By John Leake as published by Courageous Discourse on 19 January 2025

HHS Action Referral Memo announces that “Dr. Daszak lacks the present responsibility to participate in United States Federal Government procurement and non-procurement programmes.”

On January 17, 2025 – just three days before President Trump is to be sworn in – Congress issued a press release with the following statement:

Today, after an eight-month investigation, the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) cut off all funding and formally debarred EcoHealth Alliance Inc. (EcoHealth) and its former President, Dr. Peter Daszak, for five years based on evidence uncovered by the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic.

As far as I can tell, the New York Times did not report this story, though the New York Post did.

More interesting than the superficial news reporting is the HHS Action Referral Memorandum recommending that Dr. Peter Daszak be barred from participating in United States Federal Government procurement and non-procurement programmes.

The Memorandum also states:

Dr. Peter Daszak was the President and Chief Executive Officer of EHA [EcoHealth Alliance] from 2009 until his termination, effective 6 January 2025. Dr. Daszak was the Project Director (PD)/Principal Investigator (PI) for Grant Number 1R01AI110964-01.

I am not sure what to make of this document, which is written in such an arcane and convoluted style that it challenges the attention span of even the most focused reader.

I have been researching this story for four years, and I found the following paragraphs the most intriguing:

9. In a letter dated 28 May 2016, the NIAID contacted EHA concerning possible GoF [gain-of-function] research based on information submitted in its most recent Year 2 RPPR. The NIAID notified EHA that GoF research conducted under Grant Number 5R01AI110964-03 would be subject to the 17 October 2014, United States Federal Government funding pause, and that per the funding pause announcement, new United States Federal Government funding would not be released for GoF research projects that may be reasonably anticipated to confer attributes to influenza, MERS, or SARS viruses such that the virus would have enhanced pathogenicity and/or transmissibility in mammals via the respiratory route. In the letter, the NIAID requested that EHA provide a determination within 15 days of the date of the letter as to whether EHA’s research under Grant Number 5R01AI110964-03 did or did not include GoF work subject to the funding pause.

10. In a letter dated 8 June 2016, EHA provided a response to the NIAID’s 28 May 2016 letter. EHA explained that the goal of its proposed work was to construct MERS and MERS-like chimeric CoVs in order to understand the potential origins of MERSCoV in bats by studying bat MERS-like CoVs in detail. EHA stated that it believed it was highly unlikely that the proposed work would have any pathogenic potential, but that should any of these recombinants show evidence of enhanced virus growth greater than certain specified benchmarks involving log growth increases, or grow more efficiently in human airway epithelial cells, EHA would immediately: (1) stop all experiments with the mutant, (2) inform the NIAID Programme Officer of these results, and (3) participate in decision-making trees to decide appropriate paths forward.

11. Based on the information provided by EHA, the NIAID concluded that the proposed work was not subject to the GoF research pause. In a letter dated 7 July 2016, however, the NIAID informed EHA that should any of the MERS-like or SARS-like chimaeras generated under the grant show evidence of enhanced virus growth greater than 1 log over the parental backbone strain, EHA must stop all experiments with these viruses and provide the NIAID Programme Officer and Grants Management Specialist, and WIV Institutional Biosafety Committee, with the relevant data and information related to these unanticipated outcomes.

Note that various statements in the above paragraphs are inconsistent with what Baric et al. state in their 2015 paper ‘A SARS-like cluster of circulating bat coronavirus shows potential for human emergence’ – a research paper funded by the NIAID EcoHealth Grant “Understanding the Risk of Bat Coronavirus Emergence.”

As the authors state in the section on biosafety and biosecurity:

Reported studies were initiated after the University of North Carolina Institutional Biosafety Committee approved the experimental protocol (Project Title: Generating infectious clones of bat SARS-like CoVs; Lab Safety Plan ID: 20145741; Schedule G ID: 12279). These studies were initiated before the ‘US Government Deliberative Process Research Funding Pause on Selected Gain-of-Function Research Involving Influenza, MERS and SARS Viruses’ [see HERE]. This paper has been reviewed by the funding agency, the NIH. Continuation of these studies was requested, and this has been approved by the NIH.

As I noted in my series of essays titled ‘The Great SARS-CoV-2 Charade’, one of the silliest lies told by Dr. Anthony Fauci has been his insistence that NIAID did not approve gain-of-function work by EcoHealth.

Fauci has repeatedly asserted this in a loud and vexed tone, as though he is outraged by the mere proposition. And yet, Ralph Baric and his colleagues – including Zhengli-Li Shi at the Wuhan Institute of Virology – plainly state in their 2015 paper that their gain-of-function experiments, performed in Baric’s [University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill] UNC lab and Zhengli-Li Shi’s lab in Wuhan, were grandfathered in, given that they were funded before the 2014 Pause.

Another statement (in paragraph 11 of the recent HHS Action Referral Memo) that deserves special scrutiny is the following:

In a letter dated 7 July 2016, however, the NIAID informed EHA that should any of the MERS-like or SARS-like chimaeras generated under the grant show evidence of enhanced virus growth greater than 1 log over the parental backbone strain, EHA must stop all experiments with these viruses and provide the NIAID Programme Officer and Grants Management Specialist, and WIV Institutional Biosafety Committee, with the relevant data and information related to these unanticipated outcomes.

Again, it’s tough to interpret this statement, given that Baric et al. had, by their own admission, already generated chimaeras that “replicate efficiently in primary human airway cells and achieve in vitro titres equivalent to epidemic strains of SARS-CoV.”

Let’s review what Baric et al. state in their ‘Abstract’ about the functionality of the chimaeric virus (named SHCOI4-MA15) they claimed to have generated. Using humanised mice (genetically modified to have primary human airway cells) as their experimental animals, the authors state:

Using the SARS-CoV reverse genetics system², we generated and characterised a chimeric virus expressing the spike of bat coronavirus SHC014 in a mouse-adapted SARS-CoV backbone.

The results indicate that group 2b viruses encoding the SHC014 spike in a wild-type backbone can efficiently use multiple orthologs of the SARS receptor human angiotensin converting enzyme II (ACE2), replicate efficiently in primary human airway cells and achieve in vitro titres equivalent to epidemic strains of SARS-CoV. Additionally, in vivo experiments demonstrate replication of the chimeric virus in mouse lung with notable pathogenesis.

To this day, no legal authority that I am aware of has investigated the question: What became of the chimaeras SHC014-MA15 and WIV1-MA15? The latter chimaera was documented by Baric et al. in their March 2016 paper titled ‘SARS-like WIV1-CoV poised for human emergence’-a chimaera “that replaced the SARS spike with the WIV1 spike within the mouse-adapted backbone.”

What did the Wuhan Institute of Virology (“WIV”) do with these chimaeras? Did its researchers continue to modify and experiment with these chimaeras?

[…]

Via https://expose-news.com/2025/01/21/ecohealth-alliance-fires-peter-daszak/

Israeli military vehicles surround ambulance in West Bank

Al Mayadeen

IOF announces start of military operation in Jenin, the occupied West Bank, as the Palestinian Resistance moves to confront invading forces.

The Israeli military has announced the start of a new military campaign in the West Bank city of Jenin, which it dubbed the “Iron Wall”.

Israeli media reported that the campaign was executed by order of the political echelon, following a Cabinet meeting last Friday, which added the West Bank to the goals of the ongoing war.

Israeli Security Minister Israel Katz said the military operation in Jenin was “prepared to protect settlers and settlement outposts in the area,” while an Israeli security source told Israeli media that “the operation in Jenin will be unprecedented in its size and scope.”

Israeli media further noted that the Israeli military, Shin Bet, and “Border Guards” began an operation meant to “foil terrorism” in Jenin, which will continue for the coming days, asserting that a large IOF force has advanced on Jenin from all directions after the Shin Bet disrupted internet communications throughout the Jenin Refugee Camp.

“Israel’s” Walla news website’s military analyst Amir Bohbot said the military operation in Jenin began with a UAV attack on infrastructure. He further said that the operation will continue for as long as needed, noting that the goal is to “secure the Israeli Army’s freedom of operation throughout the West Bank, and destroy and neutralize terrorist infrastructure and time bombs.”

[…]

Via https://english.almayadeen.net/news/politics/-israel–announces-start-of-military-op-in-jenin–resistance

By Grant Stinchfield

A Presidential Pardon does not take effect unless the suspect accepts it. That according to a little known, 1915 ruling from the Supreme Court, once accepted, the pardon serves as an “imputation of guilt,” or what’s more commonly known as an admission. Because accepting the pardon is “essential to it’s validity,” I am demanding the Biden family, Dr. Fauci, Gen. Mark Milley, the members of the J6 Committee and everyone else Biden unsurprisingly pardoned declare their acceptance of the pardon publicly. Because, according to the Supreme Court, it would also serve as a declaration of guilt.

[…]

Via https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2025/01/supreme-court-ruling-accepting-pardon-is-admission-guilt/

Jim Hoft

President Donald Trump has signed an executive order to officially withdraw the United States from the World Health Organization (WHO), citing its failure to hold China accountable and its role in pushing radical globalist health agendas that undermine American sovereignty.

Trump’s executive order will halt all U.S. funding to the WHO, redirecting those resources to domestic health initiatives that prioritize American interests and values.

WHO has long pointed to its mishandling of global health crises, its cozy relationship with China, and its dangerous push for vaccine mandates and digital health passports.

Recall that the Biden regime publicly affirmed their commitment to a “legally-binding” accord back in 2023, which will give the World Health Organization (WHO) control over U.S. pandemic policies, though work remains in certain areas.

Once a health emergency is declared every signatory, including the United States, must submit to the authority of the WHO. This includes caving to them on treatments, lockdowns and vaccine mandates along with government surveillance.

[…]

Via https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2025/01/trump-signs-executive-order-withdraw-u-s-globalist/

The Octopus Game Part II

Press TV (2024)

Film Review

https://www.presstv.ir/doc/Detail/2024/12/24/739650/Octopus-Game-US-military-Ukraine-Israel-American-foreign-policy-documentary-PressTV

Episode 2 begins by disputing Joe Biden’s claim that the concert attacked by Hamas militants was a “peace event” promoting improve understanding between Israeli and Palestinian youth. The Nova music festival was a Zionist event celebrating the Jewish Holiday Shemini Atzeret.

It then continues with the history of the 1948 Nakba (Catastrophe) when the majority of Palestinians were driven from their homes farms by terrorist Zionist gangs (see The Octopus Game Part II – The Hidden History of Palestine), most fled to either the West Bank or Gaza, territories yet to be seized by Zionist terrorists.

When the UN recognized Israeli independence in1948, they also approved the West Bank and Gaza as Palestinian territory, with the West Bank to be administered by Jordan and Gaza by Egypt. The majority of Arab states supported the UN decision to limit Palestine to the West Bank and Gaza (denying the millions of Palestinians displaced from their homes in Palestine’s interior the right to return).

Following the Shah’s overthrow in the 1979 Iranian revolution Iran would be an exception. They played an active role in building Palestinian resistance in Lebanon by sending Shia organizers to organize Lebanese Shia Muslims during the Lebanese civil war (1975-1990). In response, the US persuaded Sadam Hussein (a CIA asset installed as Iraqi president in 1979) to declare war on Iran in 1980-1988.

Meanwhile arbitrary shooting of Palestinians by the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) led to the First Intifada in the West Bank and Gaza and to the formation of Hamas in 1987. Unlike the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO), a secular leftist organization, Hamas was an Islamic organization committed to forming an Islamic state. To counter Hamas influence, on November 15, 1988 PLO leader Yasser Arafat declared the first Palestinian State consisting of Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem. In doing so he, like the UN and the Oslo Accords, accepted defined boundaries allocating 78% of historic Palestine to Israel.

The immense unpopularity of this move led to a steady decline in PLO influence and and an increase in the influence of Islamic groups, such as Islamic Jihad, Hamas and Hezbollah.

*The Oslo Accords are a pair of interim agreements between Israel and the PLO creating the Palestinian National Authority, tasked with conducting limited Palestinian self-governance over parts of the West Bank and Gaza and acknowledging the PLO as Israel’s partner in permanent-status negotiations about remaining issues around the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It did not create a Palestinian state. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu officially opposes the formation of a Palestinian state.

By Dr Vernon Coleman

In Britain, it is now official Government policy to ignore the needs of the elderly. This policy is common throughout the world. Doctors and nurses are told to let old people die – and to withhold treatment which might save their lives. Hospital staff are told to deprive the elderly of food and water so that they die rather than take up hospital beds. Nursing home staff have even been given the right to sedate elderly patients without their knowledge. The only -ism that no one cares about is ageism.

But at what age are patients simply allowed to die? And how old is too old for patients to be resuscitated? At what point does society have the right to say `You’ve lived long enough, now you must die and make way for someone else’? And why should resuscitation be decided by age? It is possible to argue that it would make as much sense to decide according to wealth or beauty. But ageism is now officially accepted. Anyone over 60 is now officially old, though in a growing number of hospitals the cut off age for resuscitation is 55 or even 50.

We live in a politically correct world but the elderly don’t count – particularly if they are white and English. Report after report after report shows elderly patients being left in pain, in soiled bed clothes. Elderly patients in hospital are ignored by staff and left to starve to death, denied even water if they cannot get out of bed and fetch it themselves.

Old people are a burden which the Government cannot afford and so the politicians will continue to authorise whatever methods are necessary to ensure that the number of burdensome old people is kept to a minimum. The existence of an absurd branch of medicine called geriatrics is used as an excuse to shove old people into backwater wards and to provide them with second-rate medical treatment. In February 2011, an official report condemned the NHS for its `inhumane treatment of elderly patients’ and stated that NHS hospitals were `failing to meet even the most basic standards of care’ for the over-65s. It is no exaggeration to say that the NHS treats the elderly with contempt. (It used to be said that you can judge a civilisation by the way it treats its elderly.)

It was back in February 2005 that it was revealed that the Government had advised that hospital patients with little hope of recovery should be allowed to die because of the cost of keeping them alive. The Labour Government suggested that `old people’ be denied the right to food and water if they fell into a coma or couldn’t speak for themselves. So much for any hope for stroke victims. The Government suggested that the need to cut costs came before the need to preserve the lives of patients and decided it had the right to overturn a right-to-life ruling which had been made when a judge ordered that artificial nutrition and hydration should not be withdrawn unless the life of a patient could be described as `intolerable’. (The judge had added that when there was any doubt, preservation of life should take precedence.)

Of course, depriving the elderly of food and water is sometimes more a consequence of incompetence than official policy. When my mother was in hospital in Exeter she couldn’t feed herself but the staff didn’t feed her. If no relative could get to the hospital to feed her she didn’t eat. Drinks were put on her tray and then taken away untouched. `Not thirsty, today?’ an idiot would ask merrily.

Meanwhile, the Government pours money into subsidising the lives of the lazy and the work-shy. Healthy 30-year-olds sit around growing chip backsides and beer bellies, slumped in front of their high definition digital television sets watching their choice of State subsidised satellite television, opening the windows to let the heat out because it’s easier than turning down the central heating.

The elderly are classified as the `Unwanted Generation’: a political embarrassment. Elderly individuals facing blindness from age-related macular disease are denied drugs that might have prevented their blindness. The elderly are considered expensive, useless and expendable. The theory is that they don’t contribute and rarely vote and can, therefore, be disregarded. But those who believe this will be old sooner than they think. And the definition of ‘old’ is getting younger by the year.

Wars have taught us that people seem to be prepared to accept as normal all sorts of terrible things. But how unbelievably awful it is that doctors and nurses accept that the elderly (officially the over 60s) must be allowed to die because keeping them alive isn’t cost effective. The official attitude seems to be that old people don’t matter and don’t have rights simply because they are old. In mid August 2007, a Select Committee on Human Rights, comprised of MPs and peers, reported that 21% of hospitals and care homes failed to meet even minimum standards of dignity and privacy for older people. The Committee said it had uncovered evidence of neglect, abuse, discrimination and unfair treatment of frail, older people. (Their discovery came as no surprise to those of us who have been uncovering such abuse for decades.) How have we managed to forget that in the 1930s the Nazis deliberately starved and dehydrated elderly and vulnerable patients because they were regarded as a useless burden on society? That is exactly what we are doing today.

[…]

Ageism is, it seems, now endemic in health care. A reader wrote to tell me that when she visited her doctor complaining of painful knees her doctor told her, very abruptly, that her problem was that she was living too long. She was devastated. `It wasn’t said as a joke,’ she told me. `He meant it.’ In the months before he died my father repeatedly complained: `People treat me like a fool because I am old’. A 79-year-old reader told me: `If you are over 55 they want you dead because you’re too expensive alive.’

We now live in a world where it is considered acceptable for men and women to have to share a ward; where hospital bathrooms are so dirty that patients dare not use them; where dentists are so scarce and expensive that people have to resort to pulling their own bad teeth with the aid of a length of string tied to a doorknob. But it is the elderly who, above all others, are regarded as disposable and irrelevant. It is the elderly who have no rights. Sexism and racism are outlawed but ageism is not. Indeed, it seems clear that ageism is now a State sponsored prejudice. Violent, feral youths who are caught assaulting elderly law-abiding citizens are likely to be ‘punished’ with a fistful of vouchers entitling them to a handful of free CDs (the lyrics of which may well encourage more violence) but honest, elderly citizens who, cannot afford to pay their council tax bill will end up in prison.

[…]

Note
The above essay is taken from Vernon Coleman’s book entitled `Why and how doctors kill more people than cancer’. The book is available via the bookshop on http://www.vernoncoleman.com

Moreover, even if Biden’s measures survive long enough to take effect, no company, U.S. or foreign, is going to invest the time and resources necessary to take advantage of reduced sanctions when there is a better than even chance that President Trump will reverse them sooner or later, just as he reversed Obama’s in 2017.

So why would the Biden administration bother to take such ineffectual and probably ephemeral steps to reduce sanctions, and why would the Cuban government release more than five hundred prisoners in response?

Winning freedom for the prisoners was obviously the main motivation for Biden, but for years the administration was loathe to engage Cuba in negotiations to free them. However, after Bob Menendez’s departure from the Senate, the Democrats’ loss in November, and the ruby red hue of Florida politics, Biden no longer had any reason to subordinate Cuba policy to domestic politics.

Perhaps entreaties from both Congressional Democrats and the Vatican that Biden do something to alleviate the deepening humanitarian crisis on the island finally broke through. Or perhaps there was some guilty pleasure in complicating Trump’s forthcoming Cuba policy — poetic justice for Trump putting Cuba on the terrorism list as a parting shot just days before Biden’s inauguration in 2020.

Cuban officials were equally resistant to freeing the protestors, whose tough prison sentences served as a warning and deterrent against future protests. Yet they agreed, despite there being slim chance that Cuba will gain any economic relief from Biden’s measures. But even in the worst case — that Trump scuttles all of Biden’s measures immediately — Cuba would still reap some political benefit. By releasing so many political prisoners — the most since the 1970s — Havana addresses a major point of friction in its relations with the European Union, an important source of desperately needed humanitarian assistance.

Havana’s prisoner release demonstrates to the international community at large its willingness to compromise and desire to reduce conflict with Washington. It puts the United States government on record acknowledging that Cuba is not a state sponsor of terrorism. And it puts the Trump administration in the awkward position of having to choose between leaving the new measures in place or reneging on an agreement to release 553 people from jail.

President Biden’s four years in the White House were a colossal missed opportunity in U.S.-Cuban relations — four years in which domestic political aspirations overrode foreign policy interests, advancing neither. And the Cuban people paid the price as Washington stood idly by while their standard of living plummeted, partly as a result of sanctions Trump imposed and Biden left in place.

Barack Obama took bold action to normalize relations with Cuba. Donald Trump took bold action to destabilize it. Nothing about Joe Biden’s Cuba policy was bold, and it accomplished nothing. Cuba is poorer and less open today than it was four years ago, China’s and Russia’s influence there is greater, a million more Cuban migrants have fled to the United States, and Democrats are less politically popular than ever in Florida.

[…]

Via https://responsiblestatecraft.org/biden-cuba-trump-2670889161/

By Rhoda Wilson

Alok Sharma, a Secretary of State in the previous UK government, has admitted that the Government knew, before they received regulatory approval, that people would be injured by the covid vaccines.

It was a lie to say that the vaccines were “safe” and it was unethical to coerce and mandate people into taking them. Worse still, it was pure evil to expose our nation’s children to this unnecessary and entirely avoidable risk of serious injury and death.

The Government anticipated a £1.7 billion bill for injuries caused by the coronavirus vaccine, the Covid Inquiry has heard …

Documents show that after initial conversations with Pfizer-BioNTech – which developed one of the mRNA jabs – the Government had estimated indemnity costs of between £75 billion and £300 billion.

The documents state: … “While the vaccines will be subject to regulatory approval, given the timeframe, the vaccines will not be able to benefit from the longer and more extensive clinical trials that would usually be the norm in any vaccine development.”

Covid vaccine harms were expected to cost Government £1.7bn, inquiry hears, The Telegraph, 17 January 2025

The above is a tweet (with some edits) posted by Mike Fairclough, “Britian’s most outspoken headmaster.” You can follow Fairclough on Twitter HERE or Substack HERE. You can read an archived copy of The Telegraph article HERE.

Interestingly, The Telegraph also notes that the UK government did not offer pharmaceuticals full indemnity as was the case in the USA:

Pharmaceutical companies developing the jabs initially asked for “statutory immunity”, which would have shielded them from any civil claims and which had been agreed by the US.

However, Lord Sharma said the Government had “pushed back” on offering full immunity to pharmaceutical companies, and eventually negotiated a lesser indemnity agreement, which they expected to cost £1.7 billion in a worst-case scenario.

Without considering the fraud committed by Pharmaceutical companies when they marketed their covid injections as “safe and effective,” it seems in the UK, the pharmaceutical companies are liable for civil claims.

In the case of fraudulent activities related to their products, pharmaceutical companies can be held criminally responsible.  Fraudulent activities can include various forms of misconduct such as illegal promotion of drugs, failure to report safety data and manufacturing violations.

In the UK, the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023 (“ECCTA”) introduced a new offence where companies may be held criminally liable if they did not have “reasonable prevention procedures” in place when a fraudulent act was committed by persons associated with them.

[…]

Via https://expose-news.com/2025/01/20/former-uk-secretary-of-state-admits/

By Jim Hoft

Joe Biden pardoned Tony Fauci, General Mark Milley, and the entire J6 Select Committee of liars in his final act as president.

They were all faithful servants to the Democrat machine. Now comes their reward.

Fauci’s policies destroyed millions of lives, bankrupted thousands of businesses, and unnecessarily killed millions around the world.

Liz Cheney, who is currently under investigation by the US House of Representatives, knowingly lied about January 6 and President Trump’s actions that day.

General Milley was one of the architects of the worst American foreign policy blunder in history. His response to his own ineptness was to focus on the woke military agenda. Milley also was making promises with China to warn them about any possible US attack. What a traitor.

Biden just pardoned these individuals – now we know they were all criminals.

Biden pardons for Mark Milley, Anthony Fauci, the members of the Jan. 6 committee and the cops who testified before the committee because they are GUILTY OF CRIMES.

Never forget what the Democrats have done.

The mask is completely OFF.

— Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (@RepMTG) January 20, 2025

In December, Politico dropped an explosive report that Biden’s handlers were strongly considering issuing preemptive several current and former government officials who they believe will be in the incoming Trump administration’s crosshairs.

The outlet notes that the Regime has become even more panicked since Trump announced he was picking MAGA hero Kash Patel to drain the Deep State swamp and ensure those who persecuted Trump do not escape punishment.

The figures include Senator-elect Adam “Pencilneck” Schiff (D-CA), lying warmonger Liz Cheney, and COVID fraudster Anthony Fauci.

Today Biden pardoned Fauci, Milley, and liar Liz Cheney as a final act of defiance against the American people.

Read the statement below:

Our nation relies on dedicated, selfless public servants every day. They are the lifeblood of our democracy.

Yet alarmingly, public servants have been subjected to ongoing threats and intimidation for faithfully discharging their duties.

In certain cases, some have even been threatened with criminal prosecutions, including General Mark A. Milley, Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, and the members and staff of the Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol. These public servants have served our nation with honor and distinction and do not deserve to be the targets of unjustified and politically motivated prosecutions.

General Milley served our nation for more than 40 years, serving in multiple command and leadership posts and deploying to some of the most dangerous parts of the world to protect and defend democracy. As Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, he guided our Armed Forces through complex global security threats and strengthened our existing alliances while forging new ones.

For more than half a century, Dr. Fauci served our country. He saved countless lives by managing the government’s response to pressing health crises, including HIV/AIDS, as well as the Ebola and Zika viruses. During his tenure as my Chief Medical Advisor, he helped the country tackle a once-in-a-century pandemic. The United States is safer and healthier because of him.

On January 6, 2021, American democracy was tested when a mob of insurrectionists attacked the Capitol in an attempt to overturn a fair and free election by force and violence. In light of the significance of that day, Congress established the bipartisan Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol to investigate and report upon the facts, circumstances, and causes of the insurrection. The Select Committee fulfilled this mission with integrity and a commitment to discovering the truth. Rather than accept accountability, those who perpetrated the January 6th attack have taken every opportunity to undermine and intimidate those who participated in the Select Committee in an attempt to rewrite history, erase the stain of January 6th for partisan gain, and seek revenge, including by threatening criminal prosecutions.

I believe in the rule of law, and I am optimistic that the strength of our legal institutions will ultimately prevail over politics. But these are exceptional circumstances, and I cannot in good conscience do nothing. Baseless and politically motivated investigations wreak havoc on the lives, safety, and financial security of targeted individuals and their families. Even when individuals have done nothing wrong-and in fact have done the right thing-and will ultimately be exonerated, the mere fact of being investigated or prosecuted can irreparably damage reputations and finances.

That is why I am exercising my authority under the Constitution to pardon General Mark A. Milley, Dr. Anthony S. Fauci, the Members of Congress and staff who served on the Select Committee, and the U.S. Capitol and D.C. Metropolitan police officers who testified before the Select Committee. The issuance of these pardons should not be mistaken as an acknowledgment that any individual engaged in any wrongdoing, nor should acceptance be misconstrued as an admission of guilt for any offense. Our nation owes these public servants a debt of gratitude for their tireless commitment to our country.

[…]

Via https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2025/01/breaking-joe-biden-pardons-killer-tony-fauci-loser/

Satellite images of wildfires burning in Southern California By NBC Staff • Published January 11, 2025

Rpm Clutz

Holman W. Jenkins, Jr. writes in Wall Street Journal End of a Climate Delusion.  Excerpts in italics with my bolds and added images.

Amid California’s fires, voters wake up from the dream that green pork is a solution.

CO2 emitted into the atmosphere is rapidly and, for all practical purposes, uniformly distributed around the planet.

I may be stating the obvious but it needs to be pointed out. Voters and even political leaders are surprisingly poorly informed on this point. Emissions cuts in California don’t have any significant effect on California’s climate. They also have no global effect. California’s cuts are too small relative to the global whole; they also are largely illusory.

Emitting industries leave the state. They don’t stop emitting. If California imports Canadian hydro to charge its electric vehicles, consumers elsewhere have to burn more coal and gas. If Californians drive EVs, more gasoline is free to be burned by others, releasing more CO2 that influences climate change in California and everywhere else.

Green-energy subsidies do not reduce emissions. This will be news to millions of California voters. It contradicts a central tenet of state policy. It isn’t news to the actual enactors of these subsidies. A National Research Council study sponsored by congressional Democrats in 2008 concluded that such handouts were a “poor tool for reducing greenhouse gases” and called for carbon taxes instead.

Unfortunately, the incoming Obama administration quickly discovered it favored climate taxes only when Republicans were in charge. Backers would later engage in flagrant lying to promote Joe Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act, knowingly citing bogus predictions that its trillion-dollar spending profusion would reduce emissions.

A 2019 University of Oregon study had already revealed the empirical truth: Green energy doesn’t replace fossil fuels, it enables more energy consumption overall. That same year the EPA calculated that the potential emissions savings from subsidizing electric vehicles had been offset five times over by the pickup truck and SUV boom Team Obama facilitated to assure the success of its auto bailout.

Last year, the premier journal Science put a nail in the question: 96% of policies supported worldwide as “reducing” emissions failed to do so, consisting mostly of handouts to green-energy interests.

And yet certain Journal readers still assail me with the epithet “denier.” They confuse my criticism of Democratic hypocrisy with my imagined views on climate science. As I’ve written back to many, “Don’t think politicians haven’t figured this out about you. That’s why they can give us unsustainable corporate welfare boondoggles and call it climate policy.”

A CNN moderator Saturday urged viewers to vote in an online poll on whether the California disaster should be blamed on climate change or poor leadership. Notice the non sequitur: as if climate change is an excuse for not acting against fire risk.

By all means, let politicians proclaim a “climate crisis” or any other rhetorical flourish if it helps mobilize support for public actions that actually serve a useful purpose. But a prerevolutionary situation has been building in California for two decades, starting with the Third World blackouts in late 2000 not because of any shortage of power but because of large helpings of political cowardice.

 A decision in 2019 authorized yet more Third World blackouts instead of reasonably shielding utilities from lawsuit risk over fires their power lines might be accused of contributing to. One result, predictably, has been a proliferation of backyard generators, which increase fire risk.

Californians are stuck adapting in the ways left open to them. Since 2017, half a million have fled Los Angeles County.

Two social technologies might help but the state has been intent on denying itself their advantages. One is a functioning insurance market. If you can’t afford the insurance, you can’t afford the house. Get ready, instead, for a torrent of federal and state money to help residents, some of them wealthy, rebuild in high-risk fire zones.

The other is a functioning market in water. Five gallons to produce a walnut probably isn’t tenable under any realistic system of water pricing. If water were properly valued, municipalities would also rapidly discover the logic of building aquifers to capture seasonal runoff. A thousand things would change if water were priced to flow to its most highly valued uses.

Here’s another concept: Climate change can exist and yet be an insignificant variable.

In Southern California’s Mediterranean climate, anytime 100-mile-an-hour winds start blowing embers toward densely packed housing developments, a conflagration is certain. The only answer then is to have the manpower and resources ready to put fires out as quickly as they start.

[…]

Via https://rclutz.com/2025/01/20/left-coast-climate-delusion-ends-in-flames/