Advertisement

Natural Immunity Numbers

November 15, 2021

Aside from dismissing it, the CDC has had very little to say about natural immunity gained from having already been infected with COVID-19. But last week, a Freedom of Information Act request revealed that they had no records of any recovered person infecting another person. Not to say that it can’t happen; they apparently just haven’t been bothering to compile any data on what is one of the most important public health questions in America.

https://beckernews.com/the-cdc-finally-reveals-its-estimate-for-how-many-americans-have-natural-immunity-42976/

Now, as Kyle Becker of Becker News reports, after declining for five months to update its figures for how many recovered Americans there are, “The CDC quietly acknowledged that a staggering 146.6 million people have been infected by the Sars-CoV-2 virus and have survived it.” That’s far more than earlier reported. Even that could be an underestimate: counting likely unreported cases, it could be as high as 187.6 million. If infection conveys immunity, you’d think that would be something our national health agency would want to know about.

Also, 124 million of those recovered people had “symptomatic illnesses,” but only one in four sought medical treatment. (That would include my two staff writers, who took only aspirin and vitamins.) There were 7.5 million hospitalizations, but that could be greatly inflated by counting routine hospital treatments that happened to include a positive COVID test.

The 921,000 “estimated total deaths” include “COVID-related deaths,” not necessary deaths caused by COVID. 94% of these deaths had serious underlying medical conditions, such as heart disease, stroke, and diabetes, and the average age of a COVID-related death victim in 2020 was 77.

There are many more numbers at the link, but few of them bolster the government’s case for ignoring natural immunity or imposing draconian lockdowns or vaccine mandates, especially on children. It also has information on a longterm study of natural immunity that Johns Hopkins researcher Dr. Marty Makarey and his team are launching. He said it’s a study that the CDC and NIH should be doing “instead of torturing thousands of beagle puppies.”

It will be interesting to see if social media sites ban this story, considering all the numbers and charts in it are taken directly from the CDC’s own website.

With inflation at the highest level in 30 years and no end in sight, thank goodness President Biden’s top economic advisor knows how to fix it: more government spending.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/14/politics/brian-deese-inflation-cnntv/index.html?utm_content=2021-11-14T22%3A15%3A05&

Brian Deese, the director of the National Economic Council, says that to boost the economy, create jobs and bring down inflation, Congress must pass Biden’s $1.75 trillion spending package. Because nothing brings down inflation like the government printing more money and flooding the economy with it.

Sen. Ted Cruz had the most succinct response on Twitter:

“You’re drowning…MORE water!”

Fortunately, even if the House manages to drag that overstuffed pig of a bill past the debt limit and over the finish line, it still has to go back to the Senate.

https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/biden-democrats-social-reconciliation-spending-bill-thanksgiving-december-debt-limit-government-funding

Republicans are solidly opposed, and Sen. Joe Manchin said, "By all accounts, the threat posed by record inflation to the American people is not ‘transitory’ and is instead getting worse. From the grocery store to the gas pump, Americans know the inflation tax is real and D.C. can no longer ignore the economic pain Americans feel every day."

Sounds as if he’s not convinced that the key to bringing down inflation is to borrow and spend another two trillion dollars.

By the way, did I mention that Brian Deese also served as a senior adviser on the economy to Barack Obama? I’m sure you’ll recall the booming economy and supercharged job creation under Obama.

So, after three indictments and counting, will there be big-time accountability as a result of John Durham’s investigation of the Russia Hoax? It depends on who’s talking.

The NEW YORK POST ran a superb, richly detailed editorial last week that starts by condemning most of the media for their lack of coverage now that the special counsel is finally speaking. Of course, it comes as no surprise that most media are ignoring the story coming out of his grand jury. The POST reveals the whole sordid story of how the media covered the “dossier” that was peddled to them by Christopher Steele and others. For when you have time, this is recommended reading, and also good to pass along to those you know who are just now becoming aware of what we’ve all known for years.

https://nypost.com/2021/11/09/how-the-media-pushed-hillary-clintons-lies-against-trump/?utm_source=twitter_sitebuttons&utm_medium=site%20buttons&utm_campaign=site%20buttons

The media eagerly pushed a bogus “dossier,” but they avoided revealing the connections between it and Hillary’s campaign or doing anything on their own to try to discredit it, as real journalists would be bound to do. Instead, they lapped it up like a cat with a bowl of cream. For that, THE NEW YORK TIMES and the WASHINGTON POST won the Pulitzer Prize. There might not be jail cells for these “journalists,” but they should at least have to give the Pulitzer back!

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/oct/04/donald-trump-pulitzer-prize-board-russia-new-york-times-washington-post

Or make them give it to the NY POST. Here, the POST has clearly outlined the relationships among major players Christopher Steele, Igor Danchenko and Charles Dolan. Be glad that a few major news outlets such as the POST are not only reporting what we think of as “old news,” but are doing so in a clear, methodical way that makes the complex simple. We know that one strategy the left uses for cover is to make sure its scandals are too complicated or “inside” for most people to follow. They also delay, delay, delay so that stories BECOME “old news,” and then they say, “Hey, it’s time to move on!” Um, we’ve not moving on from this.

So, the NY POST has indicted the media, not literally in a court of law but as a matter of public shaming. What about actual indictments, the kind that can lead to convictions and jail sentences? I hesitate even to link to the latest commentary by Andrew C. McCarthy, as I think he might have just been in a pessimistic frame of mind last week and will put you in one, too. The theme for his piece might be that “abuse of power is not criminal.” To that we say that, yes, sometimes it isn’t, but sometimes it sure is.

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/durham-indictments-collusion-case-direction-andrew-mccarthy

It’s true that what Durham knows and what he can prove in court are two different things. But at this point, Durham doesn’t really have to prove every last word in the "dossier" is false; we’ve already seen enough evidence about this for any reasonable person to conclude it was made up. As for who is responsible at the top for directing this outrageous scheme, we still don’t know everything Durham has. He sure seems to be zeroing in on the Clinton people. So even though McCarthy literally wrote the book on the Russia Hoax (BALL OF COLLUSION; highly recommended), we think he might be trying to forecast too far ahead. There’s more material yet to be declassified, and it might go a long way towards satisfying McCarthy.

In fact, last week, former Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe told Maria Bartiromo there were over 1,000 documents from the Durham investigation that haven’t yet been declassified, and some of the intelligence relates directly to criminal activity that could be the basis for “further indictments.” He reminded us that a grand jury is saying that what happened with the Steele “dossier” is criminal in nature, and he anticipates that various people involved in exploiting it will be in legal jeopardy.

Kash Patel, lead investigator for former House Intelligence Committee chairman Devin Nunes, spoke with Maria this Sunday and specifically implicated Fiona Hill as one who could face criminal charges for lying to Congress in October of 2019 when she said, “I have no knowledge whatsoever of how he developed that dossier. None. I just want to state that.” Heck, she counts herself among Christopher Steele’s close friends and introduced him to Igor Danchenko. She also introduced Danchenko to big-time Clinton ally and Trump-Russia fabulist Charles Dolan, who provided fake stories for the “dossier.”

Fiona Hill serves as the connection between the Steele operation and the Democrat Party, Patel said. “John Durham’s on that case,” he said; “I think we’re gonna get there.”

Patel broke down three areas of criminality that Durham has been looking at, describing them as three points of a triangle and represented by the three criminal indictments that have been handed down so far. Michael Sussmann, at the top of this triangle, represents the indictment of the Hillary Clinton campaign, the DNC, Perkins Coie and Fusion GPS, “funneling tens of millions of dollars to perpetuate the biggest fraud in the history of the FBI.” FBI attorney Kevin Clinesmith represents one of the bottom two points, representing the FBI’s role in lying to a federal court by doctoring a document about Carter Page to get a warrant under false pretenses. The other point is the indictment of Danchenko, whose own words discredit the phony “dossier.”

“He’s got a long way to go,” Patel says of Durham. But he’s glad to see that Durham is finally getting information from the FBI that had been intentionally withheld from the House Intel Committee.

Former FBI deputy director Andy McCabe appears to have played a central role. “All roads lead to Andy McCabe,” Patel said. Recall that McCabe was caught in three lies by Inspector General Horowitz during the internal investigation and seemed to have skated, but we’ll see. Patel insisted that a mid-level official such as Clinesmith couldn’t have pulled off “the greatest political scandal in history” by himself. It would have been “virtually impossible.” He was directed by his supervisors, and this would not have happened without the deputy director of the FBI knowing about it, and almost certainly colleagues Peter Strzok and Lisa Page as well.

Bartiromo pointed out that “those who abused power are now in power,” notably Jake Sullivan, who was Hillary’s foreign policy adviser and is now President Biden’s national security adviser. Recall that Sullivan is the operative who broke the fake Alfa Bank story, which Hillary herself retweeted and falsely described as a discovery by computer scientists, when it was actually phonied-up by some helpful university techies. And now there he is in the catbird seat –- inside the White House.

Patel sees that “what the American public so desperately need” is accountability. “And I think that’s where this road is going, and [where] John Durham’s taking us,” he said. “So stay tuned; I think we’re only 60 to 70 percent of the way there.”

Former Georgia congressman Doug Collins is quite optimistic as well. He’s got a new book coming out on the whole scandal, called THE CLOCK AND THE CALENDAR, which comes out this week. We’ll add it to our stack.

https://www.newsmax.com/politics/hillaryclinton-trump-russia-durham/2021/11/14/id/1044594/?ns_mail_uid=f9499f75-6002-4e3d-a92a-60873ae4921d&ns_mail_job=DM275980_11142021&s=acs&dkt_nbr=010101bvtih2

When the story broke about Project Veritas employees and founder James O’Keefe being raided by the FBI Saturday morning in a purported search for Ashley Biden’s diary, our first question was, “Did they take the electronics?”

Sure enough, the diary search seems to have been a pretext, at least in part, to take the electronics.

The FBI found privileged communications between Project Veritas and their attorney from several years ago, with PV asking for legal opinions regarding their journalistic activities. It seems the Bureau leaked these to THE NEW YORK TIMES, which apparently is illegal –- yes, even when the FBI does it, but since when have they cared? –- and the NYT reported on it, which as far as we know also is illegal.

Oh, and it gets shadier. The NYT happens to be in litigation with Project Veritas or a story they did in 2020 about a PV video alleging voter fraud in Minnesota. Wonder if they saw any attorney-client communications about that?

https://thelibertydaily.com/criminal-collusion-fbi-illegally-leaked-privileged-project-veritas-communications-and-the-ny-times-illegally-reported-on-them/

Adam Goldman and Mark Mazzetti wrote a piece for Thursday’s NYT called “Project Veritas and the Line Between Journalism and Political Spying,” which they say shows “how the conservative group worked with lawyers to gauge how far its deceptive reporting practices could go before running afoul of federal laws.”

So, let me get this straight. Reporters discuss with their attorneys on how to get information for their stories without breaking the law. Stop the presses!!

Ironically, the one who might have run afoul of the law is THE NEW YORK TIMES, as it has written about communications covered by attorney-client privilege. The materials are a series of memos written several years ago by Project Veritas attorney Benjamin Barr about how to do things such as mask identity and infiltrate groups without breaking federal law. This is actually the style of undercover reporting that investigative journalists used to do all the time; you know this if you watched 60 MINUTES and other prime time news shows in their long-ago heyday.

“The documents give new insight into the workings of the group,” the NYT story says, “at a time when it faces potential legal peril in the diary investigation –- and has signaled that its defense will rely in part on casting itself as a journalistic organization protected by the First Amendment.”

Note to the NYT: Project Veritas is a journalistic organization protected by the First Amendment.

And being a journalistic organization, they chose not to do a story on Ashley Biden’s diary because they couldn’t confirm it was hers. NATIONAL FILE published 112 pages of it, in October 2020, but Project Veritas left it alone.

“Most news organizations consult regularly with lawyers,” the NYT story says, “but some of Project Veritas’ questions for its legal team demonstrate an interest in using tactics that test the boundaries of legality and are outside of mainstream reporting techniques.”

So, whatever they thought they might need to do to get a story, they were running by their attorneys first to make sure it was LEGAL and didn’t interfere with national security. Hey, NYT (and FBI), there is nothing wrong with “demonstrating an interest.” And according to James O’Keefe and his lawyer Paul Calli, who appeared in an interview with Sean Hannity, they DID nothing wrong. This would imply denial of one of the allegations in the search warrant, transporting stolen goods [the diary] across state lines.

“Mr. O’Keefe likes to describe himself as a crusading journalist exposing wrongdoing, targeting liberal groups and Democrat politicians,” says the NYT.

Note to the NYT: That’s exactly what O'Keefe is. And thank God for that, as the mainstream media aren’t interested in doing the job. They show a remarkable lack of curiosity, especially when it comes to wrongdoings within their own party.

In their story, Goldman and Mazzetti admit that they passed along some of these Project Veritas memos to Bill Grueskin, a professor at the Columbia School of Journalism, formerly with the WALL STREET JOURNAL and BLOOMBERG NEWS. He said that these memos provided “pretty good advice” but that “the undercover nature of Project Veritas’ work was more problematic.”

Did this expert think it might be “problematic” that he was reading privileged attorney-client legal advice?

“Every newsroom I’ve ever worked in has basically said undercover journalism was unacceptable,” Grueskin said. On the contrary, we used to see a lot of this type of sting, with shaky undercover cameras inside purses and such. That was long before cameras were virtually everywhere, as they are now. Why do I get the feeling that the real objection to Project Veritas is not their tactics but their targets?

Project Veritas issued a statement saying it “stands behind these legal memos and is proud of the exhaustive work it does to ensure each of its journalism investigations complies with all applicable laws” and that their work “reflects Project Veritas’ dedication to the First Amendment, which protects the right to gather information, including about those in power.”

James O’Keefe got himself an outstanding attorney, Harmeet Dhillon, and she appeared on Tucker Carlson’s FOX NEWS show Thursday evening with a shocking story about how the FBI conducted their raid. She said they showed up at his door with “a battering ram,” “threw him out into the hallway,” put him “in handcuffs” and “took his phones.”

She said he had a lot of privileged information on his phones, including communication with “by my count, four dozen different lawyers over the years.” She can’t say with certainty how these NYT reporters got the information, but “can say that they got it in a way that is illegal and unethical.

She described this as a situation in which either the U.S. Attorney’s office or the FBI was tipping off the NYT to each of the raids on Project Veritas’ current and former employees. “We know that because minutes after these raids occurred, we got calls from THE NEW YORK TIMES,” she said. She described the story they ran as “a hit piece.”

“I don’t think I’ve ever seen anything this low from THE NEW YORK TIMES before, to publish people’s private legal communications,” she said. She then said what we'd concluded independently: “All it proves is that Project Veritas is an honest and thoughtful journalistic organization that sought legal advice” before running with their stories. We would add that perhaps THE NEW YORK TIMES could do a better job of that.

Finally, the FBI may have found a treasure trove of private stuff on those phones besides the attorney-client material. Dhillon said there was confidential source information, “including sources in the Biden administration and in corporate America.” There was also donor information, which is protected by the First Amendment. So why did the FBI take those phones? Still think all they were after was that diary?

On Thursday, Project Veritas was able to get a federal judge to order the FBI and the Southern District of New York to stop looking at the phones. But that sure sounds like locking the barn door after the horse is gone.