Author: admin

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

This week marked the anniversary of one of the greatest political tricks in history: the disappearance of Hunter Biden scandal. 

New emails were released that added new details to what was a raw influence peddling operation that netted millions from foreign sources. A new tranche of emails connecting President Joe Biden to key accounts prove just how this political sleight of hand was worthy of Houdini. After all, Houdini only made an elephant disappear. The Bidens made the equivalent to an entire circus disappear in front of an audience of millions.

How Houdini made his 10,000 pound elephant Jennie disappear every night in New York’s Hippodrome remains a matter of some debate. There are no good pictures of his famous cabinet and Houdini later threatened to sue those claiming “disappearing elephants.”  What is clear is that the sheer size and the audacity of the act (like that of the Bidens) contributed to the trick. The fact is that Jennie never left the large cabinet, people just didn’t see it.

The Bidens achieved the same effect. They made a full-sized scandal disappear with the help of media and members who did not want the public to see it.  Twitter banned postings about the laptop until after Biden was elected. The media dismissed the story as a conspiracy theory with some mocking the “New York Post and everyone else who got suckered into the ridiculous Hunter Biden Laptop story. Take a bow.”

Committee Chairman Adam Schiff assured that public that “this whole smear on Joe Biden comes from the Kremlin.”

Some 50 former intelligence officials, including Obama’s CIA directors John Brennan and Leon Panetta, also insisted the laptop story was likely the work of Russian intelligence.

The laptop is, of course, now recognized as genuine even by some of the early deniers. Hunter remains under criminal investigation for possible tax and money laundering violations. But the greatest “reveal” is the person referred to as “the Big Guy” and “Celtic” in these emails: President Biden.

Recently released emails reference payments to President Biden from son’s accounts and indicate the possible commingling of funds.  Even more embarrassing, the shared account may have been used to pay a Russian prostitute named “Yanna.” In one text, a former secret service agent warns Hunter (who was holed up with a prostitute in an expensive hotel) “Come on H this is linked to Celtic’s account.”

The question is whether prosecutors will continue to act like they do not see the elephant. Consider these established facts:

• First, it is widely believed that Hunter Biden and his uncle James Biden, received millions in influence peddling. For his part, Hunter only had influence and access to sell. He admits that he was a crack addict and alcoholic all the way up to the start of his father’s presidential campaign — in his words, “Drinking a quart of vodka a day by yourself in a room is absolutely, completely debilitating,” as well as “smoking crack around the clock.”

• Second, Joe Biden has continued to deny knowledge or involvement in these foreign dealings and those denials are now directly contradicted by emails and witnesses. Hunter himself contradicted his father’s repeated denials. Likewise, a key business associate of Hunter Biden, Anthony Bobulinski, directly accused Joe Biden of lying about his involvement. Bobulinski has detailed a meeting with Joe Biden in a hotel to go over the dealings. Past emails included discussions of offering access to then-Vice President Biden. They also include alleged payments to Joe Biden. In one email, there is a discussion of a proposed equity split of “20” for “H” and “10 held by H for the big guy?” Bobulinski confirmed that “H” was used for Hunter Biden and that his father was routinely called “the big guy” in these discussions.

• Third, while he was vice president, Joe Biden allowed Hunter to fly on Air Force 2 to countries like China where he was seeking millions. He also met with Hunter’s foreign business associates. In 2015, a State Department official flagged the possible conflicts from Hunter’s dealings during the Obama Administration.

• Fourth, new emails suggest a commingling of funds between Hunter and his father. Emails from Eric Schwerin, his business partner at the Rosemont Seneca consultancy, refer to the payment of household bills for both Joe Biden and Hunter Biden. He also notes that he was transferring money from Joe Biden. Rosemont Seneca is directly involved in the alleged influence peddling schemes and questionable money transfers from Chinese and Russian sources.

• Finally, Hunter himself admitted that his missing computers files may have been stolen by foreign agents for blackmail purposes. Hunter’s emails claim one of his laptops may have been stolen by Russian agents after a drug and alcohol binge with prostitutes.

Given the ongoing criminal prosecution, that would seem an ample basis for the appointment of a special counsel. The President is mentioned repeatedly in emails and by witnesses in relation to influence peddling schemes and even receiving funds from shared accounts. He has also denied knowledge that key witnesses refute, including his son.

Influence peddling is common in Washington and can be done legally. Yet, it has also been the subject of intense criminal investigations. For example, the FBI raided the home of Trump counsel Rudolph Giuliani and others based on allegations of influence peddling in an ongoing criminal investigation. The Justice Department wants to know if Giuliani secured contracts in exchange for access or influence. The media gleefully recounted the raids and how Giuliani may have cashed in on his access.

It seems that the illusion depends on the specific elephant.

Houdini once said that “It is still an open question . . . as to what extent exposure really injures a performer.” The same question can be asked about a politician. President Biden is in full display in these emails. The question is whether the public – or the prosecutors – want to see him.

US restaurant chain Caribou Coffee Co. is panic hoarding coffee beans as a global supply deficit grips the world and fuels inflation. 

“We continue to increase safety stock on key items,” CEO John Butcher told Bloomberg. Besides coffee beans, he said the company is loading up on cups, lids, packaging, chocolate, and anything that comes to mind as supply chains remain snarled. 

Butcher said, “my gut tells me to hope for the best and to prepare for the worst. I personally don’t see any reason to believe that supply-chain disruptions are going to go away anytime soon.”

“Everybody is in the same boat: They’re hopeful that things will improve by the end of 2022. But for now, we have to prepare as though they won’t,” he said. 

Caribou, now part of Panera Brands, has approximately 450 US locations and plans to expand its franchising program in 2022. However, an emerging global supply deficit of arabica coffee beans (something we first warned in March and later explained in May), disruptions of logistical networks around the world, caused by container shortages and port congestion, will continue to elevate coffee prices higher for longer.

Arabica coffee prices have soared to fresh decade highs this week, as news of the global supply deficit paints a grim outlook for 2022. Some of the deficit originated in Brazil, one of the world’s top coffee producers, as droughts and frosts crushed crops. 

“We believe in a deficit of around four million bags, other analysts see it as high as seven million bags,” Carlos Mera, head of Rabobank’s commodities desk, wrote, adding that exports from Brazil and other top producing countries are slowing. 

If Caribou is panic buying coffee beans, imagine what Starbucks are other larger chains have been doing… 

Via Greg Hunter’s USAWatchdog.com,

Award winning journalist Alex Newman says, “The Deep State globalists cannot stop the “unprecedented awakening going on in America.” 

Newman, who wrote the popular book called “Deep State: The Invisible Government Behind the Scenes,” explains, “Everybody knows that the press is lying…”

”  Nobody believes the press anymore.  ‘Let’s go Brandon.’  Everybody knows this is absolutely absurd.  The point is not to make people believe these absurdities anymore.  The point now is to demoralize people and to really silence us.  That’s what’s going on with sicking the FBI and DOJ on parents complaining about hate being taught to their children, and that’s what’s going on with the propaganda…

They want to silence us.  They want to intimidate us.  They want to bully us, and they want to terrorize us into staying quite…

AG Garland said all these parents are intimidating and harassing school boards.  What could be more intimidating than sicking one of the world’s most powerful law enforcement agency on parents expressing their concern?  I can’t think of more things that would be more intimidating than that.  So, the irony is off the charts, but the goal here is to silence people into submission.”

Newman says the threats and bullying are backfiring and is not working in the least.  There is good news, and Newman explains,

“They trot out these people to demoralize us and to scare us and make us think that everything is over.  Just keep your head down and comply, but it’s not working. 

It is absolutely not working. 

We have an awakening going on in this country… there’s an awakening that is happening here that is unprecedented in the modern history of this country.  It is such good news, but now we are in a race against time.  They are trying to collapse the supply chain and trying to implode everything before enough people wake up and do something about it.”

Newman points out that since 2016, the Deep State has been losing the narrative and losing badly.  Newman explains,

“The entire propaganda machine was non-stop bombarding Americans with anti-Trump propaganda, and Americans went to the polls.  Even with all the voter fraud in 2016, Trump still won in an Electoral College landslide.  That’s how much they have lost control of the narrative. 

They thought by shadow banning us and rigging their algorithms, people should not come across our information.  That failed, and that’s why they had to ban you.  This is why they had to ban thousands of top content creators that were making huge amounts of money for them. 

They have lost total control of the narrative, and they are left with what can they blow up and what can they do to scare us?  What can they do to make us think we are all alone, and that’s exactly what we are seeing right now, and it is crystal clear.  I think everybody should be able to see this at this point.”

In closing, Newman points out how weak the Deep State really is and says, “Their entire narrative is based on lies, deception, trickery and intrigue...”

”  When you examine it closely, it all falls apart.  It’s true with the clot shots.  It’s true with the mandates.  It’s true with the schools.  It’s true with the courts, and it’s true with everything that they are doing.  They have to rely on lies.  The Bible says the devil is the father of lies.”

Join Greg Hunter of USAWatchdog.com as he goes One-on-One with award winning journalist Alex Newman, founder of LibertySentinel.org and author of the recent popular book “Deep State.” (10/16/21)

(There is much more in the 38 min. video interview.)

To Donate to USAWatchdog.com Click Here

For a copy of Alex Newman’s popular book “Deep State” click here. For a copy of Alex Newman’s popular book “Crimes of the Educators” Click here.  (Please support the truth tellers!!) Newman also has his own website called LibertySentinel.org. There is lots of free information and articles there.

Unsurprisingly, some influential Senate Democrats are getting cold feet about the prospect of President Biden nominating Saule Omarova to lead the OCC. The  Cornell law professor educated in the USSR who has proposed that the Fed take over most retail banking activities from the private sector (which a Fedcoin – or ZuckCoin – just might help it to do) while wholeheartedly supporting the progressives’ “Green New Deal” agenda.

This has, understandably, made many in both Congress, and the industry she is about to regulate, uncomfortable.

As we have reported, Omarova has previously favorably compared  the USSR to the US – at least when it comes to the “gender pay gap”.

“Until I came to the US, I couldn’t imagine that things like gender pay gap still existed in today’s world. Say what you will about old USSR, there was no gender pay gap there. Market doesn’t always ‘know best,’” Omarova tweeted in 2019, adding (after receiving harsh criticism) “I never claimed women and men were treated absolutely equally in every facet of Soviet life. But people’s salaries were set (by the state) in a gender-blind manner. And all women got very generous maternity benefits. Both things are still a pipe dream in our society!”

Additionally, as the Wall Street Journal editorial board notes, “Ms. Omarova thinks asset prices, pay scales, capital and credit should be dictated by the federal government. In two papers, she has advocated expanding the Federal Reserve’s mandate to include the price levels of “systemically important financial assets” as well as worker wages. As they like to say at the modern university, from each according to her ability to each according to her needs.”

In a recent paper “The People’s Ledger,” she proposed that the Federal Reserve take over consumer bank deposits, “effectively ‘end banking,’ as we know it,” and become “the ultimate public platform for generating, modulating, and allocating financial resources in a modern economy.” She’d also like the U.S. to create a central bank digital currency—as Venezuela and China are doing—to “redesign our financial system & turn Fed’s balance sheet into a true ‘People’s Ledger,’” she tweeted this summer. What could possibly go wrong? -WSJ

Omarova also wants to create a “Public Interest Council” of “highly paid” academics who would wield subpoena power over regulatory agencies, including the Fed.

But President Biden has put these concerns aside and said he plans to nominate Omarova, though he has yet to make it official. Many speculate her nomination is mostly a sop to the party’s progressive wing, since even Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen opposes her nomination.

But according to a report published Wednesday by CNBC, Omarova’s nomination is running into resistance in the Senate, including among key Democratic members of the committee that must approve her nomination before it goes before the entire Senate.

Senate Democrats are fractured over whether to support Saule Omarova, Biden’s indicated choice to lead the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, jeopardizing her candidacy.

Any Democratic defection, or an indication of such, could force Senate leadership to scrap the nomination before putting Omarova up to a vote.

According to CNBC’s main source (who remains anonymous) is that these Senators have already shared their misgivings with President Biden.

Her selection, coupled with her views on how to overhaul the US banking system, prompted several Senate Democrats or their staff to complain to the White House and suggest that the president’s choice will be tough to support on Capitol Hill, according to a person familiar with the matter.

This person declined to be named in order to speak openly about private discussions between the White House and Senate offices.

Others surrounding the OCC nomination process said a handful of moderate Democrats harbor reservations about Omarova and her aspirations to “end banking as we know it,” as she suggested in a Vanderbilt Law Review article.

Those people cautioned that skeptical senators likely haven’t made a final decision yet but are leaning against her candidacy.

But it’s not just the whispers of anonymized sources from the Hill suggesting that the nomination of what would be America’s first formerly Communist chief of the OCC (Saule once earned a “Lenin” award back in the USSR, which has favorably compared to the US in at least one notable instance) is in trouble. Sen. Jon Tester of Montana, a critical red state Democrat and community banking champion, told CNBC that he’s having second thoughts – though he didn’t say he opposes the nomination.

Sen. Jon Tester of Montana told CNBC on Tuesday that he has “concerns about Omarova’s candidacy. Tester, known in the Senate as a champion of community banks, did not indicate whether he opposes her outright.

“Some of Ms. Omarova’s past statements about the role of government in the financial system raise concerns about her ability to impartially serve at the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency,” he said. “I’m looking forward to meeting with her to discuss them.”

Tester, a moderate member of the Senate banking committee, would also vote on whether to recommend Omarova to the broader chamber. A representative for Sen. Mark Warner, another moderate on the banking committee, said the Virginia Democrat has not yet made a decision on whether to support Omarova.

Of course, Senate progressives like Sherrod Brown of Ohio still full-throatedly back Saule’s nomination.

The office of banking committee Chairman Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, a fierce advocate of Omarova’s, reiterated its support for Biden’s pick.

“Senator Brown and the White House continue to push back against Republicans’ misleading statements against Ms. Omarova’s character and policy positions,” a spokesperson said.

The White House continues to support Omarova’s nomination, an official said.

In a sign of how little the leadership wants to deal with this right now, with so many other Democratic priorities being hammered out, including Biden’s entire domestic agenda, when approached by CNBC, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer refused to even return their request for comment.

At the very least, the takeaway from all of this is that even if Omarova’s nomination isn’t already dead in the water, the Dems won’t have the bandwidth to deal with a high-profile nomination fight until next year.

Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

According to a report from Israel’s Channel 12, the Israeli government approved a $1.5 billion budget to prepare for a potential attack on Iran.

The extra funds would be used to purchase additional aircraft, surveillance drones, and the munitions needed to strike Iran’s underground nuclear facilities. The report said about $620 million would come from the 2022 military budget, and the rest of the funds would come from this year’s budget.

For years, Israel has been seeking bunker-busting bombs that could penetrate Iran’s underground facilities. If they did acquire the munitions, Israel would also need bombers capable of carrying them, something it currently doesn’t have.

The US tested a new 5,000-pound bunker buster earlier this month, which Israeli media interpreted as a possible message to Iran.

In July, it was reported that the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) requested additional funds for next year’s budget to prepare for operations against Iran. Throughout the year, IDF Chief of Staff Aviv Kohavi has repeatedly said the IDF is “accelerating” plans to strike Iran, and Israeli politicians have constantly been threatening the Islamic Republic.

Israel frequently carries out covert attacks against Iran’s civilian nuclear program, but the IDF planning suggests an overt operation could happen in the future. The US has joined Israel in issuing threats against Iran.

Footage of US “bunker buster” bomb being tested…

#BREAKING Among the agreements that will be signed between USA and Israel is to supply Israel with the GBU-57A/B Massive Ordnance Penetrator is a precision-guided, 30,000-pound “bunker buster” bomb used by the United States Air Force. #OSINT pic.twitter.com/JqczTbMt91

— INTELSky (@Intel_Sky) October 28, 2020

Last week, Secretary of State Antony Blinken hinted at military action against Iran alongside Israeli Foreign Minister Yair Lapid. Blinken said if diplomacy with Iran fails, the US will turn to “other options.”

Lapid made clear that one of Blinken’s “options” was military action. “I would like to start by repeating what the Secretary of State just said. Yes, other options are going to be on the table if diplomacy fails.  And by saying other options, I think everybody understands here … what is it that we mean,” Lapid said.

It’s becoming impossible to ignore just how unprepared the Biden administration is in tackling the current shipping crisis and its impact on domestic supply chains and state economies. A significant backlog of container ships continues to pile up at Los Angeles and Long Beach ports, even though President Biden issued a directive last week to keep both ports, which account for 40% of all shipping containers entering the U.S., operating on a 24/7 basis. Now the administration is so desperate that they’re weighing the use of the National Guard to alleviate stretched supply chains so that Americans will hopefully get their consumer goods before the holidays, according to AP News. 

Our global supply chain bottleneck, in one photo. (Port of Los Angeles from the air today) pic.twitter.com/GwefRNf0HF

— Jim Sciutto (@jimsciutto) October 19, 2021

With a record 97 container ships at anchor across the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, congestion at the nation’s top ports worsens. To alleviate bottlenecks threatening the holiday shopping season, the White House released a directive last week advising both ports to operate on a 24/7 basis to counter the backlog. For some context, the ports typically have 17 ships at anchor in pre-pandemic times, so with 97, it only suggests Biden’s plan is “too little too late,” explained one U.S. importer of toys. 

The administration is searching for other ideas to alleviate port congestion. According to WaPo, citing three sources, Biden’s team has explored whether deploying the National Guard at the ports would quell overwhelmed supply chains. 

One source said the administration has not considered activating the National Guard at a federal level but could soon deploy Guardsmen on a state level. They may take a page out from the U.K. when they deployed troops to resolve gas shortages last month. What’s likely to happen are Guardsmen with licenses to operate heavy machinery or trucks could be deployed.

Much of the port congestion is due to the relentless, fiscally stimulated demand for (made in China) products by Americans, all thanks to the government handing out hundreds of billions of dollars in stimulus checks. Labor shortages at ports have also been another issue, which originated when the Biden administration began paying people more money to sit on their couches than work. 

A.P. notes that a trade group representing clothing manufacturers has requested the National Guard or even naval ports to unload cargo.

Authored by David Henderson and Charles Hopper via The American Institute for Economic Research,

On July 28, the Wall Street Journal ran our article “Why Is the FDA Attacking a Safe, Effective Drug?”

In it, we outlined the potential value of the antiparasitic drug ivermectin for Covid-19, and we questioned the FDA’s vigorous attack on ivermectin. Many people praised us and many criticized us. We had clearly covered a sensitive subject. It didn’t help that one of the studies we referenced was retracted the day our article was published. Within hours of learning that fact, we sent a mea culpa to the Journal’s editors. They acted quickly, adding a note at the end of the electronic version and publishing our letter. It’s important to address two criticisms of our work. The first is that we exaggerated the FDA’s warning on ivermectin. The second is that Merck’s stance on ivermectin proved that even the company that developed ivermectin thought that it doesn’t work for Covid-19.

First, we didn’t exaggerate the FDA’s warning on ivermectin.

Instead, the agency changed its website after our article was published, probably to reflect the points we made.

Second, Merck had two incentives to downplay ivermectin’s usefulness against the novel coronavirus.

We’ll explain both points more fully.

Ivermectin was developed and marketed by Merck & Co. while one of us (Hooper) worked there years ago. Dr. William C. Campbell and Professor Satoshi Omura were awarded the 2015 Nobel Prize for Physiology or Medicine. They earned it for discovering and developing avermectin. Later Campbell and some associates modified avermectin to create ivermectin. Merck & Co. has donated four billion doses of ivermectin to prevent river blindness and other diseases in areas of the world, such as Africa, where parasites are common. The ten doctors who are in the Front Line Covid-19 Critical Care Alliance call ivermectin “one of the safest, low-cost, and widely available drugs in the history of medicine.” Ivermectin is on the WHO’s List of Essential Medicines and ivermectin has been used safely in pregnant women, children, and infants.

Ivermectin is an antiparasitic, but it has shown, in cell cultures in laboratories, the ability to destroy 21 viruses, including SARS-CoV-2, the cause of Covid-19. Further, ivermectin has demonstrated its potential in clinical trials for the treatment of Covid-19 and in large-scale population studies for the prevention of Covid-19.

Contradicting these positive results, the FDA issued a special statement warning that “you should not use ivermectin to treat or prevent Covid-19.” The FDA’s warning, which included language such as, “serious harm,” “hospitalized,” “dangerous,” “very dangerous,” “seizures,” “coma and even death,” and “highly toxic,” might suggest that the FDA was warning against pills laced with poison. In fact, the FDA had already approved the drug years ago as a safe and effective anti-parasitic. Why would it suddenly become dangerous if used to treat Covid-19? Further, the FDA claimed, with no scientific basis, that ivermectin is not an antiviral, notwithstanding its proven antiviral activity.

Interestingly, at the bottom of the FDA’s strong warning against ivermectin was this statement: “Meanwhile, effective ways to limit the spread of COVID-19 continue to be to wear your mask, stay at least 6 feet from others who don’t live with you, wash hands frequently, and avoid crowds.” Was this based on the kinds of double-blind studies that the FDA requires for drug approvals? No.

After some critics claimed that we overstated or overreacted to the FDA’s special warning, we reviewed the FDA’s website and found that it had been changed, and there was no mention of the changes nor any reason given. Overall, the warnings were watered down and clarified. We noticed the following changes:

• The false statement that “Ivermectin is not an anti-viral (a drug for treating viruses)” was removed.

• “Taking a drug for an unapproved use can be very dangerous. This is true of ivermectin, too” was changed to the less alarming “Ivermectin has not been shown to be safe or effective for these indications.” (Indications is the official term used in the industry to denote new uses for a drug, such as new diseases or conditions, and/or new patient populations.)

• The statement, “If you have a prescription for ivermectin for an FDA-approved use, get it from a legitimate source and take it exactly as prescribed,” was changed to, “If your health care provider writes you an ivermectin prescription, fill it through a legitimate source such as a pharmacy, and take it exactly as prescribed.” This more clearly acknowledges that reasonable physicians may prescribe ivermectin for non-FDA-approved uses, such as Covid-19.

• The ending statement about masks, spacing, hand washing, and avoiding crowds was replaced with one that recommended getting vaccinated and following CDC guidelines.

• The reasonable statement “Talk to your health care provider about available COVID-19 vaccines and treatment options. Your provider can help determine the best option for you, based on your health history” was added at the end.

The new warning from the FDA is more correct and less alarming than the previous one.

In a statement from February, Merck, the company that originated and still sells ivermectin, agreed with the FDA that ivermectin should not be used for Covid-19.

“We do not believe that the data available support the safety and efficacy of ivermectin beyond the doses and populations indicated in the regulatory agency-approved prescribing information.”

To some, this appeared to be a smoking gun. Merck wants to make money, they reason, and people are interested in using ivermectin for Covid-19, therefore, Merck would warn against such usage only if the scientific evidence were overwhelming. But that’s not how the pharmaceutical industry works.

Here’s how the FDA-regulated pharmaceutical industry really works.

The FDA judges all drugs as guilty until proven, to the FDA’s satisfaction, both safe and efficacious. By what process does this happen? The FDA waits for a deep-pocketed sponsor to present a comprehensive package that justifies the approval of a new drug or a new use of an existing drug. For a drug like ivermectin, long since generic, a sponsor may never show up. The reason is not that the drug is ineffective; rather, the reason is that any expenditures used to secure approval for that new use will help other generic manufacturers that haven’t invested a dime. Due to generic drug substitution rules at pharmacies, Merck could spend millions of dollars to get a Covid-19 indication for ivermectin and then effectively get zero return. What company would ever make that investment?

With no sponsor, there is no new FDA-approved indication and, therefore, no official recognition of ivermectin’s value. Was the FDA’s warning against ivermectin based on science? No. It was based on process. Like a typical bureaucrat, the FDA won’t recommend the use of ivermectin because, while it might help patients, such a recommendation would violate its processes. The FDA needs boxes checked off in the right order. If a sponsor never shows up and the boxes aren’t checked off, the FDA’s standard approach is to tell Americans to stay away from the drug because it might be dangerous or ineffective. Sometimes the FDA is too enthusiastic and these warnings are, frankly, alarming. Guilty until proven innocent.

There are two reasons that Merck would warn against ivermectin usage, essentially throwing its own drug under the bus.

Once they are marketed, doctors can prescribe drugs for uses not specifically approved by the FDA. Such usage is called off-label. Using ivermectin for Covid-19 is considered off-label because that use is not specifically listed on ivermectin’s FDA-approved label.

While off-label prescribing is widespread and completely legal, it is illegal for a pharmaceutical company to promote that use. Doctors can use drugs for off-label uses and drug companies can supply them with product. But heaven forbid that companies encourage, support, or promote off-label prescribing. The fines for doing so are outrageous. During a particularly vigorous two-year period, the Justice Department collected over $6 billion from drug companies for off-label promotion cases. Merck’s lawyers haven’t forgotten that lesson.

Another reason for Merck to discount ivermectin’s efficacy is a result of marketing strategy. Ivermectin is an old, cheap, off-patent drug. Merck will never make much money from ivermectin sales.

Drug companies aren’t looking to spruce up last year’s winners; they want new winners with long patent lives.

Not coincidentally, Merck recently released the clinical results for its new Covid-19 fighter, molnupiravir, which has shown a 50% reduction in the risk of hospitalization and death among high-risk, unvaccinated adults. Analysts are predicting multi-billion-dollar sales for molnupiravir.

While we can all be happy that Merck has developed a new therapeutic that can keep us safe from the ravages of Covid-19, we should realize that the FDA’s rules give companies an incentive to focus on newer drugs while ignoring older ones. Ivermectin may or may not be a miracle drug for Covid-19. The FDA doesn’t want us to learn the truth.

The FDA spreads lies and alarms Americans while preventing drug companies from providing us with scientific explorations of existing, promising, generic drugs.

Cities across Russia appear to be heading into lockdown again, despite the Sputnik V vaccine having been the world’s first to have rolled out last year, and with at this point an estimated one-third of the population being fully vaccinated. Yet this week has witnessed new daily record highs as confirmed coronavirus cases surge once again. 

Tuesday witnessed the highest single-day death toll thus far in the pandemic, with 1,038 deaths from the virus recorded, according to the AP. President Vladimir Putin announced on Wednesday an almost unprecedented order for all workers across the nation to stay home for one week. In some hard-hit cities, the mandate could reach up to two weeks. However, authorities have stopped short of imposing a full-fledged national lockdown.

During Wednesday statements, Russian health authorities reported 34,073 new coronavirus cases over the prior 24 hours, a new daily high.

The work stoppage plan was initially proposed by Putin’s Cabinet – which the president is now backing – to take effect October 30, and going through the first week of November.

“Our task today is to protect life and health of our citizens and minimize the consequences of the dangerous infection,” Putin said in a video call with officials Wednesday, The Associated Press reported. 

“To achieve that, it’s necessary to first of all slow the pace of contagion and mobilize additional reserves of the health care system, which is currently working under a high strain,” he added.

Putin further expressed frustrations with the course the pandemic is taking, after the vaccine has long been available to all seeking it: “I can’t understand what’s going on,” he said. “We have a reliable and efficient vaccine. The vaccine really reduces the risks of illness, grave complications and death.”

“There are only two ways to get over this period — to get sick or to receive a vaccine,” Putin said. “It’s better to get the vaccine, why wait for the illness and its grave consequences? Please be responsible and take the necessary measures to protect yourself, your health and your close ones.”

Graphs via Moscow Times

Reports estimate that about 45 million Russians are fully vaccinated, which constitutes 32% of the total population of 146 million. According to France24, there continues to be widespread hesitancy based on “mixed signals” from government authorities, akin to the kind of confusion and contradictory messaging seen in the United States and other parts of the globe:

Even though Russia in August 2020 became the first country of the world to authorize a coronavirus vaccine and vaccines are plentiful, Russians have shown hesitancy about getting the shots, a skepticism blamed on conflicting signals sent by authorities.

While extolling Sputnik V and three other domestic vaccines, state-controlled media were often critical of Western-made shots, a controversial message that many saw as feeding public doubts about vaccines in general.

Below are some further details on the recent Covid developments in Russia, via The Moscow Times:

• President Vladimir Putin announced a non-working week in Russia from Oct. 30-Nov. 7. Putin pleaded with Russians to get vaccinated and said the public holidays could be extended further if cases do not start to fall.
• Moscow will go into a strict lockdown if coronavirus infections continue to rise, according to a Moscow government order that was sent to businesses in the city Wednesday.
• Moscow’s mayor announced Tuesday plans to reintroduce remote work, mandatory vaccinations for service workers and other measures to slow the surging fourth wave of the coronavirus pandemic starting next week.
• Nationwide, 87% of hospital beds reserved for coronavirus patients are occupied, Deputy Prime Minister Tatiana Golikova said Wednesday in a televised meeting with President Vladimir Putin.

While Putin’s nationwide one week work furlough is being described as an “order” – it’s unclear to what degree it will be legally enforced, or met with penalties should some offices and companies stay open for their workforce. 

Authored by Vanessa Serna via The Epoch Times,

San Francisco’s leniency on drugs is filling the street with lawlessness, according to the mom of a 32-year-old drug addict, who’s urging policymakers to enforce stricter laws that criminalize drug use and sales in the city.

“[Police] are on the streets and they’re not arresting anybody and the dealers are selling right in front of them,” Jacqui Berlinn said in an interview with California Insider, a show with The Epoch Times.

“They allow the addicts to use in front of other people… Other people who live there can openly see the addict’s using needles and smoking … acting out in the ways that are harmful to them or the public.”

Berlinn said her son is suffering from a fentanyl addiction, which has left him homeless and physically bent at a 45-degree angle.

“A lot of people say, you have to let him hit rock bottom,” Berlinn said.

“My son’s rock bottom I believe is death. Right now, he needs to be coerced to get help because his fear of the withdrawals from this drug are so great.”

Berlinn’s son was introduced to drugs as a teenager and he became addicted after suffering from anxiety and depression.

Nowadays, Berlinn’s son wanders the streets between Oakland and San Francisco’s Tenderloin neighborhood since drugs are more accessible there.

In the past, Berlinn traveled throughout the Tenderloin neighborhood in search of her son, and she described the area as a “zombie apocalypse” with drug dealers on the corners of the street accompanied by homeless drug addicts.

Despite selling and consuming drugs in public, Berlinn has noticed police officers in the area allowed the lawlessness on the streets to continue.

“I feel like they’re enabling these people to commit a slow suicide,” Berlinn said.

“The people that are there that are homeless and addicted are being preyed upon and they are deteriorating slowly. It’s a slow death. They’re out in the elements. Many of them have open sores and they’re in bondage to these drugs and San Francisco particularly helps keep them in that situation by not prosecuting the drug dealers, by allowing the open-air drug scenes.”

Berlinn once reported to police a naked homeless man in plain sight.

Police stated there was not anything they could do, as people were frequently naked in the area, she said.

Amid witnessing the drug crisis in San Francisco, Berlinn called for a statewide initiative to treat mental illnesses, rather than a county-by-county approach, stating homeless drug addicts come to San Francisco due to the “hands-off, live and let live policy.”

According to Berlinn, Proposition 4 – a law that changed some lower-level crimes from felonies to misdemeanors – and other state laws has led to fewer arrests for carrying small amounts of drugs and shoplifting.

The last time of his arrest, Berlinn’s son expressed his desire to get sober. He made a call to check into a rehabilitation center but was turned away due to a lack of availability.

Temporarily, he was sent to a transitional sober living home outside of San Francisco where he eventually turned back to drugs.

The transitional sober living home offered no mental health services while allowing him to come and go as he pleased, Berlinn said.

Her son has shared that some addicts who’ve lived in the housing with no support services have overdosed while alone and nobody knew or was around to revive them.

“His greatest fear is detoxing from fentanyl because it’s supposed to be incredibly horrible,” she said. “He could even die from it if he’s not getting help and being monitored.”

Berlinn described the homeless drug addicts as people’s family members and loved ones who are trapped.

“They’re definitely not cracking down on these open-air drug scenes,” Berlinn said. “They’re allowing it to flourish and the solution I hear is safe injection sites. My son says that then there’ll just be more people like him on the street because they’re just making it easier to be a drug addict. They’re normalizing drug addiction.”

Late into the evening local time on Wednesday, a remote American military outpost in eastern Syria came under attack by unknown militants. 

So far the Pentagon is indicating that there are no American casualties or injuries during what appears to have been a sophisticated attack, given the presence of foreign drones overhead along with a ground assault.

It happened at the al-Tanf base in Syria’s far eastern desert along the Iraqi border, which has had a significant US presence since at least 2016. Tanf is the furthermost southerly US garrison in that region, given most American forward operating bases are in Syria northeast. 

The Associated Press has cited a US defense official who gave the following sparse details:

The official said the attack appeared to include at least one drone strike and possibly groundfire. It was not yet clear who carried out the attack.

US and coalition troops are based at the al-Tanf garrison to train local Syrian opposition forces on patrols to counter Islamic State militants.

Additionally, “The official said there was no information on whether local forces were injured or killed in the attack.” Reports suggest the UAV may have been a suicide drone.

Confirmed

Drone attack on US troops in Al Tanf, Syria.
Local sources claim multiple drones were involved in tonight’s attack. “Some coming from Iraq-Syria border”
Military sources at the moment though say only a suicide drone targeted the base.

— Nafiseh Kohnavard (@nafisehkBBC) October 20, 2021

Likely, Washington will point fingers at Iran-backed militias operating in the Iraq-Syria border region, given US forces have previously attacked militia garrisons on both sides of the Border, including two major strikes ordered by President Joe Biden earlier this year.

There’s also the possibility that pro-Assad forces carried out this fresh attack on Tanf; however, it was unlikely carried out directly by the Syrian Army, given it would easily invite direct US retaliation on Damascus. The attack further comes after Israel has stepped up its airstrikes inside Syria, which Tel Aviv has consistently said is toward disrupting pro-Iranian forces and their operations in the Levant region.