MENDACITY, MANIPULATION & MAKEOVER
Understanding the background to the Joe-Kamala show
The saying attributed to former UK Prime Minister Harold Wilson that “a week is a long time in politics” proved true this last week. There was the attempted assassination of Donald Trump and his “glorification” at the Republican National Convention. Then, one week later, Joe Biden resigned as the Democratic Party presidential candidate after which came his (slightly delayed) endorsement of Vice-President Kamala Harris.
It has been reported that Biden delayed dropping out of the presidential race because of “his lack of faith in Vice President Kamala Harris”. However, whoever has access to Biden’s Twitter (X) account, wrote 30 minutes after his resignation “Tweet”, when there was no mention of Harris (but after which there were reports of furious activity from Harris’ team) that:
“My very first decision as the party nominee in 2020 was to pick Kamala Harris as my Vice President. And it’s been the best decision I’ve made. Today I want to offer my full support and endorsement for Kamala to be the nominee of our party this year. Democrats — it’s time to come together and beat Trump. Let’s do this.”
It was clear from this Tweet, that Democratic Party grandees had decided that Kamala Harris was to get a “makeover”. She certainly needs one. In my research about Kamala Harris this week, I came across this wonderful YouTube video purporting to be from Harris’ “holistic thought advisor”, who goes by the name of Dahlia Rose Hibiscus:
It will be the ultimate makeover if the Democratic Party can transform Kamala Harris into a credible presidential candidate when she was forced to drop out of the 2020 presidential race because of only 3% support in her home state of California.
Biden’s Resignation
In a first by a US president, Joe Biden resigned as the Democratic Party candidate for the US presidential election by Tweet (X) on the afternoon of Sunday 21st July, just a month out from the Democratic Party National Convention in Chicago. Pressure had been building on Biden since the “great debate” on 28th June. Biden’s incoherence and confusion led to Democratic Party supporters (including key outlets like the New York Times) calling “time” on his candidacy. This was despite Biden having sealed the nomination with more than 85% of the delegates committed to him. His aides had declared only the day before that he would stay in the race, “no ifs, and no buts”. The next day, he was gone. No wonder there is a trust gap between politicians and the public.
The Democratic Party, having gone “all in for Joe” and also having tried to cover-up his increasing frailty and mental decline for several years, realized that the game was up. It was impossible to continue to present Biden as a candidate who could serve four more years. He was struggling to get to the end of each day, which seems to end about 4pm (after a 10am start).
The deciding factor in Biden’s resignation as a presidential candidate seemed to be that fundraising had dried up and, as usual, money speaks louder than words. Of course, it also raises the question about whether he can meet the current demands of the presidency?
The Mercury News published an interesting article a few days ago titled: Why Nancy Pelosi was key to nudging Biden out: ‘For her, it’s all about winning’. Pelosi is known to be a “take-no-prisoners” leader, ruling when she was Speaker of the US House of Representatives with “an iron fist in a velvet glove”.
The commentary in Mercury News (reproduced in-part below) provided some interesting insights into how Pelosi and the Democratic Party apparatchiks operate. All stops had to be pulled out to prevent Joe from continuing his campaign despite the undoubted chaos that would result.
“Throughout this past month, as Pelosi worked with Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and her successor, minority leader Rep. Hakeem Jeffries to cajole Biden to close out his campaign, her personal and political connections to the rest of the House Democratic caucus were the source of her credibility and power.
“She’s very much in the tradition of the smoke-filled backroom politician,” Sandalow said — minus the smoke. “There are still scores of House Democrats who owe their success to her…So the idea that she has enormous influence shouldn’t surprise anybody.”
By this past weekend, Biden faced the real possibility that Pelosi would ratchet up the pressure more publicly.
“Nancy made clear that they could do this the easy way or the hard way,” Politico quoted one unnamed Democrat familiar with private conversations saying. “She gave them three weeks of the easy way. It was about to be the hard way.”
It was fascinating to know that:
“Nancy made clear that they could do this the easy way or the hard way…. She gave them three weeks of the easy way. It was about to be the hard way”.
It would have been interesting to see what Nancy would have done when she had to go “the hard way”. This week, Megan Kelly referred to the famous scene from The Godfather: Part II when Frankie Pentangeli’s brother was about to give testimony against Michael Corleone. When Frankie arrived at court with a sworn statement about Corleone ordering “hits” on various rivals, Frankie suddenly sees Michael Corleone arrive at court with Frankie’s brother from Sicily.
Frankie gets the “message” about the threat to his brother, and recants his testimony.
One wonders what Nancy Pelosi was about to pull out of her bag of tricks: exposure of the Biden crime family? Leaking of digital copies of checks from Kazakhstan? Denying Joe his future presidential library? Hunter going to jail? Something put into Joe’s coffee?
Whatever it was, the threat seemed to be enough. Suddenly, Nancy used her velvet glove and praised Joe as a statesman, and possibly the saviour of the world!
The Mercury News reported:
Within hours of the president’s withdrawal from the campaign, Pelosi was praising Biden on social media as “a patriotic American who has always put our country first. His legacy of vision, values and leadership make him one of the most consequential Presidents in American history….God blessed America with Joe Biden’s greatness and goodness.”
Politicians like Nancy Pelosi seem to have no shame in speaking out of both sides of their mouths and of course, many other Democrats have piled on to praise Biden. Senate Majority Leader, Chuck Schumer said: “Joe Biden has not only been a great president and a great legislative leader but he is a truly amazing human being. His decision of course was not easy, but he once again put his country, his party, and our future first.”
The public has been deceived for several years that Biden is on top of his game. Joe Scarborough, the host of Morning Joe on CNBC, said on his show in March this year:
“I undersold him when I said he was cogent,” Scarborough said. “He’s far beyond cogent. In fact, he’s better than he’s ever been intellectually, analytically. Because he’s been around for 50 years.”
It is now evident that there was collusion and deception by White House staff and key Democratic personnel. Axios reported that “Joe Biden’s close aides have carefully shielded him from people inside and outside the White House since the beginning of his presidency.”
The whole of the Democratic Party has been shouting: “Look over there at the threat to democracy”, pointing to Trump, when the real threat has been from a senile US President, who is being manipulated by the personnel who really control the White House agenda.
The Sudden Makeover of Kamala Harris
Peter Schweizer (the author of Clinton Cash, Blood Money and Red Handed) had some interesting insights in his weekly podcast, provided below. Schweizer believes that Biden had dragged out his resignation because he was looking to negotiate some better outcomes for himself. Schweizer provided an assessment of winners and losers. One of the biggest winners from Biden’s resignation is (surprisingly to me) – Barack Obama. Schweizer said:
“Joe Biden was kind of imposed on Barack Obama when Obama was running in 2008. He was told by the leadership in the Democratic Party - you need somebody who's seasoned who's experienced because you've only been in the Senate for a few years. So Joe Biden was almost kind of hoisted on him and there were a lot of .. comments that came out in memoirs and elsewhere, people acknowledging Barack Obama never really liked Joe Biden.
What's interesting is the relationship with Kamala Harris is very different….The Obamas and Kamala Harris have been friends long before Barack Obama even appeared in the US Senate. When he was running for the Senate, she campaigned for him vigorously .. when she was out in San Francisco doing her own thing. That formed a bond when she became the District Attorney in San Francisco. What ended up happening is Barack Obama actually helped her retire some of her debts. He came and did a fundraiser as a senator from the state of Illinois for a local race in San Francisco. So they've had this connection and this relationship going on well before (Obama became president). Senator Barack Obama praised her dedication and brilliance, but he said: “She also happens to be by far the best-looking attorney general in the country”. So they have this close relationship…”
Of course, Barack Obama has had enormous influence in the Biden administration, and many of Obama’s key staff have positions in Joe Biden’s inner circle. However, Harris will likely lean even more heavily on Obama and his team as her campaign goes forward. If Harris wins, it could be the fourth Obama administration!
As I read numerous reports about what happened with the anointing of Kamala Harris, it is evident that key Democratic Party power brokers believe that she can be the unity candidate (it was impossible to reject her because they are caught in an intersectionality trap) and can be controlled. Their main problem is that Kamala has a record of no (or even negative) achievement. For example, she was put in charge of the southern border of the US, but she never visited the border, and the illegal immigrants increased on her watch. However, they are very adept at playing the DEI (diversity, equity and inclusion) and racism cards and they may be able to use these to possibly beat Trump.
Perhaps it’s just a matter of getting her a new speechwriter and a new “holistic thought advisor”. For whatever reason, the money has started refilling Democratic Party coffers.
Ben Shapiro noted in his podcast on 23rd July that:
“$150 million commitment by Democratic ”big money” donors dropped less than a day after she made her candidacy for president official. Couple that with the $50 million drop that happened the day that Joe Biden dropped out of the race. Future Forward has already set aside $250 million for TV and digital advertising. Hundreds of millions of dollars came into play almost immediately, which again is a suggestion that this was all pre-planned this thing clicked into place far too fast for it to have been spontaneous in any way shape or form.”
“Scamala” Harris
A few weeks before Biden’s resignation, Ben Shapiro recorded a three-part series about Kamala Harris titled: Scamala: Kamala Harris Unmasked
It is an unflattering portrait, but it is important to understand because it is likely that she will soon be presented by the mainstream media as the likely saviour of the nation. Shapiro says:
“Kamala Harris's story is one of corruption and failing-up; of lies and betrayals, of dishonesty and incompetence. Kamala Harris is not merely incompetent or unqualified or foolish. She is dangerous. That danger is often obscured by her awkward persona….. Here's the ugly truth: Kamala Harris is utterly and radically inauthentic . A person without any central conviction except the desire for power. ..If the story of Kamala Harris tells us anything, it's that in America, unbridled ambition combined with a complete lack of principle can take you just about anywhere, even to the White House.”
If Shapiro is correct (and I suspect he is), then a Harris presidency would be the most serious leadership threat the US has faced. If elected, Harris could be even more disastrous than Joe Biden. I recommend listening to the three-part series.
Here are a few facts about Kamala’s “brilliant” career that I have taken from Ben Shapiro’s series:
Kamala Harris was born on October 20, 1964. Her father was a Jamaican Marxist economist, and her mother was a breast cancer researcher from India. Both parents obtained PhDs from UC Berkeley.
Harris’s parents divorced when she was seven years old, but she had a privileged upbringing and was privately educated in Canada. However, she made a great play in her 2020 debate about facing segregation and accused Joe Biden of being a racist.
Kamala did not grow up facing widespread and sinister American racism. She spent her most formative years in Canada and after high school chose to attend Howard University, a historically black university.
In searching for her identity at college, she found one as a social activist. She spent many weekends protesting against apartheid in South Africa on the Mall in Washington DC. She took part in a 1983 “sit-in “of an administration building to protest the expulsion of the student newspaper editor.
After graduation, she went to the Hastings College of Law (now UC Law San Francisco). She failed her first attempt at the Californian Bar examination. However, she attached herself to the District Attorney’s office as a Deputy Prosecutor.
Kamala’s big break came when she met Willie Brown in 1994, the Speaker of the California Assembly. Brown was 30 years older than Kamala and despite the inconvenience of being married, Brown “dated” (and promoted) Kamala.
Brown was one of the most influential figures in Californian politics and eventually became Mayor of San Francisco.
Brown must have seen the great potential and hidden talent in Kamala and appointed her to various sinecures within the “gift” of the mayor. These included: appointment to the California Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board, a position with an annual compensation that would be about $205,000 today. Brown then appointed her to the California Medical Assistance Commission, which paid her over $70,000 per year (about $150,000 today). The Commission met just twice per month. Despite this, Kamala missed 20% of all the meetings. Kamala must have had great personal qualities because she had no medical qualifications and was the board's youngest member by 30 years.
Brown subsequently supported Harris for a successful bid to be the District Attorney (DA) in San Francisco, but Brown’s wife put down her foot when rumours began to circulate that Brown was going to marry Harris, and so the romantic relationship ended.
As San Francisco DA, Kamala embarked on a campaign for higher office. This involved two simultaneous goals: first, catering to a radical left-wing base; second, acting tough on crime. “There's no easy way to square those two goals, unless you're willing to lie. That's precisely what Kamala did.”
She was able to court media attention and was named as one of America's most powerful women, by Newsweek magazine.
She then ran for California’s Attorney General position and won by just 0.8% of the vote in 2011. She received the support of Barack Obama (who called her the country’s hottest AG), and a men’s magazine named her the 54th hottest woman in the world.
Despite various conflicts of interest, she prospered in the role and in 2014 she married her current husband, Doug Emhoff, who could become the first “First Gentleman”.
Kamala then put her hand up for the vacant US Senate seat in California and was successful in November, 2016. As a Senator, she tried to make a name for herself by attacking the nomination of Brett Kavanagh to the US Supreme Court, using unsubstantiated information about a high school attempted rape. This accusation had no foundation but it seemed that there was nothing that Kamala wouldn’t do to get her name into the press.
Kamala’s ambition knew no limits, and she decided to run for US president in 2019. She was an initial favourite, but her campaign flamed out after Tulsi Gabbard went for the jugular. In the second round of Democratic Party candidate debates, Gabbard said about Harris’ record on criminal justice: “There are too many examples to cite, but she put over 1,500 people in jail for marijuana violations and then laughed about it when she was asked if she ever smoked marijuana," Gabbard said during the debate to a round of applause. "She blocked evidence — she blocked evidence that would have freed an innocent man from death row until the courts forced her to do so. She kept people in prison beyond their sentences to use them as cheap labor for the state of California." The attack was effective. Harris found herself with no support and dropped out of the race.
However, Joe Biden needed a black woman to meet his intersectional criteria. Even though Kamala had no Democratic Party support and had put the boot into Biden, effectively calling him a racist, he selected her to be his presidential running-mate.
Over almost four years, Harris has achieved polling support even lower than her boss but, in the last few days, has been discovered as the saviour of the Democratic Party and the last hope for the US. It will be hard to find staff support for her campaign. She has had extraordinary staff turnover during her tenancy as Vice-President, and a former aide has said that her staff have had to endure “a constant amount of soul-destroying criticism”.
The picture that emerges about Kamala Harris is that of a person who is insecure, and neither pleasant nor competent (but extraordinarily ambitious). The Trump campaign will have plenty of material to work with to attack “Laffin’ Kamala” (as Trump has dubbed her). The only challenge is whether Trump has the finesse to critique her in a way that doesn’t unintentionally engender public sympathy for Harris.
Conclusions
My post this week exposes the sordid political manoeuvring, naked ambition, quest for power, deception, and coming makeover (of the Vice President) related to the Biden-Harris Democratic Party presidential campaign.
Democratic Party elders decided on a “take no prisoners” approach to removing Biden and have had the gall now to describe him as the most “consequential president of modern times”. They are correct, but unfortunately, it is consequential in the worst way. Here are a few of the consequences of the policies developed by Biden’s minders:
No one knows the real figures, but between 10 and 30 million illegal immigrants have crossed the southern border into the US since Biden became president in January 2021.
Biden has overseen inflation that has devastated working families as the government has spent trillions of dollars they didn’t have.
The US military has been disabled because DEI policies have been deemed more important than combat readiness.
There has been a disastrous withdrawal of the US from Afghanistan, which gave license to the US’ enemies.
Serious conflicts have arisen in the Ukraine and Israel and Taiwan is on the horizon.
The US has moved from a net exporter of energy to a net importer because of “net-zero” policies that have disabled US energy production.
Looking behind the scenes into the “sausage factory” of the Biden-Harris presidency is shocking. Deception (that involves White House staff, key Democrats in Congress and the mainstream media) hid a failing presidency and almost resulted in the assassination of the Republican presidential candidate. Unfortunately, there seems to be no good news anywhere in this terrible tale.
Now, there is a transformation of Kamala Harris as Democratic Party power brokers circled the wagons and avoided any democratic process to select a new candidate to replace Joe Biden. The Wall Street Journal provided an inside view about how Harris locked up the nomination in less than 48 hours. Ken Thomas wrote:
“Kamala Harris completed her takeover of the Democratic Party within 48 hours. And there was little standing in her way. Fearful of chaos and losing to former President Donald Trump, Democrats quickly fell in line behind the vice president following President Biden’s Sunday afternoon letter declaring he would not stand for re-election. Potential challengers to Harris backed her, and party leaders who could have stood in her way chose not to.”
The makeover of Kamala and press amnesia about her lack of achievement have been stunning. It will be fascinating to see how the Vice President is reinvented over the coming weeks in readiness for her coronation at the Democratic Party Convention from 19-22 August.
To conclude this week, I draw my readers’ attention to a substack article by Dr Jacob Nordangård this week. He has outlined some of the globalist links of the Trump-Vance presidential ticket in a fascinating post titled: Is Donald Trump the elites “Wreck-it Ralph” who will pave the way for an “enlightened international governance?”.
The post covers a lot of ground, including the UN Pact for the Future, which highlights the purported need for global governance, where the UN says that a “transformation is needed”. The transformation is (you guessed it) a one-world government!
“A transformation in global governance is essential to ensure that the positive progress we have seen across all three pillars of the United Nations’ work in recent decades does not unravel. We will not allow this to happen.”
Here are a few of the key points made by Dr Nordangård:
A move to replace Joe Biden with Kamela Harris won’t really change the game. … In addition to being blessed with the “grace of God” and spared from an untimely death, Trump also has support from the highest echelons of worldly power.
J.D. Vance…has a background as a venture capitalist in multi-billionaire Peter Thiel's Mithril Capital and subsequently received help from Thiel in building a political career and platform. As president, Donald Trump was also supported by Thiel (who had eight of his closest men placed in Trump's presidential administration).
The fact that the tech billionaire Thiel, an alumnus of WEF's Young Global Leaders program, is a member of the Bilderberg Group's steering committee together with Klaus Schwab's left-hand man Börge Brende and WEF-trustee André Hoffmann (vice-chair of Roche) gives a clear indication of Trump's function in the global game. Both sides are played to produce the desired outcome.
The end goal is the creation of “One World”. A global ecological model society with a stabilized climate/controlled population growth (New Paradigm). After the steel bath and the “reform era”, according to Raskin, “paradise” will appear through the establishment of the “Commonwealth of Earthland”. He puts the time for this at 2048.
It seems as though the globalist “elites” believe that they can fool all of the people all of the time. Fortunately, many are waking up, but there is a formidable communication machine that ensures that the globalist message pushes relentlessly forward.
We have to be alert and make others aware that there are really no “good guys” in the scenarios that face us. We must do whatever we can do to push back against the globalist agenda and surveillance state.
ARTICLES THAT CAUGHT MY ATTENTION THIS WEEK
President Xi’s Strategy Risks Global Trade Shock
Some friends recently gave me the interesting book: China’s World View by David Daokui Li. Mr Li is an academic economist who has been a senior advisor to Chinese Communist Party (CCP) leaders and also international corporations. His central thesis is that the rise of China is good for the United States and the West and that China is not a threat to the West. Also, to understand China, he believes that one needs to understand the language and spend time in the country. The book is helpful in gaining a broader view. Mr Li certainly believes that China is not a danger to the West and I hope that he is right.
China has had a meteoric rise in its capabilities and overall economy in the last 20 years. The West has become dependent on China for its manufacturing and even critical medicines. David Li writes though that :
“China is not in a position to export its ideology or overturn the world order. This is because China’s sociopolitical system relies on two thousand years of tradition in combination with the revolutionary history of the Communist Party, creating unique national circumstances that cannot be replicated….Furthermore this system dictates that China focus on its own domestic affairs while seeking due respect from the rest of the world.”
The book provides an alternative view to many in the West who see China as a danger. China’s leaders certainly take a long-term view but they face a number of economic challenges, some of which were outlined recently by Ambrose Evans-Pritchard in the UK Telegraph.
Mr Evans-Pritchard is a well-respected journalist who is the international business editor of the UK Daily Telegraph. He argues in his recent column that “China Shock 2.0” is coming. “China produces 31% of the world’s manufactured goods but accounts for just 13% of world consumption.” At China’s recent third plenum (held every five years) there is no mention of market forces. “The communique exhorts Chinese people to ‘persist’ 17 times. This means persisting with policies that divert a big chunk of the national pie towards state bodies and companies, which are then pushed into chronic overinvestment by warped incentives that defy market signals but enhance party control.”
This is not surprising because the nature of all centrally planned economies is that they fail. Debt is rising and the housing bubble has well and truly burst, with housing prices decreasing by around 30%. Local government revenues have nosedived because land sales have collapsed.
These challenges provide a special difficulty for President Xi and the Chinese leadership. The Chinese population is prepared to accept authoritarian rule but the leadership needs to deliver on its end of the equation: an improved standard of living.
Because of its dependency on China, the West is closely entangled with China’s economic challenges. There would appear to be a showdown coming if Donald Trump is elected and he implements high tariffs for Chinese products. Taiwan then may come more clearly into focus.
A Fighting Chance for the West
Melanie Phillips is a British broadcaster and writer for the UK Times, who always provides some stimulating analysis about the Middle East. Her column this week focused on the impact of the attempted assassination of Donald Trump. She writes that:
“Many religious folk regard this as a miracle. They believe that, after eight years of attempts to destroy Trump politically through constitutionally improper plots, legal actions and non-stop demonisation — from all of which, astonishingly, he emerged even stronger — this close brush with death demonstrates he has divine protection to fulfil the role on earth for which he has been marked out.
Among those who regard all that as nonsense, many have nevertheless been deeply impressed by the presence of mind and strength of character Trump displayed by struggling to his feet, defiantly raising his fist and mouthing “Fight!” with blood streaming down his face.”
It is true that all the attacks that have been thrown against Trump only seem to make him stronger. One of the most interesting points made by Ms Phillips was how this assassination attempt is seen in the Muslim world. She writes:
“Former Pentagon analyst Harold Rhode, a shrewd observer of the Islamic world, says there are Muslims who believe Trump survived the assassination attempt because God is on his side and Trump is doing God’s work.
Says Rhode: “Arabs and Iranians reason that if Trump is re-elected to the presidency, this too is the will of Allah. It would indicate that Allah favours Trump’s support for Israel and the Arab states that seek to advance their relations with Israel.” That’s a powerful force for demoralising the Iranian foe and increasing respect for Israel in the Muslim world.”
This is an thought-provoking view and reminds us that various key events are viewed through different lenses throughout the world. Harold Rhode’s analysis that:
“Arabs and Iranians reason that if Trump is re-elected to the presidency, this too is the will of Allah. It would indicate that Allah favours Trump’s support for Israel and the Arab states that seek to advance their relations with Israel” is of great significance to the future of conflict in the Middle East.
Years of Miscalculations by US, NATO Led to Dire Shell Shortage in Ukraine
This headline is from a Reuters article and was highlighted by Jeff Childers in his Coffee and COVID substack this week. Childers writes:
“Now they tell us. It explained, at great length, the real reason that Ukraine is losing the Proxy War, not because of U.S. delays in forking over high-tech wonder weapons and pallets of shrink-wrapped hundred dollar bills, but —and you have to wade through pages of chatter to find it— because of environmentalism.
As you might imagine, explosive chemicals like nitrocellulose and TNT —gunpowder— are very helpful in manufacturing boring, low-tech, and unprofitable battlefield staples like bullets, missiles, and artillery shells. These chemicals help the ordinance ‘explode,’ so to speak, causing distressingly loud noises and generally breaking enemies and their weapons into smaller, much less useful pieces.
But starting in the late 80’s, America’s military acquiesced to activist demands to make “cleaner” weapons for killing our enemies. So they began pulling the plug on most U.S. factories that manufactured explosive chemicals. So did our Western allies…..Instead of making the most important part of artillery shells ourselves, the explosives, since they are so toxic, the U.S. military outsourced that environmentally-destructive process mainly to —and I am not making this up— Russia and China.
You can probably already see where there could be some problems with that arrangement.”
While army leaders knew about the problem, their assumption was that if a war started, they could just build more TNT factories. Childers concludes his article with the following observation:
“How can NATO possibly win any major territorial land war with Russia or China if it mostly depends on those same countries for basics like gunpowder?”.
It’s a good question and apparently no one has the answer.
US Government Gives Moderna US$176 Million to Develop an mRNA Vaccine Against Bird Flu
Operation Warp Speed to hasten vaccine development for COVID-19 was always going to be problematic in providing a rapid development vaccine template for future pandemics. The decision dramatically changed the safety requirements necessary for new technology vaccines to enter the market. Rather than 5-10 years, the mRNA vaccines were developed and rolled out in around 6 months, with resultant serious adverse effects that have been universally ignored by the mainstream media.
A recent article in vaccinereaction.org reports that:
“On July 2, 2024, the U.S. government awarded a $176 million contract to Moderna, Inc. for the development of an mRNA H5N1 avian influenza biologic labeled a “vaccine,” as the media reports concerns about bird flu in dairy cows and farm workers in multiple states. The funds from the U.S. Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) will be used to finish developing and testing a pre-pandemic mRNA (messenger ribonucleic acid) biologic for H5N1 bird flu, pending the results of Phase 1 clinical trials, which are expected to be completed this month. Late-stage testing of the vaccine is set to begin in 2025…..
Amid growing concern that exposure to the virus in poultry and dairy operations could increase the risk of mutation and transmissibility between humans, the $176 million contract between Moderna and the U.S. government allows for accelerated development should human cases and/or their severity continue to grow, similar to the framework of Operation Warp Speed, the COVID shot development initiative in 2020”.
This looks like another potential health disaster as the experts “dial up” potentially dangerous injections that have nothing in common with traditional vaccines. Public health professionals, including the globalists at the WHO, certainly see this as an opportunity for another declaration of a pandemic and implementation of the draconian restrictions to freedom that come with this scare. Hopefully, we the public, will be less gullible this time around.