ANTHONY FAUCI DISCUSSED DUAL-USE RESEARCH IN 2012 SENATE HEARING:

Dual-use research, of which gain-of-function research is a kind, can involve examining the ability to manipulate natural viruses to become more transmissible or possibly even a bioweapon. Gain-of-function research has found its way into the pandemic lexicon due to the resurgence of questions regarding the origins of COVID-19. Dr Fauci has continued to downplay both his personal involvement and the involvement of NIAID in grant money used to fund research of potential bat-borne viruses in China and at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

* * * * * * * *

Today the Australian published a story resurfacing the fact that in 2012 Dr Fauci argued that the benefits of gain-of-function research outweighed any risk of a laboratory accident, or worse, that could spark an international pandemic. In a paper, Fauci wrote, ‘Many ask reasonable questions: given the possibility of such a scenario — however remote — should the initial experiments have been performed and/or published in the first place, and what were the processes involved in this decision? Scientists working in this field might say — as indeed I have said — that the benefits of such experiments and the resulting knowledge outweigh the risks.’

I have no idea what, but
WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING!™©®

He’s no more ‘On the Mark’ than most two year olds are in the bathroom.

On the Mark: Gun violence can no longer be ignored
Team 12 Anchor Mark Curtis discusses gun control after recent shootings in San Jose.

The comments are always predictable.

“Bad guys will always find a way to get their guns.”

“The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a bigger gun.”

In the wake of the latest mass shooting in San Jose, this pandemic of gun violence can no longer be ignored.

Now, let me be clear, I believe in the Second Amendment. I believe in the rights of Americans to own a gun. But not if they are violent, or mentally ill, or have been convicted of a violent crime.

I wish I had the answer…but I don’t.

All I know is, doing nothing can no longer be acceptable.

Today’s Logical Fallacy is… “We Have to Do Something!”

A very dangerous contemporary fallacy, this one arises when tragedies and crises triggers the response: “We have to do something!” – regardless of whether or not that “something” is an overreaction, ineffective, or even makes things works. The logic, or lack thereof, usually flows like this:

1. We must do something.
2. This is something.
3. Therefore, we must do this.

Humans are empathetic, and when a tragedy strikes, our emotional response pushes us to do anything we can do prevent it from happening again. However, just because we can do something doesn’t mean we should, and just because the situation seems to warrant an immediate response doesn’t mean it actually needs one.

Sometimes the situation does call for action, but action should be carefully considered before it is undertaken. Doing something because it is “better than nothing” will often result in unintended consequences that often do more harm than good.

24 states urge Supreme Court to take case challenging NJ large-capacity magazine ban

24 states, led by Arizona and Louisiana, have filed an amicus brief urging the Supreme Court to take a case seeking to overturn New Jersey’s ban on high-capacity magazines — arguing that such a ban criminalizes possession of commonly-used firearms and violates the Second Amendment

“The Amici States the Attorneys General serve are among the forty-three states that permit the standard, eleven-plus capacity magazines that New Jersey has banned…and have advanced their compelling interests in promoting public safety, preventing crime, and reducing criminal firearm violence without a magazine ban such as the one here,” the states write in an amicus brief.

The 2018 law bars “large-capacity” magazines that can hold 11 rounds or more, and was upheld by the Third Circuit Court of Appeals last year. It also bars the ownership, not just the sale of such magazines. The New Jersey gun association challenging the law has asked for the Supreme Court to take the case.

“New Jersey’s law criminalizes mere possession of commonly-used arms even in the home for self-defense, and therefore the law strikes at the core of the Second Amendment,” the states argue. “New Jersey’s outright ban on the Affected Magazines is inconsistent with the Second Amendment, and the Third Circuit erred by concluding otherwise.”

In the brief, the states argue that 43 states permit the magazines that New Jersey is banning, and are used in handguns for self-defense.

Along with Arizona and Louisiana, the states signed onto the brief are: Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North and South Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, West Virginia and Wyoming.

“New Jersey lawmakers are operating in total ignorance of self-defense, our Constitution, and the will of the people to uphold both,” Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich said in a statement. “We hope the Supreme Court will hear this case and reverse this misguided attempt to erode our rights.”

Continue reading “”

DHS = Department of HOMELAND SECURITY..
Good grief what an absolute scumbag he is.

Others have opined, that I agree with, is that since the demoncraps and elitists aren’t getting enough of the U.S. citizenry to do what they want, they’re simply importing a new populace. The children of these illegal aliens  (born in the U.S. and thus citizens) will be the cheaply paid, dutifully voting,  obedient serfs with the elite being the new nobility.

SloJoe is merely a mouthpiece, saying what he’s been told to say by the real powers hidden behind the curtains.

Joe Biden: DHS Is for Migration, Not Homeland Security

President Joe Biden’s budget request to Congress for 2022 portrays the nation’s homeland security agency as a welcome center for economic migrants who will compete for Americans’ jobs, wages, and homes.

The White House’s “Fact Sheet” simply ignores the migration wave deliberately triggered by President Joe Biden and his pro-migration deputies. Instead, it promises to “Reinvest in the Foundations of Our Nation’s Strength” with a “Fair, Orderly, and Humane Immigration System.”

The budget seeks no raise for the Department of Homeland Security, almost eliminates funding for border barriers, and flatlines spending on immigration enforcement officers.

But it seeks billions in extra spending to register, advise, and house migrants and refugees as they move into Americans’ labor markets and housing markets.

“They’re hiding the true intention of defunding,” said Rob Law, the director of regulatory affairs and policy at the Center for Immigration Studies. The goal is to convert border agents into “border welcomers, ” like Walmart greeters, he said, adding:

The [migrant] numbers will go up until there’s literally not enough people left in the Third World to come here ….They’re not going to decrease because there is no enforcement, they’re not going to decrease.

Continue reading “”

Bombshell: Fauci Said Risk of Manipulating Bat Viruses Was Worth a Potential Pandemic

Things keep getting worse for NIH Director Dr. Anthony Fauci, who continues to say during testimony on Capitol Hill that he didn’t fund Frankenstein gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

According to The Weekend Australian, Fauci wrote in 2012 that continuing dangerous gain-of-function research was worth the risk of a pandemic.

In previously unreported remarks, Dr Fauci supported the contentious gain-of-­function experiments that some now fear might have led to an escape from a Wuhan laboratory causing the Covid-19 pandemic, calling them “important work”.

An investigation by The Weekend Australian has also confirmed Dr Fauci, the director of the Nat­ional Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, did not alert senior White House officials before lifting the ban on gain-of-function research in 2017.

Writing in the American Society for Microbiology in October 2012, Dr Fauci acknowledged the controversial scientific research could spark a pandemic.

“In an unlikely but conceivable turn of events, what if that scientist becomes infected with the virus, which leads to an outbreak and ultimately triggers a pandemic?” he wrote. “Many ask reasonable questions: given the possibility of such a scenario – however remote – should the initial experiments have been performed and/or published in the first place, and what were the processes involved in this decision?

“Scientists working in this field might say – as indeed I have said – that the benefits of such experiments and the resulting knowledge outweigh the risks.

After telling Republican Senator Rand Paul two weeks ago that he “never” approved grant funding through the NIH for gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, Fauci changed his tune this week and said he simply told Chinese Communist Party controlled scientists not to conduct the research.

From Fauci’s exchange with Republican Senator John Kennedy:

Kennedy: “Here’s where I’m getting at: You gave them money, and you said, ‘Don’t do gain-of-function research.’”

Fauci: “Correct.”

Kennedy: “And they said, ‘We won’t.’”

Fauci: “Correct.”

Kennedy: “And you have no way of knowing whether they did or not, except you trust them. Is that right?”

Fauci: “Well, we generally always trust the grantee to do what they say, and you look at the results—”

Kennedy: “Have you ever had a grantee lie to you?”

Fauci: “I cannot guarantee that a grantee has not lied to us because you never know.”

Wasn’t Climate Change!™ going to kill us all in 10 years?
What about every single chair behind the desk in the Oval Office, right now.

Biden says every single hospital bed in America will be filled with Alzheimer’s patients in 15 years

 

BLUF:
It’s unlikely those on the losing side of the January 6th commission vote will handle their defeat gracefully given recent hyperbole surrounding January 6th as the Left fights to change the narrative. In case you missed it, January 6th was apparently as bad or worse than 9/11 and posed a greater threat to our Republic than the Axis powers in World War II.

Republicans Block January 6th Commission in First Filibuster Victory of Biden Presidency

Attempts to establish a commission to investigate the events of January 6th were vanquished on the floor of the United States Senate Friday morning when a procedural vote to overcome a filibuster failed to gain the 60 votes necessary to move forward.Even with a handful of Republican senators joining Democrats on the 54 to 35 vote, their support wasn’t enough. The Democrats and their Republican accomplices went for broke—and lost—handing the GOP minority its first filibuster victory of the Biden presidency.

Senator Susan Collins (R-ME), who said she supported the idea of a commission but requested changes to balance staff hiring power and move up the deadline for the commission’s findings, was among the Republicans who voted with Democrats. Lisa Murkowski (AK), Mitt Romney (UT), Bill Cassidy (LA), Ben Sasse (NE), and Rob Portman (OH) also voted to end the filibuster and move ahead with the commission.

Continue reading “”

Sixth Circuit Enjoins Use of Race and Sex Preferences for Coronavirus Relief Funding
A divided panel grants a preliminary injunction against privileging relief applications based on the race or sex of the applicant.

Yesterday, a divided panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit granted a temporary injunction barring the Small Business Administration from prioritizing applications for COVID-19 relief funding based upon the race or sex of the business owner applying for the relief. Judge Amul Thapar wrote for the court, joined by Senior Judge Alan Norris. Judge Bernice Donald dissented.

Judge Thapar’s opinion in Vitolo v. Guzman begins with a simple and straightforward description of the case and holding: “This case is about whether the government can allocate limited coronavirus relief funds based on the race and sex of the applicants. We hold that it cannot.”

The policy at issue prioritizes applications for relief funding from businesses owned by women and racial minorities. The American Rescue Plan Act of 2021–the most recently enacted coronavirus relief bill–authorized $29 billion for restaurant owners suffering economic hardship. The money is allocated to qualifying businesses on a first-come, first-served basis until the funding runs out. The catch, however, is that for the first 21 days of processing applications, the SBA will only consider applicants that are at least 51 percent owned and controlled by women, veterans or the “socially and economically disadvantaged.”

This latter category is defined to cover those who have been “subjected to racial and ethnic prejudice” or “cultural bias,” and the SBA presumes that members of specific racial and ethnic groups satisfy this criterion. According to the plaintiffs in this case, this policy constitutes unconstitutional race and sex discrimination, as those who are not members of the relevant groups risk missing out on relief funding.  In its defense, the government acknowledged the use of race and sex to prioritize relief applications, but argued that the limited use of race and sex here was nonetheless constitutional.

Continue reading “”

Spiritual Suicide or Righteous Self Determination ~ Carry Guns

When the “mainstream media” refer to “mass shootings,” we never get to know what kind of gun(s) was used. They know, but they won’t tell us, unless of course, it’s an M4, Kalashnikov, et al, one of the ones they want confined to use by their political bedfellows, but banned from ownership by us “ordinary citizens.”

In any event, here is a paragraph or two you’ll never hear, nor read:

“Not one of the murdered/injured, bystanders, nor witnesses at this massacre were armed and thereby able to effectively stop this attack. Both company policy and state law prohibit the carrying of concealed weapons by these aforementioned persons. The sad, but predictable, the result of these manufactured ‘gun-free zones’ is, as always, pitiable carnage.

How did that ‘run, hide, fight (without weapons)’ advice work this time?

About as well as it always does?

And of course, where were our vaunted ‘security personnel?’ Hiding, like everyone else?”

Why are these words never, ever spoken at “mass shooting” scenes?

Meanwhile, boot-licking “woke” CEOs, who are just dying to climb in bed with every Democrat politician they can suck up to, and decry our Second Amendment as they dutifully mouth assorted other classic Communist propaganda.

Americans are buying up the entire retail supply of firearms and ammunition, and then some, but most are leaving those firearms at home, deeply fearful of violating a leftist “malum prohibitum,” issued by hand-wringing, woke CEOs (timidly peering-out from between their cadre of heavily-armed bodyguards), and also mandated by sleazy, hypocritical Democrat-heavy state legislatures, and city councils.

Neither wants American citizens doing anything to take care of themselves. They want only victims, lots of victims. They want all Americans to think of themselves only as pathetic victims.

Indeed, they want you to consider perpetual victimhood to be your sacred civic duty.

They love victims, but only as long as they stay victims.

When you don’t want to be a victim, indeed refuse to be a victim, they hate your guts.

Listen to them!

“Self-pity is spiritual suicide.” ~ Anthon St Maarten

Nevada: Homebuilt Firearm Ban Headed to the Governor and the Senate Passes Gun-Free Zone Expansion

On May 25th, the Assembly concurred with the Senate Amendments to Assembly Bill 286, sending it to the Governor for his consideration. The Senate passed Senate Bill 452, the gun-free zone expansion, continuing the assault on your Second Amendment Rights in the Silver State.

Additionally, SB 452 still needs to make its way through the process on the Assembly side. With the legislative session coming to a close in four days, legislation can move quickly.

Assembly Bill 286, sponsored by Assembly Member Sandra Jauregui (D-41), essentially bans home-built firearms for personal use by imposing requirements that far exceed those in federal law. It prohibits private individuals from possessing certain unregulated components commonly used by hobbyists to make their own firearms. This confiscatory bill also bans possession of existing, legal, firearms without serial numbers, such as home-built firearms, but it does exempt pre-1969 firearms. This exemption covers firearms made before federal law required licensed manufacturers and importers to place serial numbers on their commercially produced or imported firearms.

Senate Bill 452, sponsored by Nicole Cannizzaro (D-6),​ prohibits anyone, including concealed carry permit holders, from possessing a firearm at certain “covered premises,” which includes all real property containing a licensed gaming establishment owned and operated by a person with an unrestricted gaming license, absent narrow and limited circumstances, or if an individual has written consent. The bill contains no requirements for gun-free businesses to provide any security measures to guarantee the safety of disarmed patrons, such as security guards or metal detectors, to prevent armed criminals from ignoring the arbitrary boundaries and entering.

Gaetz: Second Amendment about waging ‘armed rebellion’ if necessary

Rep. Matt Gaetz told an audience in Georgia on Thursday that the purpose of the Second Amendment is to “maintain an armed rebellion against the government if that becomes necessary.”

“We have a Second Amendment in this country, and I think we have an obligation to use it,” Gaetz (R-Fla.) said at a rally with Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) in Dalton, located in Greene’s home district.

“The Second Amendment – this is a little history lesson for all the fake news media. The Second Amendment is not about, it’s not about hunting, it’s not about recreation, it’s not about sports,” the 39-year-old went on. “The Second Amendment is about maintaining, within the citizenry, the ability to maintain an armed rebellion against the government if that becomes necessary. I hope it never does, but it sure is important to recognize the founding principles of this nation, and to make sure that they are fully understood.”

Gaetz and Greene have been holding a series of rallies around the Sun Belt this spring in an effort to broaden their name recognition among former President Donald Trump’s supporters.

The lawmakers have both come under fire in recent weeks, with Gaetz being investigated for potential sex trafficking of a minor and Greene being heavily criticized for recent statements in which she compared House rules about wearing masks to anti-Jewish laws in Nazi Germany.

Earlier in the rally, Gaetz railed against big tech companies, pointing to their censorship of conservative views on their platform.

“The internet’s hall monitors out in Silicon Valley, they think they can suppress us, discourage us — maybe if you’re just a little less patriotic, maybe if you just conform to their way of thinking a little more, you’ll be allowed to participate in the digital world,” he said. “Well, you know what? Silicon Valley can’t cancel this movement or this rally or this congressman.”

A clip of those remarks, which also included Gaetz’s statement that “we have a Second Amendment in this country, and I think we have an obligation to use it,” drew a rebuke from Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.), who tweeted: “This is not speech protected by the first amendment. This is beyond yelling fire in a theater” — an incorrect paraphrase of a now-overturned 1919 Supreme Court ruling that held that opposing the military draft was not protected speech.

After his Second Amendment remarks, Gaetz joked, “That’ll be the part that gets me kicked off YouTube, talking about our rights and our freedoms.”

A spokesperson for Gaetz did not immediately respond to a request for comment, while a spokesperson for Kinzinger did not immediately respond to a Post email asking whether he thought Gaetz should face legal action over the comments.

It’s a demoncrap viewpoint, but knowledge is power.

How the Democrats Tried to Water Down the Permitless Carry Bill

House Bill 1927, which would do away with the need for Texans to have a license to carry a gun in public, is on its way to Governor Greg Abbott’s desk. The governor said during his State of the State address that making Texas Second Amendment sanctuary was one of his top priorities, despite the fact that polls show the majority of Texans want more gun control, not less.

However, the bill came very close to not making it through the Senate, and there were 50 amendments that came and went in the process. As it heads to becoming a law, it’s worth looking at the refining process, particularly the amendments that Democrats pushed to try and mitigate the damage of the law.

One of the most contentious issues with the bill was its general opposition from law enforcement. Cops feel that the bill makes it much harder for an officer to act when it comes to determining if an armed person has ill intent.

“Every police officer in Texas supports the right of our citizens to arm themselves for sport, hunting and protection,” said Mike Mata, the president of the Dallas Police Association, “But as with any Constitutional right there comes great responsibility. For the safety of Texas residents, we want to make sure everyone who carries a firearm is well trained, follow basic gun safety measures and understand the importance of responsible gun usage.”

For a while, it looked like this opposition might sink the bill entirely, but compromises were made. However, it wasn’t without a fight. State Rep. Ana-Marie Ramos (D-Dallas) filed an amendment that would allow peace officers to disarm people entering government buildings provided that the buildings offer secure weapon lockers for storage. The idea is particularly germane following multiple instances of armed right-wing mobs storming state capitols, but the amendment failed.

Another failure came from State Rep. Gina Hinojosa (D-Austin). She wanted to make it a crime to wave guns around in public or otherwise parade them in a threatening manner. Since one could argue that the power of knowing someone is armed is largely the point of public carry, it’s not surprising the measure did not make it in. State Rep. Erin Zwiener (D-Kyle) had an even more reasonable amendment. She wanted it to be illegal for someone to carry while intoxicated, even if the gun was holstered. Republicans said no even though alcohol is involved in one-third of all gun violence and many suicides.

In the Senate, many more good ideas were cut down. State Sen. Borris Miles (D-Houston) wanted there to be free online safety courses for gun owners to take, but the measure didn’t pass. Sate Sen. Sarah Eckhardt (D-Austin) tried to build on a data collection section of the bill to include tracking firearm deaths, including those involving law enforcement. Good data on such incidences is still lacking, often with deliberate purpose from gun lobbyists. It did not pass either.

One of the few successes came from State Rep. Harold Dutton (D-Houston). His amendment prohibited officers from stopping and interrogating people about having a handgun. This will hopefully cut down on the harassment of non-white Texans over worries they’re armed. It’s a very small win, but it’s something. Mostly, any attempt to lessen the Wild West feel of the bill died an ignoble death, even when it came to something as sensical as disarming drunk people in public.

Seems ‘strangely’ uninterested?
“Seems? Nay it is; I know not ‘seems’.”

Or, in other words, standard operational bureaucrap hypocrisy, better known as ‘Rules for Thee, but not for me!’.

ATF Nominee David Chipman Seems Strangely Uninterested in Hunter Biden’s Alleged Illegal Gun Purchase

“Can I get your commitment that if you’re confirmed, you will in fact look into this matter and refer it for prosecution if you find that Hunter Biden violated a law?” [Senator Tom] Cotton pressed [ATF Director nominee David] Chipman.

“Senator, what I will assure you is that if ATF director, I will ensure that all violations of law are investigated and referred,” Chipman replied, again evading the Hunter Biden inquiry. “I’m not sure that it has not been investigated.” …

“If the facts are as clear-cut as they appear to be based on Mr. Biden’s own admission, I would expect to see criminal charges forthcoming,” Cotton said after questioning Chipman. “But I would say that when a case is as high-profile as this, if there is not an answer for the American people and public, it severely undermines the confidence in our gun laws, as well as the ATF and the Department of Justice, if there are not criminal consequences.”

Banning assault weapons will not work

On May 2, in New York City, a Black woman attacked two Asian women with a hammer. On May 14, three people were slashed with knives within a 12-minute period on a New York subway. On March 17, a young woman was attacked with acid, burned, and blinded in New York. On May 18 in Florida, May 13 in Hawaii, and on March 12 in New York, men were set on fire. On May 21, a Jewish man in New York was attacked with pepper spray.

Antifa and BLM rioters have routinely, and as recently as this week, used metal pipes, Molotov cocktails, laser pointers, frozen water bottles, canned vegetables, mortar-like fireworks, eggs, glass bottles, chunks of concrete, bricks, and fire in their continuing attacks on first responders and random Americans. Pro-regressive pro-stateless-Arab protestors have also resorted to violence beyond words to attack Jews since the recent cease-fire in Israel. Not to mention fists and feet.

Biden’s nominee to head the ATF, David Chipman, wants to ban assault weapons? His position and statements would be laughable if they weren’t so darn dangerous. Besides, they are disingenuous. He carried an AR-15, just like the millions in circulation, as an ATF agent? Come on, man, it was fully automatic; there’s no comparison.

Believing, and encouraging others to believe, that banning semi-automatic rifles with detachable magazines, regardless of their capacity, will make America safer has no basis in fact. Paper targets will be safer. Varmints will be safer. Banning such weapons may harm some small business owners who own gun shops and shooting ranges, as well as some larger manufacturers of ammunition, reloading supplies, and firearms.

Why not simply believe the government’s own statistics on weapons of choice? The FBI murder stats for 2018 show there were 14,123 murder victims in the United States. Not too bad for a population of 330,000,000, though devastating for those closest to the crimes. Of those, 297 or 2% were killed by criminals using rifles. The category of rifles was not further broken down, so there are no easily available numbers on how many “assault weapon”-type rifles were used, but logic says fewer than 297.

Nearly 11% of those victims were killed by criminals wielding knives, and 3% by those employing blunt objects like hammers. The most favored tools of murder before knives, which were #2, were handguns. Their owners were responsible for 73% of all murders.

The Senate bill mentioned by Chipman during his testimony contains a pages-long list of all the weapons to be banned. As a former public servant, I hate to say it, but lessons are rarely learned. What happened when the DEA listed all the drugs? Creators of illicit drugs changed a molecule and went on about their business. Technology is a wonderful thing, and as easily abused as it is used.

Besides, all crime is defined as a matter of legislation at federal, state, local, and tribal levels. Criminals, by definition, by their very naming, defy such legislation. Who in their right minds could possibly think that even more legislation would take those weapons out of the hands of such people? Or prevent murder altogether?

A few years ago, a friend was heading off to a conference in Europe. I advised her to stay away from refrigerated trucks. Many more people were killed in Nice, France, by the single driver of that truck on July 14, 2016, than have ever been killed in the United States by a single person wielding a semi-automatic rifle. Some UC Berkley students were among the injured. The perpetrator of that crime just happened to be out on parole after having attacked someone with a wooden pallet. Assault weapons?

It’s been disheartening the past couple of years to watch the Soros-ecutors around the country behave as though they believe that redefining crime, or refusing to prosecute criminal activity, will reduce crime. Just the opposite. People and their communities are even less safe.

The murders and assaults are not committed by weapons, but by those employing them. The Pro-regressives live in a dream state where people, when their exterior environment is modified, are expected to magically become internally changed into good, kind, compassionate people who no longer harbor violent and murderous thoughts or intentions. That’s like believing if you take away all the syrup, pancakes will cease to exist.

Fauci and the Media Have Serious Blood on Their Hands Over COVID.

Donald Trump did many good things as president, but he didn’t always choose the best people to work with or for him. (Omarosa and “The Mooch”?)

If he wins a second term, he would be well-advised to bear in mind the old saw “Flattery will get you nowhere.”

But I don’t blame Trump for the man who was by far the worst government functionary during his administration and right up there among the worst in American history—Anthony Stephen Fauci.

Treated by the media like some combination of Jesus, Moses, and Hippocrates, this overpaid, lifetime bureaucrat was elevated to the level of soothsayer, every word from his mouth treated as if it were “settled science,” even though that concept could be seen as an oxymoron by anyone with a seventh grade education, and even though he contradicted himself so many times it would take an abacus, appropriately, to keep count.

Meanwhile, the same media excoriated Donald Trump for even suggesting the cheap and readily-available hydroxychloroquine might be useful in curing the disease long ago dubbed here at The Epoch Times, with more corroboration daily, the “CCP virus.” (I can say congratulations to ET—you were one of the few places to come to for real information—because I had nothing to do with this.)

Indeed, what has been called Trump Derangement Syndrome now seems too weak a term, considering the degree it dominated even medical science itself during a pandemic. We need something stronger. “Paranoid Trumpophrenia” perhaps.

Continue reading “”