Vaccinated and Boosted AOC Announces COVID Infection After Maskless Partying in Florida

It used to be Branch Covidian heresy to admit the vaccinated and boosted members could be infected and spread COVID-19.  However, in the past month the vaccinated Covidians are the majority of those spreading the infection.

In the latest example of the ideological left running into the reality of Omicron, essentially a cold with a purpose, Democrat Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez announces her illness:

Despite virtue-signaling that all the good people remain locked down in the leftist epicenters of COVID restriction; and despite saying that anyone who does not adhere to the rules and regulations of the lockdown are being selfish; Ms. AOC was recently noted partying maskless without social distancing in Miami, Florida.

Not to worry, a couple of doses of Nyquil and some rest, and AOC will be ready for booster shot number four in no time.

Unprecedented: Deaths in Indiana for ages 18-64 are up 40%

 

This is huge. Something is killing healthy people at an unprecedented rate. It isn't COVID. Could it be the "safe and effective" COVID vaccine? I think so. Here's why.

Start by reading this story, “Indiana life insurance CEO says deaths are up 40% among people ages 18-64.” Read the whole thing now.

Here’s the link to the video from the CEO.

Note: In the event this story “disappears” from view, I kept a backup. You can’t be too careful nowadays.

This is big. Really big. And I’m not the only one that thinks so.

Key points:

1. Deaths among 18-64 year-olds (who don’t normally die) are up by 40% in 2021 vs. pre-pandemic levels

2. This is huge. HUGE. They’ve never seen anything like this before in their history. Normally death rates don’t change at all. They are very stable. It would take something REALLY BIG to have an effect this big. The effect size is 12-sigma. That is an event that would happen by pure chance every 2.8e32 years (as shown in the image below). That’s very rare. It’s basically never. The universe is only 14 billion years old which is 1.4e13. In other words, the event that happened is not a statistical “fluke.” Something caused a very big change.
   

   

3. Others in the industry are seeing it too.

4. It isn’t COVID. COVID deaths are down this year.

5. Whatever it is that is causing this, it is bigger and more deadlier than COVID and it’s affecting nearly everyone.

6. The CDC is totally on top of this… ok, just kidding… the CDC is clueless as usual.

All of this means that “something” is causing MASSIVE numbers of excess deaths in 2021.

I wonder what is killing all these people?

Here are the clues we have, so we need someone really smart to piece this mystery together:

1. These deaths started only after the vaccines rolled out

2. The deaths are “primarily working-age people 18 to 64” who are the employees of companies that have group life insurance plans through OneAmerica. That’s not to say 65 and over aren’t affected as well. What’s key is that we’re seeing effects in young people.

3. There are more excess deaths than anytime in history, so it is likely caused by a new threat, never seen before in history, like a novel vaccine that has never been used before or something new like that that a huge number of people would be exposed to (such as by a state that pushes vaccination).

4. Not due to COVID (COVID deaths are way down).

5. They are dying from a variety of causes, not just a single cause. So this rules out food or air-based pathogens. I note that the variety of causes of death is consistent with the wide range of adverse events caused by the COVID vaccines, for example.

6. It has to affect massive numbers of people to get an effect size that high. So it is something new affecting at least half the population, like a new mandated vaccine for example.

7. There is a huge push for vaccines by the Indiana governor, he wants to have everyone vaccinated. Interesting. “Indiana Gov. Eric Holcomb doubled down on the drive to get everyone in the state vaccinated.”

8. Useful fact: Adults 65 and older account for 16% of the US population but 80% of COVID-19 deaths in the US, somewhat higher than their share of deaths from all causes (75%) over the same period. We’ll use that 75% stat later.

9. It isn’t just the one life insurance company, they are all seeing this huge rises at other insurance companies. So this is something huge and national in scope, like a vaccine mandate in the entire US, or something like that.

10. “Just to give you an idea of how bad that is, a three-sigma or a one-in-200-year catastrophe would be a 10% increase over pre-pandemic,” he said. “So 40% is just unheard of.” This suggests it has to be a novel pathogen (like a novel vaccine, for example). It has to be something first introduced in 2021, you know, like a new COVID vaccine.

11. The company is seeing an “uptick” in disability claims, saying at first it was short-term disability claims, and now the increase is in long-term disability claims. So whatever it is is killing people and those that aren’t killed are disabled. You know, like what the COVID vaccines are proven to do (since I believe VAERS).

12. Brian Tabor, the president of the Indiana Hospital Association, said that hospitals across the state are being flooded with patients “with many different conditions,” saying “unfortunately, the average Hoosiers’ health has declined during the pandemic.” In a follow-up call, he said he did not have a breakdown showing why so many people in the state are being hospitalized – for what conditions or ailments. But he said the extraordinarily high death rate quoted by Davison matched what hospitals in the state are seeing. So this could all be caused by the COVID vaccines.

13. The number of hospitalizations in the state is now higher than before the COVID-19 vaccine was introduced a year ago, and in fact is higher than it’s been in the past five years, Dr. Lindsay Weaver, Indiana’s chief medical officer, said at a news conference with Gov. Eric Holcomb on Wednesday. So again, whatever is killing people is worse than COVID. It can’t be COVID since we have so many vaccinated people with our safe and effective vaccine that prevents COVID deaths.

14. The CEO of the insurance company doesn’t think the vaccines are causing the deaths and disability. Check out this tweet: he is requiring his employees to be vaccinated! So it cannot be the vaccine, even though it fits all the facts! Darn! The CEO knows that the vaccines are safe and effective. He has no evidence to back that statement up, but we should believe him since he’s an authority figure (you know, like the CDC). We can always trust authority figures, and even more so when they have no evidence. Who needs evidence? Science has been displaced in 2021.

So I must say, I’m baffled. I had thought it was the COVID vaccine because it fit all the evidence except the last item. I was so close…

Here is the death rate by age from the CDC below. See how stable it is from year to year? Amazingly stable! So when you get a 40% jump, that is unbelievable. It is a 4-alarm fire.

Extrapolating this to the rest of the country

We know that about 3M people die a year in the US. 75% are over 65 years old, so that leaves us with 750K deaths per year for under 65.

If that jumped by 40% from pre-pandemic levels in Q3 and Q4, we should assume that Q2 was the ramp up period (we’ll assume a linear ramp up in Q2).

So that is 75K deaths per quarter for Q3 and Q4 and half of that, 37K deaths in Q2.

So that means roughly 187K excess deaths are probably happening for ages 18-64 due to some new cause.

Comparison with number predicted from VAERS for the same age range in the US

Let’s see if this might match the number killed by the vaccines in the US for the same age range. I used 65 in the query because that means “under 65”:

(2156 deaths in VAERS - 40 background deaths)* 41 (the URF) and we get 87K deaths.

Which means either:

1. There is another effect at play which is actually killing more people 18-64 than the vaccine is (unlikely but possible)

2. My URF of 41 is underestimating deaths by a factor of 2.15

I’m going with explanation #2. I’ve always said 41 is a conservative URF for deaths. The 41 is computed from anaphylaxis rates which are the most likely events to be reported to VAERS. It wouldn’t surprise me at all that deaths are under-reported by a much larger ratio.

Even worse: the insurance companies will jack up the premiums for firms in low-vaccinated areas to pay for the deaths in the other regions. Blame the unvaccinated!

What’s interesting is what OneAmerica Life Insurance CEO Scott Davison about the higher than normal actuarial death rate. Listen to the part where he said "Premium Load":

“Most of us in the industry are starting to target and to add a premium loads onto employers that are based in counties that have low vaccination rates."

It means they are blaming the higher than normal death/disability rate on the unvaccinated (which is nonsensical).

So the insurance companies had a wrong assumption and are blaming the wrong party perhaps because they didn't have the data to see what was really behind the issue or they didn’t want to challenge the narrative and get in trouble. It could be a combination of the two reasons.

This is huge. My closest friends all noticed this article too and wrote about it.

I only found out about these articles after I wrote my initial draft last night. I wanted to sleep on it before I published.

Three of the people I talk to most frequently about vaccine-related issues are Jessica Rose, Mathew Crawford, and Robert Malone.

What do you know: all three of them published their substacks on this topic before I hit the “Publish” button. So I’m late to the game.

My friends concur with my reaction of the significance of this article.

For example, Malone wrote:

Take a moment to read the entire article.  Now. 

just like I wrote (independently). We probably wrote it at the same time.

Here are the links to the articles:

Robert Malone’s article

What if the largest experiment on human beings in history is a failure?
Excerpt:

It is starting to look to me like the largest experiment on human beings in recorded history has failed.  And, if this rather dry report from a senior Indiana life insurance executive holds true, then Reiner Fuellmich’s “Crimes against Humanity” push for convening new Nuremberg trials starts to look a lot less quixotic and a lot more prophetic.

…

AT A MINIMUM, based on my reading, one has to conclude that if this report holds and is confirmed by others in the dry world of life insurance actuaries, we have both a huge human tragedy and a profound public policy failure of the US Government and US HHS system to serve and protect the citizens that pay for this “service”. 

IF this holds true, then the genetic vaccines so aggressively promoted have failed, and the clear federal campaign to prevent early treatment with lifesaving drugs has contributed to a massive, avoidable loss of life. 

AT WORST, this report implies that the federal workplace vaccine mandates have driven what appears to be a true crime against humanity.  Massive loss of life in (presumably) workers that have been forced to accept a toxic vaccine at higher frequency relative to the general population of Indiana.

Jessica Rose’s article

Insurance companies - just like banking, not so boring anymore!
Excerpt:

So what does this tell us? It tells us that we are potentially in a huge steaming pile of shit. To be frank. These indications from our friend at the insurance company are simply that - indications. If what we are seeing in VAERS, and the other adverse event reporting systems, is the mere reflection of what is actually going on with regards to injuries, which I presume it is, then we ain’t seen nothing yet. And if what is being reported with regards to immune deficiencies associated with these injections is not simply anecdotal or representative of a small sub-cohort of individuals, we could be looking at a government imposed complete health disaster. We will have to pull together to get through it, as I always say.

To end this write-up, as Robert said, I hope I am wrong. But I fear that I am not.

Mathew Crawford’s article

Why are Non-COVID Deaths at Historic Highs in Indiana?
Excerpt:

Davidson described a 10% increase in mortality as a 3-sigma (standard deviation) event, so that makes 40% a 12-sigma event. That's statistics talk for how far from ordinary unusual events are. For clarification, a three-sigma event should happen around once every 300 or so years and a six-sigma event should happen once every 300,000 or so years. We're talking about the proportion of the area under a normal curve that is shaded in proportion to the total area. We would really need to zoom in on it quite a bit to detect with the naked eye. 

…

This is not just about COVID-19, but not one person in the news conference comes out to discuss vaccine deaths or injury, not even to allay the fear. They don't want to discuss it.

This is not an isolated incident

Life insurance death claims shoot 41%, up 3.5x in 2021

In Phoenix, the death rate of city employees (14,000 employees) in 2021 doubled from the 10-year average. That’s not a 40% increase. That’s a 100% increase. There is clearly something going on that is not unique to Indiana.

Excess mortality figures in Europe and the UK seem to show younger people are dying faster than the elderly, and that people 0-14 are dying faster in the second half of 2021 as compared to the first. More evidence showing that the vaccines are killing kids.

Reaction from the mainstream press was predictable: they ignored it

The mainstream media didn’t pick up on this at all. It is 7am PST on January 3 and I just did this Google query and found the ONLY story was the original story. Nothing else. Nobody else thought it was important. Just me and my friends.

Is there another explanation for all of this?

Is there a better explanation that fits the number of deaths and the causes of death? I wouldn’t want to leap to conclusions.

There could be something we haven’t thought of. For example, did you know that Twitter determined that the huge rise in athlete deaths since the jabs were rolled out were due to “dehydration, overheating and undiagnosed heart conditions.” The fact that these deaths were happening in the winter was immaterial. And the fact that they cited no evidence to back up their hypothesis was expected. And they didn’t explain why it didn’t happen last year or in any other year. An exercise for the reader I guess.

There is no stopping condition for the vaccine

It’s important to point out that unlike every other clinical trial that would be approved by an internal review board (IRB), this one does not have a pre-defined stopping condition.

The CDC and FDA cannot pull the plug on the vaccine because no stopping condition was pre-defined.

And nobody in Congress will set a stopping condition (we asked Members of Congress “How many kids have to die before you will call a halt to the vaccines?” and they all refused to answer).

What you can do about it

I’m gathering similar stats from other insurance companies to confirm this observation. If you work at an insurance company, please join this “special” single-purpose substack now and read this article where you can enter data. If you know someone who does work at an insurance company, please forward them this article.

Thanks!

Trump in 2024? Maybe!

What’s certain is not too many Americans will be willing to hand over the honor of choosing the next president to Liz Cheney and her smug, entitled, and repellent confrères.

by Roger Kimball for American Greatness

Among Trump-friendly conservatives, there seem to be essentially two strands of sentiment about who should be the Republican candidate for president in 2024. One strand says, “Donald Trump, assuming he runs and his health is good.” 

The other strand exhibits various shades of dubiousness. Some profess admiration for what Trump accomplished in his first term, but lament his “divisiveness,” which they anatomize in various ways as a product of narcissism, impulsiveness, or simple bad character. 

A few in this group blame the divisiveness not on Trump, but the people, inside his administration and out, who spent the entirety of Trump’s first term trying to undermine his presidency. A sizable segment of this dubious group would, truth be told, like to see the back of Donald Trump forever. 

Other segments of this group acknowledge that they would support Trump should he run and win the nomination, but confess, sotto voce, that they would prefer another “Trumpist” candidate. “Trumpism without Trump” is the slogan of many in this group, and it is in these circles that one repeatedly hears the names of Ron DeSantis, the Republican governor of Florida, and Mike Pompeo, secretary of state in the second part of the Trump Administration.

Is there such a thing as “Trumpism without Trump”? I do not know. I understand those who argue that asking for Trumpism without Trump is a bit like asking for sunshine without the sun. It was often said, sometimes thankfully, sometimes as a matter of fact, that Trump was sui generis. If that is the case, then it might well be that the message and the messenger are so closely bound up with each other that the effort to disentangle them is doomed to fail. 

I understand the concern about Trump’s vaunted “divisiveness.” But it is well to acknowledge this irony. The tsunami of hatred and vitriol that washed over Donald Trump since before he assumed office until the present moment was nothing if not “divisive.” It infected the Twittersphere as brazenly as any of Trump’s “mean tweets” about Jim Acosta, the “fake news,” or sundry other “losers.” Why was that not castigated as “divisive,” evidence of bad character, against the norms or civilized political behavior? 

We now know that the whole Russia collusion delusion was invented lock-stock-and-barrel in the fetid skunkworks of the Clinton campaign. We know, too, that it was seized upon and pumped up by an irresponsible media and the rancid outposts of the administrative state and its so-called intelligence agencies. Trump was cooked before he set foot in the Oval Office. 

But isn’t that all the more reason to reject him come 2024? There is no reason to believe the entitled magi who rule us will have changed themselves or that they will be replaced. Won’t it just be Trump hysteria 2.0, this time turned up to 11? And if that is the case, shouldn’t we give in and move on? 

Should we? I confess to being of two minds about that. I think it likely that, should Trump be the nominee, and should he be reelected in 2024, the forces arrayed against him will suffer a nervous breakdown that will make the anti-Trump hysteria of 2016-2020 look like an Oxford Union debate. 

At least, that’s what we are being warned about. Liz Cheney, the soon-to-be former faux-Republican congresswoman from Wyoming, even revealed that her edition of the U.S. Constitution is different from the one that you and I grew up with. Article II of the once-standard version of the Constitution goes into considerable detail about how the president and vice president are to be elected. Mirabile dictu, Liz Cheney is not mentioned. 

But just a week or so back, Cheney said an important goal of the congressional committee investigating the January 6 Capitol protest was to demonstrate that Donald Trump is “clearly unfit for future office, clearly can never be anywhere near the Oval Office ever again.” Will we have to pass future candidates before Cheney or her avatars to make sure that they receive ye olde nihil obstat? 

Maybe. But maybe there is something in the oft-urged point that two can play at incontinent temper tantrums. 

Why should the anti-Trump fraternity have a monopoly on that species of intemperate insanity? There might be some positive good achieved if the Left and the NeverTrump neither-Left-nor-Right were to suspect that they might themselves be the object of the sort of hysteria they have visited upon their opponents. There might be something salutary in making that sort of intimidation reciprocal. It’s worth pondering. 

While we do so, let’s also review the question of Donald Trump’s age. If he runs again in 2024, he will be the same age as Joe Biden was when he ran in 2020. That is not a confidence-building spectacle. But Biden has always been cognitively challenged and is quite clearly well down the path to senility. He refuses to take a cognitive test of the sort that Trump aced when he entered office. 

True, 2024 is three years away and there are reasons to be cautious about entrusting someone of Biden’s age with the awesome power of the presidency. At the same time, many great statesmen were about the age Trump will be in 2024 when they assumed office. Churchill won his last term as Prime Minister in 1951, when he was 77. Julian Jackson, in his magisterial biography of de Gaulle, notes that in 1967 De Gaulle, who left office at 79 in 1969, drew up a list of famous men who had been productive well into old age. Goethe began writing Faust at 80. Verdi composed his Te Deum at 85. Sophocles wroteOedipus at 90, the same age that the Venetian Doge Dondolo took Constantinople. Other names on his list were Titian, Monet, Chateaubriand, Hugo, Tolstoy, Bernard Shaw, Kant, and Voltaire. 

Of course, some men are senile at 40. Others are robust well into their ninth decade. Like so many important decisions, this one cannot be made by any formula. A week is a long time in politics, Harold Wilson rightly said. How much longer is three years? 

It’s too early, I think, to decide who the best Republican candidate will be in 2024. Age will certainly be a consideration. But so will the question of who gets to say whom the American people are allowed to elect. Not too many, I think, will be willing to hand over that honor to Liz Cheney and her smug, entitled, and repellent confrères.

X22, On the Fringe, and more-Jan 9

 

If you know of anyone who keeps saying or thinking stuff like 'Nothing will ever be done' or 'We're all doomed to die as slaves in camps' or even 'Let's just off ourselves while we still think we're free', then advise them to read this daily article.

Things ARE being done! Just because you can't see or hear of stuff being done from your local source of news doesn't mean nothing is being done! A lot of the stuff that I like to report on here from these podcasts? This is only like 20% of what is being allowed to leak out! There is so much going on that we can't hear about either because there is either not enough info or because it's top secret!

Would all the bad stuff that is happening right now even BE happening if there wasn't good stuff being done behind the scenes? The bad stuff is happening for a reason, and it's because the good guys are fighting back very hard! The bad guys know they're done, they just want to make even bigger fools of themselves before they either get hauled off to jail or to the gallows.

Imagine what state we would be in right now if everyone just simply gave up when the going gets too tough. This is not a country where everyone just gives up because we might not win. Look around your state, and look around the world. We're not giving up, we're fighting back. Whether it be through peaceful protests, or just simply being keyboard warriors, it counts!

There is hope out there, you just need to know where to look. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise.

Now, on to tonight's news:

The Communists Won The Cold War

The old Soviet regime was not defeated; it is reestablishing itself in the United States.

by Charles J. Urlacher for American Greatness

Thirty years ago, on December 25, 1991, Mikhail Gorbachev resigned as Soviet president and commander of the Red Army. By the end of the following year, the Soviet Union ceased to exist as a political entity. The democratic alliance of the western Christian nations “won” the Cold War. Intellectuals looked forward to the end of history. Politicians prognosticated about the rise of a unipolar world with the United States leading a new world order.

Yet 30 years later, the muted discussion of this anniversary should tell us something. Discussion of the dissolution of the Soviet Union is markedly absent from our current political conversation. Did we really win the Cold War?

This month, a sitting United States senator, Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), gave a speech to a group of communists. He suffered no consequences. Socially speaking, does not the America of 2021 have far more in common with the Soviet Union of 1917 or 1975 than it does with the United States of America as it existed in 1917 or 1945?

If we transported any of our cold warriors—from George Kennan to Dwight Eisenhower to John F. Kennedy to Ronald Reagan—into the present and showed them the United States (or the European Union) and its ruling class today, I doubt any of them would say, “Yes, we definitely won the Cold War.”

In 1945, Nazis and their sympathizers in positions of power were thoroughly routed, not only in Germany but also in every victorious Allied nation of World War II. In the United States, the “Friends of the New Germany” did not survive. The same cannot be said of the American Communist Party after our “victory” in the Cold War.

How many actors, directors, producers, and screenwriters in Hollywood were permanently downgraded after 1991 for having made excuses for a collapsed communist regime that killed tens of millions of people? How many socialist journalists or media executives lost their jobs for carrying water for a Joseph Stalin or a Leonid Brezhnev? How many professors or public educators who praised the revolutionary spirit of a Lenin or a Rosa Luxemburg lost their jobs? The answer, of course, is none.

Thirty years later, in the United States, communists and communist-adjacent individuals and institutions control the “post-Cold War” United States. In American universities, almost 20 percent of social science professors are open Marxists. Among the youth, “one in three millennials favor communism. As many as 70% would likely vote for a socialist candidate. Only 57% believe that the Declaration of Independence better ‘guarantees freedom and equality’ than the Communist Manifesto does.”

Did we win the Cold War? Just look at the evidence and compare.

We have a policy of korenizatsiya aimed against Middle Americans. In the Soviet context, this was the anti-majoritarian policy that penalized the ethnic Russian majority in the Soviet Union. One historian described the Soviet Union in its early years as an “Affirmative Action Empire.” The Biden-Harris regime pursues its own version of korenizatsiya today.

On the sex question, it was the Bolsheviks who were the first to legalize infanticide. These long dead and “defeated” Soviets can sleep soundly knowing that their mortal American enemies adopted this practice in 1973, and in 1992, a Supreme Court with a majority of judges appointed by Republicans maintained the practice just one year after we “won” the Cold War.

It was the Bolsheviks who gave us “International Women’s Day” (though today’s communists scarcely can tell us what a “woman” even is) which is celebrated on March 8. The vice president of the United States marks its observance every year.

The Soviets had political commissars who ensured loyalty to the Soviet regime within the Red army. The United States Army has its Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion commissars. But it’s not confined to the military.

In “victorious” post-Cold War America we also have these commissars within every major institution that oversees hiring, promoting, and firing in America’s mass government, mass culture, and mass economy. Human resources, as an industry, grows at a 10 percent rate per year. Within this industry, the DEI commissars proliferate at between 30-106 percent year over year throughout the West.

In the Soviet Union, state-controlled media waged a relentless propaganda campaign against Christianity. Our official state media who direct the movies, write the public-school textbooks, and produce “mainstream” journalism spew a constant stream of derision against the foundational faith of the United States in the name of replacing it with the new religion of wokeism.

Not content to cut off traditional religious faith from mainstream society, the Soviets purposely divided and conquered the churches themselves by promoting what they called the Living Church. Today, the American churches are turned against themselves as globalist billionaires buy them off and pay servile false shepherds whose flocks invariably end as apostates. How many American Christians are simply members of these new Living Churches like those which the Soviets imposed?

For the time being, we—the American nation—may be a conquered people living under a sort of pseudo-communist regime. Let us hope that our future leaders are wiser than the American leaders of 1991 were.

In their premature celebrations, they failed to realize that winning the global war against communism also required rooting it out here, at home.

Next time, in order to win, we need only heed the advice that President Truman gave us in his 1953 Farewell Address: “the Communist world has great resources, and it looks strong. But there is a fatal flaw in their society. Theirs is a godless system, a system of slavery; there is no freedom in it, no consent. The Iron Curtain, the secret police, the constant purges, all these are symptoms of a great basic weakness—the rulers’ fear of their own people. In the long run the strength of our free society, and our ideals, will prevail over a system that has respect for neither God nor man.”

Today, we live in a regime that is both godless and unfree. None of us consented to seeing our Nation’s world-historic heroes smeared by occupiers; none of us consented to being subject to this regime’s poisonous propaganda. The occupiers can fortify all the fraudulent elections they want; they can haul out all of their Soviet-knock-off Lysenkoist experts to try to force us to bend the knee to Science ™. They can use their own secret police to set us up and purge us. They can import aliens to weaponize demography against us and clutch their pearls about “Our Democracy ™” when we protest that they aim illegitimately to try and wield an artificial majority to submerge and marginalize the core of our nation.

But in our hearts, we know what is and isn’t real. We must remain loyal to the faith of our fathers. We must revere the men who built this nation. Those of us who resist the grip of this communist-inspired globalist occupation regime, threatened by the natural alliance of managerial capitalism and international communism, can and must do better when we are presented with an opportunity like that which was missed after December 25, 1991.