Trump Covid Adviser Confesses '15 Days to Slow the Spread' Was a Lie from the Beginning
Trump Covid Adviser Confesses '15 Days to Slow the Spread' Was a Lie from the Beginning
Plus: CDC Director Rochelle Walensky appears to be caught in a serious conflict-of-interest scandal involving her husband.
Dr. Anthony Fauci has retired (if you haven’t heard). But Herr Doktor Fauci is far from the only member of America’s ‘crack’ Covid response team to have lied repeatedly to the Americna public.
One of the first clues that Covid was going to be a complete fiasco was the announcement in March 2020 that we had "15 days to slow the spread."
Donald Trump took the advice of his Covid advisers, such as Dr. Robert Redfield, Dr. Anthony Fauci, and Dr. Deborah Birx, and "told people to stay home, avoid gathering in groups, forgo discretionary travel and stop eating in food courts and bars for the next 15 days."
“If everyone makes this change or these critical changes and sacrifices now, we will rally together as one nation and we will defeat the virus and we’re going to have a big celebration all together,” Trump said at a White House press briefing on March 16, 2020. “With several of weeks of focused action we can turn the tide and turn it quickly.”
You might recall the guidelines as including common sense tips, but most importantly the warning: "Listen to and follow the directions of your state and local authorities."
Coronavirus.gov provided other handy tips, which look relatively mild and unconcerning at first glance.
But anyone who had been paying attention to the federal government's behavior knew instantly that "15 days to slow the spread" was destined to become yet another supposedly 'noble lie' to socially condition the American 'herd' into compliance with state demands.
That's where Dr. Deborah Birx comes in. In a recent book that has effectively become a mea culpa, "Silent Invasion," the former White House Coronavirus Response Coordinator admits that it was all a lie. This comes via The Brownstone Institute:
No sooner had we convinced the Trump administration to implement our version of a two-week shutdown than I was trying to figure out how to extend it. Fifteen Days to Slow the Spread was a start, but I knew it would be just that. I didn’t have the numbers in front of me yet to make the case for extending it longer, but I had two weeks to get them. However hard it had been to get the fifteen-day shutdown approved, getting another one would be more difficult by many orders of magnitude.
As recently discussed here, this is far from the only example of Dr. Birx's grotesque subterfuge. In another passage, she effectively admits to massaging data in order to nudge state officials into overreaction to the viral pandemic:
After the heavily edited documents were returned to me, I'd reinsert what they had objected to, but place it in those different locations. I'd also reorder and restructure the bullet points so the most salient — the points the administration objected to most — no longer fell at the state of the bullet points. I shared these strategies with the three members of the data team also writing these reports. Our Saturday and Sunday report-writing routine soon became: write, submit, revise, hide, resubmit.
This is a remarkable admission that is tantamount to data fraud; but in Dr. Birx's worldview, it was a necessary evil in order to weaponize Covid to push the overriding agenda of universal vaccination and restrictive lockdowns to effect 'behavioral changes,' something that Dr. Anthony Fauci has talked about at length.
Never mind that lockdowns have never been shown to work and did not work during the Covid pandemic, Dr. Birx was a true believer in them as a tool to manipulate human behavior. Her book "Silent Invasion" is one long testimonial in her unshakeable belief in them, all evidence to the contrary about their utility in viral pandemics be damned.
In another disturbing passage, Dr. Birx confesses that she knew from the very beginning that 'vaccines' would not stop the spread of SARS-CoV-2 worldwide. She also lied about the effectiveness of natural immunity from prior infection, which was embarrassingly confirmed in January 2022.
As early as July, in my role as board member for Operation Warp Speed, I had adamantly stated that it needed to be made clear to the American people that the vaccines would not end the threat to SARS-CoV-2 virus posed globally. It would take at least two years to get the world immunized. Also, reports from around the world were beginning to show that prior natural infection was not preventing reinfection. The evidence was yet to be fully realized. We didn't know the durability from either infection or severe disease with natural infection or from vaccines. The vaccines being studied were to prevent against severe disease, hospitalization, and death.
So, this is an admission that the "experts" did not know what they were talking about or what they were doing, all pretenses aside, but they had a sociological-behavioral agenda that was draped in the trappings of biomedical "Science."
It is infuriating at this point to see one's criticisms of the coronavirus pandemic response echoed in the form of a mealy-mouthed apologia from a 'public health expert,' whose concessions were points that had gotten numerous people banned from social media over the years for having made them at the time.
But here is Dr. Birx, saying the silent part out loud, and daring the American public to hold her and her colleagues-in-crime accountable for it.
But Lady Birxy of the Colorful Scarves isn’t the only Lockdown-loving scandal in this Perfidious Passion Play known as the Pandemic Response.
In an eye-opening exclusive published at RedState, a publication where I have previously contributed, Scott Hounsell has a pretty explosive tidbit about current CDC Director Rochelle Walensky worth reading in full. It adds an outstanding glimpse into the seedy world of biomedical cash-grabbing schemes that have become commonplace at America's once-prestigious 'public health' agencies.
Hounsell is uniquely qualified to lay out the issues involved with CDC Director Walensky's glaring conflict-of-interest concerning her husband, a pediatric oncology researcher, given his background in grant writing. What he has found, thanks in part to a tip from radio host Howie Carr, is disturbing.
New information provided exclusively to RedState by syndicated radio talk show host Howie Carr shows that Centers for Disease Control (CDC) Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky is finding multiple ways to benefit from her new position. Walensky, who took over as director with Biden’s inauguration, is married to Loren D. Walensky, a renowned pediatric oncology researcher at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute at Harvard. In October 2019 Loren Walensky became the scientific co-founder and a member of the Board of Directors of Lytica Therapeutics, “an early-stage biotechnology company working on an innovative platform for developing next-generation antimicrobials.” (LabCentral)
Just four months later, Walensky’s Lytica received a $16.9 million dollar HHS grant to “develop antibacterial peptides with broad activity against multidrug-resistant bacteria.” Only $5.3 million of that money was initially disbursed to Lytica, and the remaining $11.6 million is scheduled to be disbursed upon the achievement of “certain development milestones.” I have previously worked in the world of grant writing and can tell you most agencies will not give grants to organizations that have existed for less than a year and organizations that have no other stream of funding. In this particular case Crunchbase, which monitors funding for corporations and non-profits, shows that the only funding that Lytica has received to date is the $5.3 million allocated from the grant received.
Again, the only funding this new company has received to date – nearly two years after its founding – is the $5.3 million allocated from the HHS grant.
The RedState piece notes that the grant was "funded and organized by the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response (ASPR) with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, which oversees and administers the Biomedical Advanced and Development Authority (BARDA) program, which is similar to the PREDICT program at the center of Wuhan Institute of Virology gain-of-function research controversy. The Lytica Therapeutics grant was provided through BARDA’s CARB-X program." According to the website:
BARDA plays a critical role in the federal government’s National Action Plan for Combatting Antibiotic-Resistant Bacteria (CARB), 2020-2025. Because making new antibiotics is difficult, expensive, and low profit for innovative companies, BARDA supports the world’s largest antibacterial portfolio through public-private partnerships. These partnerships incentivize companies to focus on antibiotic development by providing non-dilutive funding to offset high research and development (R&D) costs and technical assistance to reduce R&D risk.
Projects funded by CARB-X, the group states, “are in the early stages of research, and there is always a high risk of failure,” the author notes, thus drawing more suspicion over the ready disbursement.
(Pictured: Loren Walensky praising his wife upon her swearing in as CDC Director.)
As Scott Hounsell points out, Walensky received the grant before his wife became the CDC director, but she had a long history with Health and Human Services, including having been the chart of the Office of Aids Research Advisory Council, where she associated with Dr. Anthony Fauci. While some "insiders" were a bit surprised that Dr. Rochelle Walensky was appointed to CDC director, it should come as no surprise that Fauci was largely behind it:
Biden’s transition team conducted a wide search for a new CDC director, and Walensky’s name was mentioned by several people, according to an official familiar with the process. For some, she was a surprise choice. Yet among those recommending her was Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, who is serving as a medical adviser to Biden.
“One of the key people we talked to was Dr. Fauci, and Dr. Fauci really believed that Dr. Walensky was the right person to lead the CDC, so that was obviously an important recommendation,” [Biden transition co-chair Jeff] Zients said. “In Dr. Walensky, we were able to find someone with the experience and the background to lead the CDC and that turnaround.”
The story notes that: "Two top NIAID officials, one of whom worked closely with Director Walensky in the HIV/AIDS research arena, serve on CARB-X’s Joint Oversight Committee, which selects which applicants will receive grants through a competitive process."
Walensky's grant cannot be found in her financial disclosures from January 2021. Dr. Walensky only lists her husband’s stake in Lytica Therapeutics as a “spousal holding,” but doesn’t indicate that he is the "co-founder" of the company and his invention would benefit from the CARB-X grant.
There is a further conflict of interest in that Walensky was being appointed to a leadership position in an agency that would have significant influence on the decision about whether or not to award the additional $11.6 million.
Dr. Rochelle Walensky's apparent conflict of interest is indicative of the rampant backroom sidedeals that have become prevalent in public health institutions and have transformed them into little more than sales departments for Big Pharma.
Dr. Walensky, at a minimum, needs to be intensively and critically questioned about this alleged conflict-of-interest, preferrably in public at her next Congressional hearing. The stipulation being that her testimony is given under oath, and there are actual consequences for any further substantiation of unethical behavior.
If there is a God and any justice in the world, all public health "experts" will be held fully accountable for their actions, including any abuses of office that can be substantiated before Congress, and if needed, in a court of law.
We need to call our State reps and demand they defund these crony health agencies. This is one huge example: There is a further conflict of interest in that Walensky was being appointed to a leadership position in an agency that would have significant influence on the decision about whether or not to award the additional $11.6 million.
Dr. Rochelle Walensky's apparent conflict of interest is indicative of the rampant backroom sidedeals that have become prevalent in public health institutions and have transformed them into little more than sales departments for Big Pharma.
Great Article 👍