Before You Click On The "Read More" Link,
Please Only Do So If You Are Over 21 Years Old.
If You are Easily Upset, Triggered Or Offended, This Is Not The Place For You.
Please Leave Silently Into The Night......
Thursday, June 30, 2022
The 90 Miles Mystery Box: Episode #1765
You have come across a mystery box. But what is inside?
It could be literally anything from the serene to the horrific,
from the beautiful to the repugnant,
from the mysterious to the familiar.
If you decide to open it, you could be disappointed,
you could be inspired, you could be appalled.
This is not for the faint of heart or the easily offended.
You have been warned.
Wednesday, June 29, 2022
The Biden Admin Just Made It Easier for Terrorists To Enter the United States
Lawmakers, former officials say change will let Iranian terrorists come to US
The Biden administration altered federal law to make it easier for individuals who have worked with designated terrorist groups to legally enter the United States.
This Day in History: The Stonewall Riots BeginKeep Watching
The State and Homeland Security Departments last week amended federal immigration laws to allow foreigners who provided "insignificant material support" to designated terror groups to receive "immigration benefits or other status," according to the policy published in the Federal Register but not formally announced by the administration. Examples of individuals who would fall into the new category, according to the announcement, include individuals who provided "humanitarian assistance" or "routine commercial transactions" to terror groups.
The policy shift is fueling concerns that the Biden administration wants to make it easier for individuals who work with or for Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC), the country's paramilitary fighting force that has killed hundreds of Americans, to enter the country. Notice of the change came several days before the Biden administration and hardline Iranian government resumed talks aimed at securing a revamped version of the 2015 nuclear deal.
A State Department spokesman said the law was amended to help vulnerable Afghans, who might have inadvertently worked with terror groups, gain refuge in the United States following the Biden administration's bungled withdrawal that left the Taliban in power. Lawmakers and former U.S. officials, however, say the new regulations are so broadly written that they would apply to organizations like al Qaeda and the IRGC. The policy change is also raising red flags as U.S. officials, including former secretary of state Mike Pompeo, face credible death threats from Iran.
The rule does not specifically mention Afghanistan but is written to cover all U.S.-designated foreign terrorist organizations, such as the IRGC and al Qaeda, experts told the Free Beacon. The Taliban is not designated as a foreign terrorist organization, leaving lawmakers and former U.S. officials concerned the changes extend far beyond vulnerable Afghans and cover those tied to some of the globe's most violent terror groups.
Gabriel Noronha, a State Department special adviser for Iran during the Trump administration, said that "the Biden administration is claiming this regulation is all about Afghanistan, but they didn't even mention Afghanistan once in their action, and have made no serious attempt to...
Democrats Have Become A Serious Threat To The Republic
For the left, ‘democracy’ is no longer just a euphemism for ‘policies I want,’ it’s a belief in a system that exists outside the Constitution.
Those who seek to destroy or delegitimize the Supreme Court for upholding the Constitution are no better than those who desire to overturn or delegitimize presidential elections. In fact, they probably pose a greater long-term threat to American “democracy.”
Now, if you believe the above contention is hyperbole, consider that many leftists aren’t merely advocating for court-packing or nullification of the Dobbs decision; they justify those attacks with a litany of other grievances about the constitutional order.
Even as the Supreme Court relinquished its power, and threw the abortion issue–unmentioned anywhere in the Constitution–back to the voters, a horde of j-school graduates and politicians, either ignorant of basic civics or contemptuous of them, descended with panic-stricken warnings about the demise of “democracy.” Almost none of their objections were grounded in any sort of legal arguments about the alleged constitutionality of terminating unwanted human beings. Instead, their case centered around the specious idea that the court had undermined the will of voters by no longer dictating abortion policy by judicial fiat.
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who, at this point, sounds virtually indistinguishable from Senate leadership or the authoritarians writing at The Washington Post, points out that seven of the nine justices on the court “were appointed by a party that hasn’t won a popular vote more than once in 30 years,” that one of their seats “was stolen,” and that “several lied to Congress to secure their appointment…”
None of those contentions are true. Every single justice on the court, including the ones Democrats preemptively smeared as deviants to undermine the legitimacy of the court, was nominated using the prescribed constitutional method that is used by every party. And every senator who voted to confirm those justices did so using the only legal process available to them. The “popular vote” is not a real thing.
When Democrats win both the Senate and the White House, they have the power to nominate and confirm any justice they desire. But they also seem to be under the impression that when they win only the White House, they’re still authorized to dictate whom Republicans are allowed to confirm (as was the case with Merrick Garland). And when they are completely out of national power, they simply reject the legitimacy of justices who do not meet their invented, evolving, extraconstitutional standards. Democrats treat every victory of the opposition as dubiously attained.
“The Founding Fathers wrote a constitution designed to prevent a tyranny of the majority,” says former Barack Obama adviser David Axelrod. “But what happens when you have a tyranny of the minority, gaming the system to promote a radical agenda that flouts the will of the majority under the guise of constitutionalism?” Similar assertions were repeated across the left-wing punditsphere this weekend.
Axelrod, in true Obama fashion, begs the question. But the fact that the Electoral College doesn’t align with the “popular vote” isn’t a disqualifying aspect of American politics, it is the very point. If the Electoral College always synchronized with the outcome of the nonexistent direct democratic national tallies, it wouldn’t need to exist. It isn’t a loophole; it is a deliberately created mechanism that stops a handful of states from...
Breaking: WHO Behind FDA Scheme to Skip All Future Clinical Trials for COVID Vaccines
The “Future Framework” is coming from the World Health Organization, and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is the biggest voluntary contributor to the WHO, so Gates is likely directing the play.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) tomorrow, June 28, will vote on the “Future Framework,” a scheme that would allow Pfizer and Moderna to “reformulate” COVID-19 mRNA vaccines in perpetuity, without conducting clinical trials on the new vaccines. Click here to tell the FDA to vote no on the “Future Framework.”
Introduction: The FDA always rigs the game on behalf of Pharma
Late Friday afternoon, the FDA released its agenda for the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC) meeting that will vote on the Orwellian “Future Framework” on Tuesday, June 28.
Then on Saturday morning, the FDA released a briefing document in connection with this scheme to end science as we know it in connection with future COVID-19 shots. (Much appreciation to the brilliant James Roguski for alerting me to these documents.)
In this article, I will explain what is in the briefing document, what is likely to happen at the meeting and what can be done about it.
The FDA’s ‘Future Framework’ briefing document
The briefing document is 18 pages of text, 1.5 line spacing, with just 19 references — 9 of which are pre-prints or from the CDC’s in-house newsletter Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR) which means they are not peer-reviewed.
Any true believer in The Narrative(TM) could have written this in a few hours. To base the entire future of COVID-19 shots on this glorified undergrad term paper is madness.
As I predicted, even though the April 6 meeting was presented as an exploratory initial conversation that reached no conclusions whatsoever, the “Future Framework” is now being presented by the FDA as a done deal, fait accompli, you’d have to be crazy to insist on proper safety studies.
The core argument of the briefing document is hilarious (or rather, it would be hilarious if it was not a plan to permanently institutionalize genocide and hide the evidence). In several places the FDA argues (colloquialisms mine):
1. These COVID-19 shots work great, miracles really, incredibly effective, boy howdy do they work well! Boosters too, total home run, the Israelis even have 10-weeks of data showing that they might help old people. What more evidence could you want?
2. Okay, well, it depends on what you mean by “work.” These shots do not stop infection, transmission, hospitalization, or death, even though that’s why we licensed them. Any protection wears off fairly quickly, but It’s Not Our Fault(TM) because This Wily Virus(TM) mutates too fast and no one told us that it would ever mutate.
3. So these shots must be reformulated but we cannot possibly ask Lord Pharma to do proper clinical trials ever again because we already know that these shots work great (see point #1)!
The briefing document literally states:
“The evaluation of modified vaccines for the purpose of vaccine strain composition decisions will need to rely mainly on comparative immunogenicity data due to the time constraints involved in vaccine manufacturing and clinical efficacy evaluation.”
Did you catch that? The evaluation “will need to rely on” (no decision to be made here) measures other than actual health outcomes because of “time constraints.”
Ah, $cience!
Moderna, Pfizer and Novavax are all developing reformulated COVID-19 shots. But they know that the FDA is not going to look at health outcomes so they are going to great lengths to jack up the antibody response.
Pfizer tested a double-strength dose (60 mcg of mRNA instead of 30 mcg) even though they had previously ruled out a higher dose because of safety concerns. So the antibody levels are through the roof.
But the VRBPAC admitted on April 6 that there are no known correlates of protection (meaning: antibody levels do not tell you who will be immune) so these antibody measures are medically meaningless.
Sane people realize that if you turbo charge the immune response, you may also turbo charge adverse events. But the “Future Framework” allows pharmaceutical companies to skip...
"Bullsh*t": Claim Trump "Lunged" For Steering Wheel On Jan 6 Discredited By Secret Service
Hutchinson testified that Tony Ornato, the then-White House deputy chief of staff, told her that Trump said something like, “I’m the f-ing president, take me up to the Capitol now,” and had “reached up towards the front of the vehicle to grab at the steering wheel” before then using “his free hand to lunge towards Bobby Engel,” the the presidential driver.
Despite the legacy media breathlessly reporting Hutchinson’s claims without much skepticism, the term ‘Amber Heard 2.0’ subsequently trended on Twitter as Hutchinson’s assertions were demolished.
Within hours, Peter Alexander of NBC News revealed that Engel was prepared to testify “under oath that neither man was assaulted and that Mr. Trump never lunged for the steering wheel.”
Trump himself also asserted that the incident never happened.
Hutchinson also apparently told another outright lie during her testimony when she claimed she had written a note of a statement for Trump to release on January 6.
The note was actually penned by Former Trump White House lawyer Eric Herschmann.
“The handwritten note that Cassidy Hutchinson testified was written by her was in fact written by Eric Herschmann on January 6, 2021,” a spokesperson for Herschmann told ABC News Tuesday evening.
It remains to be seen whether Hutchinson will face any consequences for apparently lying under oath, although the already dubious credibility of the January 6 Committee has taken a further massive blow.
“The January 6 committee clowned itself,” summarized Tim Young:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)