Category: Fraud O’ The Day

Study: COVID-Vaxxed Kids SIX TIMES Likelier to Die Than Unvaxxed Peers

The ostensible takeaway, per the authors, of a poorly-publicized study from June of this year was that children vaccinated for COVID had much higher rates of asthma — almost double, in fact — post-COVID infection than their unvaccinated peers.

That’s compelling enough of a headline, but what should really have been the lede in any sane world got buried deep in the weeds.

Via Infection (medical journal) (emphasis added):

Two cohorts of children aged 5 to 18 who underwent SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR testing were analyzed: unvaccinated children with and without COVID-19 infection, and vaccinated children with and without infection. Propensity score matching was used to mitigate selection bias, and hazard ratio (HR) and 95% CI were calculated to assess the risk of new-onset asthma.

Our study found a significantly higher incidence of new-onset asthma in COVID-19 infected children compared to uninfected children, regardless of vaccination status.

In Cohort 1, 4.7% of COVID-19 infected children without vaccination developed new-onset asthma, versus 2.0% in their non-COVID-19 counterparts within a year (HR = 2.26; 95% CI = 2.158–2.367).

For Cohort 2,COVID-19 infected children with vaccination showed an 8.3% incidence of new-onset asthma, higher than the 3.1% in those not infected (HR = 2.745; 95% CI = 2.521–2.99). Subgroup analyses further identified higher risks in males, children aged 5–12 years, and Black or African American children. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the reliability of these findings.

The study highlights a strong link between COVID-19 infection and an increased risk of new-onset asthma in children, which is even more marked in those vaccinated. This emphasizes the critical need for ongoing monitoring and customized healthcare strategies to mitigate the long-term respiratory impacts of COVID-19 in children, advocating for thorough strategies to manage and prevent asthma amidst the pandemic.

However, as Alex Berenson — vindicated “conspiracy theorist” who turned out to be right about all of the things he was censored for since the start of the pandemic — explains, the truly shocking statistical finding, which somehow never made it into the conclusion, is a six-fold increase in death among vaxxed kids in the study as compared to the unvaxxed.

Via Alex Berenson (emphasis added):

The study about Covid and asthma in American kids and teens has gone mostly unnoticed. It hasn’t been cited once since it was published in June.

Which may be why no one has raised an alarm over the stunning figures buried in its appendix about deaths among mRNA Covid-vaccinated kids.

They show that 354 of the 64,000 children and teenagers who received a Covid mRNA shot died within a year after vaccination – a death rate of almost six kids per 1,000.

In contrast, only 309 out of 320,000 unvaccinated kids died, fewer than one per 1,000.

One might assume, again, that finding a drug is implicated in a six-fold increase in childhood mortality might be the headline — but, if it were, these researchers might not get another grant their whole careers. In fact, they might be working at McDonald’s or collecting unemployment within a week.

Why the researchers refused to focus on this statistic, or even mention it in passing in the summary of their work, is obviously a matter of speculation.

But speculate I will.

Scientists rely on grant money, either directly from the pharmaceutical industry or indirectly from the pharmaceutical industry by way of the government, which is often in bed with said industry.

There are, as such, clear financial interests at play, which is why you will notice that, virtually universally, scientists will downplay even the mildest negative effects of pharmaceutical products they study— especially blockbuster ones like the COVID-19 shots — or else rig the research design to produce rosier results, or else never publish any negative research findings in the first place.

Indeed, it’s mildly surprising that the data Alex Berenson unearthed ever made it to publication at all, when it would have been so easy just to scrub it out of existence.

Harris-Walz campaign recruiting military veterans to influence social media
Veterans are being bribed to betray their oath.

The next time you see a social media post from a military veteran who claims to support banning certain firearms or any other infringement of our civil rights, realize they may be getting paid to violate their oath.

An email obtained last week by the Second Amendment Foundation’s Investigative Journalism Project revealed that the “precision micro-influencer” marketing firm People First is hiring veterans to serve as paid social media influencers for the Harris-Walz campaign.

It is not hard to understand why the progressive firm wants to hire former military members. Veterans have credibility — especially when the topic is guns. Whenever the gun-ban industry convinces a vet to call for an AR ban or violate their oath in some other way, they always tout it as a win. This is why Tim Walz is so celebrated by Giffords, Brady and Everytown. Before his stolen valor was revealed, Walz cultivated the false impression that he spent most of his military career knee-deep in grenade pins.

People First has a long history of supporting the war against guns and Second Amendment Rights. They know what they’re doing, and they’re very good, unfortunately. Now, the New York City-based firm wants to recruit veterans living in seven key battleground states, but then explains in its recruitment email that they are open to hire anyone with a “compelling story,” regardless of where they live.

Paid Social Media Opportunity for Veterans!

Phil McKnight

Hi there!

My name is Phil, and I am an Organizer at People First. I am reaching out to share an exciting partnership around veterans!

Veterans, you know better than anyone that our allegiance to this country is pledged toward the Constitution and the values that are enshrined within it – not to any particular man or woman.

We need your help explaining which values you believe our elected leaders should uphold as we approach the upcoming November election. This campaign is also open to family members of those currently or previously enlisted in any of the six US military branches.

Join this campaign now if you are located in any key battleground states:

Arizona
Georgia
Michigan
Pennsylvania
Wisconsin
Nevada
North Carolina

Not from one of these states? No problem. Anyone who has a compelling story to share should apply now too.

If you are interested in participating in this opportunity, please let me know as soon as possible so we can get you started on the next steps.

Looking forward to hearing from you!

Best,

Phil—

Phil McKnight

Digital Relationship Organizer

People First Marketing

CreatorNetwork.cc is a CRM (Customer Relationship Management) platform designed specifically for People First Marketing. Our platform helps businesses and marketers to connect and collaborate with content creators in a more efficient and effective way.

The process is relatively simple. The influencer submits draft content, which is then edited and approved.  The influencer then posts it on their social media platforms, and they’re paid 10-15 days later. As a result, People First has made oath breaking easy and, unfortunately, profitable.

McKnight did not respond to emails seeking his comments for this story.

Censorship, gun control

People First founder and CEO Curtis Hougland rose to prominence fighting against what he told Vanity Fair magazine in 2019 was “hate speech and online extremism.”

“Democrats want to focus on facts and figures. The other side plays into fears and taps into emotions, and they show it to you. It’s all about emotional resonance,” Hougland told the magazine.

Hougland was behind the passage of Nevada’s Question 1 in 2016, which expanded background checks and ended most private gun sales.

“Across the geographic footprint of Nevada, the company credentialed and recruited 287 influencers, many of them doctors and nurses, and told them to create their own version of a messaging brief, provided to them with a company dashboard,” Vanity Fair reported.

Today, People First is working dozens of campaigns and advocacy programs, Hougland says on his LinkedIn page.

“We can source online advocates by district, religion, party, ethnicity, age, and affinity,” he wrote. “We’re 82 days away from Election Day! Enough time to execute a local or national campaign and impact elections and ballot initiatives.”

Takeaways

When you raise your right hand and swear to support and defend the Constitution of the United States, you don’t get to pick and choose the amendments you’re willing to support and defend. The oath has no expiration date. It doesn’t end upon retirement or ETS. Walz forgot that, sadly. Same-same for any vet who responds to People First’s siren song.

If you really want to thank a veteran for their service, hire them. They will be the best employee on your payroll, but not this. What People First is doing to our veterans is reprehensible. They’re bribing them into betraying their oaths. Rather than direct deposit, People First should pay their influencers with 30 pieces of silver.

The Ignominy Of Master Sergeant Timothy Walz

If Tim Walz could not be trusted to fulfill the duties he had to his nation in 2005, how can he be trusted to be vice president in 2025?

The last couple of days have been a whirlwind of controversy regarding the military service record of Democrat vice presidential candidate Tim Walz. My X account has seen the most traffic it has ever known as I have discussed this issue at length, and I thought it would be a good idea now to take a deep breath and kind of recap where we are at in this controversy. I know for sure that the veteran community is fired up over this issue, but I sense that many from the non-veteran community do not know what to think given the competing arguments from both sides of the political aisle.

I would like to share my own personal experiences and thoughts as a retired Army colonel and veteran of both Iraq and Afghanistan. What I hope for civilians to understand is this: The issue is not the number of years Walz served, or when he submitted his retirement paperwork, or what his final rank was, or even — just as a stand-alone proposition — whether he ever went to combat. No, the issue is the unique and special position of trust he held when he decided to walk away from his soldiers, his unit, and his nation. I’ll explain.

But first, some facts. There are all sorts of facts and disinformation flying around on this matter, so I want to highlight the most basic and most important facts, ones that not even the most rabid Democrat can dispute:

Walz served for 24 years in the Minnesota Army National Guard, retiring at the rank of master sergeant (an “E-8” in the Army).
In the spring of 2005, Walz was serving as the command sergeant major (an “E-9”) of the 1st Battalion, 125th Field Artillery, a Minnesota Army National Guard battalion that is part of the 34th Infantry Division.
Also in the spring of 2005, Walz and his battalion received a warning order that the battalion would be deploying to Iraq. (We know this because Walz’s own congressional campaign told us at the time.)
Knowing that his unit was deploying, Walz nevertheless chose to retire from the National Guard in May of 2005 to pursue his congressional campaign.
Serving members of the National Guard and the Reserve routinely also serve in Congress, and always have. Tulsi Gabbard is an excellent recent example. Walz did not necessarily need to retire to run for Congress. However, an Iraq deployment he might have instead chosen to participate in would, in fact, have prevented him from campaigning.
Walz’s retirement meant he did not fulfill a contractual service commitment he willingly entered into when the Army selected him to attend the United States Army Sergeants Major Academy. As a result, the Army reduced his official retirement rank from E-9 to E-8.
These are facts. Now let’s explain what was so egregious in what Walz did.

So Walz retired when he was allowed to and ran for Congress instead — what’s the big deal, right? Well, had Walz been some slug E-8 holding down some clerical job in the 34th Infantry Division Headquarters, counting his days until retirement, and had he opted to take a lawful retirement rather than go to Iraq, no one would care. But that’s not what happened. Walz was a COMMAND SERGEANT MAJOR (“CSM”), and that makes all the difference in the world.

Continue reading “”

If Democrats Want Proof Non-Citizens Are Registering To Vote, Virginia Just Found 6,303 Examples

As part of their embarrassing smear campaign against Republicans worried about the integrity of America’s elections, legacy media have twisted themselves into pretzels trying to convince the country that foreign nationals interfering in the U.S. electoral system is a nonexistent problem.

So-called “journalists” and their Democrat political allies regularly claim concerns about noncitizens registering ahead of and voting in the 2024 election are baseless because it’s already illegal for foreigners to cast ballots in federal contests. Of course, these self-professed “experts” on “misinformation” conveniently decline to mention that there’s no enforcement mechanism to prevent this from happening; or that numerous Democrat-run cities have granted illegal aliens the ability to vote in municipal races.

Yet, for all their hyperbolic grandstanding and opposition to ensuring only eligible Americans have a say in U.S. elections, Democrats have no legs left to stand on when it’s revealed that foreign nationals are, in fact, registering to vote.

In an executive order directing state agencies to undertake election security efforts ahead of the November election, Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin revealed on Wednesday that the commonwealth’s Department of Elections (ELECT) has removed more than 6,300 noncitizens from its voter rolls since his administration took office.

“All data collected by the DMV that identifies noncitizens is shared with ELECT, which uses it to scrub existing voter rolls and remove noncitizens who may have purposefully or accidentally registered to vote,” Youngkin wrote. “According to data from ELECT, between January 2022 and July 2024, records indicate we removed 6,303 noncitizens from the voter rolls.”

Virginia is one of only three states to require individuals “provide their full 9-digit Social Security number” when registering to vote, according to Youngkin.

In his order, the GOP governor instructed ELECT Commissioner Susan Beals to provide him with annual confirmation that the state’s proper election protocols are “in place” and local registrars are fully trained on “these critical procedures.” This includes rules governing ballot deadlines, ballot chain of custody, tabulation machines, and verifying election results to ensure accuracy.

Continue reading “”

It has always been a genetic ‘treatment’

BREAKING: 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Rules mRNA COVID-19 Jab is NOT a Vaccine Under Traditional Medical Definitions

The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has delivered a seismic decision that could reshape public health policy across the nation.

In a contentious case involving the Health Freedom Defense Fund and other plaintiffs versus the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD), the court has declared that mRNA COVID-19 injections do not qualify as vaccines under traditional medical definitions.

The case revolved around the LAUSD’s COVID-19 vaccination policy, which required all employees to be fully vaccinated against COVID-19 by a specified deadline.

The plaintiffs argued that the district’s vaccine mandate infringed upon their fundamental right to refuse medical treatment, as the mRNA injections do not prevent the transmission of COVID-19 but merely mitigate symptoms for the recipient.
The court’s opinion, penned by Circuit Judge R. Nelson and supported by Judge Collins, asserts that the mRNA shots, marketed as vaccines, do not effectively prevent the transmission of COVID-19 but merely reduce symptoms in those who contract the virus. This crucial distinction undermines the foundational premise of the vaccine mandates enforced by various governmental and educational institutions.
Judge Nelson pointed out that the mandate was inconsistent with the Supreme Court’s century-old ruling in Jacobson v. Massachusetts, a case that upheld the state’s right to enforce smallpox vaccinations due to their proven effectiveness in preventing disease spread. In contrast, the mRNA COVID-19 shots do not offer such public health benefits, thus failing the criteria established by Jacobson.

The ruling points out that traditional vaccines are designed to provide immunity and prevent transmission, which is not conclusively proven in the case of mRNA COVID-19 shots.

The Gateway Pundit previously reported that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) had modified the definition of “vaccine” to include the mRNA shots.

So, look at what the CDC did. Here’s the definition the CDC used on 26 August 2021:

  • Vaccine– “a product that stimulates a person’s immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease.”
  • Vaccination– “the act of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce immunity to a specific disease.”

Rather than admit the COVID-19 vaccine is not working as advertised, the CDC took a page out of Orwell’s 1984 and opted for new spin language.

Here is the new definition:

  • Vaccine– “a preparation that is used to stimulate the body’s immune response against diseases.”

It can be recalled that Pfizer’s President of International Developed Markets, Janine Small, admitted in an EU hearing that the vaccine had never been tested on its ability to prevent transmission, contrary to what was previously advertised.

Judge Collins, in a concurring opinion, highlighted that compulsory medical treatments for individual health benefits infringe upon the fundamental right to refuse such treatments. This perspective aligns with the constitutional principles protecting personal liberty against unwarranted governmental intrusions.

You can read the full ruling below:

View Fullscreen

COVID vaccines responsible for rise in excess deaths, study reveals

A new study suggests that COVID vaccines might be partly responsible for a rise in “unprecedented” excess deaths in Western countries over the past three years, NY Post reported.

The researchers expressed serious concerns and urged government leaders and policymakers to thoroughly investigate the underlying reasons for this ongoing high mortality, according to their study published in BMJ Public Health.

Researchers urge investigation into high mortality as study links COVID vaccines responsible for rise in excess deaths

Scientists from the Netherlands’ Vrije Universiteit analyzed death rates from 47 Western countries. They found that excess mortality has stayed high since 2020, despite widespread vaccination and other measures to control the virus.

Continue reading “”

Long……

Fauci Squirms During GOP Grilling Over COVID, Pandemic Response

Update (1530ET): Former NIAID director Dr. Anthony Fauci was grilled by Republicans during Monday testimony in front of the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic, where he repeatedly denied Republican allegations that he sought to cover up the COVID-19 lab-leak theory – calling the accusation “absolutely false and simply preposterous.”

In his opening statement, Fauci denied trying to silence officials and scientists who thought the virus was created in, or at least escaped from, the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China.

“The accusation being circulated that I influenced these scientists to change their minds by bribing them with millions of dollars in grant money is absolutely false and simply preposterous. I had no input into the content of the published paper,” said Fauci. “The second issue is a false accusation that I tried to cover up the possibility that the virus originated from a lab. In fact, the truth is exactly the opposite.”

Following his opening statement Fauci was grilled over the government’s response to the pandemic – defending the CDC over mask mandates, lockdowns, and other public policy – while Democrats on the panel repeatedly bent over backwards to defend him.

Rep. Michael Cloud (R-TX) got into a heated exchange Fauci over the measures – at one point forcing the former NIAID director to admit that the Covid-19 vaccine doesn’t stop transmission.

Continue reading “”

REVEALED: Dr. Anthony Fauci confesses he ‘made up’ covid rules including 6 feet social distancing and masking kids

Bombshell testimony from Dr. Anthony Fauci reveals he made up the six foot social distancing rule and other measures to ‘protect’ Americans from covid.

Republicans put out the full transcript of their sit down interview with Fauci from January just days before his highly-anticipated public testimony on Monday.

They plan to grill him about covid restrictions he put in place, that he admitted didn’t do much to ‘slow the spread’ of the virus.

Kids’ learning loss and social setbacks have been well documented, with one National Institute of Health (NIH) study calling the impact of mask use on students’ literacy and learning ‘very negative.’

And the impacts from social distancing caused ‘depression, generalized anxiety, acute stress, and intrusive thoughts,’ another NIH study found.

Dr. Anthony Fauci, former Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, claimed the six foot social distancing rule ‘sort of just appeared’ and said that he ‘might have’ reviewed studied on masking kids but ‘that’s still up in the air’

Continue reading “”

A CBS News Report From Over 40 Years Ago Proves Global Warming Is the Ultimate Hoax.

As loyal Townhall readers, you already know about the media hysterics over global warming. Still, digging up old clips proving how wrong the experts were about this subject is constantly refreshing. Based on their timelines, we’re supposed to be dead. Based on their advice, the only way for us to survive is to be poorer and let more people from third-world nations die from preventable diseases. That’s the nasty undercurrent within the population control folks. If it’s not that, these so-called activists are obsessed with controlling the means of production in the industrialized world to save Mother Earth. It’s backdoor communism when you boil it all down.

The green folks want us to sacrifice trillions in economic activity to save the planet. That’s the byproduct of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s Green New Deal, which aims to ban the internal combustion engine. Anyways, here’s a 1982 CBS News segment on the subject, where the godfather of fake news, Dan Rather, anchors the end times projections from these environmental clowns, who predicted that 25 percent of Florida would be underwater. Also, our agriculture centers would have to relocate to Canada. Look out for an appearance by a young Al Gore:

In 1975, Newsweek published an article about global cooling, in which re-glaciation was projected to hit the North American continent. Massive granaries holding seedlings were advised to be built since food shortages could be rampant. This event never happened. The same folks warned that the Arctic Ice Cap could melt by 2013. It didn’t.

So, when the same people warn about how we’re all going to die in 12 years, just replay this 1982 segment. They said that same nonsense over 40 years ago. None of it came true.

We were right! The ONS lied about covid vaccine safety.

IN 2021 when the Office for National Statistics (ONS) started releasing its vaccine by mortality status reports we revealed that there were large spikes in the non-covid death rates in the ‘unvaccinated’. These spikes in mortality coincided with the first main vaccine rollout and did so for each age group (see this report, for example).
Here is the chart for non-covid mortality rates in weeks 1-38 of 2021 for the 60-69 age groups:

The charts for the other age groups looked much the same.

We asserted that these obvious anomalies were a result of the standard ONS procedure of categorising anyone within 20 days of their first dose as ‘unvaccinated’. However, in our own discussions with the ONS they maintained that, although that method was used for their efficacy calculations, it was not used when it came to mortality. They clearly said that a person dying any time after vaccination was correctly categorised as a vaccinated death in the mortality data they regularly released to the public and which formed the basis of a massive public communication campaign encouraging vaccination.

Continue reading “”