Suppose you get a job right out of school making $65,000 per year...yay! Now what does 9% inflation do?

Let's say you're a college student who just graduaated, and you got a job making $65,000 per year.  Nice!  That's just a bit under the U.S. median income of $67,500, but for your first job that's really fine!

Or suppose you're an entry-level skilled tradesman--plumbing, electrical, construction and so on.  You may be in the same position as the recent college grad..

Suppose the total of your food, rent or mortgage, utilities, gasoline, kids school, TAXES and so on was $60K a year, you spend $3,000 on "entertainment" and a vacation, and invest the remaining $2,000.  Good job! 

Now, what happens to the cost of "essentials" if inflation causes prices to rise 9.1 percent in the next 12 months?

You'll spend 9.1 percent more per year.  Based on the numbers above, you'd be having to spend an extra $5,500 to keep the same lifestyle you had before.  So you just went from saving $2,000 a year to spending $500 more than you earned.

And sure enough, analysts at Moody’s Analytics say the typical American household will spend $5,915 more this year than in 2021, with inflation running at a 40-year high and stinging prices at gas pumps and the grocery store.

Consumers across the U.S. tell the DailyMail how they're struggling to put food on the table after inflation reached 9.1 percent last month — the highest rate in over 40 years.  That means having to cut back on spending.  Problem is, what do you give up?  Most Americans stop being able to save money for emergencies or retirement.  Others load up their credit cards, at ruinous interest raes.

If you're a college student or college-age American you should recognize what's happening, and vote accordingly.  Most 20-year-olds have been getting at least some help from parents, but at some point soon you're gonna be paying your own bills.

Unless you love high inflation, vote like your future depends on that vote.  Or you can join the hordes of people who depend on government handouts to live.

 

What major rule changes if a bill that goes to "reconciliation" is ruled to be a "budget bill"?

Hey, you're a well-informed American, right?  So what does it mean when the Democrats say they intend to pass a pork-loaded bill "by reconciliation"?

It sounds so happy and cheerful, eh?  Nothing could possibly be wrong with "reconciliation," eh?  When the House and senate versions of a bill differ, each chamber appoints three negotiators who sit down with the three from the other chamber and negotiate the actual final language of the soon-to-be law.

But it's much worse than you think.  First, there are NO transcripts of the negotiations, meaning if a ghastly piece of obvious corruption gets in, the public can never learn what corruptocrat did it.  Second, there are NO RESTRICTIONS AT ALL on what the negotiators can put in the final bill.  So if the House version approved $500 Billion for X, and the senate only $400 billion, the final bill could say $800 billion--no limits, and no transcripts to tell who did it or why.

But that's not the worst part.  Because the Dems are claiming their latest "Global Warming" porkfest of a bill is a "budget bill," which vastly changes the rules of the game.  Know how?

Sure ya do, cuz you're a well-informed American, right?  And if you don't know, ask your parents, and your professors.  See if *anyone* knows.

Okay, time's up.  What big rule changes if a bill is ruled to be a "budget bill" and goes to "reconciliation"?

Answer: The senate isn't allowed to use the filibuster.  Which means only a simple majority is needed to pass the bill.  

So do you think that since the senate is divided exactly 50-50, the bill won't pass?

Hahahahahaha!  Did your highschool even teach civics?  Because as every American should know, if a vote ties in the senate the vice-president is allowed to vote.  And that would be...Cackles.

So...unless one Democrat senator breaks party discipline (spoiler: Democrat senators almost never vote against their party, since that risks losing funding from the national committee next election), the bill will become law in two weeks.

I hear my liberal friends cheering--"Yay, Democrats win again!"  And I hear Republicans scrambling to grovel and beg and horse-trade to get a piece of the graft and corruption for their state.  Because this bill is LOADED with graft and corruption, as I detailed here.

Clever Democrats, eh?  If you wanna give your donors a BILLION-dollar grant (i.e. gift--which ensures they'll give you back a few million in "campaign contributions" to your "political-action committee"), put that grift provision in a budget bill, and with the senate under Dem control it will automatically pass.  And Democrats feel this is perfectly fine.

Source.

Graft and corruption in the bill:
 

For Americans under 40, a history lesson from 1998 fthat will help you grasp the audacity of the lies

If you're under 30 you don't really have a first-person understanding of political events that happened more than 15 years ago--any more than us older folks did in that same position.  To 15-year-olds, politics is of almost no interest--which is as it should be.

So as the corrupt Democrats ramp up their efforts to BAR president Trump from running for office again in 2024--something totally supported by our corrupt, Democrat-loving Mainstream Media--you might want to know how the Media treated a Democrat president way back in 1996.

Bill Clinton was accused of raping several women, and of having oral sex with a 20-year-old White House intern, Monica Lewinsky, IN THE OVAL OFFICE.  (Clinton was 30 years older then Monica.)  After a couple of YEARS of legal dodging by the Clinton regime to avoid it, on January 17, 1998 Bill was FINALLY forced to give a deposition in the case.

It's also a matter of record that after Monica's name appeared on a list of witnesses, Clinton began taking steps to conceal their relationship, including suggesting to Lewinsky that she file a false affidavit to misdirect the investigation, encouraging her to lie, including about gifts he had given her, and about him using his connections to find her a cushy job after he'd had her removed from the White House to help conceal their affair.

Clinton also asked his personal secretary, Betty Currie, to lie to cover up his affair with Monica.

If those acts strike you as criminal--and FAR more serious than a phone call asking a Ukranian president to investigate corruption in a Ukranian energy company who hired Hunter Biden--congratulations.

Now, depositions are given under oath, meaning that if you're proven to have lied that's perjury.  And if you're a "normal American" who commits perjury, you go to jail.  Of course that was before Americans accepted that there are two vastly different sets of laws in this country, in which the powerful get away with everything.

So when the questioner asked Bill whether he'd "had sex" with 20-year-old White House intern Monica Lewinsky--in a room off the Oval Office!--Bill looked right into the camera, shook his finger and sternly growled “I did not have sex with that woman, Miss Lewinsky.”  He growled--sternly--to show he was reeeealy serious.  No uncertainty at all, citizen!  You MUST believe him!

But as the deposition went on, Bill–often called “Slick Willie” because he was so good at lying–realized the man questioning him had the goods on him–in part because, in an almost unbelievable twist, as Monica "serviced" the president, Clinton had ejaculated on Monica’s dress.

And by amazing luck she hadn’t had the dress cleaned.  So investigators were able to get DNA off the dress.  And you'll never guess who it matched.
Bill Clinton.  Ooooh.

Does that surprise you?  Shock you?  Do ya think it's just a "right-wing conspiracy theory"?  Then look it up.  Here's part of Clinton's sworn testimony--as printed by the New York Times!  And as you read it, keep in mind that Clinton knows he's gotten oral sex from Monica--so watch his wheels spinning as he lies:

Q:  Do you know a woman named Monica Lewinsky?

CLINTON:  I do.

Q. How do you know her?

A. She worked in the White House for a while, first as an intern, and then in, as the, in the legislative affairs office. . . .

Q. Is it true that when she worked at the White House she met with you several times?

A.  I don't know about several times. There was a period when the Republican congress shut the government down that the whole White House was being run by interns, and she was assigned to work back in the chief of staff's office.  And we were all working there, so I saw her on two or three occasions then.  And then when she worked at the White House, I think there was one or two other times when she brought some documents to me.

Q. At any time were you and Monica alone together in the Oval Office?

A.  I don't recall.  [Ah, so maybe someone else was there when you were getting a blowjob from a 20-yeare-old...but you just can't recall?]  But as I said, when she worked at the legislative affairs office, they always had somebody there on the weekends. I typically worked some on the weekends. Sometimes they'd bring me things on the weekends. She -- it seems to me she brought things to me once or twice on the weekends. In that case, whatever time she would be in there, drop it off, exchange a few words and go, she was there.
   I don't have any specific recollections of what the issues were, what was going on, but when the Congress is there, we're working all the time, and typically I would do some work on one of the days of the weekends in the afternoon.

Q. So I understand, your testimony is that it was possible, then, that you were alone with her, but you have no specific recollections of that ever happening?

A. Yes, that's correct. It's possible that she, in, while she was working there, brought something to me and that at the time she brought it to me, she was the only person there. That's possible.

Q. Do you recall ever walking with Lewinsky down the hallway from the Oval Office to your private kitchen there in the White House?

A. Well, let me try to describe the facts first, because you keep talking about this private kitchen.  My recollection is that, that at some point during the government shutdown, when Ms. Lewinsky was still an intern but was working the chief of staff's office because all the employees had to go home, that she was back there with a pizza that she brought to me and to others. I do not believe she was there alone, however. I don't think she was. And my recollection is that on a couple of occasions after that she was there but my secretary, Betty Currie, was there with her. . . .

Q. Have you ever met with Monica Lewinsky in the White House between the hours of midnight and 6 A.M.?

A. I certainly don't think so.  Now, let me just say, when she was working there, during, there may have been a time when we were all -- we were up working late. There are lots of, on any given night, when the Congress is in session, there are always several people around until late in the night, but I don't have any memory of that.  I just can't say that there could have been a time when that occurred, I just -- but I don't remember it.

You got a blowjob from a 20-year-old, and you damn sure remember it.

Q. Certainly if it happened, nothing remarkable would have occurred?

A. No, nothing remarkable. I don't remember it.

Same observation as above.  He absolutely remembers every detail.

Q. When was the last time you spoke with Monica Lewinsky?

A. I'm trying to remember. Probably some time before Christmas. She came by to see Betty sometime before Christmas. And she was there talking to her, and I stuck my head out, said hello to her.

Q. Did she tell you she had been served with a subpoena in this case?

A. No. I don't know if she had been.

When Clinton learned that Monica was a witness, he started askig her to lie--including under oath.  That's a crime.  He also used his good friend Vernon Jordan to offer her a cushy job.

Q. Did anyone other than your attorneys ever tell you that Monica Lewinsky had been served with a subpoena in this case?

A. I don't think so. 

Actually Monica had called Clinton to tell him she'd been subpoenaed.  She was in a panic, "What should I do?"

Q. Did you ever talk with Monica Lewinsky about the possibility that she might be asked to testify in this case?

A. Bruce Lindsey, I think Bruce Lindsey told me that she was, I think maybe that's the first person told me she was. I want to be as accurate as I can. 

Ah, "I want to be accurate."  That's reassuring, eh?  But note that Clinton did NOT answer the question.  His response was a cunning effort to avoid answering--which was immediately noticed by the questioner.  So he repeated the question:

Q. Have you ever talked to Monica Lewinsky about the possibility that she might be asked to testify in this lawsuit?

A. I'm not sure, and let me tell you why I'm not sure.  It seems to me the, the, the --- I want to be as accurate as I can here. Seems to me the last time she was there to see Betty before Christmas we were joking about how you-all, with the help of the Rutherford Institute, were going to call every woman I'd ever talked to, and I said, you know -- --
    And I said that you [Monica] would qualify, or something like that.  I don't, I don't think we ever had more of a conversation than that about it, but I might have mentioned something to her about it. ... I might have said something like that, so I don't want to say for sure I didn't, because I might have said something like that.

Doesn't take a degree in psychology to tell he's lying.

Q.  Have you ever given any gifts to Monica Lewinsky?

A.  I don't recall. Do you know what they were?

Q. A hat pin?

A. I don't, I don't remember. But I certainly, I could have.

Q. A book about Walt Whitman?

A. I give --- let me just say, I give people a lot of gifts, and when people are around I give a lot of things I have at the White House away, so I could have given her a gift, but I don't remember a specific gift. . . .

Q. Has Monica Lewinsky ever given you any gifts?

A. Once or twice. I think she's given me a book or two.

Q. Did she give you a silver cigar box?

A. No.

Q. Did she give you a tie?

A. Yes, she had given me a tie before. I believe that's right.

Now watch a great tactic:  The questioner's last several questions have seemingly been about trivial matters.  Now without missing a beat, this:

Q. Did you have an extramarital sexual affair with Monica Lewinsky?

A. No.

Q. If she told someone that she had a sexual affair with you beginning in November of 1995, would that be a lie?

A. It's certainly not the truth. It would not be the truth.

Q. I used the term "sexual affair." And so the record is completely clear, have you ever had sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky, as that term is defined in Deposition Exhibit 1, as modified by the Court.

A. I have never had sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky. I've never had an affair with her. 

While the transcript printed by the Times is utterly damning to Clinton, it leaves out one of the most absurd parts: When the opposing attorney asked Bill “Have you ever had sexual relations with Miss Lewinsky?” Bill gives an unequivocal answer: "I have never had sexual relations with Monica..."  It's only later in the depo that he tries to wriggle out of his unequivocal lie by using a classic dodge–one that Hilliary would use decades later:

   “It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘IS’ is.”

And yes, that doesn’t make sense, but because he said it really sternly, pointing his finger and shaking it, everyone is expected to believe him.  Cuz he was really serious, eh?

That classic line–and the way it was delivered, by a sitting president–should go down in history books.  And if it had been said by a Republican president it would be in the history books.  But sadly, since all the publishers are Democrat-lovers, it won't be.

There’s one more amazing twist to this story: As far as I know, no sitting president had ever been forced to give a deposition, so Clinton’s attorneys demanded that he give his deposition remotely, by closed-circuit TV. This resulted in a videotaped record–parts of which were later broadcast by the Mainstream Media to show how MEAN the prosecutors were to a Democrat committing perjury.  But the video also revealed Clinton’s outrageous effort to undo his egregious lie: “It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘IS’ is.”

But not surprisingly, opinion polls showed Democrat voters supported Bill just as strongly after seeing that as before!  The Media bleated that Bill's perjury wasn't really serious, because "everybody lies about sex."

They actually said that--and it's probably true.  But it's still supposedly against the law to lie under oath--something the Media cunningly ignored.

So thanks to the Media spinning the story to "Everyone lies about sex" and "The prosecutors were so MEAN to our wonderful president," Clinton didn't lose popularity.  He was ultimately impeached by the House for committing perjury, but there weren't enough votes in the evenly-divided senate to remove him from office.

Imagine how the Media would have absolutely hounded Trump from office if he'd done even a fraction of what Democrat Clinton did.  And yet liberals claim there is NO pro-Dem bias in the Media.  Really?

But Clinton's myriad lies--in sworn testimony!--and the fact that so many government officials and friends of his were willing to help him cover up all of it--are extremely revealing about the whole "covid" scam:  If you didn't know about Clinton's brazen perjury, and the eagerness of all the Dem lackeys to help him cover up his affair with Monica you could be excused for believing all the total, brazen lies the biden regime has been telling you since February of 2020 about duh Chyna virus.  Only by knowing the depth of the utter corruption revealed by Clinton's conspiracy to cover up his affair with a 20-year-old White House intern can you really believe that a) the government is corrupt; and b) every government official will lie to you, about everything--even to the extent of lying under oath--to keep their cushy jobs and pensions.

Remember this if the scam and coverup about Covid ever starts to crumble.

Yep

 

Biden press secretary on the recession: “We are in a *transition*”

When is a recession NOT a recession?

Take your time answering this one.  We wouldn't want any hasty answers, eh?

Until last Thursday the rule was that if the U.S. had two consecutive quarters of falling GDP, that was a recession.  The U.K. and most other nations agreed on this definition.

But Thursday, after the U.S. GDP was reported to have fallen for two consecutive quarters, the White House sprang into action, re-defining the defintion to junk the long-accepted "2 consecutive quarters" definition, and substituting the verdict of a board months after the fact.

This of course made it impossible to determine whether we were in a recession for five or six months after it started.  That was the time it took for the NBER board of "experts" to vote on if and when a recession had started.

Not surprisingly, the  Lying Mainstream Media also sprang into action, agreeing that the long-accepted "two consecutive quarters of GDP shrinkage" was no longer accurate.  So they agreed with the regime that the time-honored definition was no long "operative."  They changed the definition--cuz they're determined that the Democrats retain control of both chambers of congress in November. 

This resulted in a very amusing exchange between the black lesbian and a white house pool reporter:  The press secretary said she simply was NOT gonna quibble about the definition of a "recession."  So they'll just ignore it and trust that the Mainstream Media and social media will make the controversy vanish.

Axios runs propaganda piece trying to discredit the "modified in Chinese lab" theory of covid origin

Wanna see an absolute *classic* piece of disinformation/propaganda?  Check this piece in Axios four days ago, titled

Wuhan market pinpointed as pandemic's Ground Zero
  by Adriel Bettelheim, Jul 26, 2022

A market in Wuhan, China, was the epicenter of the COVID-19 pandemic, and the virus emerged from activities connected with the live animal trade, according to research published in Science today.

Why it matters: The case-mapping and genetic studies offer some of the strongest evidence yet that the coronavirus jumped from an animal host to humans — a type of zoonotic spillover seen in other outbreaks like SARS, from 2002 to 2004.

"Zoonotic spillover," eh?  Sounds SO plausible, since that's happened in other outbreaks . But it turns out that even though 99% of the genetic code of C19 matches the closest natural bat virus, there is NO evidence of any animal being infected with the actual Covid-19 virus--which differs in having four crucial insertions in its genetic code (although I suspect the Chinese will have injected a few bats with C19 to "prove" the "spillover" claim).  Note the attempt to persuade you with phrases like "a type of zoonotic spillover seen in other outbreaks like...."  That's the conclusion they want you to draw, but it is NOT evidentiary.

What they found: There were two lineages of the virus introduced in humans as early as November 2019.  The variants over time spread into the neighborhoods surrounding the market and beyond, challenging the idea the market was the source of a single superspreader event.
    Early cases linked to the part of the market where wildlife sales took place resemble cross-species transmissions later observed on mink farms and from infected hamsters to humans in the pet trade.

What they’re saying: University of Glasgow virologist David Robertson told BBC News he hoped the studies would "correct the false record that the virus came from a lab."

The intrigue: While early patient data showed few of those hospitalized had a direct link to the market, Robertson said, “it's exactly what we would expect, because many people only get very mildly ill, so they would be out in the community transmitting the virus to others and the severe cases would be hard to link to each other.”

Notice how blythely the Axios author dismisses the huge negative--that "few of those hospitalized had a direct link to the market."  And "The severe cases would be hard to link to each other."  And yet they're seeking to use case locations to supposedly "prove" the virus originated from an animal at the market.  It's garbage reasoning--either incompetence or propaganda.

A map of samples collected from market stalls showed most that tested positive for the virus were on the southwestern side, where animals like Raccoon dogs and hedgehogs were sold.

"...animals like" ?  This is like saying the virus is "like" swiss cheese since both are made from atoms. The author almost certainly isn't giving these examples because she thinks you may not know what an "animal" is, but because the mention of unusual food animals gets the reader to think "Sure, they have lots of odd animals there, and any of 'em could be infected."  But the statement has zero evidentiary use--it doesn't help prove the author's case. 

And who collected the samples and supposedly tested them to confirm they had the actual C19 instead of the common, harmless-to-humans bat virus?  The author doesn't say, because she doesn't know (and likely wouldn't think it was relevant in any case).  If it turns out to be the Chinese (spoiler: yes), do ya think they'd tell us the truth, that any/all virus found in samples from the market was NOT the actual C19 virus, but merely the relatively harmless-to-humans natural bat virus. 

A World Health Organization-backed team of scientists said in June that available data suggests SARS-CoV-2 had a zoonotic origin and that the theory that the virus escaped from a laboratory needs “further investigations,” per the Washington Post.

Ah, would that be the same W.H.O. whose director was installed by the government of China?  The same corrupt moron who claimed for the first two months that "There is absolutely no evidence of human-to-human transmission?"  Uh...can you trust a thing he or his corrupt organization says?

Oooh, and the Washington Post, ya say!  You mean the same paper that for years took millions from China to run big glossy pro-China inserts?  Conflict of interest?  Nah, never heard of it.  But let's see what the Post actually published:

The report also said that available data suggests SARS-CoV-2 had a zoonotic origin, which means it spread between animals in a natural setting, but that neither the animal that infected humans nor the place where this infection occurred could be identified.

"Available data" "suggests" that the virus "spread between animals in a natural setting...."  But of course spreading between animals isn't the issue, eh?  In claiming a "zoonotic origin" for C19 they mean the virus jumped from animal to humans.  So the fact that it may have spread between animal species is totally irrelevant to the question of how the harmless natural bat virus became lethal to humans.
   But your eye and brain picked up the key sciency words "zoonotic origin," and in context that means they're implying C19 came from animals.  But in the very next sentence they discard that theory, though without explicitly saying so:
     "...but that neither the animal that infected humans nor the place where this infection occurred could be identified.

Obviously if they can't find either the "animal reservoir" of C19, nor where the jump occurred, that  makes the "zoonotic origin" theory pure speculation.  The reason C19 has never been found in any animal is because it never infected any animal.  We know the genetic sequence of C19, and when you compare that to the closest matching bat virus it's obvious that in four places the bat-virus RNA has been cut, and four new sequences inserted--all of which are contiguous blocks of six or eight "codons," all of which produce functional genes.  This is statistically impossible by natural mutation--a fact every person familiar with the art would immediately realize. 

In summary, the Axios piece is loaded with innuendo and faulty reasoning, with the goal of getting readers to believe the C19 virus was NOT modified at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.


https://www.axios.com/2022/07/26/covid-studdy-wuhan-market

Military health database shows huge jump in medical problems from 2020 to 2021. "Fauci, CDC, FDA baffled"

The Defense Medical Surveillance System (DMSS) is a health reporting system for the U.S. military.

Last January attorney Thomas Renz testified before Senator Ron Johnson, citing DMSS data showing showing that heart attacks among military personnel had increased 269% in 2021 from a year earlier. Pulmonary embolisms (blood clots) increased 467%, neurological issues increased 1,000%, female infertility increased 471%.  

The Mainstream Media quickly claimed these numbers were "unconfirmed."  Then when they were confirmed, the FDA and CDC claimed they were just normal variations in the data, like a baseball player batting .280 one season and .325 the next.

When people realized that some of these reports involved hundreds of people, and that with such a large sample a variation of more than about ten percent in the incidence from one year to the next would NOT be expected as "normal variation," the Media won the debate in their usual fasion, by simply not mentioning the story or the controversy again.  

Voila, problem vanishes.

Say, anybody remember when the "vaccines" become widely available?  Ah yes, the records show the first ones received "emergency use authorization" on December 21 of 2020, so by the end of 2021 roughly half of all military personnel would have taken one or two shots.

Fauci and Democrats: "Dis proves NOTHING!  We don't admit there were any increases in medical problems!  But even if there were, all increases were probably due to...uh...Global Warming!  Yeh!  Or fluoride in drinking water!  Sunspots!  Or anxiety!  Yeh, dat's it!  Da military pipo wuz all anxious about catching Covid!"

Geez.

 

A look at some of the fraud in Dems' "Covid relief act"--and a hint of what's coming with their new $700-billion law

Now that the Democrats have agreed to pass a law "appropriating" $700 BILLION to supposedly reduce Global Warming, it's worth looking at what happened to a $600 BILLION program pushed thru by the Dems as "Covid relief."

The moment congress or the administration proposes a $600-BILLION giveaway program, every scam-artist in the world starts figuring out ways to illegally grab some of that easy cash.  Of course every government giveaway is a target for fraud, but the Democrats' "CARES" act, the "paycheck protection program" and the extension of fat unemployment- insurance benefits were an especially lucrative target.  And now government investigators report that they've identified nearly $100 billion in fraud tied to COVID relief programs.

Now, you might think that the gruberment agencies in charge of handing out huge amounts of cash for these programs would do at least a TINY bit of checking to identify applicants who were OBVIOUS fraudsters, eh?

Hahahahaha!  No.  Those agencies didn't do the tiniest bit of checking to catch the most obvious fraud.  And of course that's due to crappy managers: Employees would only check for fraud if their supervisors told 'em to, eh?  And the supervisors...well, the less said about them the better.

So here are some of the most egregious examples of fraud in the Dems' "Covid relief" law:

Florida resident Kenbrell Thompkins stole the identities of several Florida residents and applied for COVID unemployment benefits for each.  With no one checking, he received $300,000 in cash benefits (via EBT cards).  The AP reported that he withdrew about $230,000 in cash at various ATMs.


After Democrat governors ordered small businesses to be closed (while oddly, big-box chain stores were allowed to stay open), Dems created the "Paycheck Protection Program," which allowed employers of businesses which had been ordered to close by Dem governors to borrow money--guaranteed by the government--to keep paying employees.  The cherry was that the federal government would "forgive" the loans if certain conditions were met.  So...free money!
 
A man named Miles applied for a loan of $1,904,593, claiming he owned a company with 50 employees and a monthly payroll of $768,838.  But in reality there was no such company.  He'd never paid any withholding tax (required if you have employees!), hadn't filed a single tax return for his supposed company, and the address he listed was a home in a residential neighborhood.  The most casual checker would have tagged this guy as a total fraud.  But for some reason this was beyond the capability of the gruberment bureaucrats.

Since the government agency didn't do even the most basic checking, Miles got the loan, and promptly withdrew hundreds of thousands in cash, spent $250,000 on a new Bentley and another $100,000 on a new Cadillac.

In New York City 18-year-old Angel Cabrera and five of his friends managed to steal $2 MILLION in PPP funds.  The gang stole personal information from people in COVID-assistance programs, then used that data to apply for PPP funds that went into their own accounts.  The gang members ended up with 100 debit cards in the names of other people, and used the cards to withdraw cash from ATMs.

The gang used the same addresses and cellphone numbers on several of the loan applications, proving that the federal system lacked any sort of method of checking to identify matching addresses or phone numbers on applications from supposedly different people.  Again, exactly the level of incompetence we've come to expect from the federal government and all its agents.

Bernard Lopez, of Sayreville, NJ, took PPP funds for a non-existent business.  He claimed his phantom company employed 25 and had a monthly payroll of roughly $192,000.  He received a loan of $481,500 which he spent on himself.

Vinath Oudomsine, of Dublin, Ga., got an "Economic Injury Disaster Loan" by claiming he had a company with ten employees.  Just a month later the Small Business Administration gave him $85,000.
 Allison Marie Baver applied for eight PPP loans, claiming to have between 100 and 430 employees and a monthly payroll of $4.7 million.  But in fact she had no employees at all.  Zero.  But because no federal gruberment employee did even the most basic checks, she ended up fraudulently obtaining a staggering $10 million in taxpayer funds.

Wanna know why this country is totally f'd, probably beyond hope of recovery?  Of course there are lots of reasons, but the above examples show that one reason is that the stupidity of managers of government agencies responsible for giving away billions.  The entire government is like this, at every level.

And now the Democrats are passing another $700 BILLION bill funding another thousand corrupt, kickback-riddled "programs" supposedly intended to reduce Global Warming.  So get ready for another $200 Billion to vanish into the pockets of fraudsters and politicians.

 

Yet another 20-year-old college athlete drops dead from heart attack. Experts: "Totally normal"

 

Fauci, Rochelle Walensky and all the Democrat conspirators: "Dis TOTALLY NORMAL, citizen!  Dis happen all da time!  Always happen, way befo' vax!  You remember, right?  You prolly lost two or three classmates in school due to sudden heart attacks, right?  Sure, you remember that, right?"

"Wait, we gots newz flash:  He had a pre-existing condition dat shoulda been caught by docs.  He should nevah have been allowed to play college sports!  Yeah, dat's it!"

Will you scared, pro-vax sheep EVER realize that the vax is unsafe?  Nah, you won't.  And a lot of the blame for that failure is on the Mainstream Media: If they'd been honest and doing the job they should have been doing, they would have exposed the scam.  But they were more interested in shilling for the Democrat regime.  

Outrageous.. Their absurd, blind allegiance to the Democrat party made them complicit in the deaths of at least 30,000 Americans.  And I predict this is just the beginning.

Organization that sets teaching standards for med-schools demands they take time away from medicine to teach wokie crap

A medical doctor has written a piece for the NY Post warning that the same radical woke activists who’ve devastated K-12 education are about to force every medical school to take class time away from medicine and science and instead use it to indoctrinate students, with the goal of forcing them to learn wokie crap.

The wokie radical activists in this case control an organization called the "Association of American Medical Colleges" (AAMC), which runs the MCAT and decrees teaching standards for 171 U.S. and Canadian medical schools.  That is, the AAMC tells schools what they must teach.  It also creates the test (MCAT) that determines which students are admitted to med schools.

And as you already guessed, the new "standards" ordered by these wokie morons are "diversity, inclusion and equity."

It's a huge challenge for med-school students to learn everything they need to know to be competent doctors in the allotted time.  And just as K-12 education has suffered--greatly--from diverting limited class-time to teach worthless crap forced by Ivy League teachers' colleges, woke school boards and wokie bureaucrats, the "woke" courses the AAMC dictators are now demanding med-schools teach their students will consume valuable time that would otherwise have been spent learning actual medicine and science.

The new demands--rolled out in mid-July--are overtly ideological.  Don’t take my word for it: When announcing the standards, the AAMC’s president and chair of its council of deans declared that woke identity politics “deserves just as much attention from learners and educators at every stage of their careers as the latest scientific breakthroughs."

Seriously.  But in reality, by taking limited class time for his "wokie" crap instead of actual medicine, he and his supporters are claiming, in effect, that more patients will benefit from doctors learning about "intersectionality" than about actual medicine.

For example, under the new "standards" med-school grads must be fluent in something called “intersectionality.” This includes “demonstrat[ing] evidence of self-reflection and how one’s personal identities, biases, and lived experience” influence clinical practice, as well as identifying a “patient’s multiple identities and how each may result in varied and multiple forms of oppression.”

That word-salad is an actual quote from the new "standards."

Oppression is a consistent theme of the AAMC's demands, which will require that all students be able to describe “the impact of various systems of oppression on health and healthcare,” including “colonialism, White Supremacy, acculturation, [and] assimilation.”

Students must also identify “systems of power, privilege and oppression,” including “white privilege, racism, sexism, heterosexism, ableism, [and] religious oppression.” The AAMC demands that graduates "practice allyship,” which is defined as “recogniz[ing] their privilege” and “work[ing] in solidarity with oppressed groups in the struggle for justice.”

The "new standards" demand that graduates be able to “articulate race as a social construct that is a cause of health and health care inequities.” And they must look beyond health care itself to “identify and address social risk factors,” like “food security, housing, utilities, [and] transportation.”

It doesn't take a PhD to realize that ordering that lots of hours of precious class time be used to indoctrinate students with "woke" racist crap must necessarily reduce the amount of time left to teach actual medicine.

The real-world harm of this moronic demand will be severe.

The most enraging part of this whole DECREE is: Barring someone getting to the head of the AAMC, these "new standards" can't be stopped.  By some malign twist, the AAMC has accrued the power of life and death over med schools.  No school is willing to risk being unaccredited by complaining about what I've described above.

Again, these "new standards" will cause real-world harm.  And you can't stop the AAMC from ramming them through.

https://nypost.com/2022/07/28/we-must-fight-back-against-health-cares-terrifying-conquest-by-the-radically-woke/

Wiki changes the definition of "recession", promptly locks page, demands that no one use the old def'n

The Mainstream Media's insistence on changing the definition of what indicates a "recession" is getting more absurd and obvious by the hour.  Latest example: 

A scant three HOURS after the biden regime was obliged to release the Q2 GDP figures--which showed two consecutive quarters of falling GDP that has always been the concensus definition of a recession--the rat-bastard socialists at Wiki joined the other Dem-run media in changing the definition of "recession."

Here's the original:

While national definitions vary, two consecutive quarters of a decline in a country's real GDP is commonly used as the definition of recession.

Here's the Newspeak version:

Although the definition of a recession varies between different countries and scholars, two consecutive quarters of decline in a country's real gross domestic product (real GDP) is commonly used as a practical definition of a recession.  [BUT] In the United States a recession is defined by the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) as "a significant decline in economic activity spread across the market, lasting more than a few months, normally visible in real GDP, real income, employment, industrial production, and wholesale-retail sales."  In the United Kingdom and most other countries, it is defined as a negative economic growth for two consecutive quarters."

Wiki then adds "Please feel free to improve this article"--but the lackeys immediately locked the page to keep anyone except Wiki lackeys from changing it!

The lackeys then add this:

An outdated version of this article has been widely circulated.  Please check if claims or screenshots you've seen are consistent with what's currently here.

"Outdated," ya say?  Hmmm--it was just fine up to three hours ago.  How, exactly, did you lackeys suddenly decide it was "outdated," eh?

Translation: "The only definition we'll allow is the one you see now.  Earlier definitions that WERE here are 'outdated' and thus no longer operative.  So even if someone posts a screenshot of our earlier definition--which was our definition up until three hours ago--it's no good any longer!

Down the memory hole, citizen.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recession

Dem convert their lone senate holdout, set to pass a law enacting roughly half of the Green New Deal

Every American has heard about a Democrat program called the Green New Deal, in which the Dems used the fake threat of Global Warming to demand that the U.S. stop using all carbon-based fuels, supposedly because burning carbon fuels produces CO2, which supposedly makes the Earth warmer.

Ah.  So if we agree to the Democrats' demand that we not burn carbon fuels, what do they propose we use for energy?  

Why, "renewable energy," of course--wind, solar and hydroelectric power.

Wait, what about nuclear?  Using nuclear to make electricity doesn't produce CO2, so that should still be acceptable under the faaabulous all-electric Green New Deal, right?

No.  "Too dangerous, comrade.  Look at all the people killed by the accident at Chernobyl.  Way too dangerous!"  So...just wind, solar and hydro.

Some engineer: "Um...you DO realize that solar and wind are intermittent, right?  And that when either one stops working for a few hours, either a few million Americans won't have electricity, or else you're gonna need to build a LOT more dams to have enough hydro to fill in for the down-time of wind and solar."

Democrats:  "Whut?  No, we won't allow you build any more dams, cuz dat ruins pretty valleys!  So...no."

Engineer: "Ah.  So your faaabulous "Deal" will ensure that parts of the country lose electric power about half the time.  Is that right??

Democrats:  "Whut?  Dat not our problem.  You not allowed to talk about stuff like dat!  Your social-media accounts have been deleted!  YOU GO NOW!"

Mainstream Media hacks: "YEAH!  You stupid engineers don't care about killing po' folks, an' all da cute li'l puppies an' kittycats!  You haters!!!  We're saving the planet, and all you wanna do is whine that a few million Americans will lose power for a few hours every week.  Geez!"

Engineer: "One more thing.  There's no way to power commercial jets with electricity, and they burn lots of kerosene.  So will you Democrats ban commercial jet travel?"

Democrats: "Don't be silly!  Jet travel will still be allowed!   But only for Very Important People, like members of congress, government officials and Hollywood stars.  We'll compensate for the CO2 by hiring fired pilots, flight attendants, ground crew and people who worked in the oil business to plant more trees!  But of course we'll pay 'em the new Democrat-ordered minimum wage of $15 per hour, so they'll be happy."

Engineer: "Interesting claim.  So how would those of us who aren't part of your "elite" class get from, say, LA to DC?"

Democrats: "Isn't it obvious?  Electric vehicles!  Doesn't matter that it'll take 3 days instead of six hours because we have to make a few sacrifices to save the Erf:

Engineer: "So regular people sacrifice 3 days while you people fly there in six hours, eh?"

Democrats: "Um...yes.  Because your time isn't as important as OUR time." 

Now here's the real hoot:  Back in 2019 the main pusher of the Green New Deal admitted that the real goal of the entire bullshit "Green New Deal" is NOT stopping Global Warming, but to push the U.S. further into...socialism.  

Ah, I hear many of you saying that's un-possible--it has to be a conspiracy story concocted by right-wing extremists!  Certainly it does sound unbelievable, but it's true--as printed by the Left-wing rag, the Washington Post.  The son of a bitch pushing it admitted it, in a 2019 interview with the Post.

This POS who said that is Saikat Chakrabarti, and unless you follow politics closely you've never heard of him.  He was chief of staff and campaign manager for the congressional campaign of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez--and a gushing admirer of communism.

In a July 2019 interview with the Washington Post, Chakrabarti admitted that the Green New Deal

...wasn’t originally a climate thing at all. Do you guys [reporters] think of it as a climate thing?  Because we really think of it as a ‘how-do-you-change-the-entire-economy’ thing.  We don’t say this but instead conceal it, because if we [admitted it] we'd have to explain why the epic failures of socialist regimes in our lifetimes should not be a red flag against repeating them.

This was published in the Post, which is a pro-Democrat, anti-conservative rag, so it's an "admission against interest."  You should know what that implies.

SO...with that as background:  The Democrats knew so many voters opposed their faaabulous Green New Deal that they never even brought it to the floor of either chamber of congress, since they knew they didn't have the votes to pass it.  But thanks to Democrats, about half of the Deal is on track to become law within a week.  A new bill would spend $390 BILLION on "de-carbonization improvements" like giving po' folk $4000 to buy used "clean energy" vehicles (no definitions yet), and a staggering $7,000 "rebate" to people who buy a new EV.  Cuz, see, dem 'lectric cars don' use no carbon fuel, eh citizen?  Surely mus' be true, cuz dey sayd it.  An' duh Democraps nevah lie, right?

One of my favorite boondoggles in the bill is $9 BILLION fo' "consumer home energy rebate programs, focused on low-income consumers, to electrify home appliances and for energy efficient retrofits."  Now, jus' whut kinda "home appliances" run on gas dat duh Dems wanna change to 'lectric, eh?  Do duh dishwasha run on gas?  Well, not home gas, anyway, even though right now 60% of all electricity comes from burning carbon fuels.  
  Do duh lights run on gas?  Same answer.  How 'bout duh TeeVee?  Same answer.  So what is the ONLY target here, eh?

It's duh hot-water heater.  Lots of gas HWHs in homes, cuz it costs a lot less to heat water with gas than with electricity.  But duh Dems gonna give po' folk $9 BILLION to junk duh gas HWHs an' buy a 'lectric one.

Is this stupid, almost beyond belief?  Why yes, yes it is.  But duh Democraps control ev'ryting, so can't be prevented from doing whatever they want.

Here's another gem: "$2 billion in grants to retool existing auto manufacturing facilities to manufacture clean vehicles, ensuring that auto manufacturing jobs stay in the communities that depend on them."
   So duh Dems gonna give $2 BILLION to duh auto makers so dey kin make dem EVs, eh?  Cuz, bribes.

But dat's not duh biggest slush-fund: It's duh $30 BILLION in "loans to build new clean vehicle manufacturing facilities."  That'll be a total disaster, as incompetent or corrupt bureaucrats give half-billion-dollar loans to scam artists, exactly as happened with the so-called "Paycheck Protection Program," in which roughly two BILLION was grabbed by scammers claiming to own businesses with 80 employees--despite the business being supposedly run out of their apartment.

Three BILLION for "Environmental and Climate Justice" grants, which are supposedly given to "community-led projects in disadvantaged communities and community capacity-building centers to address disproportionate environmental and public health harms related to pollution and climate change.

Wait, what is a "community capacity-building center"?  They don't define it.  Which means the Dem bureaucracy can give tens or hundreds of millions to anyone they like, for any purpose.

Wait, dat not enuf, so dey add anuddah three BILLION

....for Neighborhood Access and Equity grants, to support neighborhood equity, safety, and affordable transportation access, with competitive grants to reconnect communities divided by existing infrastructure barriers...

What the fuck does that even MEAN?  It means anything the Democrats giving out these "grants" decide to spend it on.

...mitigate negative impacts of transportation facilities or construction
projects on disadvantaged or underserved communities...

Same response as above.  What's a "negative impact of transportation facilities," eh?  This is so fucking vague that the Dems could give a half-BILLION grant to, say, install noise-reducing windows on homes near freeways or airports.  Money vanishes, no one will ever hear about it.  If you think that won't happen, search for "Solyndra."  Made solar panels.  Company execs donated max amounts to Obozo, and got a government-guaranteed loan for...half a BILLION dollars.  Three weeks later they declared bankruptcy--after giving top execs multi-millioin-dollar bonuses!  No one was charged, and taxpayers re-paid the corrupt loan.  Cool, eh?

...and support equitable transportation planning and community engagement activities.

"Community-engagement activities"??  That could be more millions to "midnight basketball."  It's so damn vague that it's a cover for any bullshit the Dems wanna fund--like the whole bill.

•  Three billion for "Grants to Reduce Air Pollution at Ports" (caps in the Democrat press release), "supporting the purchase and installation of zero-emission equipment and technology at ports."

Again, what does this actually mean?  Presumably they wanna replace piston engines wif' dem faabulous electric vehicles. 

• "More than $20 billion to support climate-smart agriculture practices."

Oh, like banning  nitrogen-based fertilizers (unless dried sewage residue, which is currently used)?  Canada has already proposed banning those, and the Netherlands already has.  Without fertilizer, food production plummets.  That's fine with the Democrats, because you can eat insects (seriously), while they can afford steak.

• $5 billion in grants to support healthy, fire resilient forests, forest conservation and urban tree planting.
• "Tax credits and grants to support the domestic production of biofuels, and to build the infrastructure needed for sustainable aviation fuel and other biofuels."
•  $2.6 billion in grants to conserve and restore coastal habitats and protect communities that depend on those habitats.
  

"To conserve and restore coastal habitats and protect communities..." eh?  That's pure pork, like everything else in this bill.  Nothing at all to do with energy.  My guess is some cunning Democrat's brother will apply for a grant to put a two-foot-tall concrete barrier around Obozo's palatial estates on Martha's Vinyard and in Hawaii, claiming taxpayers "must preserve the homes of former presidents."  And he'll offer to do it for a trivial $75 million.

That's enough examples for now.  Point is, this entire bill is a total Democrat boondoggle--a "white elephant."  A bill tailor-made for kickbacks and corruption. Click on this link to read the Democrats' own summary of this utter horse-shit bill.

And as long as the Democrats rule, this $390 BILLION of pure pork is just the beginning.  And yet the stupid average Dem voter will think this is the greatest bill EVAH!  Cuz it beez savin' duh Erf!  An' all duh puppies an' kittycats and unicorns!

Thanks, Democrats.  And thanks to all the folks who helped steal the electionS (plural) that not only saddled us with Porridgebrain, but also gave the Dems control of the corrupt senate.  Cuz without the steal of the two Georgia senate seats in the runoff election January 3rd of 2021, the Dems wouldn't control the senate.

Barring divine intervention, the U.S. is doomed, thanks to Dems and their RINO allies.
====
Good piece analyzing how the Left has taken over the universities, ensuring that no studies will be published on Global Warming unless they support the Democrat lie about it.

Q2 GDP released today: dropped 0.9%. By definition, that's a recession. WAIT...Media to the rescue!

As every educated adult American surely knows, for decades the official definition of a "recession" was two consecutive quarters of lower GDP (i.e. economy shrinking instead of growing, as it needs to do to keep up with population growth).

SO...the regime released the GDP numbers for Q2 today, and if you keep up with news (as opposed to the absurd horseshit called "newz") you know the result, right?

Sure: Q2 dropped 0.9%--which is about half the real number.  Seriously, the Atlanta Fed had a "GDP tracker" that showed a contraction of 1.6%.  Eh, what do they know, right?

So since Q1 also showed contraction, then by the long-accepted definition, we're in a recession, right?

Silly American!  You forgot who's running the country:  Democrats and their Media allies.  So the Lying Mainstream Media simply...changes the definition: we are NOT "in a recession."  No no no, citizen!  Instead the Dem-loving, Trump-hating, anti-American Associated Press bleats that "the nation may be approaching a recession."  Or as another Democrat-shill outlet put it, "it may be a recessionary signal." 

Isn't that precious?  See, if the Mainstream Media admitted that the U.S. was in a recession, that might cause Americans to question the wisdom of Democrat policies and edicts--like killing pipelines and drilling permits already issued, and offshore oil and gas leasing, and the biden regime selling oil from our Strategic Petroleum Reserve to China and Europe.

Geez, we can't have that!  Cuz that might make more Americans less willing to vote Dem in November.

Nah, the opinion polls show Democrats actually have a 2 to 4-point LEAD when asked which party they think should control congress.  Seriously.

Hey, happy days are here, comrade!  And to celebrate the great newz about the economic performance under the Dem regime, the Department of Free Stuff is increasing the chocolate ration from 20 grams per week to ten grams, and increasing the vodka allowanc from 750 ml to 500 ml.  

So this November be sure to show your gratitude to the regime by voting Democrat!

And lest you naively think the Democrats and Media re-defining terms to make Dems look better, here are a few other words that Dems and the Mainstream Media have redefined:

"woman"--now re-defined to include men
"vaccine"--now re-defined to include shots that do NOT keep you from getting a disease
"healthcare"--now re-defined to include killing other living things
"domestic terrorism"--now re-defined to mean anything the Democrat party doesn't like
"racist"--now re-defined to mean "white"
"mostly peaceful"--now re-defined to mean no more than 200 dead and five billion in arson and looting
"disinformation"--now re-defined to mean anything the Democrat party doesn't like
"insurrection"--re-defined to include "parading in the Capitol after being invited in by cops
"voter suppression"--re-defined to include having to show a photo-ID to vote or request a main-in ballot

The biden regime has also demanded the banning of the term "illegal alien," since "illegal" calls attention to the fact that the aliens in question violated U.S. law to enter the U.S.  Thus they are here "illegally"--raising the question, doesn't the Constitution direct the president to "faithfully enforce" U.S. laws?  Why yes it does.  So why does the regime continue to allow 200,000 illegals every month to break U.S. immigration law?
   The regime-approved Newspeak is "non-citizen," which hides the fact that they're here illegally, because biden refuses to enforce U.S. law.

"War is Peace."  "Freedom is Slavery."  "Ignorance is Strength."   Wait, my bad: Dems have re-written that to "DIEversity is our greatest strength."

(If you're a young American you may not recognize that the first 3 sayings in the line above were propaganda from the dictatorial socialist regime in Orwell's dark novel "1984.")

Outrageous: Many young Americans have no idea who fought in the Civil War, and lots more.

The video at this link is one of a series, in which the interviewer asks young Americans (20-ish) things like "How many dimes in a dollar?"  "What state is Utah in?"  "Who fought in the Civil War?" "What language do they speak in Idaho?" "What's 3 times 3 times 3?" and so on.

And you may be surprised to learn that none of the people interviewed knew any of those answers.

Now I'll readily admit that the guy might have found lots of people who DID know, and only showed the ones who didn't.  Sure.

For the last 30-plus years I've tutored college students in all the really hard subjects, and if a student got to the session a few minutes before the start time (so we're waiting for the other students to arrive) I'd ask them questions just to see what the schools were teaching.

My students weren't as woeful as the people in the video, but many didn't know if a fraction like 85/230 was bigger or smaller than one.  Many had no idea who we fought in WW2, or who first described communism, or who flew the first powered airplane, or how many nations had landed men on the moon.

It was...how to put it?  A matter of some concern to me.  And I hope to every American.

So let's take a look at some possible explanations.  Two obvious possibilities.  First is that due to either environmental or genetic disasters, young people are getting dumber.  I seriously doubt that, and you do too. 

The second possibility is that "our" public K-12 schools are failing to teach the most basic skills and knowledge.  I think that's pretty obviously the cause.

But what's the explanation for that failure?  I think it's pretty obvious that K-12 in the inner cities is hopeless--beyond saving.  But outside the northeast and west coasts, I think most teachers are dedicated and hard-working.  The problem seems to be school boards ruled by liberals, and "woke" administrators (principals, superintendents and the myriad munchkins they hire) who are dedicated communists in mindset if not literally card-carrying.

For example, there are literally hundreds of videos of parents speaking at school-board meetings, trying to read a few paragraphs from books in the school library explicitly promoting and describing homosexual acts--only to be shouted down by some dip-shit board president bleating "You are not allowed to read that!"  Parent says "If it's so awful that you refuse to allow me to read it, what the hell is it doing in a school library where it can be read by 12-year-olds (and often by much younger students)"?

The board dipshit never answers that question.  Because the answer is, some dip-shit on the board approved that book, and they don't want to be identified.

As things now stand, even with a maximum effort it'll take 25 years to clear all the wokie saboteurs out of the school boards and school administrations.

If I had kids or grandchildren I'd say that was far too long, and too devastating for the country, and I'd look for a faster method. 

https://youtu.be/g2oMv93EUpY

DC: 11-year-old steals car, runs over 7-year-old. No charges expected, cuz...well, you know. Thanks, Democrats.

Two days ago in cesspool DC an 11-year-old boy stole a car, ran over a 7-year-old, jumped out of the car and ran away.

Police said they would "review this case with the D.C. Attorney General’s office to determine whether to charge the hit-and-run thief with any sort of crime.

A woman at that office told Fox "He probably didn’t mean to do it, but he still shouldn’t have been in the car. He shouldn’t have been driving."

"He shouldn't have been driving."  Well that and he shouldn't have stolen the car, eh?  But because "He probably didn't mean to do it" that means the dumb sons of bitches in the A-G's office won't charge him.

Well, that's one reason.  The other is, Who's the mayor of DC?  Who runs every government office in that corrupt shit-hole of a "city," eh?  DC is one of the MANY Democrat-ruled cities where even drug dealers, muggers, carjackers, robbers and rapists are routinely released within hours of arrest, and without having to post even ten bucks as bail.  Cuz they're members of the same "specially-protected class" as the mayor and all the gruberment officials.

And as long as the mayor and all officials are Democrats, nothing will ever change for the better.

 

Round 2 starts: W.H.O. director overrules board, declares "monkeypox" a world health emergency--3 deaths worldwide

As of July 22nd the "Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy" at the U. of Minnesota reported 2,593 cases in the U.S., and zero deaths.   Most of those cases are in homosexual males. 

Worldwide, there have been a total of three deaths from it. 

That's not a typo, missing the word "million" or something.  Three (3) deaths.

So based on reported cases and deaths, the director of the World Health Organization--a communist from Ethiopia, installed by the Chinese communist party (feel free to look it up) asked the learned "experts" on that organization's board of medical advisors to see if monkeypox was a serious threat.  They concluded it wasn't.

So days later he asked them to reconsider their decision.  They did, and gave the same answer: Not a serious threat.

So being a man of Science (spoiler: he's not even an M.D.), Tedros Ghebreyesus listened to the Science...and overruled the board and used his China-Power to unilaterally declare monkeypox a "public health emergency of international concern"--a declaration currently applied to just two other diseases, Covid-19 and polio.

Wow, that sounds REALLY serious, eh?  Say, do ya think the CDC or FauXi will order gay men to stop having orgies for, say, two weeks--just to "flatten the curve," you understand.

Hahahahahaha!  Of course that will never happen.  The biden regime would sooner commit suicide than do anything to cross the gay mafia.

So what's the significance of the W.H.O. declaring monkeypox a "public health emergency of international concern," eh?  Well apparently when a nation joins the WHO, it agrees that when such a declaration is issued, all member countries are obligate to invest significant resources in doing whatever the WHO says is needed to "control" the outbreak.  And if you think that sounds awfully vague, that's intentional.

Nearly all the infections outside Africa have occurred among men who have sex with men, so the biden regime quickly swung into action to "control" the outbreak, realizing that doing less than everything could conceivably cost them votes.  And this leads us to ask--and quickly answer--the first question on every American's mind:

"Is there a 'vaccine' for this dread disease?"

And the answer is yes.  It's made by "Bavarian Nordik."  So the biden regime has bought (ordered) over five MILLION doses of that vaccine.  But since there are supposedly 25 million homosexual men in the U.S., that clearly won't be enough.  And there's another problem: there are indications that the virus can be spread thru the air, without contact.  Which would mean that to vaccinate all the Democrats in the country would require another 100 million doses.

And using the same logic that allowed maskers to scream that unmasked Americans were a threat to their lives--even though they presumably believe the virus can't get thru the mask!--then anyone who doesn't take the vaccine could be at risk of transmitting the dread disease.

Of course that leaves only one possible solution: the regime forces everyone down to 6 months old to take the vaccine.  Who could possibly object to that, eh?

In unrelated newz, pharmaceutical giant Pfizer has reportedly made an offer o buy Bavarian Nordik for about 20% more than the company's book value.

https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2022/07/monkeypox-epidemic-control-hinging-scarce-vaccines

U.K. government death stats prove the vax is neither safe nor effective--unless you're a Democrat

If you're looking for "official" numbers on deaths of vaxxed vs. unvaxxed in the U.S, good luck.  I suspect the CDC is deliberately making those numbers very hard to find.  Instead they just push bullshit buzz phrases like "safe...and effective!"

But oddly, the U.K. has those numbers (although in a spreadsheet that takes work to decipher). They're from an official government website called the Office for National Statistics, at this link.. 

And what the U.K's government stats show is utterly damning to those who believe "duh vax" is either safe OR effective:  

As of a week ago, 93.3% of all U.K. residents age 12 and over had taken the jab.  So for Democrats:  if the "vaccine" is "safe and effective," what percentage of Covid deaths would expect to see among the vaxxed, eh?  

Obviously, less than the percentage of vaxxed residents, right?  But how much less to make it worth the risk of vax injury and death?  Personally if deaths among the "vaccinated" weren't less than half those of the unvaxxed, I wouldn't take the damn thing.  So what are the numbers for the U.K?

Turns out that in the U.K, with 93.3% of residents having had at least one jab, 94% of all deaths due to "covid" are among those who've taken the "vaccine."

And if we look at deaths from "all causes," 96.3$ of deaths from all causes were in the vaxxed.  This figure is relevant because it would include people who showed no covid symptoms but died of a clot or heart attack.  So even more revealing.

Democrats: "Dis not true!  Dis bees a LIE!  Fake newz!  Cuz Lord Fauci and Queen Walensky done tol' us duh vaccine beez safe and effective!  So YOU LIE!"

Oh you bet, snowflake.  I used my super-powers to hypnotize the lackeys in the U.Ks. NHS to get them to fake the stats.  Oh yeah.  You bet.  You people are totally delusional. 

Democrat politicians and officials (like CDC and FDA; much smoother): "We haven't confirmed the data in this so-called spreadsheet, so it may well be "disinformation," just like the story about Hunter Biden's laptop!  But assuming for the moment that our trusted fact-checkers at Google and MSNBC and CNN can confirm these so-called 'numbers', they don't prove that the vaccine isn't safe and effective, because obviously the U.K. is an entirely different country!  So the people there are genetically different from Americans, and thus probably don't respond to the safe and effective vaccine the same way Americans do.  Yeh, dat's it!"  

Source for U.K. data

https://www.ons.gov.uk/file?uri=/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/datasets/deathsbyvaccinationstatusengland/deathsoccurringbetween1january2021and31may2022/referencetable06072022accessible.xlsx

Three middle-aged doctors at same hospital die in the same week, days after taking "2nd booster"; "Coincidence!"

In the town of Mississauga, Canada, the local hospital recently began giving all doctors and nurses a "second booster" (i.e. a 4th shot of duh "vaccine").

Less than a week later, three middle-age doctors who'd gotten that faaabulous "booster" mysteriously died. Dead were Stephen McKenzie, Lorne Seagall and Jakub Sawicki, who died July 17, 18 and 20.

Democrats and sheep: "Dis not true!  Dis bees 'misinformation'!  Fake newz!  You LIE!"

No, you dumb sons of bitches, it ain't fake.  Click on the link above and view three emails from their employer, Trillium Health Partners, announcing the deaths.

The "experts" expect you to believe there was no link whatsoever between these deaths.  They had no connection with having gotten the 4th shot of the vax, citizen!  Just coincidence--like the hundreds of extremely fit pro and college athletes dropping dead within two weeks of taking the vax.  "That's always happened, silly citzen!"  

And now the CDC is running ads implying that blood clots in healthy athletes are totally normal, so if you THINK you've heard about this happening, a) you're wrong; or b) "this has always happened, citizen, so there's no need to worry.  And if you insist on claiming it's being caused by duh "vaccine," we'll have your social-media account cancelled!

Now, I can't blame you sheep for believing everything the Lying Media and gruberment told you about duh Chyna virus and "two weeks to flatten the curve," and "If you're vaccinated you CANNOT get the virus!" because virology and epidemics aren't something you know about in any detail.  But with that said, for the past year there have been hundreds of peer-reviewed studies, and autopsies finding huge clots, and genetic sequences that show the virus was deliberately altered, so that if you STILL believe the Media and the biden regime, and insist on taking the 4th booster--or the 5th or 6th, or the NEW vax for the BA.5 variant--at some point it's hard to be very sympathetic..  

The information was there.  You just ignored it, preferring to believe the government and the Media.  After all, why would those two groups lie to you, right?

Oh, you think that's harsh, snowflakes?  You ain't seen harsh.  But you're about to.. 

https://stevekirsch.substack.com/p/will-physicians-ever-speak-out

New CDC ads try to convince Americans childhood heart attacks and blood clots in fit athletes are NORMAL

If you pay attention to events (spoiler: you don't, even though you think you do), you may have heard some vague rumors about some sort of increase in heart problems--including heart attacks--among people who have taken the "vaccine."  In fact dozens of fit 20- to 28-year-old athletes have dropped dead on the field from heart attacks.  No cause given, but no known pre-existing medical conditions--cuz if there were any, they wouldn't be playing competitively, eh?  Pretty obvious--except to the Media.

You may also have heard vague rumors about young Americans--under 30--being diagnosed with some sort of heart enlargement--myo-something--that a few nervous doctors considered worrisome.  But since it wasn't you or one of your kids, and the Media didn't seem concerned, you didn't think much about it.

Well...all the incidents noted above happened in people who'd taken the "vaccine."  But that's just a coincidence, citizen.  Young athletes have always dropped dead on the playing field, as far back as we've been keeping records, right?  Surely you remember, back in high school, a couple of your classmates had fatal heart attacks on the field, right?  Sure ya do!  It's always happened, citizen.

Same with myocarditis in young people.  It's always happened, at virtually the same rate as today.  The only reason you heard anything is that right-wing extremists--anti-vaxxers, Science Deniers!--came up with this nutty idea that the vaccines were causing these cases.  How silly!  It's always happened, citizen.

And to let every American know how normal both these things are, your CDC has rolled out a faaabulous public-service ad campaign to show you!  Here's the first one:

I'll bet you didn't even know kids had heart attacks.

See, the ad doesn't say whether heart attacks are normal or routine in kids, but it doesn't have to--because the CDC wouldn't go to the effort of doing an ad about child heart attacks unless it was a problem worth alerting parents about, eh?  And if heart attacks in children weren't totally normal, you would have seen a far larger warning from the same CDC saying "We're seeing a big increase in heart attacks in children, for absolutely no reason!"  Since you never saw any ads like that, what's the only conclusion you can reasonably draw?

That heart attacks in children are fairly normal.  It's always happened, citizen.  Almost all of us lost a classmate or two to heart attack before age 12, right?  Surely you had the same experience, citizen.

Here's the second ad.  You heard something about blood clots?  Perfectly normal, citizen: Anyone can develop a blood clot--even young, highly-fit athletes. 

Note carefully the setup:  You probably thought clots never happened to young people, or to very fit athletes up to about 50.  But here's the CDC to tell you, in the very first line: "ANYONE can develop a blood clot."  Second line: Whether you're an athlete or..."  Then later, next to the football player, just to ensure no one missed it the first time: "EVERYONE is at risk for blood clots!  Even the healthiest athletes get blood clots..."

So see, citizen?  You probably didn't know until a few seconds ago that blood clots are TOTALLY normal, even in the healthiest of athletes.  And like the first ad, about kids having heart attacks, blood clots in the healthiest athletes must be normal, because if we were seeing a big increase in blood clots in healthy athletes (and presumably in non-athletes too), the CDC would have told us "We're seeing a huge increase in blood clots this year, for no known reason!  So you need to know how to...um...'protect your health.'"

And...um...about that last phrase:  What does the CDC recommend to "protect your health," eh?

Do they recommend a no-fat diet?  More vegetables?  Fauci's favorite killer drug Remdesivir?  Or one of the favorite standbys, "Get regular exercise!"  (they recommend this for a trained athlete?)

Uh...no.  They have zero ideas to prevent clots (though we have one).  Instead it's just "Know the warning signs."  Fortunately falling flat on the field gets everyone's attention very quickly, so there's that.

And you have to love the inversion of the classic line: In very large type the CDC writes, "The best offense is a good defense."  Your average 25-year-old probably never heard the original, so thinks this is brilliance, even though it doesn't make sense.  But older folks know the original was "The best defense is a good offense.

So for Democrats:  These two CDC ads above are a cunning way to make child heart attacks and blood clots in fit, healthy athletes appear completely normal.instead of unprecedented.  Cuz if they weren't normal, any ads the CDC created would be warning you about this new, unprecedented threat--with, as noted, no known cause.  Instead, by saying nothing like that the normal reader gets the impression this is something that's perfectly routine.  It's always happened, citizen.

And I suspect we'll start seeing more of this type of thing, including explicit claims that neither childhood heart attacks nor blood clots in young fit athletes are happening at a higher rate than normal, and that even if there was a "small" increase it would prove nothing.

German "Green" party puts out posters of that country's future--all females and immigrants

Angela Merkel was chancellor of Germany for 16 years.  She rammed through the "open borders" policy under which Germany allowed millions of Muslim and African immigrants to enter Germany permanently.

Immigrants now make up 12.5% of all residents of that nation.  They commit 56% of all murders.

Democrats: "Dis not true!  Dis mean nuffin'!  Dear Leader say 'DIEversity is our strength' so mus' be true!  So you lie!  Fake newz!"

Merkel says she regards her open-borders policy as a stunning success.

Combine that policy with moronic Leftist judges who sentence killers to a slap on the wrist.  Oh, the "official " sentence may sometimes long, but the killer is almost always released after serving just half of the "official" sentence.  Judges also almost never agree to deport killers after they're released.

To get an idea of how well these policies are working for Germany, take a look at three poster just released by the "Green Party" touting the future of Germany.  Notice anything?

 

The only white face in the lot is the female half of a half-black lesbian couple.  No other white faces.  And all females.

It's important to recognize that the leaders of the cunningly-named "Green Party" are actually communists.  By claiming to be Green they attract millions of naive young people eager to eliminate all carbon-based and nuclear energy--leaving Germany dependent on Russian gas to survive.  It's brilliant..

It's also worth noting that before East and West Germany reunited, Angela Merkel was a rising star in the Young Communist league in East Germany, joining at age 14.  She was fluent in Russian, and at 24 became a member of the "secretariat" (ruling committee) of the young communist league, serving as the secretary for "Agitation and Propaganda."  According to her former colleagues she openly propagated Marxism--a claim Merkel has cleverly denied, claiming insteaed that she was secretary for culture, which merely involved organizing talks by visiting Soviet authors. 

Consider her cunning evasion, telling Germany's biggest magazine "I can only rely on my memory. If something turns out to be different, I can live with that."  She knows she's lying so wants to give herself the "out" of "faulty memory, which I told you was possible!"

Merkel remained a star in the communist party until reunification in 1990, when she was 36..  After reunification she brilliantly joined the West's most popular political party (the CDU), and her past was almost forgotten.  The media expect everyone to believe Merkel was never really a communnist.

So back to the present: If someone wants to destroy a society, there are lots of ways.  If you want to do it without cost, without war, the easiest and least expensive way is to make the males stop supporting the society.  

That's actually much easier than you think.  You push several things at the same time, such as appointing females and foreigners to as many ruling positions as possible.  Yes, this requires males currently in those positions to cooperate, but that's easy to arrange: Just use Media allies and articles by "elites" to persuade everyone that pushing "female empowerment" and minority empowerment is "virtuous," and they those at the top quickly become eager to do it.  Having reached the top of the earning pyramid, now they want above all to be popular, and they're told they'll be admired for doing this.

Have all advertising about jobs and the future feature females and minorities almost exclusively--no native-nationality men.  You see that today in ads by American companies, and in the posters above by the German Green party.  (One of the most infamous U.S. ads was by razor-maker Gillette showing a black father teaching his female-to-male tranny daughter how to shave.  The company ran the ad constantly for several weeks--ironically during pro-football broadcasts.  In thousands of comments men wondered what "woke" beta males at the company approved the ad.)

Increase the number of women admitted to universities while reducing the number of men.  Particularly effective is to have universities actively recruit women and minorities into engineering--a field every bit as challenging as medicine.  Promote products that push classic feminine traits to men--like skin softeners.  Show ads depicting men doing laundry and swooning over the scent of cleaners or fabric softeners.

Finally, award literary prizes to books that tear down the native society.  The German Greens had a big jump there because of the nation's guilt over WW2, so this wasn't needed, but we see it in the U.S. in spades: It's become so fashionable among "wokie" college-age rioters that they've destroyed statues of George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and Abraham Lincoln.  The wokies have turned James Madison's Virginia home into a diatribe against the man and his ideas.  Their website calls it "A memorial to James Madison and the Enslaved Community." 

If you think all this has no effect, or is all just coincidence ("right-wing conspiracy stories!!!) I've got some oceanfront property in Nebraska I'd like to sell ya.

Meanwhile Muslim immigrants to Germany continue to merrily kill defenseless German girls.  Thanks, Angela!  And for Americans, thanks, Democrats!

Excellent source for Merkel's past is Der Spiegel article from 2013.

Dem governor of NY urges supporters to make trouble for opponent. One attacks the opponent with a knife

In New York, Republican Lee Zeldin is facing unelected Democrat Kathy Hochul.  And using standard Democrat tactics, Hochul sent out a so-called "Media Advisory" describing Zeldin as a right-wing extremist, surrounded by similar extremists.

 

She cunningly encouraged her more insane supporters to show up and make trouble--and sure enough, a man with a knife attacked Zeldin at a rally.  Zeldin blocked the first thrust and security tackled the attacker.

Now here's the topper: Since Democrats rule New York, the attacker was released within hours without having to post any bond.

Gosh, that seems...odd, eh?  I mean, if you or I tried to knife Kathy Hochul, do ya think we'd be released within hours without having to post any bail?  Not possible.  But since all local law enforcement depends on Kathy's whims for the extra state funding that buys new cop cars and radios and goodies, they'll do whatever Kathy wants.

Two sets of laws, comrade:  One relaxed set for those who support the rulers, and a far harsher set for the rest of us.

Wait...you say you never noticed that?  Wow. 

For a look at what you're up against, read the comments at the twatter link above: lots of Dem shills saying "There was no weapon!" and "The guy just wanted a hug."  Seriously.

Backup link to Citizen Free Press in case twatter deletes the account or post.