Judge Boasberg: The Clinesmith Lies Don't Matter

Judge Boasberg’s “Sentencing” of Kevin Clinesmith Betrayed Us All.

The sentencing hearing of Kevin Clinesmith, the former FBI lawyer who pleaded guilty to altering a CIA e-mail to further the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant renewal on Carter Page, took place on the morning of Friday, January 21 before Judge Boasberg in Washington, D.C.

This hearing was the culmination of an investigation by those within the Department of Justice who actually sought to do justice in exposing the FBI’s misconduct in opening Crossfire Hurricane, and the FBI’s abuse of their power to spy on Carter Page and those associated with the Trump campaign. While the process continues with Special Counsel John Durham’s investigation, this was one loose end that was ready to be tied.

Those demanding Clinesmith to be incarcerated weren’t being unreasonable, though they were ultimately disappointed when Judge Boasberg sentenced Clinesmith to 12 months probation and no prison time. In fact, they have every right to be angry.

Background

As an FBI lawyer, Clinesmith was providing support to the FBI in their third FISA renewal against Carter Page. He acted as an intermediary between the FBI and the CIA, tasked in the summer of 2017 to determine whether Page had ever been a “source” for the CIA.

Clinesmith’s assignment was particularly important. Before the submission of the third FISA renewal (which was ultimately filed on June 29, 2017), Page publicly stated on May 11, 2017 on MSNBC that he had “helped both the FBI and the CIA” in the past.

The FBI had a problem if Carter Page was a CIA source. The FISA Court, which approved the initial Page FISA warrant and two subsequent renewals, requires the disclosure of material facts. Under the FISA Court’s Local Rule 13(a), if material facts are discovered after an application is approved, the government must immediately inform the Judge of the omission, make any necessary corrections, explain why the information was omitted, and generally explain how to proceed in light of the new information.

The necessity of these rules goes to the nature of the FISA Court. It is a secret court in which the government does not face an adverse party. This creates a “heightened duty of candor” so a Judge can be fully informed on his probable cause findings and to “provide an external check on executive branch decisions to conduct surveillance in order to protect the fourth amendment rights of U.S. persons.”

Whether Carter Page was a CIA source was certainly a “material fact.” Clinesmith knew as much, as he later admitted in an internal FBI discussion that the information would need to be provided to the court. It would explain Carter Page’s contacts with Russian nationals. It would suggest that he might not be an agent of Russia. It would go to the loyalties of Carter Page.

Moreover, it would potentially lead the FISA Court to look deeper into the veracity of the information the FBI and DOJ had presented to the Court in its efforts to seek the warrant against Page. The FBI didn’t want skepticism of their representations – they wanted acceptance without question.

This leads us back to the conduct in question before Judge Boasberg. There was no dispute that Clinesmith altered an e-mail he received from the CIA to state that Page was “not a source.” As explained in the government’s Criminal Information:

Judge Boasberg Opts for Leniency

Clinesmith, in his bid to escape incarceration and salvage his career prospects, argued he “did not knowingly lie about the relationship between [Carter Page] and the [CIA].”

He called his action a “performance failure during a time of tremendous stress.” He even had the nerve to suggest that by describing Carter Page as a “subsource” and not a “source,” he actually “invited additional scrutiny from his colleagues” as to Carter Page’s relationship with the CIA.

These were weak excuses by Clinesmith. But they worked on Judge Boasberg, who sentenced Clinesmith (against government recommendations of incarceration) to 12 months of probation and 400 hours community service. He was given no fines and no time in jail.

Judge Boasberg explained his reasoning:

“My view of the evidence is that Mr. Clinesmith likely believed that what he said about Mr. Page was true.”

This was a remarkably naïve statement by the Judge. “The evidence.” What evidence?

As the government noted in a motion before sentencing, there was no evidence that anyone ever told Clinesmith that Carter Page was a “subsource of a source rather than a source.”

Additionally, Clinesmith had been seen doubling-down on his efforts in a message to an FBI Supervisory Special Agent, where he lied that the CIA explicitly said Carter Page “was never a source.”

And do you see that part above where Clinesmith says “at least we don’t have to have a terrible footnote”?

Judge Boasberg commented that Clinesmith, “By altering the email, he was saving himself some work and taking an inappropriate shortcut.”

Again Judge Boasberg misses the mark. Clinesmith wasn’t “saving himself some work.” Rather, Clinesmith was taking efforts to keep material facts away from an FBI agent and ultimately the FISA Court – the very Court that Judge Boasberg presides over.

The Message from Judge Boasberg

After the Inspector General’s December 2019 Report on the Carter Page FISA applications and the Crossfire Hurricane investigation, there was hope for reform and accountability. The FISA Court (under then-Presiding Judge Rosemary Collyer) required a review of all prior filings involving Kevin Clinesmith. She admonished the government that the FBI’s handling of the Carter Page applications called into question other FBI applications. The government promised reforms. Maybe we’ll get reform. Maybe not.

But one thing is certain. The Clinesmith sentence isn’t accountability. What does it say about the FISA Court’s “heightened duty of candor” if there aren’t heightened punishments for violating that duty?

In sparing Kevin Clinesmith incarceration, the Presiding Judge of the FISA Court has set a standard: government officials who lie and alter evidence in pursuit of secret warrants against U.S. citizens will not be imprisoned.

Judge Boasberg: The Clinesmith Lies Don't Matter - The Reactionary (substack.com)

WHO urges UK to pause vaccination programme when vulnerable and healthcare workers inoculated

The World Health Organisation has urged the UK and other wealthy nations to pause their mass vaccination drives once vulnerable groups are protected from coronavirus in order to ensure a fair global rollout.

Ensuring that vaccines are equitably distributed across the world is “clearly morally the right thing to do” and failure to do so “will put us on the brink of a moral catastrophe”, said WHO spokesperson Margaret Harris.

The UN agency will appeal to Britons and remind them “you can wait”, Dr Harris said, arguing that the UK should shift its focus from Boris Johnson’s national target of giving every UK adult a first dose by autumn to a wider goal of ensuring that 2 billion doses have been fairly distributed globally by the end of 2021.

Her comments come as the EU – beleaguered by delays amid ongoing rows with AstraZeneca and Pfizer – is accused of engaging in vaccine nationalism after it introduced export controls to protect its supply, which the WHO warned could set a “very worrying trend”. 

Such a “self-defeating” approach would prolong suffering and lead to a “protracted recovery”, the WHO has warned, potentially allowing more new variants to emerge as the virus spreads and costing high-income nations trillions of dollars – all the while risking the permanent erasure of decades of global development.

The UK is arguably a leader in current efforts for an equitable global vaccination drive, having helped raise more than £730m for the Covax Advance Market Commitment (AMC), including £548m in UK aid to help distribute 1.3 billion doses of coronavirus vaccines to 92 developing countries this year.

But despite this, many poorer nations are yet to start any immunisations.

The UK currently has one of the highest levels of vaccine coverage, along with Israel and the UAE, and has pre-ordered some 367 million doses of seven different vaccines for its population of 60 million.

Asked to clarify whether, once the UK has vaccinated its top nine priority groups, it should help efforts elsewhere instead of giving jabs to less vulnerable members of the population, Ms Harris told BBC Breakfast: “We’re asking all countries in those circumstances to do that: ‘hang on, wait for those other groups’.

“We’ll also appeal to all the people of the UK – you can wait.

“We’re asking countries, once you’ve got those (high risk and health care worker) groups, please ensure that the supply you’ve got access to is provided for others,” she added.

“While that is morally clearly the right thing to do, it’s also economically the right thing to do.

“There have been a number of very interesting analyses showing that just vaccinating your own country and then sitting there and saying ‘we’re fine’ will not work economically.

“That phrase ‘no man is an island’ applies economically as well. We in the world, we’re so connected and unless we get all societies working effectively once again, every society will be financially effected.”

WHO directors have previously said vaccine nationalism could cost high-income countries 4.5 trillion US dollars. This is almost half of an estimated $9.2 trillion hit to the global economy, according to a new report.

And Sir Jeremy Farrar, a Sage member, has warned that vaccinating “a lot of people in a few countries, leaving the virus unchecked in large parts of the world, will lead to more variants emerging”.

He also said countries with existing vaccine supply deals could donate a percentage of doses to the WHO’s Covax global vaccine-sharing fund “without taking away from the national effort to protect the most vulnerable in society and healthcare workers”.

Echoing this, Dr Harris said the UN wants to see health workers and the most vulnerable in every country vaccinated “in the first 100 days of this year”.

‘You can wait’: WHO urges UK to pause Covid vaccinations after vulnerable protected to boost global rollout | The Independent

Trump, RNC Raise $86 Million Online for Efforts to Investigate Election Integrity

President Donald Trump walks to the podium to speak at a campaign rally at Keith House, Washington's Headquarters, in Newtown, Pa., on Oct. 31, 2020.

Former President Donald Trump and the Republican National Committee (RNC) in the last 37 days of 2020 raised $86 million online, according to a Jan. 29 filing with the Federal Election Commission (FEC). The president’s legal team at the time was seeking support for the campaign’s efforts to investigate the integrity of the 2020 presidential election.

The amount raised was in addition to the $207.5 million raised by the Trump Make America Great Again Committee in the 19 days after Election Day, according to Bloomberg. That figure doesn’t include all contributions made to various Trump committees or the RNC.

The Trump Make America Great Again Committee is a joint fundraising committee for small-dollar donors to donate to the Trump campaign, the RNC, and from Nov. 18, the Save America PAC—a political action committee that was set up to fund Trump’s post-presidency activities.

Most of the money raised since Nov. 24—$68 million—was via WinRed, a Republican online contribution platform.

The Trump campaign raised $14.1 million, while the RNC raised $3.5 million. Save America raised $501,224 and Trump Victory, which focuses on big donors, raised only $24,965.

Fundraising solicitations that the committee pushed on Jan. 6, the day some Trump supporters and others breached the Capitol building, said that 75 percent of small-amount donations from that day would go to Save America, while the rest would go to the RNC.

Trump to Be ‘Actively Involved’

Rather than parting ways with the RNC, as some pundits had suggested, Trump has voiced his support for helping Republicans take back the House in the 2022 midterms.

Corey Lewandowski, who managed Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign, has also said that Trump won’t form a separate party, after there were reports and speculation saying that he might start his own “Patriot Party.”

“I don’t think the president has any interest in being part of a third party,” he said.

“The president continues to have enormous support and approval among Republican primary voters. He continues to have hundreds of millions of dollars in his campaign account, which he can utilize. And he will continue to be actively involved in recruiting candidates and holding elected officials accountable for their votes,” he told Fox News on Jan. 28.

Trump’s political team last week disavowed any affiliation with a newly formed political committee called the MAGA Patriot Party.

“We are not supportive of this effort, have nothing to do with it, and only know about it through public reporting,” campaign adviser Jason Miller told The Epoch Times on Jan. 25 via text message. 

Trump, RNC Raise $86 Million Online for Efforts to Investigate Election Integrity (theepochtimes.com)

5 Elite Families Who Made Their Fortunes in the Opium Trade

There's a lot of money in the dope business, and there always has been. Prohibit something people want--sometimes very desperately--and someone will find a way to get it to them anyway--at a price. That's a lesson in futility, as some American politicians seem to be finally figuring out with our current drug prohibition, and as China's emperors found out when they attempted to ban the importation of opium into the Middle Kingdom in the early 19th Century. 

Backed by their own governments, Western traders ignored Chinese concerns and demands, flooding the country with opium. When necessary, they enlisted their governments to back them up with military force, humiliating and humbling the empire, and getting rich in the process. Most of these traders were British, but a significant number were American, and the profits they made were the cornerstone of some of 19th Century America's greatest fortunes.

Right now, other merchants are making fortunes in the same business. If they get caught, they lose everything. But if they don't, there's nothing like time and money to wash the dirt off their fortunes. 

Here are five prominent American families that got rich in the Chinese opium trade:

1 .The Astor Family. America's first multimillionaire, John Jacobs Astor, joined the opium smuggling trade in 1816 when his American Fur Company bought 10 tons of Turkish opium and smuggled it into Canton. Seeking other sources of profit while faced with woes in the fur trade, he became the first American known to have entered the contraband Chinese opium trade and made a nice profit before abruptly exiting the business three years later. 

2. The Forbes Family. John Murray Forbes and Robert Bennet Forbes worked for Perkins & Co. in its China trade. While the former's main job was to secure quality tea for export, that latter was more intimately involved in the importing size of the business and had more of a direct role in the opium trade. Their father, Ralph Forbes, had married into the Perkins family. It was the brothers' activities in the 1830s and 1840s that led to the Forbes family's accumulated wealth. The most notable family member on the contemporary scene is US Secretary of State John Forbes Kerry. The Forbes legacy in the China opium trade lived on in the Museum of the American China Trade in Milton, Massachusetts, which was housed in Robert Bennet Forbes' 1883 Greek Revival-style home. That museum merged with the Peabody Essex Museum in 1984, leaving what is now known as the Captain Forbes House Museum. 

3. The Russell Family. Samuel Wadsworth Russell started as an orphaned apprentice to a maritime trade merchant, made his initial investment capital on trading commissions while working for other traders, and eventually founded Russell and Co., the most powerful American merchant house in China for most of the second half of the 19th Century. He landed in Canton in 1819 and quickly amassed a fortune in the opium trade. His mansion, now known as the Samuel Wadsworth Russell House, still stands in Middletown, Connecticut. Russell's cousin and fellow opium trader, William Huntington Russell, was a co-founder and funder of Yale University's Skull and Bones Society.

4. The Delano Family. Warren Delano, Jr., the grandfather of Franklin Delano Roosevelt, was chief of operations for Russell & Co., another Boston trading firm which did big business in the China opium trade in Canton. He first went to China at age 24 and spent a decade dealing dope on the Pearl River before returning to New York as a newly wealthy and very eligible bachelor. He admitted in letters home that opium had an "unhappy effect" on its users, but argued that its sale was "fair, honorable, and legitimate," akin to importing wine and spirits to America. Delano lost his fortune in the Great Panic of 1857, but returned to China and rebuilt it in part by supplying the US military with opium to treat Union soldiers in the Civil War. The Delanos don't like to talk about the opium connection much. As FDR biographer Geoffrey C. Ward noted, "In a family fond of retelling and embellishing even the mildest sort of ancestral adventuresno stories seem to have been handed down concerning Warren Delano’s genuinely adventurous career in the opium business."

5. The Perkins Family. Thomas Handasyd Perkins, a wealthy merchant and Boston Brahmin par excellance, made his bones as a young man trading slaves in Haiti, then peddled furs to China from the American Northwest before amassing a huge fortune smuggling Turkish opium into China. Although he got rich off the trade, he avoided mentioning it, and his official biography, written by his son-in-law, never mentions the word "opium." Perkins assuaged himself through philanthropy, supporting the Boston Atheneum and the New England Institute for the Blind, which was renamed for him. The town of Belmont, Massachusetts, is named after the estate of nephew, John Perkins Cushing, who was active in the trade himself.

5 Elite Families Who Made Their Fortunes in the Opium Trade - Alternet.org

Retired NFL Player Calls for 'Separate Transgender Category' in Sports in Response to Biden's 'Body Blow to the Rights of Women and Girls'

 

On today’s episode of “Progressive Heads Explode in 3… 2… 1…”, a retired NFL player has suggested the creation of a separate category for transgender athletes, following Biden’s executive order allowing boys who think they’re girls to play on girls’ sports teams.

Former defensive end Marcellus Wiley, a father of three girls, also thinks it’s time to have a national discussion on the issue.

“As a father of 3 daughters & the husband to a former collegiate athlete, this hits home in a special way🤯It’s time to create a separate transgender category in competition!

“Also think it’s time for me to start a podcast bcuz some things need to be discussed in detail!💯#respect”

Is it too early to tell Marcellus he’s “transphobic,” “homophobic,” “sexist,” and whatever other “phobics” and “isms” the Left slaps on “hateful” people who have the misguided gall to stand against their “progressive” destruction of America and its institutions? [sarc]

Check out the case of 400-meter hurdles runner Craig Telfer Wiley referenced in a tweet, which follows the following tweet.

2016: Craig Telfer is ranked 200th
2017: Craig Telfer is ranked 390th
2018: Craig Telfer “transitions to female”
2019: CeCe Telfer is national champion

How many girls and young women trained for years to compete in that event and others like it? The guy goes from being ranked below 389 males in 2017 to national champion two years later — simply by declaring himself a female. That is disgusting.

Looks can be deceiving. I mean, look at Marcellus and his beautiful family, below.

Who knew that an evil, hateful bigot exists behind his smile? A hater who wants to keep “transgendered” people the hell out of sports? To keep boys from living out their dreams, including competing in sports with girls? Shame on him and his bitterness. [sarc]

Unlike “hater” Marcellus Wiley,” Biden is far more sensitive; a truly compassionate man who believes everyone deserves an equal result chance to succeed. And what better way to succeed than males competing against females in sporting events?

C’mon, all you haters. Get with the program! [more sarc]

And that “program” is Biden’s Executive Order on Preventing and Combating Discrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity or Sexual Orientation, which reads in part:

Every person should be treated with respect and dignity and should be able to live without fear, no matter who they are or whom they love. [All good, sure]

Children should be able to learn without worrying about whether they will be denied access to the restroom, the locker room, or school sports. [Again, no problem]

Adults should be able to earn a living and pursue a vocation knowing that they will not be fired, demoted, or mistreated because of whom they go home to or because how they dress does not conform to sex-based stereotypes. [Yup, no problem]

People should be able to access healthcare and secure a roof over their heads without being subjected to sex discrimination. All persons should receive equal treatment under the law, no matter their gender identity or sexual orientation. [Couldn’t agree more]

These principles are reflected in the Constitution, which promises equal protection of the laws. These principles are also enshrined in our Nation’s anti-discrimination laws, among them Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended (42 U.S.C. 2000e et seq.). [Yeah, no]

Wall Street Journal writer Abigail Shrier, in an op-ed titled Joe Biden’s First Day Began the End of Girls’ Sports — An executive order rigs competition by requiring that biological boys be allowed to compete against girls, argued that Biden’s executive order was “far more ambitious” —executive overreach? — than the intent of the law.

“Amid Inauguration Day talk of shattered glass ceilings, on Wednesday President Biden delivered a body blow to the rights of women and girls: the Executive Order on Preventing and Combating Discrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity or Sexual Orientation.

“On day one, Mr. Biden placed all girls’ sports and women’s safe spaces in the crosshairs of the administrative state.

[…]

“Any school that receives federal funding—including nearly every public high school—must either allow biological boys who self-identify as girls onto girls’ sports teams or face administrative action from the Education Department.

“If this policy were to be broadly adopted in anticipation of the regulations that are no doubt on the way, what would this mean for girls’ and women’s sports?“

I’m not an attorney specializing in such things, but again, using the Civil Rights Act to justify males competing with females in sporting events appears to be a stretch. It also seems to me that Title IX is not only more applicable but its relevance comes into play based more on what it doesn’t say than what it does say.

The U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) enforces, among other statutes, Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972. Title IX protects people from discrimination based on sex in education programs or activities that receive Federal financial assistance. Title IX states that:

No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.

Lemme illustrate, as a layman. Both of the following statements are true:

Title IX protects the right of both males and females to participate in sporting events.

Title IX does not say males and females have the right to participate on the same teams.

This, from the U.S Department of Education website:

A college or university may sponsor separate teams for men and women where selection is based on competitive skill or when the activity is a contact sport.

Contact sports under the Title IX regulation include boxing, wrestling, rugby, ice hockey, football, basketball and other sports in which the purpose or major activity involves bodily contact.

“Based on competitive skill OR when the activity is a contact sport.” Not “AND when the activity is a contact sport.”

So by implication, males are generally larger and stronger than females, thus giving them a competitive edge. Does that edge not extend, in most cases, to non-contact sports, as well? (P.S. This has ZERO to do with misogyny, and everything to do with biological reality.)

Here’s what the NCAA has to say about Title IX and athletics:

Athletics programs are considered educational programs and activities. There are three basic parts of Title IX as it applies to athletics:

Participation: Title IX requires that women and men be provided equitable opportunities to participate in sports. Title IX does not require institutions to offer identical sports but an equal opportunity to play.

Progressives argue “equal opportunity to play” extends to males competing against females; critics contend that it does not.

As is the case with innumerable other examples, the Left is turning Title IX (and Title VII) on its head in the name of “progressivism.”

The competitive edge of boys unfairly competing with girls in athletics is not “progress.”

OK, RedStaters, what say you?

Retired NFL Player Calls for 'Separate Transgender Category' in Sports in Response to Biden's 'Body Blow to the Rights of Women and Girls' (redstate.com) 

Biden Economic Adviser: Americans Don't Care About the Budget Process or What's In the COVID Relief Bill

 

One of President Joe Biden's economic advisers, Jared Bernstein, on Sunday claimed the American people have no interest in how the next Wuhan coronavirus relief package is passed or what's in the package.

"The president has consistently said three things: one, he is absolutely willing to negotiate; two, [Biden's] plan is scaled to have the punch to finally put these dual crises behind us, to meet the challenge of vaccine distribution, of virus control, and meeting the economic relief that is so urgent in this moment," Bernstein explained. "The cost of inaction in this moment is so high. Part three, as I mentioned, a willingness to negotiate with Republicans. ... Right now we're in a position where delay and inaction are the enemy of moving forward."

"Look, the American people really couldn’t care less about budget process, whether it’s regular order, bipartisanship, whether it’s filibuster, whether it’s reconciliation," he said. "They need relief and they need it now."

According to the economic adviser, if Congress doesn't act to quickly pass Biden's $1.9 trillion "American Rescue Plan," the country will sustain a loss of four million jobs by the end of the year.

"We risk taking a year longer to get full employment. Kids who are out of school every year, that costs their lifetime earnings north of five percent. That's a permanent ding on their ability to prosper throughout their lives," Bernstein said.

To make matters even worse, Bernstein said he "rejects" the idea that Biden's climate change actions, including killing the Keystone Pipeline, put tens of thousands of Americans out of jobs when millions of Americans are unemployed. Instead, he said Americans would soon see the benefits of a "clean energy industry." 

"Not only are there many more jobs in the climate agenda – and this will be more part of the recovery act that's coming later than the rescue plan – but this is something where the market is already moving in this direction," the adviser said. He cited GM's decision last week to shift away from gas-powered vehicles as a prime example. 

"This is us really picking up and trying to amplify where the market is going anyway. It's a walk and chew gum moment," Bernstein said. "... I firmly believe this a pro-growth plan. It also has to occur as we take the steps to finally get to a robust recovery where we can start building our clean energy industry."

Of course, Bernstein's solution to get those 11,000 Keystone Pipeline jobs back is by passing Biden's American Rescue Plan. 

Under Biden's plan, individuals making $75,000 or less and couples making $150,000 or less would receive $1,400 per person in direct cash payments. Ten GOP senators created their own proposal, which would offer more targeted payments. Under their plan, individuals making $50,000 or less and couples making $100,000 or less would receive $1,000 per person in direct cash payments. Both plans keep the extended federal unemployment benefits and provide funding for vaccine distribution.

Biden's plan would also increase the federal minimum wage from $7.25-an-hour to $15-an-hour., which is one major concern critics have.

Biden Economic Adviser: Americans Don't Care About the Budget Process or What's In the COVID Relief Bill by Beth Baumann (townhall.com)

“Getting Stronger”- Liberal Reporter Gets Wake Up Call On Trump Support

One left-wing reporter is finally learning the truth.

Politico reporter Tara Palmeri traveled to Wyoming to find out who supported Rep. Liz Cheney’s (R-WY) vote to impeach President Trump.

What she found was no one supported Rep. Cheney.

They all supported President Trump.

Politico reporter Tara Palmeri’s observation runs contrary to the assumptions of many in the Washington D.C. establishment and the mainstream media.

“People don’t want to hear anything against Trump,” Palmeri said during an appearance on MSNBC. “Actually, the more he stays out of the media, the more that he becomes this martyr, this looming figure over the GOP.”

She followed up by saying that his base was getting “stronger”:

In Wyoming, she added, “A lot of people said they aren’t really Republicans, that, like, they’re for Trump. That’s it … I think the base is getting stronger, truly. I think an impeachment would make him even more powerful — a conviction, is what I mean.”

Watch the video here:

Republican voters want a party that fights for them and the country.

Not one that surrenders the country to the left.

"Getting Stronger"- Liberal Reporter Gets Wake Up Call On Trump Support (thegatewaypundit.com)

Biden Plagiarizes Again After Bloomberg Points Out Virus Plan Is Basically Trump's

 While President Biden has done nothing but disparage President Trump's COVID-19 vaccination plan - while promising on the campaign trail to 'introduce his own,' it now appears there was no 'new' plan whatsoever - and his team is essentially using Trump's playbook with "modest changes," according to Bloomberg.

Biden has said vaccine distribution was in “worse shape than we anticipated.” White House Chief of Staff Ron Klain said a Trump administration plan “did not really exist.” Adviser Cedric Richmond said they “didn’t leave a plan.” Xavier Becerra, Biden’s choice for health secretary, said it was like taking over a plane in a nosedive.

But while Biden’s approach to the virus -- frank warnings about the pandemic, mask mandates on federal property -- is a reversal from Trump’s policies, his administration’s distribution of vaccines so far looks little different from that of its predecessor. Before Biden was sworn in, vaccines already were being delivered at a pace to meet his goal of 100 million doses in his first 100 days as president.

The Biden administration has said they’ll order new doses, but will do so by exercising options in contracts negotiated by the previous administration, which thought it premature to do so. They say they’ll use the Defense Production Act, which Trump used repeatedly. Rather than a total overhaul, they have otherwise made course corrections and modest shifts. Data released Friday by Johnson & Johnson will fuel hopes that a third vaccine soon could hit the U.S. market. -Bloomberg 

Biden - who has a history of plagiarism - was essentially lying, especially when one considers the mammoth effort involved in distribution efforts which would make major changes costly and risk setbacks to the program. Bloomberg adds that "some aspects of the program don't offer much wiggle room to begin with, while the trickiest part are yet to come."

Bloomberg does toss Biden a bone, however, reporting that Trump 'undercut' Biden's efforts to shape the program by delaying the transition while disputing the results of the election. Trump's team, however, says they had over 300 transition briefings with health officials - which Biden officials claim contained little useful information until just days before the inauguration.

Meanwhile, officials from the Operation Warp Speed - the joint effort between the Trump administration's Departments of Health and Human Services and DoD, say the partisan sniping from Biden's team is hurting morale among career staff who are handling the vaccine rollout.

"The transition is happening less well than I, and my team, had been hoping," said Moncef Slaoui, chief scientific adviser to Operation Warp Speed. "The team doesn’t understand why the Operation is being criticized as it is. It is so unfair and unjustified."

"If it wasn’t for this Operation, we may not have as many vaccines as we will now."

Also pushing back against the Biden team's besmirchments is Anthony Fauci, the highest-paid employee in the federal government and ongoing COVID-19 advisor to the Office of the President.

"We certainly are not starting from scratch," Fauci said earlier this month. "It’s taking what’s gone on, but amplifying it in a big way," he added. Even Biden said that "credit is absolutely due" to the Trump administration for launching the vaccine program.

The differences

According to Bloomberg, "Biden is endorsing federally run community vaccination centers and mobile clinics," and will attempt to provide states with a three-week supply, along with an increase in the number of people who can administer it. Trump officials, however, say the limitation is the number of vaccines, not healthcare professionals.

Biden is also focusing on communities of color instead of devoting all resources to first vaccinating essential workers and those at most risk of dying from the virus. According to Biden, communities of color have been disproportionately affected by the virus.

Yet, most of the plan remains unchanged.

Via Bloomberg:

[T]he biggest pieces of the distribution effort remain unchanged, undercutting claims from some Biden advisers that they inherited no plan. Many of the most stubborn bottlenecks don’t stem from the federal government’s decisions: Companies simply can’t produce vaccines fast enough and supplies are scarce; even if distribution goes smoothly, the administration of doses gets backed up at the local level.

“What we’re seeing here is them marching through the playbook of Operation Warp Speed,” added Michael Pratt, a former Health and Human Services official under Trump. “Something cannot simultaneously be a dismal failure and have already accomplished the ‘ambitious goal’ you set.”

Nearly every industrialized nation has been beset by vaccine delays. The European Union has moved to restrict vaccine exports. The U.S. has administered 8.3 doses per 100 people, trailing the U.K. and Israel yet outpacing Germany, Canada, France and the EU overall, according to Bloomberg’s Vaccine Tracker. -Bloomberg

The Biden team has also retained many key Trump personnel, including the co-leader of Operation Warp Speed, General Gustave Perna.

Furthermore, one of Biden's key tools to move quickly on the virus response is the use of the Defense Production Act to prioritize the availability of certain materials and supplies - which the Trump administration used extensively.

"It is really incorrect to say there was no plan -- because we’re already achieving 1.3 million doses in arms per day, which exceeds the first goal President Biden had," said Brett Giroir, who led the Trump administration's program to ramp up widespread virus testing.

One wild card is whether another vaccine will hit the market anytime soon. Late Friday, Johnson & Johnson announced that its single-dose vaccine generated strong protection against COVID-19 in a large, late-stage trial. The company expects it to be 'quickly brought to market without the missed delivery timelines of the Pfizer shots.' If authorized for use, the J&J vaccine could allow the Biden team to reach 2 million total doses per day according to a former Trump official.

And that's, the rest of the story...

Biden Plagiarizes Again After Bloomberg Points Out Virus Plan Is Basically Trump's | ZeroHedge

STEAK BITES

 

INGREDIENTS 1 lb (454 g) beef ribeye steak 1 tsp salt (I like to use onion salt) 1/4 tsp black pepper 2 cloves garlic 1 sprig of fresh rosemary 2 Tbsp (28.5 g) unsalted butter garnish with cracked black pepper and fresh chopped parsley 2 Tbsp (30 ml) cooking oil (for pan)

China rolls out anal swab coronavirus test,

 

Authorities in China have introduced anal swab as a new type of coronavirus test that could detect the virus more accurately as they struggle to contain rising infections ahead of the Lunar new year celebrations.

This comes after local outbreaks in the country led to China shutting off many of its northern cities.

Before, coronavirus tests were mostly being carried out in China with nose and throat swabs.

However, the new anal test involves a swab being inserted around two to three centimetres (0.8 to 1.2 inches) into the rectum and being rotated multiple times. The swab is then taken out and sealed in a sample container, a process reported to take around 10 seconds.

Li Tongzeng, a senior doctor from Beijing’s Youan hospital, says the anal swab method can increase the detection rate of infected people.

He says this is because virus traces remain longer in the anus than in the respiratory tract, where you collect nasal and throat swabs.

He said: “We found that some asymptomatic patients tend to recover quickly. It’s possible that there will be no trace of the virus in their throat after three to five days.

“But the virus lasts longer from the samples taken from the patient’s digestive tract and excrement, compared to the ones taken from the respiratory tract.

According to Washington Post, news of the new anal swabs has been met with criticism from some experts.

Yang Zhanqiu, a deputy director of the pathogen biology department at Wuhan University said that nasal and throat swabs remain more efficient as the virus is a respiratory disease.

He adds: “There have been cases concerning the coronavirus testing positive in a patient’s excrement, but no evidence has suggested it had been transmitted through one’s digestive system.

https://thestreetjournal.org/2021/01/china-rolls-out-anal-swab-coronavirus-test-kit-says-its-more-accurate/