We Have Been Lied To: 6 Facts That Change Everything We Know About SARS-CoV-2

James Madison once said, “A popular Government, without popular information, or the means of acquiring it, is but a Prologue to a Farce or a Tragedy; or, perhaps both.” The coronavirus fascists have succeeded in cementing their illogical, immoral, and illegal policies through the prism of false information about the timing of the virus, the specific nature and severity of the overall fatality rate, the number of actual deaths, and the utility (or perhaps harm) of lockdown policies in actually mitigating deaths – all the while obfuscating the much higher collateral deaths and damage caused by the lockdown itself.

Every day we learn new information demonstrating the lies driving lockdown. Here are some of the most important ones from over the weekend.

1) The shocking inflation of COVID-19 death numbers: From day one, we were warned that states are ascribing every single death of anyone who happens to test positive for the coronavirus — even if they are asymptomatic — to the virus rather than the clear cause of death. Now, thanks to a lawsuit in Colorado, the state was forced to revise its death count down by 23 % over the weekend — from 1,150 to 878. The state is now publishing numbers of deaths “with” COVID-19 separate from deaths “from” COVID-19. As I reported on Thursday, county officials started accusing the state’s department of health of reclassifying deaths of those who tested positive for the virus but died of things like alcohol poisoning as COVID-19 deaths just to insidiously inflate the numbers. This revision in Colorado is a bombshell story that, of course, will remain unknown to most Americans. Every state needs to do this, and if they did, we would find an across-the-board drop in numbers by at least 25%, the same %age by which Dr. Birx reportedly believes the count is being inflated, according to the Washington Post. For example, in Minnesota, state officials are now admitting that every single person who dies in a nursing home after testing positive is now deemed to have died from the virus, never mind the fact that 25% of all natural deaths in a given week occur in nursing homes and that most cases of COVID-19 are asymptomatic, which means more often than not, they died exclusively of other causes.

2) States with longer lockdowns had worse results: Kyle Lamb posted a solid analysis on Twitter, grouping states by how long they implemented a lockdown and averaging out the deaths per 100,000 people by each grouping. The results are stounding, as there is a perfectly inverse relationship between how long a state implemented a lockdown and how successful it was in keeping the deaths down. I independently cross-checked these numbers, and they appear to be accurate.

While this doesn’t necessarily prove that lockdowns cause more COVID-19 deaths (although they definitely cause other deaths), it’s nearly impossible to assert the other way around – that lockdowns prevent deaths – if we see zero correlation in the data. This is especially true given that Florida is the third most populous state and has the highest concentration of seniors, yet deaths and hospitalizations are way down since the state reopened on May 4. Florida is more densely populated than Michigan and Pennsylvania, yet has one-sixth and one-fourth of the deaths per capita, respectively. The same holds true for Georgia, which is a fairly densely populated state. Infections are down over 40% and deaths are down 31% since reopening. As Secretary of Health Alex Azar said yesterday, “We are seeing that in places that are opening, we’re not seeing this spike in cases. We still see spikes in some areas that are, in fact, closed.”

3) Outside nursing homes, the fatality rate never warranted such action, even if it would work: Every day we find more hard data showing that the overwhelming majority of cases are asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic, and outside nursing homes, the chance of dying is very low and very limited to a population we can more efficiently shield. For those who are younger and healthier, deaths are almost nonexistent. Spain was one of the hardest-hit countries and has a higher overall fatality rate than others, yet its age-stratified fatality rates mirror what we have seen in the Netherlands, Denmark, France, and elsewhere. One Twitter commentator has broken down the age-based fatality rates of the comprehensive Spanish antibody study, and the results are similar to what we’ve seen elsewhere:

He used public information to calculate the case data and the population age data, and I have spot-checked some data points and they all seem on target. It’s identical to what the Netherlands found.

Remember, Spain was one of the hardest-hit countries, but even there, 57% of all deaths and the overwhelming majority of deaths of those above age 80 were in senior care facilities. When you take them out of the equation, the death rates are shockingly low. Yet the same politicians who focused on locking up an entire country failed to care for those in nursing homes. . .

It’s essentially the same story in every state.

4) Outside New York, this is barely worse than bad flu seasons: While Europe is opening its schools, almost every U.S. state continues to keep schools shut. Yet according to the CDC’s latest weekly report, “For children (0-17 years), COVID-19 hospitalization rates are much lower than influenza hospitalization rates at comparable time points during recent influenza seasons.” Even the World Health Organization’s top scientist just admitted that children “seem less capable of spreading the virus.” As for everyone else, if you look at the bump in overall deaths for most states (outside the tristate area), they are either at, slightly below, or slight above the 2018 flu season. But at this point, everything is way below a typical flu season in the winter, yet you wouldn’t know it from listening to the media. According to the CDC, hospitalizations and deaths have been declining in all 10 designated regions for the past 3-7 weeks. Still, we are now being more fascist that even Italy in violating civil rights.

5) Excess deaths are from the lockdowns, not the virus: While there is zero evidence that lockdowns saved any lives of coronavirus patients, there is clear evidence they cost other lives. It has been observed in a number of states that there are excess deaths being detected, primarily from people dying at home. The CDC is predicting 21,462-40,097 excess deaths NOT due to COVID-19, likely from those too scared to come to the ER because of the exaggerated risk being associated with COVID-19. Also, a recent analysis of excess deaths in England shows that they are seeing thousands of people dying at home from other symptoms because of the lockdown.

6) Social distancing was invented by a high-school kid and politicians, not scientists: Jeffrey Tucker of the American Institute for Economic research reports that the origin of this cult of “social distancing” being used for totalitarian lockdowns was the brainchild of a high schooler’s sociology paper in 2006, promoted by the Bush administration during the avian flu. It was widely mocked by the epidemiological community, including by Johns Hopkins, for “causing the potential for a ‘serious adverse outcome,’” thereby ensuring that “a manageable epidemic could move toward catastrophe.”

How have we allowed such an illogical approach to crush our liberties, economy, hospitals, education, and criminal justice? How have we lost our freedoms?

The answer is that the public is not getting the right information. This is why the political class is doing everything in its power to censor anyone who dares question the idolatry of this lockdown cult. YouTube has censored the videos of Knut Wittkowski, who was a top epidemiologist in Germany and then served as the head of biostatistics, epidemiology, and research design at Rockefeller University. One would think we’d want to hear his opinion, but there is only one view that is allowed to gain traction. Why is it that only one side is scared of the information of the other side?

As James Madison warned, “Knowledge will forever govern ignorance: And a people who mean to be their own Governors, must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives.” (For more from the author of “We Have Been Lied To: 6 Facts That Change Everything We Know About SARS-CoV-2” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

4 Big Unanswered Questions About the ‘Unmasking’ Scandal

As the “unmasking” scandal unfolds, the Senate Judiciary Committee will delve into the conduct of the Obama administration and the intelligence community in secretly investigating the incoming Trump administration.

Two Senate Republicans released previously secret information Wednesday listing top Obama administration officials who made the same request in early 2017: that the intelligence community disclose to them that retired Army Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn was the American whose phone conversation with the Russian ambassador had been intercepted by intelligence officials.

Flynn at the time had been chosen by President-elect Donald Trump as his first national security adviser. Flynn’s “unmasking” at the request of some of outgoing President Barack Obama’s closest advisers set in motion events that led to Flynn’s resignation after only 23 days in office during the new Trump administration.

Sens. Charles Grassley of Iowa and Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, both Republicans, released the names of the Obama officials requesting Flynn’s identity as part of information declassified by Richard Grenell, acting director of national intelligence.

Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., announced Thursday that his committee would hold hearings in June examining issues surrounding the Flynn case and related to the initial FBI investigation of possible ties between the Trump campaign and the Russian government.

In a joint statement, Johnson, chairman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, the Senate’s chief oversight panel, and Grassley, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, said:

Our investigation of these matters has been ongoing for years, and as information finally comes to light, our focus on these issues is even more important now. The records are one step forward in an important effort to get to the bottom of what the Obama administration did during the Russia investigation and to Lt. General Flynn. We will continue to review this information and push for additional relevant disclosures until we are satisfied that the American people know the full truth.

Meanwhile, U.S. Attorney John Durham of Connecticut continues to look into the origins of the Russia investigation, and the Justice Department has said that the Flynn unmasking requests is one part of that probe.

Here are four big unanswered questions as the Senate and the Justice Department scrutinize actions taken by the Obama administration between Trump’s election on Nov. 8, 2016, and his inauguration on Jan. 20, 2017.

1. Can Obama Be Compelled to Testify?

It might well be must-see TV, but at this point it seems highly unlikely that Obama himself would be subpoenaed to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Trump made the demand in a tweet Thursday.

“If I were a Senator or Congressman, the first person I would call to testify about the biggest political crime and scandal in the history of the USA, by FAR, is former President Obama,” Trump said in the tweet. “He knew EVERYTHING. Do it @LindseyGrahamSC, just do it. No more Mr. Nice Guy. No more talk!”

The previously classified documents released this week show that in the waning days of the Obama administration, these six well-known officials each submitted an unmasking request that would reveal Flynn’s otherwise protected identity under U.S. law: FBI Director James Comey, White House chief of staff Denis McDonough, Vice President Joe Biden, United Nations Ambassador Samantha Power, CIA Director John Brennan, and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper.

The Justice Department’s case against Flynn for lying to the FBI about his conversations with the Russian ambassador largely fell apart after other documents recently surfaced. They included notes of a discussion among Comey and two other top FBI officials about whether the goal in questioning Flynn at the White House was to “get him to lie” so that he could be fired or prosecuted.

The Justice Department last week dropped the case against Flynn for misleading the FBI, but a federal judge this week called in outside authorities to dispute that action. Flynn has withdrawn his guilty plea.

Graham, in a statement Thursday, appeared to be reluctant about Trump’s call for Obama to testify.

“I am greatly concerned about the precedent that would be set by calling a former president for oversight,” Graham said. “No president is above the law. However, the presidency has executive privilege claims against other branches of government.”

Graham continued:

To say we are living in unusual times is an understatement.

We have the sitting president (Trump) accusing the former president (Obama) of being part of a treasonous conspiracy to undermine his presidency. We have the former president suggesting the current president is destroying the rule of law by dismissing the General Flynn case.

All of this is occurring during a major pandemic.

As to the Judiciary Committee, both presidents are welcome to come before the committee and share their concerns about each other. If nothing else it would make for great television. However, I have great doubts about whether it would be wise for the country.

Graham is striking the correct balance, said Charles Stimson, a senior legal fellow for national security at The Heritage Foundation.

“Chairman Graham should go after the facts, and see where that leads. He’s going to hold hearings,” Stimson told The Daily Signal on Thursday. “To take the president up on that suggestion [of calling Obama to testify] would risk looking political and could delegitimize the inquiry.”

2. What Are the Legal Issues?

Graham said the first part of his committee’s comprehensive inquiry would focus on the Flynn matter.

“Our first phase will deal with the government’s decision to dismiss the Flynn case as well as an in-depth analysis of the unmasking requests made by Obama Administration officials against General Flynn,” Graham said in his written statement. “We must determine if these requests were legitimate.”

If Obama administration officials engaged in improper conduct, it’s not clear whether a law was broken, or who violated the law if one was broken.

Under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, U.S. intelligence agencies may intercept and listen to the telephone calls of foreign citizens, including foreign officials. That would include Flynn’s call with then-Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak on Dec. 29, 2016, roughly three weeks before Trump’s inauguration.

If a foreign citizen is speaking to an American citizen on the intercepted call, the law requires the name of the American citizen to be blacked out, or masked, in documentation.

So unmasking is the process by which authorized federal officials request to see information regarding American citizens mentioned anonymously in classified transcripts of calls or other communications involving foreigners.

However, someone leaked Flynn’s communication with the Russian ambassador to the media shortly after the unmasking requests were made. Leaking classified information is a crime.

Brennan, Clapper, Comey and the others named in the documents released by Grenell were authorized to ask for the unmasking. The question is whether there was a legitimate reason to ask for the unmasking, Stimson said.

Another question, besides who leaked Flynn’s name, is whether the unmasking was an attempt by officials of the outgoing Obama administration to undermine the incoming Trump administration.

“I’m not there yet. I want to see more facts,” Stimson told The Daily Signal.

Stimson added that congressional hearings typically seem political, but could produce further lines of inquiry.

He said he is more focused on the probe by Durham, whose career has been as a “stand-up, just-the-facts-ma’am, Joe Friday type of guy.”

3. How Did FISA System Go ‘Off the Rails’?

Graham said the next phase of the Judiciary Committee’s inquiry will revisit the apparent abuse of the process for obtaining warrants under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, highlighted in a scathing report late last year by Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz.

Horowitz testified to the committee in December about his report’s findings. Among the most startling: The FBI relied almost entirely on the so-called Steele dossier, an opposition research document financed by Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, as the basis for a FISA warrant to surveil Trump campaign aide Carter Page.

The inspector general’s report also determined that FBI overreach wasn’t limited to Page, but included other Trump campaign aides such as Flynn, then an adviser; George Papadopoulos, a campaign volunteer; and one-time campaign chairman Paul Manafort.

“Our next area of inquiry, later this summer, will be oversight building upon the Horowitz report about FISA abuses against Carter Page,” Graham said. “My goal is to find out why and how the system got so off the rails.”

4. What Was the Point of the Mueller Probe?

After an investigation lasting nearly two years and costing taxpayers $32 million, special counsel Robert Mueller, Comey’s predecessor as FBI director, determined that the Trump campaign did not conspire with the Russian government to influence the 2016 election.

The problem, critics of the Mueller probe say, is that prior to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein’s appointing him as special counsel, no evidence existed to suggest a Trump-Russia conspiracy.

Thus, the Judiciary Committee will look into the predicate of initiating a special counsel probe, Graham said.

“Finally, we will look at whether Robert Mueller should have ever been appointed as Special Counsel,” he said. “Was there legitimate reason to conclude the Trump campaign had colluded with the Russians?”

Mueller secured grand jury indictments against some two dozen Russian operatives—none of whom is expected ever to stand trial because they are in Russia.

The special counsel’s team also scored a conviction of Manafort for financial crimes unrelated to the presidential campaign. (For more from the author of “4 Big Unanswered Questions About the ‘Unmasking’ Scandal” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Neurosurgeon: Face Masks Pose Serious Risks to the Healthy

Dr. Russell Blaylock warns that not only do face masks fail to protect the healthy from getting sick, but they also create serious health risks to the wearer. The bottom line is that if you are not sick, you should not wear a face mask. . .

With the advent of the so-called COVID-19 pandemic, we have seen a number of medical practices that have little or no scientific support as regards reducing the spread of this infection. One of these measures is the wearing of facial masks, either a surgical-type mask, bandana or N95 respirator mask. When this pandemic began and we knew little about the virus itself or its epidemiologic behavior, it was assumed that it would behave, in terms of spread among communities, like other respiratory viruses. Little has presented itself after intense study of this virus and its behavior to change this perception. . .

Now that we have established that there is no scientific evidence necessitating the wearing of a face mask for prevention, are there dangers to wearing a face mask, especially for long periods? Several studies have indeed found significant problems with wearing such a mask. This can vary from headaches, to increased airway resistance, carbon dioxide accumulation, to hypoxia, all the way to serious life-threatening complications.

There is a difference between the N95 respirator mask and the surgical mask (cloth or paper mask) in terms of side effects. The N95 mask, which filters out 95% of particles with a median diameter >0.3 µm2 , because it impairs respiratory exchange (breathing) to a greater degree than a soft mask, and is more often associated with headaches. In one such study, researchers surveyed 212 healthcare workers (47 males and 165 females) asking about presence of headaches with N95 mask use, duration of the headaches, type of headaches and if the person had preexisting headaches.

They found that about a third of the workers developed headaches with use of the mask, most had preexisting headaches that were worsened by the mask wearing, and 60% required pain medications for relief. As to the cause of the headaches, while straps and pressure from the mask could be causative, the bulk of the evidence points toward hypoxia and/or hypercapnia as the cause. That is, a reduction in blood oxygenation (hypoxia) or an elevation in blood C02 (hypercapnia). It is known that the N95 mask, if worn for hours, can reduce blood oxygenation as much as 20%, which can lead to a loss of consciousness, as happened to the hapless fellow driving around alone in his car wearing an N95 mask, causing him to pass out, and to crash his car and sustain injuries. I am sure that we have several cases of elderly individuals or any person with poor lung function passing out, hitting their head. This, of course, can lead to death. (Read more from “Neurosurgeon: Face Masks Pose Serious Risks to the Healthy” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

WATCH: Obama-Appointed CDC Chair Caught on Camera Lobbying to ‘Get Rid of’ White Americans

A newly surfaced video features Dr. Carol Baker lobbying to “get rid of whites” to reduce “vaccine refusers.” She is a former chair of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). . .

In the 2016 footage uncovered by Patrick Howley at National File from the Achieving Childhood Vaccine Success in the US panel in New York City, Dr. Baker asserted that the way to get everyone vaccinated is to “get rid of all whites in the United States.”

“So I have the solution. Every study published in the last five years, when you look at vaccine refusers. I’m not talking about…hesitance, most of them we can talk into coming to terms. But refusers. We’ll just get rid of all the whites in the United States,” Baker said at the event on May 9, 2016. “Guess who wants to get vaccinated the most? Immigrants.”

(Read more from “WATCH: Obama-Appointed CDC Chair Caught on Camera Lobbying to ‘Get Rid of’ White Americans” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

The Constitution Requires Judge Sullivan’s Lawless Amicus Order Against Michael Flynn Be Overturned; Flynn Judge Ignores Shocking Record of False Guilty Pleas

By The Federalist. On May 13, Judge Emmet Sullivan issued a blatantly biased and unconstitutional order in the long-lasting Michael Flynn criminal case. To preserve the rule of law and our constitutional separation of powers, the Department of Justice has no choice now but to seek a writ of mandamus from the D.C. Circuit Court ordering the criminal charge against Flynn dismissed and reassigning the case to another judge. . .

Soon after Judge Sullivan announced he would accept amicus briefs, a group of lawyers operating under the moniker Watergate Prosecutors filed a notice of its intent to file an amicus brief. That a group of left-leaning lawyers intended to relitigate Obamagate via the Flynn case wasn’t surprising. What was surprising—no, unbelievable—is what Judge Sullivan did on Wednesday: He entered an order “appoint[ing] The Honorable John Gleeson (Ret.) as amicus curiae to present arguments in opposition to the government’s Motion to Dismiss.”

This order was jaw-dropping for two reasons. First, the U.S. Constitution makes clear that the judiciary has no business second-guessing prosecutorial decisions. In fact, the very case Judge Sullivan cited for the proposition that he had the inherent authority to appoint an amicus curiae—United States v. Fokker—made clear Sullivan’s order was lawless.

In that case, the government had criminally charged Fokker Services with violations of export control laws. The government and defendant entered a deferred prosecution agreement, under which the government would dismiss the charges in exchange for Fokker Services agreeing to several compliance provisions. But when the parties went before a federal district court judge to formalize the arrangement and a waiver of the Speedy Trial Act, the presiding judge refused to accept the waiver—which in essence doomed the agreement—because he believed the agreement was too lenient on the business owners.

The government filed a “writ of mandamus” with the D.C. Circuit Court. A writ of mandamus is a procedural machination that allows a party to seek to force a lower court to act as required by law. The Fokker court explained that while mandamus is an extraordinary remedy, it is appropriate where the petitioner: (i) has “no other adequate means to attain the relief he desires”; (ii) “show[s] that his right to the writ is ‘clear and indisputable’”; and then “(iii) the court ‘in the exercise of its discretion, must be satisfied that the writ is appropriate under the circumstances.’” (Read more from “The Constitution Requires Judge Sullivan’s Lawless Amicus Order Against Michael Flynn Be Overturned” HERE)

______________________________________________________

Flynn Judge Ignores Shocking Record of False Guilty Pleas

By The New York Sun. . .The fact is that it’s by no means rare for persons to plead guilty to crimes they didn’t commit. Some are scared. Others confused. Some lack the intestinal fortitude or financial wherewithal to stand up against the warnings or threats from the prosecutors. What’s so unusual in the Flynn case is that the Democrats and liberals are siding against the poor schlepper caught in the prosecutorial vice. . .

Some 95% of felony convictions in America, the Website notes, are obtained through guilty pleas. Among persons known to be exonerated, it reports, a staggering 18% pleaded guilty to crimes they didn’t commit. It is a humbling statistic for those of us who cover the courts. The filing of a guilty plea by an innocent party occurs at a pace that leaves GuiltyPleaProblem.com saying: “there’s no telling how many are behind bars as a result.”

So where are the liberals now? Where’s the logic of Judge Sullivan getting up on his high horse over the idea that someone in his court might move to withdraw a guilty plea? The idea that General Flynn was uncomfortable with his own plea deal can’t be a surprise to the judge. It was already in the air when the judge erupted at the general at a now-infamous hearing in open court back in December 2018.

That’s the hearing at which the judge declared, “I’m not hiding my disgust, my disdain, for this criminal offense.” With the judge listing the general’s misdeeds, the Washington Post reported at the time, “was not how Flynn’s supporters or Trump thought Tuesday’s sentencing hearing would unfold.” They’d hoped Judge Sullivan would be the one “who would reveal overreach by special counsel Robert S. Mueller III and the FBI.” (Read more from “Flynn Judge Ignores Shocking Record of False Guilty Pleas” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Gowdy: Trump Family Unmasked During Inauguration Day Surveillance Reports… Wait, What? (VIDEO)

Unsurprisingly when Trey Gowdy said “the Trump family was unmasked on inauguration day”… interviewer Sandra Smith never paused to say: “wait, unmasked in what”?

During his tenure as House Oversight Committee Chair, apparently Trey Gowdy has seen intelligence reports showing the Trump family was unmasked on inauguration day. The logical follow-up question would be: who was generating intelligence reports on the Trump family?

Alas, the dangling participle never had the opportunity to dangle… go figure.

Follow the bouncing ball. If Gowdy is correct, and he has no vested interest in just making it up, then there was FBI domestic surveillance of the Trump family on inauguration day; which generated an intelligence report. Yet, apparently, no-one seems surprised by that… I digress. (For more from the author of “Gowdy: Trump Family Unmasked During Inauguration Day Surveillance Reports… Wait, What?” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

‘Obamagate’ Isn’t a Conspiracy Theory, It’s the Biggest Political Scandal of Our Time and Biden is Right in the Middle of It

By The Federalist. When former president Barack Obama told supporters last week that the Justice Department’s decision to drop the case against former White House National Security Adviser Mike Flynn is a “threat to the rule of law,” he was relying wholly on the fiction, willingly propagated for years by a pliant media, that the Russia-Trump collusion probe launched by his administration was lawful and legitimate.

But of course it wasn’t. A string of recently released documents have confirmed that the entire Russia-Trump investigation, which eventually entrapped Flynn and forced then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions to recuse himself, was an unprecedented abuse of power that amounted to organized effort by the Obama administration to nullify the results of the 2016 presidential election. It was in effect an attempted coup. . .

The Flynn case is just one piece of a much larger story about how the Obama administration—with the full knowledge and support of both Obama and Biden—targeted incoming Trump officials in a failed attempt to cripple the new administration with allegations it had colluded with Moscow.

The complexity of their scheme, and the efforts to hide it and mislead the American people, are frustrating. The cast of characters—from high-ranking Obama administration officials to relative nobodies loosely associated with Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign—is long, as is the timeline of events. Details have come out slowly, in fits and starts, over the course of years. Following all the leaks and declassified transcripts and congressional hearings requires constant vigilance, and if you don’t keep up with it you can easily lose the thread.

That all works to the advantage of those who perpetrated this hoax, because it’s easy to get overwhelmed and tune it all out, or simply accept the corporate media’s deceptive reporting. But the ongoing revelations about the FBI’s targeting of Flynn can’t be ignored. They demand a full accounting. If ever there was a threat to the rule of law, it was the Obama administration’s abuse of power and its weaponization of intelligence agencies in an attempt to take down Trump. (Read more from “‘Obamagate’ Isn’t a Conspiracy Theory, It’s the Biggest Political Scandal of Our Time” HERE)

__________________________________________________________

The Unmasking of Joe Biden

By The Hill. . .The media portrayed both Obama and Biden as uninvolved. But now we know they both actively followed the investigation. According to former acting attorney general Sally Yates, she was surprised that Obama knew about the investigation and knew more than she did at the time. Obama called upon former FBI director James Comey to stay after a meeting to discuss the investigation. Comey had mentioned using the Logan Act to charge Flynn, even though the unconstitutional law has never been used successfully in a prosecution since the country was founded.

Biden has repeatedly denied knowledge of the investigation. Just a day before the latest disclosure, George Stephanopoulos asked Biden in an interview what he knew of the Flynn investigation. Biden was adamant that he knew nothing about “those moves” and he called it a diversion. But that is not true if he took the relatively uncommon action for a vice president of demanding the unmasking of Flynn information.

Yet none of this matters. A Democratic administration using a secret court to investigate the opposing political campaign does not matter to many in Congress or in the media anyway. An investigation continuing despite the lack of credible information supporting collusion does not matter to them either. A president and a vice president who take personal interest in the surveillance of their political opponents also does not matter.

There was a time, however, when all of this did matter. There was once a time when this would be viewed as the story of the century, including the unmasking of Biden himself in this investigation. But these are not those times, and this cannot be the story. Russian collusion is the story and, as Biden stressed, the rest is just a diversion. It is up to the public to decide who has been ultimately unmasked by the Flynn investigation. (Read more from “The Unmasking of Joe Biden” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

The Sun Has Entered a ‘Lockdown’ Period, Which Could Cause Freezing Weather, Famine

Our sun has gone into lockdown, which could cause freezing weather, earthquakes and famine, scientists say.

The sun is currently in a period of “solar minimum,” meaning activity on its surface has fallen dramatically.

Experts believe we are about to enter the deepest period of sunshine “recession” ever recorded as sunspots have virtually disappeared. . .

NASA scientists fear it could be a repeat of the Dalton Minimum, which happened between 1790 and 1830 — leading to periods of brutal cold, crop loss, famine and powerful volcanic eruptions.

Temperatures plummeted by up to 2 degrees Celsius (35.6 degrees Fahrenheit) over 20 years, devastating the world’s food production. (Read more from “The Sun Has Entered a ‘Lockdown’ Period, Which Could Cause Freezing Weather, Famine” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

This Is the Most Blatant Example of Inflated COVID-19 Death Stats Yet

I have spectacular news to share with you. Amid all the death, doom, and gloom resulting from the coronavirus, we can now celebrate the fact that the virus has cured all other forms of death. Nobody dies from other causes of death anymore. At least that is what we are seeing in some states that are so eager to use the virus as a pretext to crush our liberties.

This week, Colorado recorded Montezuma County as having suffered its third coronavirus death. The implication of being tagged with more deaths for many Democrat-controlled states is that even small rural counties like Montezuma will not be allowed to resume regular life because they will fail to meet arbitrary and impossible benchmarks established unilaterally by the Governor Kings. The problem in this case is that the county coroner is disputing the cause of the death. This now appears to be a widespread problem.

“COVID was not listed on the death certificate as the cause of death. I disagree with the state for listing it as a COVID death, and will be discussing it with them this week,” said County Coroner George Deavers on Tuesday.

It turns out that even though the decedent tested positive for the virus, he died of alcohol poisoning because toxicology showed his blood-alcohol level was 0.55, way past the lethal level of 0.3.

“The person who died did not die from COVID-19, but they did test positive for the virus,” said county public information officer Vicki Shaffer. “The state is reporting that death as a COVID death, but our health department wanted to let people know that even though the person did have the virus, they did not die from it.”

According to local news, the decedent, Sebastian Yellow, 35, was found dead in a park in Cortez on May 4. Think about that for a moment: a 35-year-old just drops dead in a park (the virus takes a long time to kill), and yet they test his body for coronavirus and find it to be positive, and now the state rules it a coronavirus death instead of the obvious alcohol poisoning!

This is not the first time the state government has been caught inflating the numbers. On April 30, CBS4 reported that the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment reclassified three deaths in a nursing home as COVID-19, overruling the decision of the attending physician who said they died of other ailments while in hospice care. The state officials blamed it on the CDC guidance forcing them to tag anyone who tests positive as a COVID-19 death, irrespective of the circumstances. Recently, Dr. Deborah Birx has reportedly called into question the policy and how it’s inflating the number of coronavirus deaths.

We are seeing disputes between state health departments and local coroners over how to determine cause of death play out in other states as well.

As we’ve reported, most estimates show the infection fatality rate for people in their 30s is roughly 0.007%. A typical 35-year-old has a 0.17% chance of dying in any given year … of anything. Thus, the normal mortality rate is 24 times higher than that of coronavirus for people that age. Now that the virus is so ubiquitous and so rarely lethal in young people, it makes no sense to assume someone died from it unless the autopsy showed the degradation of the lungs or other similar symptoms. They are literally coding every death in this country of anyone who has the virus (which is likely in the tens of millions) as a COVID-19 death.

Approximately 2.8 million people die every year, which means roughly 470,000 will die over a 2-month period. Given that it’s very likely 5%-10% of the country have the virus, but very few die from it as a percentage of those infected – nearly zero among younger people – how many of those typical deaths are now being coded as COVID? This is particularly concerning when we see states report a few random deaths among younger people. While anomalous death from the coronavirus is certainly possible in younger people, this raises serious questions about the accuracy of any existing recorded deaths for those particularly young.

We saw this play out in April when Ventura County, California, coded the death of a 37-year-old who overdosed on fentanyl as a COVID-19 death. Nearly 70,000 are dying every year from drug overdoses, particularly young adults. How many of these respiratory deaths will easily be coded as the coronavirus so long as they test positive?

There was much commotion when Georgia officials announced that death of a 22-year-old in Columbus, but the local coroner absolutely disputes that assertions. The 22-year-old new mother tragically died four days after giving birth, but Muscogee County Coroner Buddy Bryan believes she died from a complication stemming from the C-section. “The E.M.S. personnel and myself pretty much came to the same conclusion,” Bryan said. “I personally don’t believe she died from the virus.”

We all see how this virus has become more political than anything in our lifetime. When places like Los Angeles, with so few deaths per capita, are preemptively announcing a lockdown for another three months, there is no longer any denying that liberal politicians will use this as a pretext to push generation-changing social transformation and will stop at nothing in the misinformation war to justify their actions. At least 60,000 people die in L.A. in any given year. In a county of 10 million people, there are officially only 1,659 coronavirus deaths (including the likely inflation). Are we really to believe that coding of deaths going forward will not be politicized and easily conflated with typical deaths?

Nowhere is this more of a concern than in nursing homes where we are seeing more than 50% of the recorded deaths and where many of them are being added retroactively. Naturally, roughly 25% of the annual 2.8 million national fatalities occur in senior care facilities and so many have already tested positive for the virus, but didn’t necessarily die from it. But per CDC guidance, it must be counted as a COVID-19 death.

Last week, my colleague Steve Deace received an email from a listener who just lost her father in a nursing home in Ohio. She noted that he had advanced Alzheimer’s and tested positive for COVID-19, along with 75% of the residents. However, 90% were asymptomatic and her father had recovered from the virus. None of the staff believed he died from the virus, but it was listed as the cause of the death on his death certificate. “Covid-19 is listed as cause of death. Absolute lie. Hopefully our firsthand experience can be added to your research,” she wrote.

Indeed, we are the ones who will have to do this research because the media and government won’t do it for us. (For more from the author of “This Is the Most Blatant Example of Inflated COVID-19 Death Stats Yet” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Federal Judge Out of Control: Trying to Sentence Gen. Flynn Even Though Prosecution Wants Charges Withdrawn; List of Officials Who Sought to ‘Unmask’ Flynn Released

By CNN. Federal Judge Emmet Sullivan on Wednesday asked whether President Donald Trump’s former national security adviser Michael Flynn could be held in contempt of court for perjury.

Sullivan also appointed a retired judge to look into Flynn’s case and argue against the Department of Justice’s request to dismiss it. . .

Sullivan signaled on Tuesday he would open the door to third parties to weigh in on the case, but it wasn’t clear whom he would allow. Others have argued to him that the judge could sentence Flynn, essentially ignoring the Department of Justice’s motion to dismiss his charge.

Sullivan appointed a retired judge, John Gleeson, [to present] arguments to the judge “in opposition to the government’s Motion to Dismiss” and on “whether the Court should issue an Order to Show Cause why Mr. Flynn should not be held in criminal contempt for perjury,” the judge wrote.

Gleeson is a former Clinton appointee to the federal trial bench in the Eastern District of New York. (Read more from “Federal Judge Out of Control: Trying to Sentence Gen. Flynn Even Though Prosecution Wants Charges Withdrawn” HERE)

__________________________________________________________

Hannity Warns Biden ‘Might Want to Start Thinking About Getting His Story Straight’ on Flynn Unmasking

By Fox News. Sean Hannity opened his show Wednesday by reacting to the newly released list of Obama administration officials who requested to “unmask” the identity of former national security adviser Michael Flynn in intelligence reports during the Trump transition.

“Why in the hell did the Obama administration’s unmasking requests jump threefold from 9,500 in 2013 to 30,355 in 2016?” Hannity asked.

“Now, we know one part of the massive increase was targeted at Donald Trump campaign adviser, an incoming national security adviser, a man who has served this country honorably for 33 years in combat zones, and that’s General Michael Flynn,” the host added. “We now know he was unmasked a whopping 48 times by roughly two dozen Obama officials between Election Day, November 8, 2016 and the president’s inauguration, January 20, 2017.”

The host explained that the term ‘unmasking’ refers largely to the process of identifying an American citizen whose communications have been picked up by U.S. intelligence officials during surveillance on a foreign government, person or other entity.

In Flynn’s case, he was unmasked over his calls with then-Russian Ambassador to the U.S. Sergey Kislyak, which were picked up on wiretaps. That information was then leaked to The Washington Post in early 2017. (Read more from “Hannity Warns Biden ‘Might Want to Start Thinking About Getting His Story Straight’ on Flynn Unmasking” HERE)

__________________________________________________________

List of Officials Who Sought to ‘Unmask’ Flynn Released: Biden, Comey, Obama Chief of Staff Among Them

By Fox News. Top Obama administration officials purportedly requested to “unmask” the identity of former national security adviser Michael Flynn during the presidential transition period, according to a list of names from that controversial process made public on Wednesday.

The list was declassified in recent days by Acting Director of National Intelligence Richard Grenell and then sent to GOP Sens. Chuck Grassley and Ron Johnson, who made the documents public. The roster features top-ranking figures including then-Vice President Joe Biden — a detail already being raised by the Trump campaign in the bare-knuckle 2020 presidential race where Biden is now the Democrats’ presumptive nominee.

The list also includes then-FBI Director James Comey, then-CIA Director John Brennan, then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, and Obama’s then-chief of staff Denis McDonough. (Read more from “List of Officials Who Sought to ‘Unmask’ Flynn Released: Biden, Comey, Obama Chief of Staff Among Them” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE