Better in their words…

Source: Coffee & Covid ☙ Wednesday, July 27, 2022

*COVID NEWS AND COMMENTARY*

💉 Question asked: the Deseret News ran a story earlier this week headlined, “Perspective: Why have so few children been vaccinated for COVID-19?”

The highly-revealing sub-headline suggests, “More than a month after vaccines were approved for children 6 months and older, vaccination rates show low trust in health officials.”

Low trust in health officials. For some reason. The article explains that after the CDC proudly announced the availability of covid vaccines for infants and toddlers, nothing happened:

And the American public responded — by not vaccinating their young children. This shows not only their skepticism of the need for the vaccine in those least likely to get sick, but also their lack of trust in the CDC writ large.

The article says that while 15% of kids 5-11 got the jab after that range was announced, only 3% of eligible kids 0-5 have been vaccinated. It’s not just the age range. Politico cited a Johns Hopkins vaccine expert who warned, “The distrust in government, the distrust in public health and the distrust in science is growing and is very, very worrisome.”

In an interview on Fox & Friends, Dr. Marty Makary, also of Johns Hopkins, said it even more directly: “Parents are not falling for it. After nearly a month of the government heavily pushing vaccines for kids under 5, only 3% have chosen to get their kids under 5 vaccinated. More parents believe in UFOs, I think.”

The article then spends several paragraphs musing darkly on the implications for the next pandemic or public health emergency if lots of people distrust the government health agencies. I’ve said this before: the path back to trust begins by confessing they lied, admitting that their lies caused enormous avoidable injuries, and accepting responsibility for the damage they’ve caused.

But, I’m not holding my breath or anything.

🔥 The Department of Justice rolled over Rubicon bridge sometime yesterday traveling at a brisk 60mph. The Washington Post reported it in an article headlined, “Justice Dept. Investigating Trump’s Actions in Jan. 6 Criminal Probe.”

The details are pretty thin, but a breathless WaPo excitedly reported that the DOJ’s January 6th grand jury — which, assembly-line-like, has been indicting grandmothers and firefighters for enhanced Capitol visits — is now questioning witnesses and asking very detailed questions about Trump and the people who worked with him.

One problem dogging the “prosecute Trump” contingent has always been, “for what?” Even the WaPo, at this late date, struggles to find a crime. It suggests two possibilities. The first crime could be seditious conspiracy — which requires the use of FORCE in a conspiracy to overthrow the government. The second could be regular ‘fraud,’ for trying to persuade different government officials to do things like withhold electors or say the election results were fraudulent.

Both possibilities are incredibly weak, from a legal point of view. There’s no “force” in the story except for the riot in the Capitol, which they’d have to prove Trump planned ahead of time to get him for conspiracy. Second, to prove fraud, it’s not enough to prove someone lied. You must also have a victim who relied on the false statement. It’s not at all clear who that victim might be.

As the WaPo noted, no former president has ever been charged with a crime in the country’s history. But n so-called ‘banana republics,’ it’s typical for incoming administrations to promptly begin criminally prosecuting the prior administration. So that’s where we’re headed, apparently.

In every previous heated political era, the DOJ has wisely chosen NOT to prosecute a former president. Today, the decision whether to prosecute Trump will be made by Merrick Garland, the same aging genius who recently green-lighted an investigation of soccer moms as seditionists for their “over-harsh” criticism school boards.

The drooling morons whipping the prosecutorial chariots forward are shredding long-standing tradition, standing since the founding of the country, on the weakest of crimes, while ignoring that all their own former presidents have long rap sheets of much more attractive potential crimes ripe for prosecution. It’s the goosey-gander rule. If the DOJ charges Trump, Merrick Garland will have shattered the glass wall, and it will be open season on former presidents. Oh, and open season on wives of former presidents. (I’m looking at you, Hilary.) And on kids (Hunter).

It’s obvious that Garland is under tremendous political pressure to prosecute. If Garland were smart, he’d thread the needle by leaking the existence of the investigation, conducting a bunch of annoying, intrusive, and very public discovery, then would finally decline to prosecute because of the difficulty of proving the alleged crimes. But Garland’s recent history in DOJ suggests he’s not smart. Not at all.

🔥 Yesterday, Dr. Simone Gold started her 60-day prison sentence for trespassing, on account of peacefully giving an anti-vaccine speech in the U.S. Capitol on January 6th before leaving immediately afterwards after being asked by police.

She’s concerned that her arrest and imprisonment will negatively affect the mission of America’s Frontline Doctors to provide Americans with real choice in their medical care. Should we multiply her to show support?

🔥 New York City’s Department of Health is on top of the monkeypox outbreak. Well, I mean, they’re getting all over it. What I mean is, they’re riding the monkeypox bull. They’re prying into every crack and crevice. You know what I mean.

💉 It only took them two years. The Hill featured an op-ed last week headlined, “Bad News: COVID-19 Numbers Are Pretty Meaningless.” Now, some of us were pointing out that the covid numbers were basically meaningless from sometime around May or June of 2020. But I digress.

It’s a total wipeout, none of the covid data is useful. The article explained:

The number of cases, test positivity, hospitalizations and deaths being reported by local and state health departments, the mainstream media and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have little meaning these days.

As if it were some kind of miraculous research that nobody ever thought of before, the story’s author says he did “a deep dive” to find out how many hospitalizations were “with” covid as opposed to “for” covid:

I and several colleagues recently took a deep dive into COVID hospitalization at the Los Angeles County public hospital. Among 462 COVID hospitalizations, only 32% required oxygen, the most basic therapy for COVID-19, suggesting that the other 68% were admitted for reasons other than COVID-19.

Great. Very smart. Oxygen use, that’s pretty simple. Now explain to me: why couldn’t they have done the EXACT SAME THING eighteen months ago? Please. I’ll wait. Take your time.

And, look at this remarkable bit of late discovery and revisionism:

Death counts are also an overestimate of deaths caused by COVID-19. There are various reasons why a positive COVID-19 test result might be added to a death certificate resulting in the reporting of COVID-19 related death in someone who only tested positive during their hospitalization because they were tested on admission.

Wait, what? Is this new? Or, was it ALWAYS true there were “various reasons” that a positive covid test result might be added to a death certificate, resulting in the reporting of a covid-related death even though the person didn’t die from covid?

The op-ed ends with this suggestion for moderation and perspective:

We should not be responding out of proportion to the severity of the epidemic. We should be focused on making sure vulnerable people have easy and timely access to effective treatment and investing in new vaccines that can truly prevent future infections.

Imagine that. If only we’d had this kind of intelligent, measured advice earlier in the pandemic, we could’ve avoided all that over-reaction and panic and stuff.

Thanks, experts!

Seriously though, how about we DON’T let them get away with oiling their way back into polite society this time?

🔥 Joe Biden excreted two videos yesterday to reassure everybody he’s back in the saddle after his covid infection. In the second video, he dumps on Trump, calling him a coward and insisting you can’t be an “insurrectionist” and also “pro democracy,” whatever that means. It’s anti-American:

Did you notice that in the clip, Biden never blinks? Not one time during the whole clip. Watching it again and try not to blink along with him. My eyes water every time I try. How does Biden do it? He’s not blinking OR squinting.

His unblinkiness seems to have started sometime yesterday — after his first video. Someone did a side-by-side comparison of both Biden videos, where he blinks in one but not in the other. He also did a wardrobe change between videos.

I don’t want to go down a rabbit hole here, but compare the two outfits. Blinkey Joe is better dressed than wide-eye Joe. You have to admit it’s weird.

💉 Uh-oh! The Daily Wire ran a story this morning headlined, “FDA Officials Warn Of Brain Swelling, Vision Loss In Minors Using Puberty Blockers.”

That’s not good for business.

The FDA’s officials said they’d identified a plausible association between puberty blockers and pseudotumor cerebri, which is similar to a brain tumor, in six girls aged 5 to 12.

The FDA’s analysis, dated July 1st, was first reported by the American Academy of Pediatrics in a story titled “Risk of pseudotumor cerebri added to labeling for gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists.”

Back in April, the Florida Department of Health created a firestorm of controversy by advising AGAINST pediatric transition treatment.

So.

🚀 The Washington Post ran a story yesterday headlined, “Russia to Withdraw from International Space Station.” That’s the whole story. The Russians announced they intend to discontinue their participation in the ISS after 2024, but will honor their commitments until that time. They’ll build their own space station, thanks.

🚀 Speaking of space news, the India Express ran a story yesterday headlined, “NASA On Building a Nuclear Reactor in Space and What’s Next.” The story explains that NASA awarded a grant to three companies to build small nuclear reactors for use on the moon (and beyond). Where it’s sunny all the time. No clouds.

So, in perfect solar-energy collecting conditions, NASA is opting for nuclear power over solar power. So. Weird.

🔥 More expert covid backtracking:

It occurred to me that the last time Fauci pulled something like this — during the AIDS era — there was no internet, no social media, and no permanent searchable video archive. In other words, the lying isn’t new; what’s new is how easy it is now to catch the lies.

Progress!

Have a wonderful Wednesday and I’ll see you all back here tomorrow for more.

Share

If you can, help me get the truth out and spread optimism and hope: https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/p/-learn-how-to-get-involved-

Twitter: @jchilders98
Truth Social: @jchilders98
MeWe: mewe.com/i/coffee_and_covid.
C&C Swag! www.shopcoffeeandcovid.com
Emailed Daily Newsletter: https://www.coffeeandcovid.com