Audio debunks viral claim 'falsely smearing' Neil Gorsuch over transcription error



Political commentators, reporters, and at least one media organization distributed clear misinformation about Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch on Friday.

The misinformation circulated on the same day the Supreme Court heard oral arguments for President Joe Biden's constitutionally questionable vaccine mandate. But audio of Gorsuch from the hearing clarified that he did not, in fact, say what was claimed.

What happened?

Elie Mystal, a far-left political commentator who routinely appears on MSNBC, claimed that Gorsuch alleged during oral arguments that the seasonal flu kills hundreds of thousands of people each year.

"NO IT DOES NOT. STOP GETTING YOUR MEDICAL STATS FROM FOX NEWS," Mystal blasted, adding links to information from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention about the seasonal flu.

Gorsuch: "the flu kills hundreds of thousands of people every year"\n\nNO IT DOES NOT. STOP GETTING YOUR MEDICAL STATS FROM FOX NEWS.
— Elie Mystal (@Elie Mystal) 1641574762

"I know Gorsuch, nor any conservative, nor any 'omg I'm bored and want to go to the movies' person, will APOLOGIZE for their consistent Covid misinformation, but Covid is ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE more deadly then the GOD***N FLU," Mystal added.

Mystal's tweet, which generated more than 10,000 "retweets" and 65,000 "likes," was amplified by far-left journalist Aaron Rupar.

"The flu kills about 30,000 Americans each year. I'm kinda surprised Gorsuch would broadcast his ignorance like this. I looked this up with help from Google in about 10 seconds," Rupar said while quoting Mystal's tweet.

Newsweek also circulated the claim. "Justice Neil Gorsuch Slammed After He Suggests Flu Kills 'Hundreds of Thousands' Each Year," a headline at the news outlet read.

But what is the truth?

Gorsuch did not say the seasonal flu kills "hundreds of thousands" of people each year. Audio from the oral arguments makes this year.

In fact, the audio demonstrates that Gorsuch made a clear pause between saying "hundreds" and "thousands," and he did not say "of" in between each number.

"Flu kills, I believe, hundreds, thousands of people every year," Gorsuch said.

In posting the audio of Gorsuch, commentator Phil Kerpen said, "Hey genises. You are falsely smearing Justice Gorsuch for a TRANSCRIPTION ERROR. ... Correct and retract your false stories."

Hey geniuses. You are falsely smearing Justice Gorsuch for a TRANSCRIPTION ERROR.\n\nListen carefully: "Flu kills, I believe, hundreds, thousands of people every year."\n\nCorrect and retract your false stories.\n\nAt 1:50:00 https://www.c-span.org/video/?516920-1/justices-hear-case-vaccine-test-mandate\u00a0\u2026pic.twitter.com/WfD21LrLWH
— Phil Kerpen (@Phil Kerpen) 1641611588

However, the official Supreme Court transcript recorded Gorsuch as saying "hundreds of thousands." Transcripts, though, are not always correct, and are often edited to correct the record.

Justice Sotomayor stuns court observers with dubious COVID-19 claims



Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor astonished critics during oral arguments on Friday by making numerous dubious claims about COVID-19.

Court observers watching arguments for and against the Biden administration's employer vaccine mandate expressed shock when the justice, who attended arguments virtually, falsely claimed that 100,000 children are hospitalized and in "serious condition" from COVID-19 in the United States.

“We have hospitals that are almost at full capacity with people severely ill on ventilators. We have over 100,000 children, which we’ve never had before, in serious condition, and many on ventilators,” Sotomayor claimed.

Here is Justice Sotomayor saying that "hospitals are almost all full capacity" and there are "over 100,000 children" hospitalized with covid "many on ventilators.\n\nNone of those things are true. Not even close.pic.twitter.com/MqWEL2UvJg
— Greg Price (@Greg Price) 1641572971

Critics were quick to point out Sotomayor's numbers were incorrect. According to data from the Department of Health and Human Services, there are 3,342 pediatric hospitalizations for COVID-19 in the United States. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported Tuesday that the average number of children admitted to the hospital per day with COVID-19 was 776.

The total number of children hospitalized with COVID between Aug. 2020 and Jan. 4, 2022, is 81,923, according to the CDC.

This is just absolutely astonishing. "100,000 children in serious condition," per Sotomayor. Where do these people obtain their misinformation? The current national pediatric COVID census per HHS is 3,342. Many/most incidental.
— Phil Kerpen (@Phil Kerpen) 1641570918
Justice Sotomayor\u2019s comment on 100,000 children in serious condition with covid is such a flagrantly untrue statement she should have to correct it after the argument. It\u2019s embarrassing for the Supreme Court to allow that factual inaccuracy to occur in an oral argument.https://twitter.com/kerpen/status/1479481779643895816\u00a0\u2026
— Clay Travis (@Clay Travis) 1641572790

While there has been a spike in children who have been hospitalized with COVID-19, White House chief medical adviser Dr. Anthony Fauci explained last week that many children are being admitted to the hospital for unrelated ailments and then are testing positive for the virus.

“First of all, quantitatively, you’re having so many more people, including children, who are getting infected. And even though hospitalization among children is much, much lower on a percentage basis than hospitalizations for adults, particularly elderly individuals,” Fauci said on MSNBC on Dec. 30. “When you have such a large volume of infections among children, even with a low level of rate of infection, you’re going to still see a lot more children who get hospitalized."

"But the other important thing is that if you look at the children who are hospitalized, many of them are hospitalized with COVID as opposed to because of COVID," Fauci explained. "And what we mean by that — if a child goes in the hospital, they automatically get tested for COVID. And they get counted as a COVID-hospitalized individual. When in fact, they may go in for a broken leg or appendicitis or something like that. So it’s overcounting the number of children who are, quote, 'hospitalized with COVID,' as opposed to because of COVID."

Sotomayor made several other unfounded claims about the virus. At one point, a lawyer for the National Federation of Independent Businesses — the group challenging the Occupational Safety and Health Administration's mandate — noted that the OSHA mandate was implemented when the Delta variant was the most prevalent variant in the U.S. and that the now-dominant Omicron variant causes less severe disease.

Sotomayor interrupted, claiming, "Counsel, those numbers show that Omicron is as deadly and causes as much serious disease in the unvaccinated as Delta did."

J. Sotomayor says over 100K children in serious condition, "many on ventilators" #SCOTUS
— Shannon Bream (@Shannon Bream) 1641570700

On the contrary, research suggests that Omicron causes less severe disease than previous variants of the virus. The New York Times reported on Dec. 31 that animal studies found Omicron is mainly an upper respiratory disease that produced less damaging infections to the lungs. Those findings followed early studies of human patients with Omicron that suggested the virus causes less severe disease, especially in vaccinated people.

Justice Sotomayor also claimed that hospitals are nearing capacity.\n\nShe also asked "Why is a human spewing a virus not like a machine spewing sparks?" \n\nIncredible performance all around.
— Greg Price (@Greg Price) 1641575738

Other justices appointed by Democrat presidents made equally extraordinary and incorrect statements about COVID-19.

Justice Stephen Breyer claimed there were "750 million new cases yesterday, or close to that." The actual number was 727,863, and the daily average cases reported for Jan. 6 was 610,989, according to the New York Times.

Justice Breyer says that there were "750 million new covid cases yesterday"\n\nThere are 330 million people who live in America which means everyone apparently got covid twice in the last 24 hours.pic.twitter.com/rzMf8OzAlj
— Greg Price (@Greg Price) 1641572607

Breyer also wrongly suggested that hospitals in the U.S. are nearly over capacity because of COVID-19 patients, which is not true.

Breyer: "Hospitals are full almost to the point of the maximum."\n\nThese people know absolutely nothing. Zero.pic.twitter.com/F5z3Hzz6IR
— Phil Kerpen (@Phil Kerpen) 1641568600

Justice Elena Kagan piled on with a statement about how COVID-19 vaccination is the best way for people to prevent the spread of the virus. While the COVID-19 vaccines authorized for use in the U.S. have been found to prevent severe disease and death in most cases, the CDC warns that "anyone with Omicron infection can spread the virus to others."

Kagan: "We know the best way to prevent spread is for people to get vaccinated."\n\nKakistocracy.\n\nThere is literally zero evidence that these vaccines prevent Omicron infections.
— Phil Kerpen (@Phil Kerpen) 1641568391

Additionally, the CDC says that fully vaccinated people who contract a Delta variant breakthrough infection "can spread the virus to others," albeit for a reportedly shorter time than unvaccinated people.

The Supreme Court will decide whether to issue a stay preventing the Biden administration from enforcing an OSHA temporary emergency standard, which mandates that businesses with 100 or more employees must require their workers to get vaccinated against COVID-19 or submit to involuntary weekly virus testing. Challengers contest that the Labor Department does not have the constitutional authority to both create and enforce the mandate.

Sotomayor tipped her hand on this issue, repeatedly arguing that the term "vaccine mandate" was inaccurate because the OSHA standard includes the testing option.

"There's no requirement here. It's not a vaccine mandate. It's something totally different," Sotomayor said.

Republicans are united behind effort to overturn OSHA vaccine mandate: Rand Paul



Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) said Wednesday that Republicans in the Senate are universally opposed to President Joe Biden's federal vaccine mandate, predicting that a resolution to nullify the mandate will pass the Senate with Democratic support.

Senators are expected to vote at around 5:30 p.m. ET Wednesday on SJRes29, a bill that would overturn the Occupational Safety and Health Administration's COVID-19 vaccine mandate on large private companies via the Congressional Review Act. The resolution has the full support of the House Republican conference and, Paul told Newsmax, every Republican senator.

"This is a special situation, what we call a privileged motion. It is a real bill and it would be a law but it has to be signed by the president. We can do this any time that there's a regulation or a rule put out," Paul explained Wednesday.

.@RandPaul: "The Republican Party is entirely united against mandating or firing people who choose not to get vaccinated." \n\n@HeatherChilders @BobSellersTVpic.twitter.com/CwoCAd4oHt
— Newsmax (@Newsmax) 1638992624

"This resolution, which we're going to pass today, all 50 Republicans will vote for it and the word is that Sen. [Joe] Manchin will join us. So we will end up winning this vote," Paul said.

At least two Senate Democrats have publicly stated they will vote for the resolution. Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) said last week he will join Republicans to vote for the bill.

“I do not support any government vaccine mandate on private businesses. That’s why I have cosponsored and will strongly support a bill to overturn the federal government vaccine mandate for private businesses,” Manchin said in a statement.

He was joined by Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.) on Tuesday, who told The Hill via a spokesman he is "inclined to vote for the CRA resolution" put forward by the Republicans.

Manchin and Tester's support would give a united Republican conference 52 votes to pass the resolution and send it to the House of Representatives for a vote.

Paul was less optimistic that the resolution will pass in the House, where he said Democrats will "march lockstep" to support Biden's vaccine mandate, but he held out hope that some moderates may vote with Republicans.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has no plans to bring the resolution to a floor vote. However, if a majority of the House signs a discharge petition filed by Republicans, they can force Pelosi to hold a vote.

Rep. Fred Keller (R-Pa.), the sponsor of the House's version of the resolution, confirmed Tuesday that all 212 members of the GOP conference had co-sponsored the bill.

All 212 members of @HouseGOP have cosponsored my Congressional Review Act resolution to nullify President Biden\u2019s vaccine mandate on private employers with more than 100 employees.\n\nI urge my House Democratic colleagues to stand with us against this blatant gov\u2019t overreach.pic.twitter.com/YX9ivKXJPD
— Congressman Fred Keller (@Congressman Fred Keller) 1638899358

Paul also cautioned that even if the House surprised and passed the resolution, Biden will almost certainly veto any attempt by Congress to reverse his vaccination order. He also admitted that there aren't enough Democrats opposed to the mandate in either the House or the Senate to overturn a veto.

"There is some symbolism to this," Paul acknowledged. "But it shows you that the Republican Party is entirely united against mandating or firing people who choose not to get vaccinated."

Regardless of what actions Congress takes, Biden's OSHA mandate has temporarily been suspended pending further litigation after multiple lawsuits were filed challenging the president's authority to mandate COVID-19 vaccinations.

An attempt by some conservative lawmakers to shut down the government to defund the mandate was unsuccessful, as many GOP senators stated their preference for using the Congressional Review Act to show where lawmakers stood on the issue.

Federal judge blocks Biden's vaccine mandate for federal contractors



A federal judge in Georgia has blocked the Biden administration's vaccine mandate for federal contractors, in yet another legal defeat for the president.

"A Georgia district court has ordered the federal government to temporarily stop enforcing the vaccine mandate for federal contractors. This nationwide halt is the result of our own lawsuit and marks the third of Biden’s vaccine mandates to be stopped by the courts," Georgia Attorney General Chris Carr said Tuesday.

"We will continue to stand up for the rule of law to protect our state and our citizens from this unconstitutional and unprecedented federal overreach," Carr said.

The vaccine mandate was scheduled to take effect on Jan. 4 and would apply to any company that holds a contract to work with the federal government, comprising nearly a quarter of the U.S. workforce according to Bloomberg Law. Major U.S. firms including Lockheed Martin Corp., Microsoft Corp., Alphabet Inc.‘s Google, and General Motors Co. would be forced to have their workers get vaccinated against COVID-19 without the option to refuse vaccination but submit to regular virus testing.

Several states filed legal challenges to Biden's order, claiming the president overstepped his constitutional authority with the mandate. Another federal judge in Kentucky granted a preliminary injunction against the order in a lawsuit involving Kentucky, Tennessee, and Ohio.

Arizona, Florida, Texas, Oklahoma, and Georgia are among other states that have filed lawsuits in federal court against Biden's mandate.

The vaccination requirements for federal contractors were part of a series of sweeping COVID-19 orders Biden issued to force Americans to get vaccinated or lose their jobs. A second mandate issued as an emergency order from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration required private companies with more than 100 employees to have their workers get vaccinated against COIVD-19 or submit to weekly testing. Any company that did not comply with the order would face substantial fines. Health care companies that receive money from Medicare and Medicaid were also required to have their workers vaccinated.

Lawsuits have been filed against each of these requirements in multiple courts, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit last month blocked the Biden administration from enforcing the OSHA mandate. Since then, the administration has complied with the court order, suspending enforcement of its vaccination requirements pending further litigation.

The mandates have also been protested by workers with federal contracts, who say the mandates are a violation of their constitutional rights.

Sen. Mike Lee asks for up or down vote on funding Biden's vaccine mandate



A small group of conservatives led by Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) is pushing for an up or down vote on funding President Joe Biden's federal vaccine mandate ahead of Friday's deadline to fund the government.

In what should by now be a familiar story, Congress must pass a short-term government funding bill by Friday, or else the government will shut down. Lawmakers in the House of Representatives struck a deal on Thursday to keep the government open, but the Senate could pose an obstacle to passing the funding bill.

Lee and a handful of other Senate Republicans are threatening to delay the funding bill past Friday's midnight deadline unless they are granted a vote on an amendment to defund the president's vaccine mandate.

Speaking on the Senate floor Thursday, Lee said a number of senators are "not inclined to give consent to expedite a funding measure that supports and funds President Biden's unconstitutional and sweeping vaccine mandate without holding a vote on that mandate." Without their support, the government may shut down.

If the government shuts down for an extended period of time, federal workers may be furloughed and certain non-essential government services, like national parks, will be suspended.

Lee offered an alternative to a shutdown by asking for a simple majority vote on funding Biden's vaccine mandate, calling his suggestion a "reasonable solution."

"I'm not asking that a poison pill or pet project be included. I'm not asking for dramatic reforms or draconian cuts, far from it," Lee said. "I just want a vote on one amendment. I want the members of this body to go on record on whether they support funding in this bill President Biden's vaccine mandate."

"The American people have a right to know through our votes where we stand," he added.

Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT): "I just want a vote on one amendment. I want the members of this body to go on record on whether they support funding in this bill President Biden's vaccine mandate. The American people have a right to know through our votes where we stand."pic.twitter.com/cALCUKYEa6
— CSPAN (@CSPAN) 1638469125

The mandate, which Biden announced in September, orders companies with more than 100 employees to require that their workers get vaccinated against COVID-19 or be regularly tested for the virus. The administration estimated that the requirement would impact more than 80 million Americans, and any company that refused to comply could face steep fines.

However, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration suspended the mandate in October in response to a federal court order, after at least 27 states filed lawsuits challenging the constitutionality of Biden's order.

The Senate Republican conference is divided on Lee's strategy. Sens. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), and Roger Marshall (R-Kan.) are with Lee. But other GOP senators do not want to risk a government shutdown over BIden's vaccine mandate, especially because the administration has already suspended the order.

“There was not full agreement, that’s for sure,” Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) told Politico Wednesday after the Republicans discussed the issue during a lunch meeting. "Shutdowns almost never work out," he said.

Politico reported that most of the conference is opposed to the idea of fighting Biden's vaccine mandate in the government funding bill.

“I just don’t quite understand the strategy or the play of leverage for a mandate that’s been stayed by 10 courts,” said Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.). "I want the vaccine mandates lifted, but I don’t think the [spending bill] is the tool to do it. For all practical purposes, the mandates weaken every single day.”

Sen. Mitt Romney, Lee's colleague from Utah, is among those opposed to the effort.

"It smacks of virtue signaling when the courts have already put a stay on it and when the Biden administration isn’t enforcing a vaccine mandate on federal employees," Romney said Thursday.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) is also opposed to any talk of a government shutdown.

“We’re not going to shut the government down,” he told Fox News Thursday. "That makes no sense for anyone. Almost no one on either side thinks that’s a good idea.”

Report: Conservatives prepared to shut gov't down unless Democrats defund Biden's vaccine mandate



A handful of conservative lawmakers in both chambers of Congress are "privately plotting" to force a government shutdown this week to pressure Democrats to defund the Biden administration's vaccine mandate on private employers, according to Politico.

The news outlet, citing multiple anonymous Republican sources, reported Tuesday that the lawmakers plan to stall the approval of a continuing resolution to fund the government into early 2022 unless Democrats agree to deny money to enforce the mandate.

Congress is set to consider the resolution — which currently includes money to fund the mandate — on Friday. But if the process gets dragged out past midnight, funding will officially expire.

President Joe Biden announced the sweeping vaccination mandate in September, instructing companies with more than 100 employees to require their employees to get vaccinated against COVID-19. The mandate was set to affect more than 80 million Americans.

However, backlash to the mandate was swift and sharp, as at least 27 states filed lawsuits challenging the order in court. Last month, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration suspended the mandate for private employers in response to a federal court order.

Many Republicans in Congress have publicly decried the mandate as a massive overreach by the administration, and now it appears that at least some are willing to back their words up with action. Given the current 50-50 split in the Senate, Republicans would technically only need one objector to push past Friday's deadline.

“I’m sure we would all like to simplify the process for resolving the [continuing resolution], but I can’t facilitate that without addressing the vaccine mandates,” one conservative lawmaker, Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), told Politico in a statement.

“Given that federal courts across the country have raised serious issues with these mandates, it’s not unreasonable for my Democratic colleagues to delay enforcement of the mandates for at least the length of the continuing resolution," he added.

Politico said it remains unclear how many Republican senators will follow through with the shutdown threat, but noted that 15 signed on to a letter authored by Sen. Roger Marshall(R-Kan.) in early November vowing to “use all means at our disposal” to stop the mandate's implementation.

Conservative members of the House Freedom Caucus on Tuesday also reportedly voted to back their Senate colleagues by demanding that House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy adopt a tougher stance against the resolution as written.

Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, on the other hand, downplayed the shutdown threat on Tuesday, saying as a matter of fact, “We won’t shut down” and that “nobody should be concerned about a government shutdown.”

Horowitz: Are elites planning a COVID repeat ... with smallpox?



Those who watched Glenn Beck's special presentation Wednesday night on the origins of SARS-CoV-2 now understand that people like Bill Gates spent over a decade both funding coronavirus gain-of-function research and, curiously, warning about the coming of a coronavirus pandemic. So with Bill Gates insinuating that there might be a smallpox pandemic — an idea we would have laughed off as the ultimate conspiracy theory a few years ago — we should pay close attention.

What is the likelihood that less than two weeks after the most notorious global financier of vaccine research warns about an outbreak of the long-extinct smallpox virus, questionable smallpox vials would show up in a Merck lab? Well, this is the world we now live in, or perhaps the world our globalist overlords have now created.

During a Policy Exchange think tank interview with the chair of the U.K. parliament's Health and Social Care Select Committee and former U.K. Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt, Bill Gates randomly and shockingly warned of a smallpox bioterror attack. "You say, OK, what if a bioterrorist brought smallpox to 10 airports? You know, how would the world respond to that?" asked Gates rhetorically in the creepy Nov. 4 interview with Hunt. "There's naturally caused epidemics and bioterrorism-caused epidemics that could even be way worse than what we experienced today."

There's no evidence of any terrorist organization even focusing on this issue, which was more of a concern among our counterterrorism community during the previous decade.

Fast-forward to Monday night outside Philadelphia, and Yahoo News reported that the CDC is quarantining and the FBI is investigating 15 "questionable vials"that were found in a Merck lab freezer in North Wales, Pa., with 10 labeled as "Vaccinia" and the remaining five labeled as deadly "Smallpox."

As Yahoo reported: "The frozen vials labeled 'Smallpox' were incidentally discovered by a laboratory worker while cleaning out a freezer in a facility that conducts vaccine research in Pennsylvania," the CDC said in a statement to Yahoo News. "CDC, its Administration partners, and law enforcement are investigating the matter and the vials' contents appear intact. The laboratory worker who discovered the vials was wearing gloves and a face mask. We will provide further details as they are available."

"Vaccinia" is related to the pathogen that causes smallpox and was used as the foundation to create the vaccine for smallpox. In fact, the etymology of the word vaccine dates back to the late 18th century when cowpox was used as a precursor to smallpox vaccines. "Cow" in Latin is "vacca."

It is well known that it's illegal for Merck to hold such a vial in a freezer. What is Merck's explanation for having this in its freezer in a random storage locker?

In normal times, we'd dismiss these concerns, but the discovery of a labeled pathogen and at least the symbolism of the antidote beside it – following a warning by the vaccine pope of the world – actually mimics the lead-up to COVID almost perfectly.

A brief history of how we got here: coronavirus and vaccines

For two decades, there was a seamless web of people like Fauci, Gates, Peter Daszak, and Ralph Baric working on coronavirus gain-of-function research, pursuing coronavirus vaccines, and warning about the imminence of an outbreak. So we should take these people seriously when they warn of other outbreaks, because evidently they are "in the know."

Here is just a small segment of the history behind the virus:

  • In January 2010, Bill Gates predicted we'd be ushering in the "decade of vaccines."
  • In 2012, the NIH partnered with Moderna, an obscure start-up company, to create mRNA vaccines. They are still fighting over the patent rights to this day.
  • On Sept. 9, 2013, Ralph Baric, the doctor behind the coronavirus gain-of-function research at UNC Chapel Hill in cooperation with the Wuhan lab, announced a $10 million grant from Fauci's NIAID "to study the pathogenic activity of viruses including severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), Ebola, highly pathogenic influenza and herpesvirus HHV8," which will help "identify novel targets for therapeutic intervention and improve strategies for vaccine design."
  • In November 2015, Baric and company publish their discovery in Nature magazine on cracking the code of transferring coronavirus from bats into mice with human lung tissue that is now pathogenic and can create an epidemic. Last month, the NIH finally admitted in a letter to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce that the agency indeed did fund EcoHealth's support of Baric, together with the Wuhan lab that succeeded in enhancing a bat coronavirus to become more infectious to humans. The NIH blamed EcoHealth and called the breakthrough research "an unexpected result."

Now consider the fact that on Jan. 10, 2017, Fauci delivered a speech at Georgetown University's conference on "Pandemic Preparedness in the Next Administration" and warned that there "definitely" would be another pandemic. He ended his speech (around the 38:25 minute mark) warning "the administration that is going to come in in the next few days" is going to have to deal with a pandemic. After listing some potential pandemics, he boldly predicted, "What is for sure that no matter what, history has told us definitively that it will happen." He added, "The thing we are extraordinarily confident about is that we will see this in the next few years."

It's one thing to say you always have to be ready for an unprecedented pandemic, but to predict definitively with extraordinary confidence that it will happen within a "few years," most certainly falling within the term of the next president? That is downright creepy, given his funding of the very research that likely created the virus.

But perhaps his comments could be dismissed as doomsday prophecy from a man steeped in infectious diseases … if not for a germ war game the Obama administration played with the Trump transition team just three days later, accompanied by an ominous policy change Trump was certainly unaware of. Last March, Obama's homeland security and counterterrorism adviser Lisa Monaco revealed in "Foreign Affairs" that on Jan. 13, 2017, Obama national security officials held a pandemic war game exercise with transition team members from the incoming Trump administration. She described the scenario as follows: "A new virus was spreading with alarming speed, causing global transportation stoppages, supply-chain disruptions, and plunging stock prices. With a vaccine many months away, U.S. health-care infrastructure was severely strained."

However, what she does not reveal, but what Peter Breggin pointed out in his book, "COVID-19 and the Global Predators," is that on that very same day in 2017, the FDA placed a new regulation in the Federal Register that "enhances FDA's authority" to shepherd through policies and products in the event of a "pandemic influenza." Specifically, the regulation "Permit[s] FDA to waive otherwise applicable current good manufacturing practice requirements (e.g., storage or handling) to accommodate emergency response needs" and allows CDC "to create and issue "emergency use instructions" concerning the FDA-approved conditions of use for eligible products."

The "medical products" affected by these changes, which are referred to as "medical countermeasures" (MCMs)," include "drugs (e.g., antivirals and antidotes), biological products (e.g., vaccines, blood products, and biological therapeutics), and devices (e.g., in vitro diagnostics and personal protective equipment)."

There are many more interconnected webs, but fast-forward to October 18, 2019, supposedly two months before the pandemic, and the Gates Foundation, in conjunction with Johns Hopkins University and the World Economic Forum – the three major players in this escapade – held "Event 201," which simulated "an outbreak of a novel zoonotic coronavirus transmitted from bats to pigs to people that eventually becomes efficiently transmissible from person to person, leading to a severe pandemic."

What is the nature of the pathogen? "The pathogen and the disease it causes are modeled largely on SARS, but it is more transmissible in the community setting by people with mild symptoms."

What was the purpose of the simulation? Among other things, "Governments, international organizations, and businesses should plan now for how essential corporate capabilities will be utilized during a large-scale pandemic."

And as they say, the rest is history.

Other important dates and documents in the timeline of the cover-up can be found here.

Deja vu with smallpox?

So when Bill Gates is warning about smallpox right before vials of smallpox are discovered, and in the same week a Maryland woman tests positive for monkeypox, we should pay attention.

But that is not even the punch line. Just like with coronavirus, they were already working on a "cure." On June 4, the CDC randomly approved a smallpox drug, Tembexa (brincidofovir), because "there have been longstanding concerns that the virus that causes smallpox, the variola virus, could be used as a bioweapon."

It is well known that no pharma company will spend hundreds of millions developing a drug for an eradicated disease, on which there is no way to earn billions in profit. Now, even if this drug was around before and they are repurposing it for smallpox, it still costs millions to go through the process. Why?

And speaking of this history of this drug, it sounds eerily similar to the drugs they have approved for COVID, including remdesivir. It turns out that like Gilead's remdesivir and Merck's molnupiravir, brincidofovir was a failed repurposed drug with safety concerns. Its maker, Chimerix, conducted three failed Phase 3 trials for the indication of adenovirus, and it flopped! It also comes with an FDA "black box" warning for use for smallpox, for increased mortality after taking more than just two doses, based on those same failed studies!

So just like remdesivir, the drug they plan to use is an expensive, on-patent drug, although repurposed. But unlike ivermectin, which was extraordinarily safe and effective for its original use – yet is vociferously opposed by the cabal – these drugs failed miserably in their original indications. Just like the other two failed COVID drugs approved by the FDA – baricitinib and tofacitinib – this smallpox drug comes with an FDA black box warning!

Shockingly, the FDA notes in its June 4 approval letter that it did not conduct any human trials for safety and relied on the "Animal Rule," "which allows findings from adequate and well-controlled animal efficacy studies to serve as the basis of an approval when it is not feasible or ethical to conduct efficacy trials in humans." But that is only when it is proven from previous approved indications to be safe and effective so that it can be repurposed for a secondary indication in its same formulation based on animal studies … you know, like perhaps something like ivermectin being used for antiviral after approval for parasites because it was so safe and effective. But this drug was proven unsafe and ineffective to the point that it never got approval for its primary indication and is now being used for a secondary indication without a human study!

Typically, the cure is created after the illness, but in this case perhaps the illness is coming to "cure" what they perceive to be an ailment among we the people. And perhaps the proposed "cures" will look a lot like ailments, just as we have seen with the shots, remdesivir, baricitinib, and tofacitinib – and most likely will see with Merck and Pfizer's new COVID drugs.

Dozens of health care groups urge businesses to voluntarily comply with Biden's vaccine mandate



More than 60 health care associations and medical groups, including the American Medical Association, on Thursday called on private employers to voluntarily enforce President Joe Biden's vaccine mandate ahead of the holiday season.

"We — physicians, nurses and advanced practice clinicians, health experts, and health care professional societies — fully support the requirement that workers at companies with over 100 workers be vaccinated or tested," the organizations said in a joint statement reported by the Washington Post. "This requirement by the Occupational, Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is reasonable and essential to protect workers."

The Biden administration's vaccine requirements were issued on Nov. 4, and American companies were given until Jan. 4 to come into compliance with the mandate or face penalizing fines. But Republican-led states, businesses, and legal groups challenged the requirements in court, arguing that the administration overreached by issuing an unconstitutional mandate. Last week, a federal appeals court blocked OSHA's rule from taking effect, and the Biden administration has suspended enforcement of its mandate pending further litigation.

Regardless of the court order, the White House has urged businesses to go ahead and implement the vaccine rules voluntarily, citing the need to have more people vaccinated to protect the community at large from COVID-19 this winter.

In their joint statement, the health care associations agreed with the government, arguing that COVID-19 spread has been linked to workplace, retail, and food settings.

"To overcome COVID and the highly transmissible Delta variant, and return to 'normal,' we need to substantially increase the vaccination rate from its current level of under 60 percent," the groups said. "We need to vaccinate about another quarter of the American population, roughly 80 million more people."

"Requiring masks for all unvaccinated workers by the December 5th deadline will be key to keeping customers and fellow workers safe during the holiday and shopping season. And getting workers vaccinated or testing by the January 4th deadline will further protect workplaces and communities, bringing us closer to normal life and the end of this pandemic," the groups said. "From the first day of this pandemic, businesses have wanted to vanquish this virus. Now is their chance to step up and show they are serious."

Meanwhile, Senate Republicans have moved forward to challenge Biden's vaccine mandate under the Congressional Review Act, which permits Congress to overturn rules issued by administrative agencies if a majority of both houses oppose them. The Senate is expected to vote on the rule in the coming weeks, but with Democrats in command of majorities in both houses, it is unlikely BIden's rule will be overturned.

Biden administration's OSHA suspends enforcement of vaccine mandate



The Occupational Safety and Health Administration has suspended the implementation and enforcement of President Joe Biden's vaccine mandate for private employers, following a federal court order to do so.

The agency announced Wednesday that it will comply with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit order to "take no steps to implement or enforce" the vaccine mandate "until further court order."

"While OSHA remains confident in its authority to protect workers in emergencies, OSHA has suspended activities related to the implementation and enforcement of the ETS pending future developments in the litigation," the agency said.

The announcement comes after a Nov. 12 ruling from the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals staying implementation and enforcement of Biden's vaccine mandate until there is a final ruling on its legality.

The mandate, known as the COVID-19 Vaccination and Testing Emergency Temporary Standard, requires employers that have 100 or more employees to have each of their workers vaccinated against COVID-19 or tested regularly for the virus. Employers that do not comply could face nearly $14,000 in penalties per violation.

The standards were intended to take effect on Jan. 4, but a flurry of legal challenges questioning the constitutionality of OSHA's mandate put a temporary halt to its enforcement. At least 27 states have challenged the vaccine mandate in courts, as well as other groups, calling Biden's order a gross example of federal overreach.

A federal judiciary panel on Wednesday randomly selected the Sixth Circuit Appeals Court in Cincinnati to take up the more than 30 cases filed against Biden's vaccine mandate, Fox News reported.

The Department of Justice has pledged to "vigorously defend" the OSHA mandate in court.

"This decision is just the beginning of the process for review of this important OSHA standard," an agency spokesperson told Fox News. "The Department will continue to vigorously defend the standard and looks forward to obtaining a definitive resolution following consolidation of all of the pending cases for further review."

In his decision to block OSHA's standard, Fifth Circuit Judge Kurt Engelhardt said a stay was in the public's best interest because of concerns over the sweeping impact the vaccine mandate could have on the economy.

"The public interest is also served by maintaining our constitutional structure and maintaining the liberty of individuals to make intensely personal decisions according to their own convictions - even, or perhaps particularly, when those decisions frustrate government officials," Engelhardt wrote.