’

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) floated on Thursday his theories for why Dr. Anthony Fauci allegedly visited the CIA headquarters to advise the intelligence agency on the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic.

What is the background?

The House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic revealed this week that it had received “concerning information” about the CIA’s investigation into the origins of the pandemic.

In a letter sent to the inspector general of the Department of Health and Human Services, committee Chairman Brad Wenstrup explained:

The information provided suggests that Dr. Fauci was escorted into Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) Headquarters—without a record of entry—and participated in the analysis to “influence” the Agency’s review. Our goal is to ensure the scientific investigative process regarding the origins of COVID-19 was fair, impartial, and free of alternative influence.

Importantly, the visit remains an allegation only; Congress has not made public evidence proving the visit took place.

What did Paul say?

The Kentucky Republican, Fauci’s archenemy, posited three theories for the purpose of Fauci’s alleged visit to CIA headquarters.

First, Paul suggested that Fauci outright “convinced the CIA to dishonestly obscure the lab origin of COVID.” Second, Paul suggested the inverse, that the “CIA convinced Fauci to obscure the lab origin of COVID.”

Finally, Paul suggested, “An outside entity or person with unlimited monetary resources convinced Fauci to influence the CIA to obscure the lab origin of COVID.”

One thing, however, “is for certain,” Paul declared, “Fauci did not visit the CIA to seek the truth but to facilitate and further the cover-up.”

The CIA is one of the intelligence agencies that has not reached a definitive conclusion about the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic.

“The Central Intelligence Agency and another agency remain unable to determine the precise origin of the COVID-19 pandemic, as both hypotheses rely on significant assumptions or face challenges with conflicting reporting,” explained a declassified report from the director of national intelligence.

That conclusion, or lack thereof, was purportedly reached despite six of seven CIA investigators allegedly concluding the pandemic originated at the Wuhan bio lab.

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