Continuing our inquiry into the Covid-19 pandemic, this program continues analysis of the disease as a “plandemic”–a biological warfare manifestation that is one part act of war, one part domestic terrorism, and a major “psy-op.”
The widely publicized interview Trump gave to Bob Woodward, in which Trump candidly assessed the lethal nature of SARS Cov-2 has been misunderstood. Trump’s policy on the virus has been just exactly what he and the interests for which he fronts desire.
The Plandemic is a portal for the realization of the goals of the Underground Reich for which Trump is a front man and enabler. These issues either have been or will be discussed at greater length.
The virus is the Wealth Concentration Virus.
It is the Wealth-Destroying Virus for areas and institutions that the Trump interests oppose.
It is the Urban Area Destruction Virus.
It is the White Supremacist Virus–hitting people of color much harder, due to health and socio-economic factors.
It is the Eugenic Virus–killing older people and people with complicating medical conditions.
It is the Education-Destroying Virus, drastically and negatively affecting public schools and colleges.
It is the Public Transit Destroying Virus.
It is the Divide and Conquer Virus–separating the old from the young and–potentially–women from men.
The Plandemic is the “Bio-Psy-Op Apocalypse” Virus, ravaging the psyches of individuals and groups.
Trump kept a copy of this by his bedside for late-night reading.
The Covid-19 pandemic is driving what might be termed a right-wing ideological wet dream in a number of different respects. Here, we note that the damage done by the virus is seen as furthering a corporatist agenda, masquerading under the common rhetorical camouflage of “libertarian” philosophy.
An important piece in “The Guardian” details how plutocrats terming themselves “anarcho-capitalists” see the pandemic as forcing regions–from nations to municipalities–to conform to the demands of dominant, mobile blocks of capital by eliminating the essentials of the progressive social agenda.
1.–” . . . . They spy opportunity in the crisis, and wager that we might be able to ride the wave of the pandemic into a new tomorrow, where the virus shatters the global map – and undermines the power of democratic nation states. The US is ground zero for this type of thinking. . . .”
2.–” . . . . In an analysis released at the end of April, Arthur Laffer and Stephen Moore, two of Trump’s closest economic confidants and authors of the book on ‘Trumponomics’, predicted that ‘blue’ Democratic states would be slower than ‘red’ states to recover, because of what they saw as their pre-existing excess of regulations and taxes. . . .”
3.–” . . . .Their analysis divided the US map into ‘laggard anti-growth’ states and ‘momentum pro-growth’ states. The former have minimum wages, pro-union laws and state income tax; the latter are free of such regulations. In the established mode of disaster capitalism, Laffer and Moore’s analysis appears to see the pandemic as a way to compel ‘anti-growth’ states to adopt ever lower tax rates in order to attract mobile capital and labour. It suggests those who resist will not be bailed out by redistribution from the central government, but left to languish in a deserved economic depression. The effect is reminiscent of social Darwinism, applied as a philosophy of government. . . .”
4.–” . . . . As nations are divided into different zones according to their respective stages of viral and economic recovery, the well-off could follow Elon Musk’s recent threat to relocate from California to Texas, voting with their feet for locations that elude redistributive taxation. In our post-pandemic future, the flight to safety, away from contagious ‘red zones’, could be a flight from the nation state as we know it. . . .”
As an introduction, we review key aspects of a very important article by Whitney Webb, setting forth extensive DARPA research into bat-borne coronaviruses, potentially genocidal gene-driving technology and overlapping research into vaccine development, as well as the possibility that such research may have been involved with the CDC’s shutdown of Fort Detrick’s USAMRIID in early August of 2019.
In numerous programs, we have noted remdesivir and how it has driven–very possibly with insider advanced knowledge and trading–the stock market. We have covered remdesivir and Gilead Sciences in detail in FTR #’s 1132, 1134, and 1138.
The FDA–now headed by the Hoover Institute’s Stephen Hahn, a former cancer specialist with no experience in infectious diseases–has expanded the approved use of remdesivir. Experts are warning that the FDA provided no data justifying the move and now the drug is going to be in even shorter supply for the sickest patients.
The remainder of the program focuses on fast-tracking of vaccines.
Among the gambits being discussed as possible vehicles for Trump to gain a second term is the rollout of a Covid-19 vaccine. The CDC has told states to prepare for such a development. Many critics have cited the premature nature of such a possibility and the lack of adequate testing.
Next, we present an interview of the head of the FDA, Stephen Hahn, about his willingness to fast-track a vaccine. The way Hahn puts it, the criteria for his decision to fast track is simply as long as the benefits outweigh the risks.
Hahn comes from the Hoover Institute. His medical experience is in the field of cancer treatment. He has no experience in infectious diseases.
As critics point out, even if early results are overwhelmingly positive that doesn’t preclude the possibility of dangerous side effects taking longer to manifest. In addition, ending the trial early reduces opportunity to recruit more people from groups currently under-represented in trials, such as blacks and Hispanics. Ending the trials early due to very positive initial results might hide deleterious results down the line, particularly for the non-whites that Trump and his base despise.
Anthony Fauci has indicated the possibility of such an early authorization.
Next, we present an interview with Trump’s previous FDA chief, Scott Gottlieb, who sits on the board of Pfizer–along with Moderna, leading the race to get a vaccine to market.
One scenario he saw as feasible for a pre-election vaccine release: if clinical trials demonstrate that the vaccine is highly effective in the middle of a new “dense” wave of cases.
