If you were surprised by biden's mental confusion during the debate, maybe...

 

NY Times writes a breathless story of angst among Dems; buries the lede in 24th graf

This just keeps getting better.  Not trying to compare biden to Hitler, but the Media's breathless "reporting" on the Democrat' frantic scrambling on whether to roll the dice with Porridgebrain or try a different nominee kinda reminds me of "the last days of Adolf Hitler."  Here's the NY Times, today at 3:30 (four hours ago):

President Biden’s family is urging him to stay in the race and keep fighting despite last week’s debate performance.

You don't say!  You don't say!  I'm...shocked.

On Sunday Mr. Biden [wait, isn't the term approved by the NYT style sheet "President biden"?] huddled with his wife and family at Camp David trying to figure out how to [win the support of his party].

In a HUGE surprise, the Times says biden's family argued he should stay in the race, as he's, like, totally competent and capable of serving for another four years.  Seriously, the Times "reported" that.

Mr. Biden has also been soliciting ideas from advisers about how to proceed.

Translation: Most of his staff wants him to stay in the race, since not all of 'em can be hired by CNN and MSNBC.  A few of his staff--those to whom a Democrat win is more important than which Democrat wins--have been arguing that he should drop out.  Wow, there's a huge shock, eh?

One of the strongest voices imploring Mr. Biden to resist pressure to drop out was his son, Hunter.

You don't say!  You.  Don't.  Say!  Cuz if joe bails, he gets a huge pension.  Now, I don't know jack about how long a federal pension continues to pay to the heirs of dead folks, but I suspect if Hunty can't bag bribes for daddy anymore, his income will drop drastically!  Of course he could always get hired by CNN or MSNBC, eh?  Or maybe Burisma would hire him to sit on their board of directors again, at a lavish million bucks a year, eh?  Hahahahahaha!

John Morgan, a top Democratic donor, publicly blamed the advisers who managed the biden’s debate prep, specifically naming Ron Klain, Anita Dunn and Bob Bauer.  “For too long Biden has been fooled by the advice of Anita Dunn and her husband,” Morgan wrote on social media. “They need to go … TODAY. The grifting is gross. It was political malpractice.”

Wow.

Members of the family were also said to be focused on the president’s staff, including Ms. Dunn, who was a White House senior adviser for Obama, and her husband, Mr. Bauer, who is biden’s personal attorney.

Here the Times slips in some really obvious propaganda:

One person said the president wanted to keep campaigning hard to show a contrast with Mr. Trump, a convicted felon who tried to overturn the last election and made numerous false statements during the debate.

Nicely done, assholes.  Your readers applauded.

The only way insiders said they could imagine biden dropping out was if he could claim credit for beating Trump in 2020, restoring our precious democracy and saving all life on Earth from death by global warming.

Some of that last 'graf may have been garbled in transmission, but I think you get the gist.

A new poll of Democrats by CBS found that 45 percent said they wanted a different nominee.  Among all voters just 27 percent said Mr. Biden was competent to serve as president, down from 35 percent before the debate.

This is called "burying the lede."  The fact that CBS found biden dropped eight points in the polls after Thursday night should have been the most important event of this otherwise breathless non-story.  You'd think the news that just 27 percent of voters said biden was competent to serve would be pretty newsworthy, eh?  But by burying it in the 24th paragraph, no one saw it.  Mission accomplished!

This morning (Sunday) Biden supporters took to the morning talk shows to defend the president.  Dem senator and wife-beater Raphael Warnock of Georgia praised Biden.  Maryland's Dem governor Wes Moore praised "historically low unemployment rates."

That's jus' faaabulous, senator.  But the "labor force participation rate" is at a record low.  How can both those things be true, eh?  (Hint: the regime is cooking the books.  The unemployment numbers are fake.)

Moore predicted biden would not step aside, "nor should he.”

Former Speaker Nancy Pelosi also dismissed talk of the president dropping out. “I support the Biden-Harris ticket,” she said.  And we all know Pelosi is smart and powerful.

Source: NY Times

https://archive.is/CVURQ#selection-687.0-819.293

biden's lies during the debate

The Mainstream Media is going crazy bleating that while biden may have embellished slightly during Thursday's debate, Trump spewed a fountain of lies.  Let's take a look:

Biden claimed he was endorsed by "the Border Patrol."  You believed it, cuz biden said it, eh?  And I don't doubt that the head of the BP--biden's hand-picked lackey--said "You're the best, boss!"  No surprise.

But of course you'd expect that, cuz the biden appointee wants to keep his high-paid job.  But how do the rank-and-file Border Patrol agents feel?  Within minutes of biden's claim at the debate, the BP union issued the following statement: We never have and never will endorse Biden.”
  Is that clear enough for you media propagandists?

biden claimed “there have been 40 percent fewer people coming across the border illegally on my watch than under Trump."  That's a brazen, grotesque lie.  Under the biden/mayorkas/garland/harris regime we've seen a record number of illegals crossing into the U.S.--around ten million since he was installed.

Biden claimed "I'm the only president not to have ANY American troops die on my watch." That's a brazen lie:  Thirteen service members were killed during Biden’s humiliating rout from Afghanistan.

Biden claimed he inherited a dead economy from when he took office, that inflation was 9 percent.  That's a brazen lie: the official inflation rate was 1.4 percent.

biden claimed that when he took office the unemployment rate was 15 percent.  That's a brazen lie.  The unemployment rate was 6.4% when biden took office.  

After Trump claimed the Democrat party supported late-term abortion biden angrily denied that.  But biden has repeatedly promised to legalize unlimited, on-demand abortion through all nine months of pregnancy via a sweeping bill.  Unless biden has secretly switched parties, he lied.  Democrat leaders, including Pelosi and Schumer, support unlimited abortion at any time.    

"Cages for children": Biden claimed Trump “separated babies from their mothers [and] put them in cages” when he was president.  That statement is misleading.  Back in 2010 Leftists pretended to be horrified that children were being housed with adults in border detention facilities.  So they filed a flurry of lawsuits, and liberal judges agreed that this was absolutely awful.  This of course comes from the principle of American jurisprudence that children NOT be detained with adults due to the obvious possibility of sexual abuse by wacko adult males.

But the U.S. penal system had never detained entire families.  So the Border Patrol initially concluded it was better to keep kids with their parents, eh?  Dis ain't rocket science. 

But to the Left this was just AWFUL.  And as a result of the Left's lawsuits, and the subsequent judicial orders, the Obozo/biden regime was ordered to house children in a separate facility from adults--a fact admitted even by the leftist Associated Press.  

In a classic case of shooting yourself in the foot, around 2021 a radical Democrat member of congress [Eric Swalwell?] posted pics on the internet purporting to be "children put in cages by Donald Trump."  One day later internet sleuths found that those photos had been taken during the Obozo/biden regime, in facilities their people were ordered to create by liberal judges.

biden claimed "Trump wants to get us out of NATO."  There is no evidence of this whatsoever.  It's likely that biden's senile brain--what's left of it--reached this false conclusion from the fact that Trump frequently pressured the heads of NATO countries during his presidency to meet their defense spending commitments, adding that if they didn't, he wasn't going to continue to fund NATO.

But hey, biden claimed two years ago that "We support truth over facts!"  Hard to parse that in a logical fashion.  

Now the hoot: you've read headlines that Democrats are in a meltdown trying to find a replacement for biden.  That's a hoot: the Dem establishment is fighting hard to keep this vegetable as their nominee, NOT because they're dumb (??) but because they're counting on the Mainstream Media to come to their rescue yet again.  The theme will be that "biden merely embellished, while Trump brazenly lied."

Seriously, that's the strategy...for the moment.  Which way they go depends on what Monday's polls show.  If biden's numbers haven't dropped, they'll stick with him--NOT because they believe he's competent, but because naming a replacement who's NOT Kammi Harris will alienate a ton of black voters.  And naming Kammi as the nominee...well, the less said about that the better. 

"Demography is destiny"

If you're a well-educated American over a certain age you've probably heard the phrase "Demography is destiny."

Ring any bells?

The phrase was reportedly coined by a 19th-century French philosopher, Auguste Comte, who from studying history hypothesized that the size and composition of a nation's population "influence" its future.

Young Americans have never heard that phrase--and there's a reason.  It's not because the idea has been discredited, but because  your "elites" have cleverly gotten Americans  to ignore the truth of this concept, in part by such an amateurish (but effective) means as  sneering that the man credited with the observation may not actually have uttered it.

Ahh, uncertainty about the author discredits the idea, does it?  Of course not.

I'll explain why the "elites" want very much to discredit this concept in a minute.  But first let me go a bit further than Comte:  The size and composition of a nation's population doesn't just "influence" its future, but rather limits its future with absolute certainty.

Ahh, I hear my Democrat friends saying "Dat beez an old, discredited falsehood!  And you have no evidence that the 'elites' want to discredit this concept!  Dat jus' right-wing conspiracy stories!  Yep yep yep!"

Your so-called "reasoning" is amusing.  Here the f'n New York Times from 2016:
>>There’s a common saying: Demography is destiny. It holds that population trends and distributions determine the future of a country, region or even the entire world.
   But is the concept really valid? Is demography truly destiny? Or, are there still too many questions about what demographic trends actually mean?>>

You were saying...?

So let's begin by looking at military tactics of the 19th century:  In long wars of attrition, 99 percent of the time the nation that had the largest army won.  Any questions?

Yes, there have been exceptions, but they're rare: If the size of the armies of two nations was only different by a few percent, a smaller but better-led army, with more motivated fighters, sometimes won.  But again, it's rare.

But of course that was then, eh?  Today, in the age of nuclear weapons, the size of a nation's armed forces can be offset by a couple of well-placed nukes, eh?

This is why the big nuclear powers haven't gone toe-to-toe: the fear that the side that finds itself losing will go nuclear.

So because nuclear weapons exist, you may think that ends the idea that demography is destiny, eh?

Not even close.  Because for the threat of nuclear weapons to be a deterrent...your enemy has to believe you might actually use 'em.  And here's where "composition" of a nation's population comes in.

Some national leaders put a high priority on survival of their nation.  But other nations--no doubt more sophisticated--know nuclear weapons are terrible: not only do they kill lots of people, they also release harmful radioactive fallout that can last for centuries!

To these more sophisticated people it's far better to surrender--or simply not fight in the first place--than to use nuclear weapons and risk a full-scale nuclear war.

Now stop for a moment: How many of you agree with that last sentence?

Damn near everyone.  And that's totally understandable.  And it's possible that our opponents feel the same way, eh?  I mean, all modern people feel the same about the terrible effects of nuclear weapons, right?

So where does that *inexorably* lead?

With nukes off the table we're back to conventional war, where (assuming equal technology) the size of a nation's armed forces determines who wins.

Now, every young American knows China has X times more people than the U.S.  So ask your kids--or your co-workers--what they think the value of X is.  And if China didn't want to rule the world, having five times our population wouldn't be worrisome.  But...

Now watch the following 4-minute video (turn the sound off; it's terrible!).  It's of thousands of female Chinese soldiers marching in formation at a state parade.  

Democrat: "So?  Dat all for show.  Means nuffin'."

Ah, you've obviously never been in the military.  Getting that many people to march with such precision takes a staggering amount of training and practice.  Extremely dedicated troops.  Total obedience.

Think these gals aren't totally dedicated to the goals of the communist party?

Democrat: "Whut dat matter?  These women won't ever be used in combat!  Dis all for show by duh Party!"

Yes, it's a show.  And other than precise marching skill (which by itself is obviously of no tactical value), what do ya think it shows, sparky?  

Among other things it shows that the CCP could send every man in the PLA into combat without the leaders of the party having to worry about being overthrown, as the female troops would be more than adequate to prevent that.

So with nuclear weapons off the table, how many active-duty military in China vs. the U.S?  China has about two million, the U.S. 1.29 million (of which 100,000 or so are trannies).  But more to the point, if China decides to take over Taiwan they'd be operating just 100 miles from the mainland--thus from land bases--while the U.S. would be operating from aircraft carriers or would depend on air refueling to give U.S. aircraft enough endurance after flying 1,700 miles from Guam.

Either way, no way we can win such a conflict--and every military professional knows it.  None will ever admit it to the public, of course.

So now you start to see why no U.S. school teaches "demography is destiny" anymore.  For a few decades our superior technology kept the peace, but it was only a matter of time before China was able to develop (and with the help of spies in U.S. universities and defense companies, to steal) modern technology.  And when both sides have equal tech, the larger military wins.

As almost always throughout history, demography is destiny, eh?

China's leaders know they don't need to take on the U.S. directly.  Other nations will soon see that the U.S. has ceased to be the dominant world power, and will make whatever arrangements they can with China.

The Media coverup of biden's senility--known to insiders for years--is beginning to crack

A year from now the books will start coming out, and you'll all get a chance to learn how brazenly, massively the Media has been lying to you, to cover for biden and the Democrats.  

Everyone in DC government has known for years that biden was senile.  Call it dementia, Alzheimers, whatever.  But they all covered for the Democrat to protect the party.

All the heads of state of Europe knew it too. Here's a preview, edited from the Wall Street Journal.

"The world saw biden deteriorating. Democrats ignored the warnings."

--June 28, 2024

The [only] public alarm about Joe Biden’s mental acuity came in February with the release of Special Counsel Robert Hur’s report, a document he produced after spending five hours interviewing the president that revealed Biden displayed significant memory problems.

Democrats worried. Then most of them followed the [party line] and dismissed the report as "partisan hackery."  Biden’s closest advisers defiantly [rejected] suggestions that the 81-year-old president showed signs of decline.

Minutes into Thursday night’s presidential debate, the concerns began gushing into the open.  But they had already become increasingly apparent for months inside DC and overseas.

The White House did not immediately provide comment for this story.

European officials had been expressing worries in private about Biden’s focus and stamina before the debate, but one senior European diplomat said U.S. officials denied there was any problem.

"U.S. officials denied there was any problem."  They've been working hard to con everyone--even our allies.  But at last the dam is beginning to break.  Perhaps the Mainstream Media can yet again make you ignore what you see with your own eyes, eh?  It's easy: just call the videos "cheap fakes.

Two senior European officials cited an EU-U.S. summit last October in Washington where Biden had struggled to follow the discussions. Both said that he stumbled over his talking points several times, prompting Secretary of State Blinken to interrupt and point out the lines he should use.

A former adviser to the EU’s foreign-affairs chiefs said European officials have been talking about biden's decline for months.

On June 13 biden skipped the formal dinner with the G7 heads of state to sign what U.S. Media called "a landmark US-Ukraine security deal.  Think biden knows a single item he obligated the U.S. to in that "landmark security deal" touted by the U.S. Media?

Biden’s top aides insist the president is mentally sharp.  But before the Hur report on the probe into Biden’s mis-handling of classified documents was released in February, White House lawyers pushed to delete references about Biden’s memory from the report.  

"Sharp."  But the regime has ordered biden's attorney-general, Merrick Garland, not to release the audio of Hur's interview with biden, despite releasing what the White House claims is a totally accurate transcript.  Why do you think that is, eh?  Oh wait...not one of you ever heard about that, eh?

Republicans believe hearing Biden’s tone and the length of his pauses would reveal the severity of his a mental decline to voters.

During a May fundraiser in Washington state, Biden appeared to lose his train of thought as he talked about Israel. “The ceasefire would begin tomorrow. It all has to do…you know, we’ve not..anyway, I guess I shouldn’t get into all this about Israel but…”

DC insiders and foreign leaders have known biden's been senile for years.  Voters who watched hour after hour of his freezes and invented words--only on the internet--knew.  But the Media never showed those, so most Americans never knew.  Now the Media are scrambling to make it look like they were NOT covering for the Democrats.  Oh, you bet. 

Source: Wall Street Journal

https://archive.is/BCmpw#selection-2167.0-2528.0

Tucker in Oz explaining biden, his media supporters and "democracy"

Lots of Americans understand what's going on in the U.S.  Tucker Carlson has a marvelous ability to explain it--with a sense of humor.  Here he is doing what amounts to standup comedy in Australia.

Well worth watching.

How much is the government really paying to subsidize electric vehicles?

Americans bought 1,190,000 battery-powered electric vehicles last year.

All but a fraction of those qualified for a "rebate" of $7,500 per car.  So roughly eight BILLION of your tax dollars were spent on "rebates."

Now add the $7.5 BILLION the biden regime has appropriated (what an anodyne word, eh?) to build more charging stations across the country.  They've built SEVEN so far, but that's just because no one's ever built one before so they're having to design 'em from the ground up.

Just kidding.  The real answer is...reasons. See?

So if you spread that $7.5 BILLION over, say, three years you end up with another $2,500 a year per EV sold.  So with the $7,500 "rebate," every time you see an EV on the street, there goes $10,000 of your tax dollars.  Is that cool?

But nasty ol' MAGA folks forget that back when the automobile was first produced, the federal government not only gave Henry Ford and friends a big subsidy per car sold, but the gummint also spent the equivalent of $4 BILLION in today's dollars to help John D. Rockefeller start Standard Oil and build a network of gas stations all over the country!  Really!  At least that's what joe biden tol' me.  He said he was friends with ol' John D.

Okay, just kidding: Ford didn't get any subsidy or rebate for each car sold, and Standard Oil opened gas stations without taking a single dollar of your taxes.  But ouah government is WAY more sophisticated now, eh?  Why wait for the free market and better technology to develop a product people will want to buy without any subsidy, when the preznit and a Democrat congress can make it happen way faster, eh?

See, when advanced countries like China and Russia want a product, they simply order it done, and it happens fast.  But clunky, slow free market capitalism is still plodding along, waiting for technology to get going.  It's no wonder a majority of students in east coast universities said they preferred communism to capitalism, eh?

How the Dems are responding to the debate

To see how the Democrat "elites" are thinking, you need to read the responses by the leftist sons of whores at the NY Times to the debate.

Paul Krugman, NY Times:

    I must reluctantly join the chorus asking Biden to voluntarily step aside, with emphasis on the “voluntary” aspect.
    Step aside for whom? Kamala Harris was by all accounts an effective district attorney and attorney-general, and she has also been very effective as vice president.  Choosing her as his successor would in no way be settling for less.

Wow, does Krugman really believe Harris is even remotely qualified to be president?  That choosing her "would NOT be settling for less" than with biden?  Of course given biden's corruption and incompetence, that may well be true.

Leftist Nick Kristof has lots of suggestions for the Dem nominee--none of 'em Kammie: In addition to the ghastly Gretch Whitmer Kristof suggests Sherrod Brown and even the corrupt, barely-known Gina Raimondo.  (You know who she is, right?  Clearly presidential material, eh?)  But not Kamala.  And yet not a single member of the "elite" will blast leftist Kristof for dissing the faaabulous "black" female VP.  Wait, Joy Reid will.  But Reid is hardly smart or "elite," despite being given her own hour-long show on a miserable leftist cable network.

The deputy editor of the times editorial board described biden's performance as "occasionally he seemed to lose his train of thought and became a little incoherent.  Wow.
  The guy also lied by agreeing with biden's brazen lie that Trump "had encouraged" the  Jan. 6 protesters.  And the Times guy can't even blame age or stress for his own lie.

As a smug Dem preznit once sneered, "Elections have consequences."  Yes, barack, they certainly do.  Your followers enabled you and your party to fuck this country up faster, and worse, than most of us thought would even be possible.  And your hand-picked VP--deliberately chosen to ensure no one would impeach or murder you--has now pretty much finished the job you started.  "I'm going to fundamentally transform this country," you bleated.  And you expect to be congratulated?

The Times guy mentioned above also wailed that Trump refused to promise to accept the results of the November election.  You're a lying asshole.  I watched every minute of the debate and what Trump actually said was "If the election is honest, yes."  Only a spineless fool would agree to accept the results of an election that's stolen (again) by massive fraud.

The question is a classic Democrat "when did you stop beating your wife" propaganda ploy:  Saying "Of course I'll accept the results even if there's massive fraud" gives the Dems the green light to cheat (not that they needed it), while giving Trump's answer allows the NY Times (and every other shitty Democrat mouthpiece) to bleat exactly what they did.

If you don't get it (and you don't), reverse the parties:  Ask Democrat candidates if they'd accept the results of an election when there was incontrovertible evidence of massive fraud.  If they say yes, point out how dumb that makes them.

What we need is a Constitutional amendment that says "In order to preserve the faith of citizens that elections are fair, if there are allegations of election fraud, the Circuit Courts shall begin immediately to hear every allegation and every witness, and shall report their findings to the Supreme Court not later than December 15th."  Better to have fair elections than to tolerate stolen ones, eh?

Oh wait, I hear Democrats say the reverse: better to tolerate a stolen election than to throw out precincts where more votes were tallied than eligible voters, or where ten-thousand mail-in ballots had signatures that obviously didn't match the signature on file from the real voter.  Both these things happened in 2020.

For those who don't believe that: the precinct results speak for themselves.  And re signature: we have video of computer screens as they're being used by corrupt poll workers to approve thousands of ballots where side-by-side images of signatures showed they obviously didn't even remotely match.  And yet the corrupt poll worker said the signatures did match.

You don't believe that because you never heard about it, or saw the surveillance footage.  The networks never showed you.  And if you didn't see it on ABC, it nevah happened, eh?

A group of hard-core Dems who run a "podcast" said the best thing biden can do for America is to end his presidency "as the success it deserves to be."  Wow, talk about totally clueless!

I understand how beta boys and communists believe Trump will "destroy ouah precious democracy" if elected again--even though he didn't remotely do anything like that in the four years of his first term, eh you lying motherfuckers?  But for anyone to seriously claim biden's presidency has been a success...by what criteria?  A record number of gays and trannies appointed to government positions, including officers in the military?  Forcing everyone in the armed forces to state and use "preferred pronouns"?  Ordering all schools in the U.S. to allow boys claiming to be girls to use girls locker rooms and to compete in girls sports?

What.  The.  Fuck?  Is this how you moronic Democrats define "success"?  Guess so.

Is the "labor force participation rate" up or down under your preznit, assholes?  How many Democrats even know what that is, let alone what it means for the future?

How are the armed forces doing in meeting their recruiting goals, eh?  Have they had to lower their standards?  Did lowering those standards enable 'em to meet those goals?

You have no idea.  All you care about is that biden ordered schools to let doze precious trannies use girls locker rooms.

How many millions of illegals has biden ordered released into the interior of the U.S.?  You have no idea, nor do you care.  When hundreds of 'em rape and murder U.S. girls, the absolute standard liberal/talking-head response (after trying hard to ignore it) is to claim that "males who are citizens rape and murder even more!"  Thanks, that really helps.

American taxpayers are being forced by their Democrat rulers to pay hundreds of billions to provide (give) food, housing and medical care to illegals.  Is that your priority?  Did they ask ya?  No, they didn't.  But you voted for 'em, so they think they have carte blanche.

(For young Americans, that's a useful French phrase.  Look it up.)
 
You believe what the Democrat/liberal Mainstream Media tells ya, and if you didn't see something in the Media, you don't believe it could have happened, because you stupidly believe the Mainstream Media are honest and neutral.

Hahahahahaha!

Source: NY Times

https://archive.is/DdPvl 

Stock of nation's largest drugstore chain drops 25% in less than a day. But "market is up"

Walgreens is the nation's largest pharmacy chain, with over 8,500 stores and more than 300,000 employees.  

 

Its stock is down 24% just today, and has lost 80% of its value in less than 5 years.

 

But don't worry, citizens.  Dis don' mean nuffin'!  Duh whole stock market is BOOMING, jus' like duh economy!  Everyt'ing faaabulous!  Dey might make a small adjustment or two, but nothing that can't be fixed by closing a few stores and laying off a few employees, eh?

A minor adjustment--say, laying off ten percent of the employees--would only be...um...30,000 people.  An' in dis' BOOMING economy they'll all be able to find new jobs really soon!  I hear cities and counties are starting to hire lots of "election workers" and "ballot scanners."  Of course only Democrats are hired for those positions but most workers are Democrats so that won't be a problem, eh?

 

Someone noted that when you go into a Walgreens in a big Dem-ruled city all products are locked up behind plastic.  No one from the company is willing to talk about why, but surely that can't be hurting sales, right?

Wait, here we go: Walgreens say it plans to close up to 25% of stores nationwide.  Early word was that the planned closures were because the company anticipates weaker consumer spending for the remainder of 2024, but a company quickly said that wasn't the case, and that everyone agreed the economy was BOOMING under the brilliant policies of the Democrat party.

Let's see...what's 25% of 300,000 employees?  Eh, no matter.  They'll find new jobs in no time.  And cities can take over the closed stores and use 'em for needle-distribution centers.

A summary of the origin of covid, and the lies surrounding it

The first case of covid was confirmed in the U.S around Jan 29th, 2020.  By coincidence, researchers in India, analyzing samples smuggled out of China, had already found its gene sequence.  And two days after the first case was confirmed in the U.S., virologists (and a few regular people, like me) had that genetic code.

That gene sequence showed beyond all doubt that the thing had been deliberately modified by inserting four new, human-specific genes in the "spike protein" to make it more lethal to humans.  If you'd like to know how we know this, I'll show ya below.  It's not particularly complicated, and you'll instantly see why it's obvious.  

What that means is that Fauci and his co-conspirators were lying from the beginning when they claimed the thing was NOT modified in a lab.

"Wait...how can you claim to know the alleged four new genes were added, let alone that they were added by humans instead of "natural mutation," eh?  Neener neener neener!"

Read on and learn something--mainly about not trusting your lying government:

Imagine a long string of thousands of letters.  That's what a gene sequence looks like.  Now cut that string apart in four places, and in each of those cuts insert a group of eight letters, each group being a functioning new gene.

We know these four groups were inserted because except for those four insertions all the other letters in the long string are identical to the natural bat virus.

It'll take a minute or so for that to make sense.  The pic below will help...a LOT:

  

Read this like sheet music: the top line in each row is the genetic code for covid-19.  The next line is the closest "natural" bat coronavirus.  Bottom line is the "consensus" of dozens of corona variants.  Red letters mean all three lines were identical.  As you can easily see, in four places the closest matching bat coronavirus was cut apart, and a contiguous (consecutive) chunk of 8 letters--representing "base pairs"--was inserted.  And all four insertions turn out to be functional genes.  It's not an accident. 

Covid viruses mutate like crazy.  But a mutation would simply change one letter to another, or just delete a base pair and make an existing gene not function.  But these insertions are NOT mutations, because the genes AFTER the insertion totally match the closest natural bat virus.  They're obvious insertions.

And by total coincidence (sarc) all four of the inserted genes are from the HIV virus, and enable covid-19's "spike protein" to bind more tightly to target cells in the human airway.

WHAT a coincidence, eh?

The liars (Fauci et al) bleat that the differences between the closest matching bat virus and covid-19 are due to "natural mutations," in which a single letter in the genetic code isn't accurately duplicated.  And it's well known that those happen.  But again, these four groups are obviously insertions, not mutations.

Also: if, as the liars like Fauci claimed, the virus had evolved naturally in animals, there would be lots of the same species of infected animals in the wild--a so-called "animal reservoir."  But no such animal reservoir has been found, despite intensive efforts.

Because the virus started in Wuhan and had clearly been modified from the closest "natural" (unmodified) bat virus, and the city has a biological weapons lab funded by the communist government, a reasonable theory was that the virus had been modified in that lab and had escaped.

But two very powerful forces didn't want you (or anyone else) to believe that.  Those forces were 1) the communist Chinese government; and 2) a fraudulent egomaniac named Anthony Fauci.  

Fauci had a HUGE reason for not wanting Americans to believe the virus had been modified by Chinese researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology:  He'd given them U.S. tax dollars--grants--via a cunning "cutout"--to fund "gain of function research."  If Americans every found out, Fauci would be a dead man.

So Fauci concocted a Narrative--a plausible cover story--that the virus had evolved by natural mutation from an animal virus, and then supposedly made the jump to humans after the infected animal was eaten by a Wuhan resident.  

A good Narrative must be superficially plausible, so the fraudsters made the lie more plausible by naming two specific animals as likely sources: a bat, or a "pangolin."  This  Narrative was made more plausible by the fact that just seven miles from the Wuhan Institute of Virology was a "wet market" where all type of animals were sold for food.  

Media: "Hey, just seven short miles away!  That proves it!  Obvious!"

(Unverifiable specificity makes bullshit Narratives more convincing, more plausible.  So to a lay person this was a very plausible Narrative.)

Except...unmodified bat viruses weren't dangerous to healthy humans.  By contrast, the covid-19 virus was lethal to humans, entirely because it was able to bind more effectively to specific "receptor cells" in the human airway. ("ACE-2" cells, if you're curious.)

This improved binding ability was due entirely to four new genes that had clearly been inserted into the closest natural bat virus.  But Americans never heard about the four inserted genes.  Hmmm...

Fauci didn't want you to believe the virus was modified in a Chinese lab because his own damn agency--the one he'd headed for something like 30 years--had given the Wuhan Institute of Virology a grant--U.S. taxpayer dollars--to fund precisely the question of how to modify natural viruses to make them lethal to humans--the infamous "gain-of-function research."

This research was considered so risky that congress had outlawed it in the U.S.  But the cunning, savvy Fauci knew how to get around that: instead of giving the money directly to the Wuhan Institute, he funneled it thru what's called a "cutout"--an organization called "EcoHealth Alliance," run by a crony named Peter Daszak, who was a big fan of that research.

A House committee has emails from half a dozen top U.S. researchers telling Fauci in February of 2020 that Covid's genetic code had obviously been modified in a lab.  But Fauci didn't want Americans to know that, so he insisted those researchers write a paper ("The proximal origin of Covid-19") saying exactly the opposite: that the virus had evolved naturally.  Hmmm...

We have the damn emails.

While we let that percolate for a bit, consider the so-called "vaccine."  Fauci, Rochelle Walensky (then head of CDC), the FDA and biden all claimed the jab was "safe, and effective."  But all involved (except for Porridgebrain) knew neither claim was true.  And yet the FDA approved at least three "vaccines" from different makers, under an "emergency-use-only" exception to normal rules.

That exception allowed the FDA to approve a vaccine after only a fraction of the normal, lengthy testing for safety and effectiveness.  But the rules also said that to get the EUA exception there couldn't be any other effective treatment for that disease.

That brings us to the biden regime forbidding doctors from prescribing two inexpensive, effective medicines--both approved for human use--by our own FDA--decades earlier.  

The uses were obviously not to treat covid, which wasn't then known.  But by law, for over 20 years doctors have been allowed to prescribe approved drugs for so-called "off-label" uses.  So if either of the two drugs were effective that should have ruled out the use of the EUA for the jab.

So the Deep-Staters who run the FDA and CDC quickly responded by banning the use of both drugs, and refusing to run "controlled, double-blind" studies.. And as a backup, the regime also threatened to prosecute any pharmacist who filled such a prescription.  The Deep-Staters even got the Post Office to seize perfectly legal shipments of these two drugs from overseas makers, despite there being zero legal authority for doing that.  

If you didn't grasp the implications of the last 'graf, read it again: The biden regime barred American citizens from using two known-safe,drugs approved by "your" FDA for human use, instead letting hundreds of thousands of Americans die.  And why?  Clearly it was NOT because either drug was dangerous, since both had been approved by the FDA.  Instead it was to allow the FDA to claim there was no effective treatment for covid, which was the necessary condition to approve the non-vaccine under the "emergency-use-only" rule.

The FDA even created a sneering tweet implying that one of the treatments was only approved as a "horse de-wormer," which was a brazen lie.  While that was "a" well-known use, your own damn CDC had even published recommended dose levels for humans.  But even though all that was open-source knowledge, the Media didn't call the regime out on its lies.

Banning approved drugs and allowing hundreds of thousands of Americans to die should be a capital crime, yet the Media didn't say a word.  Didn't bat an eyelash.  The entire Democrat party was totally uninterested in anything that bucked the Party Line that NO effective treatment existed.

And wait, it gets worse: After Porridgebrain was installed, he was asked on camera if he would order everyone to take the (ineffective) vaccine.  He said he would never do that.  But just three weeks later he had his Labor Department order all Americans working for a company with 100 or more employees to take the jab or be fired.

At this point the CDC and FDA already knew the so-called "vaccine" did NOT prevent people from getting or transmitting the Chyna virus.  Thus it didn't actually meet the definition of a "vaccine."  And yet biden, Fauci, Rochelle Walensky (CDC head) et al continued to lie that it was "totally safe and effective."  They also knew even then that thousands of people who took the jab were injured or killed.

Trump said of the "vaccine" "If you're at high risk, take it."  The biden regime should never have ordered all Americans to take it--even allowing corrupt teachers' unions to force kids (who were virtually immune to covid) to take it in order to attend school.  

You'd think that if the CDC knew the jab was causing health problems--and thousands of deaths--they would have objected to school boards demanding that all public-school and university students take the jab.  Yet they didn't say a damn word.

What kind of government does this?  Lies, lies and more lies--all to benefit one party.

Everything above is in the public record.  You just never heard about it. And Democrats either don't believe any of this, or they're fine with it.

Hopefully you didn't have a loved one who died from either the virus or the jab.  Unfortunately no one responsible for this outrage will ever be punished.  They've all retired and are drawing their generous taxpayer-funded pensions.

Maine's ruling Dems paying groups to give druggies detailed instructions on how to shoot drugs up their...

Back in the old days the main jobs of state governments were to run the courts and keep the highways repaired.  But of course we're way mo' sophisticated now, eh?

When a government gives tax dollars to NGOs to tell people how to inject drugs "more effectively," would you think that's a good sign for that society?

Democrats: Take all the time you like to answer that question.

In the Peoples' Republic of Maine, the state has been giving tax dollars to an NGO called "Maine Access Points."  The capital city also runs a place that gives free needles to addicts.  Now both are giving out "how-to" guides and "injection kits" to enable addicts to take drugs "more effectively."

And what do ya suppose liberals mean by "more effectively," eh?

It means if your veins are so collapsed from injecting precious recreational drugs that you're having trouble hittin' em wif' duh needle, there's another way to get your high that doesn't use those destroyed veins.  Yaaaay!

Like almost every ghastly, destructive liberal idea, the Dems have given this new method a cutesy name that keeps naive straights from knowing what it really means:  They call it "boofing."

See, citizen?  Hard-working taxpayers aren't a bit shocked by this cute euphemism--and if you hadn't read the headline you'd have no idea that this cutesy term means shooting drugs up your ass.  

See, dis beez WAY bettah den usin' needles in veins, cuz no pain from huntin' aroun' fo' a good vein!  AND the cunning li'l bastards who run duh NGO--teaching kids dis betta, pain-free way to take drugs-- even add that this can lead to sexual fun wif' yo' partner!  Seriously.

Of course this sounds so outlandish that you believe it can't possibly be true.  So take a quick look at this link, and then I'll give ya the "highlights."

Here's the NGO's detailed "how to" guide explaining the faaabulous advantages of this "better" way to get high, and the proper technique for shooting drugs up your butt.  (Click pic to enlarge, I think.)

“If you are struggling to hit a vein, or would like to give your lungs a break from smoking, boofing is a great option to do your drugs without using a needle or a pipe,” the flyer says.  And “Compared to smoking or sniffing your drugs, boofing may hit harder or faster.”

Wow, that's a GREAT sales pitch, eh citizen?

The guide also says you get the best high if you “stay on your side for a few minutes to let [the drugs] absorb."  That's SO thoughtful!  See, "Maine Access Points" wants users to get the best high for your drug dollar, eh?

The taxpayer-funded group has also produced a 30-minute video--“All About Boofing”--pushing the benefits of this new drug-taking pathway.  Experts explain that it's a great way to give your veins time to "heal" if you’ve accidentally [??] damaged 'em by hundreds of injections.

(Non-junkies may be surprised to learn that repeatedly injecting heroin into your veins a couple of times a day, every day, is well known to destroy 'em.)

The "experts" also say their faaabulous new method reduces the likelihood of developing an infection, which can lead to brain damage.

Straight taxpaying citizens agree that this advice is particularly useful, since IV drug users seem to be short on functioning brains to begin with.

The "experts" even explain that boofing can be an “intimate activity” with a romantic partner--even better than injecting each other with needles, if that's possible.

The taxpayer-funded "public health experts" do note a tiny down-side:  squirting fabulous drugs into your ass can cause blood vessels in your rectum to burst.  They explain that while this may be alarming to novices at first, it's not really that dangerous...at least as long as there's not TOO much blood.

Given its many advantages, the MAP "experts" seem a bit disappointed to admit that more IV drug users haven't embraced the clear advantages of boofing.  After all, the only reason the NGO is pushing this is to...uh..."Reduce harm to the public."

Yep yep yep.  Dat whut we all about, citizen: reducing the harm of illegal drugs to users!

According to MAP’s most recent Form 990 tax filing, in 2021 the organization received $498,492 in taxpayer funds.  But since then the state has reaped tens of millions from the "opioid settlement" case, so I suspect the grift is now at least twice the 2021 figure.

The state has created the Maine Recovery Council that will receive and distribute the millions they expect to get from the big settlement.  According to a watchdog outfit that Council estimates that thru the end of 2028 it will receive about $63,000,000.

Wow, that's quite a bit for a small state, eh?  Members of that Council include every top pol in the state, including the governor and attorney-general.  Hmmm...

Source.

https://www.themainewire.com/2024/06/maine-is-handing-out-free-boofing-kits-to-help-fentanyl-addicts-squirt-drugs-up-their-butts/