Connect with us


President Rogan 2024?

President Rogan 2024?

Submitted by QTR’s Fringe Finance

I am encouraged by the fact that the mainstream media and the elites who set the narrative for them have found it necessary to take on Joe Rogan head-on.

For those of you that have…



President Rogan 2024?

Submitted by QTR's Fringe Finance

I am encouraged by the fact that the mainstream media and the elites who set the narrative for them have found it necessary to take on Joe Rogan head-on.

For those of you that have been reading my blog for the last couple of weeks, this should come as no surprise.

recently predicted that the mainstream media was “losing the fight of its life” and would be forced into one of its largest pivots of all time on Covid, partially thanks to Joe Rogan, and I defended and argued those points in an hour-long follow up interview with former Fox newswoman Ivory Hecker about a week ago.


In the hours after my original post was published, outlets like Zero Hedge and Revolver News linked to the story and widespread discussion about how Joe Rogan was forcing a change in the media broke out.

As Rogan became a hot topic, people who blindly carry the narrative for the mainstream media and the global elite all of a sudden felt like they had to push back on this discussion head-on.

This is why last week, we saw widespread coverage of 270 “experts” and “doctors” who wrote an open letter to Spotify referring to Rogan as a “menace to public health” who spreads “false and societally harmful” Covid-19 claims.

“Spotify has a responsibility to mitigate the spread of misinformation on its platform, though the company presently has no misinformation policy,” the doctors wrote.

Rogan has a “concerning history of broadcasting misinformation, particularly regarding the COVID-19 pandemic,” they continued.

“These are fringe ideas not backed in science, and having it on a huge platform makes it seem there are two sides to this issue. And there are really not. The overwhelming evidence is the vaccine works, and it is safe,” one epidemiologist wrote.

Neuroscientist Ben Rein stated: “People who don’t have the scientific or medical background to recognize the things he’s saying are not true and are unable to distinguish fact from fiction are going to believe what [Malone is] saying, and this is the biggest podcast in the world. And that’s terrifying.”

As I noted last week on Twitter, the last time this many “experts” spoke against a story hitting the mainstream media narrative was the time that “dozens” of “senior intelligence officials” spoke out to write off Hunter Biden’s “laptop from hell” as “Russian disinformation” heading into the 2020 election.

And everybody knows how that story ended, about a year later in September 2021 and once, of course, the election was over.

The very same outlet that reported the laptop was Russian disinformation was forced to admit that “some of the purported Hunter Biden laptop material is genuine, including two emails at the center of last October’s controversy.”

The pushback on Rogan hit such a fever pitch that even Dana White got involved this past weekend at a UFC press conference. When asked about the “experts” pushing back on Rogan, White fired back with some Covid truth bombs of his own

“Well, how about this: ever since I came out and said what I did, it’s almost impossible to get monoclonal antibodies. They’re making it so you can’t get them. Medicine that absolutely works, they’re keeping from us,” White said.

“I don’t want to get too political and start getting into all this shit, but ivermectin and monoclonal antibodies have been around for a long time. Now all of a sudden you can’t dig them up to save your life, the doctors won’t give them to you.”

“Even when I did it here in Vegas, when I had it right before Christmas, I made one phone call and I was able to get it done,” White said. “And that’s not some rich famous guy shit. Anybody could’ve called and got it back then. Now Rogan’s been talking about it and I went crazy talking about it, you can’t get those things to save your life now, literally.”

“It’s disgusting. It’s one of the craziest things I’ve ever witnessed in my life. And we’re not talking about experimental drugs or things. This stuff’s been around. Ivermectin, the guy won a Nobel Peace Prize.”

When a reporter followed up and asked White “Are you a doctor?”, White responded: “You want to know what’s scary? I bet I could get some fuckin pain pills quicker than I can get some monoclonal antibodies. That’s a fact. They fuckin hand out pain pills like they’re Tic Tacs.”

“Monoclonal antibodies and ivermectin isn’t going to do anything to you. Pain pills kill you. Fact.”

And so, if there was doubt before, there shouldn’t be any now: Regarding the biggest issue in recent history, Rogan has landed himself in the crosshairs of those who willingly push the mainstream narrative and those who obediently and willingly obey it.

After the 270 signatories to the open letter got widespread media attention, it started to come into focus that “only around 100 of the 270+ signatories to the letter are people with qualified medical degrees,” according to an analysis by The Dossier.

Yet the letter is being peddled everywhere as being signed by “270 doctors”.

This is a bit of that pesky misinformation in and of itself.

The analysis further found that “a large chunk of that 100 or so medical doctors are MDs employed at universities who are not in fact practitioners of medicine.”

The first couple of signatures of the open letter to Spotify signed by “270 doctors” includes numerous nurse practitioners and even podcasters.

The list also includes Licensed Clinical Social Workers, a “Senior Communications Consultant”, “Public Health Advisors”, Psychiatrists, unspecified “Consultants” and “MD/PhD Candidates”.

Meanwhile, Rogan guests like Dr. Pierre Kory, who has advocated for ivermectin and Dr. Peter McCullough, are both practicing physicians. Kory is a critical care physician and McCullough is a cardiologist. Dr. Robert Malone received a medical degree in 1991 from Northwestern University.

Neither Jessica Rivera, M.S. and Ben Rein, PhD - the reported co-authors of the letter to Spotify featured by Rolling Stone - appear to hold practicing medical degrees. Rivera has a Masters degree in Emerging Infectious Diseases from the Georgetown School of Medicine and Rein is a postdoctoral fellow who works researching “cellular and synaptic mechanisms underlying social deficits in various transgenic mouse models of autism spectrum disorder” at Stanford.

The Dossier’s analysis found that the letter was, in fact, signed by “over 50 PhD academics, around 60 college professors, 29 nurses, 10 students, 4 medical residents, and even a handful of… science podcasters.”

I noticed today that Rivera and Rein are both described as “science communicators” in their respective bios. It’s a term used in Rein’s Stanford bio:

And also used in Rivera’s Rockefeller Foundation bio:

Finally, nowhere in the open letter to Spotify is there a note of who officially organized the petition and what groups or interests may have had a hand in putting it together.

What was the genesis of the letter? Who led the charge?

Putting aside the fact that many of these “experts” that have pushed back against Rogan have scattered credentials, there’s one thing their letter says without saying: Rogan is now being recognized on a countrywide stage where everybody knows his name and almost everybody has an opinion about him.

This type of prominence naturally bleeds into casual conservation about the world of politics. A friend of mine half-heartedly suggested to me a couple of weeks ago that Rogan could run for president and win – a notion that we laughed at together and I didn’t think I would ever write about.

But as I think about it more and more, the idea really isn’t that crazy. And if Joe Rogan himself doesn’t run, he’d be a great a profile of what it may take for a new presidential candidate to win in 2024: somebody who’s not afraid to challenge the official narrative, somebody who doesn’t write off the population as too stupid to hear the “other side of the story”, and somebody who approaches dialogue with open mindedness and civil discourse.

I’m not going to rehash all of the arguments I made two weeks ago about why Rogan is dominating the mainstream media, but I will bring to the table a point I haven’t yet made: Rogan represents a move toward basic common sense and earnest discussion that politicians have lacked for decades.

In many ways, he’s a centrist. He has expressed in interviews with people like Bernie Sanders that he is socially and financially very liberal. He has also spoken to people like Ted Nugent and expressed why he is conservative on issues like the second amendment. He has the skill to be able to communicate with people on both sides of the aisle and, as Bill Maher pointed out during a recent podcast with Rogan, the skill to talk to any of his guests about almost anything.

He doesn’t consider party lines when making his ideological decisions and, as much as radicals on both sides of the aisle wouldn’t want to admit, ultimately winds up somewhere toward the middle.

This is what could win an election in 2024.

There are many in the Republican party who want to move on from Donald Trump and find a less abrasive, more centrist candidate that they hope will help them being in Democratic votes.

Democrats are also trying to find the center, hoping that moving away from the far left socialist and Marxist ideologies of people like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib will help them secure some of the nation’s centrist votes as well. Democrats like Joe Manchin are already starting to bleed over into the center and Republicans like Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski are well known as residing closer to the center than most Republicans.

And if you ask the everyday “Joe Sixpack” in America, what he’s going to tell you is that he doesn’t care about political labels - he just wants somebody that represents his interests best. How many times in casual conversation has someone said to you “I don’t vote by party, I vote by the candidate”? Someone literally said this to me, unprovoked in a bar, just two nights ago.

This is because what the majority of the country wants is the same: somebody that’s looking out for their best interest and isn’t going to make any rash decisions without talking things out.

While Rogan has no experience in politics and he’s certainly not a medical doctor – as evidenced by a major mistake that he was happy to admit he made this past week on his program - he brings to the table a willingness to explore all options and an unbiased innocence with how he approaches topics.

He also publicly admits his mistakes. When was the last time you saw a U.S. politician do that?

And if Joe Rogan doesn’t wind up being a candidate, both sides of the aisle would do well to use him as a template of the refreshing breath of air that their respective political bases desperately need heading into the 2024 election.

There’s a reason that Joe Biden’s approval rating recently hit an an atrocious 33% in a Quinnipiac poll: everybody knows he’s too old for the job, everybody is starting to understand that his left-wing base dictates his agenda and people are starting to question whether or not he is sharp enough to run through basic Presidential decision making processes.

On the right, while President Trump doesn’t seem to have any issues getting out of bed in the morning and doesn’t seem to lack energy, he often gives the impression that he doesn’t think things through and makes spur of the moment decisions.

Both parties could take a cue from how Rogan approaches current events when looking for ideas on how to plug the gaps in their respective political candidate bases.


Today’s blog post has been published without a paywall because I believe the content to be far too important. However, if you have the means and would like to support my work by subscribing, I’d be happy to offer you 22% off for 2022: Get 22% off forever

Thank you for reading QTR’s Fringe Finance. This post is public so feel free to share itShare

Tyler Durden Tue, 01/18/2022 - 15:40

Read More

Continue Reading


Updated: US sees spike in Paxlovid usage as Merck’s molnupiravir and AstraZeneca’s Evusheld are slower off the shelf

New data from HHS show that more than 162,000 courses of Pfizer’s Covid-19 antiviral Paxlovid were administered across the US over the past week, continuing…



New data from HHS show that more than 162,000 courses of Pfizer’s Covid-19 antiviral Paxlovid were administered across the US over the past week, continuing a streak of increased usage of the pill, and signaling not only rising case numbers but more awareness of how to access it.

In comparison to this week, about 670,000 courses of the Pfizer pill have been administered across the first five months since Paxlovid has been on the US market, averaging about 33,000 courses administered per week in that time.

A Pfizer spokesperson told Endpoints News the company does “not have any concerns nor foresee any supply issues in our ability to support if [usage] rates increase.”

Cumulatively, as of May 24, almost 3.8 million doses of Paxlovid have been made available to states so far by the federal government, and about 2.4 million of those have been ordered by states, with more than 831,000 courses administered.

Signs for such a spike in usage were evident earlier this month, as in a call with reporters senior HHS officials credited the surge in the use of Paxlovid to their outreach, and through the Biden administration’s Test to Treat initiative, which allows for use of Paxlovid with a positive test at participating pharmacies.

“We have seen more than a 315% increase in Paxlovid use over the past four weeks. In the first week of May, nearly 115,000 courses were dispensed,” an official said at the time.

Meanwhile, outside of Paxlovid, few other treatment options are really in wide use.

Merck’s molnupiravir, known commercially as Lagevrio, has struggled to make its way out of the inventory closet, according to the latest numbers posted by HHS.

Only about 20,000 courses of the Merck pill were used in the past week, and only about 13% of the total US inventory of molnupiravir has been used to date. That compares with about 35% of overall usage of Paxlovid courses ordered by states so far, and the bulk of those orders have come within the last several months.

But for AstraZeneca’s preexposure mAb Evusheld, only about 16,000 courses were administered in the past week. About 38% of all Evusheld ordered by states has been administered so far, according to the latest HHS numbers.

For Eli Lilly’s bebtelovimab, which is a monoclonal antibody that’s supposed to be used ahead of molnupiravir if both are on hand, about 100,000 courses in total have been administered of 379,526 courses ordered (542,330 courses available). Bebtelovimab is the follow-on mAb after Lilly’s former combo mAb (850,000+ courses distributed earlier in the pandemic) that lost efficacy against the latest variant.

Meanwhile, HHS has become less and less transparent with its data and information on its distribution of Covid-19 therapeutics.

After the Trump administration, and the beginning of the Biden administration allowed for the public posting of weekly calls between HHS and states on Covid-19 therapeutic distribution, those calls have since been made private and the prior recordings have been deleted from the ASPR website.

In addition, each week’s therapeutic administration numbers have to be tallied independently because HHS now deletes the previous week’s numbers.

Editor’s note: Article updated to add Pfizer comment and note the stats for Lilly’s Covid-19 treatments bebtelovimab too.

Read More

Continue Reading


EUR/GBP price prediction: is the bears’ pain over?

Ever since Brexit happened, the British pound gained against the common currency, the euro. Despite many analysts calling for the pound’s decline, it…



Ever since Brexit happened, the British pound gained against the common currency, the euro. Despite many analysts calling for the pound’s decline, it gained ground in a relentless bearish trend.

The downtrend was so strong that even in 2022, some analysts believe that the EUR/GBP exchange rate will still hover around 0.84 in March 2023 – about 10 months from now.

Currently, EUR/GBP trades at 0.85, bouncing from its lows and looking constructive from fundamental and technical perspectives. So, where will the exchange rate go next?

Here is a price prediction considering both the technical and fundamental aspects.

The two central banks’ policies are set to diverge

Let’s start with the fundamental perspective. A currency pair moves based on the monetary policy differences between the two central banks.

In this case, the Bank of England was one of the first major central banks in the world that decided to increase the interest rate in the aftermath of the COVID-19 induced recession. Moreover, it did so not once but multiple times.

At the same time, the European Central Bank did nothing. It couldn’t do so, as a war started in Eastern Europe (Russia invaded Ukraine) in February.

In order to shelter European economies from the war’s economic impact, the European Central Bank preferred a wait-and-see stance. However, inflation is running way higher than the central bank’s target, and one of the causes is just the war.

As such, the central bank recently announced that it plans to end negative rates by September. Considering that the deposit facility rate is at negative 50bp, it means that a couple of rate hikes are on the table during the summer.

Yet, the Bank of England is now in a wait-and-see mode. Therefore, the fundamentals favor a move higher in the EUR/GBP exchange rate over the summer.

An inverse head and shoulders shows EUR/GBP struggling to overcome resistance

From a technical perspective, the market may have bottomed with the move to 0.82. It was quickly retraced, suggesting the presence of an inverse head and shoulders pattern.

A close above 0.86 should put the 0.90 area in focus. That is where the pattern’s measured move points to, and the move also implies that the lower highs series would be broken, thus ending the bearish bias.

All in all, EUR/GBP looks bullish here. Both technical and fundamental aspects favor more strength in the months ahead.

The post EUR/GBP price prediction: is the bears’ pain over? appeared first on Invezz.

Read More

Continue Reading


The UK’S Rich Are Getting Richer

The UK’S Rich Are Getting Richer

The UK’s richest people were announced in The Sunday Times’ annual roundup this week, including the…



The UK'S Rich Are Getting Richer

The UK’s richest people were announced in The Sunday Times’ annual roundup this week, including the founder of Dyson vacuum cleaners, as well as JK Rowling and Elisabeth Murdoch. As Statista's Anna Fleck notes, the list comes at a time when the majority of Brits are feeling the burden of the cost of living crisis.

You will find more infographics at Statista

At the top of the list came billionaire brothers Sri and Gopi Hinduja, who own the Mumbai-based conglomerate Hinduja Group. They were reported to own £28.47 billion together. Other key names to make it onto the list, albeit further down, included Chancellor of the Exchequer Rishi Sunak and his wife Akshata Murty, ranking at 222nd place out of 250 with a joint £730m of wealth. Sunak is reportedly the richest serving MP in history.

Chelsea manager Roman Abramovich dropped 20 places on the newspaper’s list this year, after his wealth was believed to have been cut from £12 billion down to £6 billion. He was one of the Russian figures to have been hit with sanctions in light of the Russian war in Ukraine. Alisher Usmanov also saw a fall, from sixth to eleventh place, with an estimated wealth of £10bn this year.

In terms of demographics, only seven of the people on the list were women, while 116 of the richest were men, and a further 78 were listed under the grouping “man with family.”

Income from property was the most common primary source of wealth, with 43 percent of people on the list benefiting from it.

Additionally, as Statista's Fleck details below, the UK’s top ten richest people are wealthier than the group has ever been, with their cumulative wealth having grown from £47.77 billion in 2009 to £182 billion in 2022 - an increase of 281 percent.

Infographic: The UK'S Rich Are Getting Richer | Statista

You will find more infographics at Statista

As this chart shows, following the 2008 crash, the UK’s billionaires have seen a steady, and fairly steep, incline in their wealth.

The upward trend continued despite the pandemic, which saw the UK’s economy shrink by 20.4 percent in the second quarter of 2020, as most industries suffered, and 30.5 million people in Europe were expected to be pushed into poverty. This is a stark contrast to the UK’s 250 ultra wealthy, who saw their collective wealth surge to a record high of £653 billion in 2022.

George Dibbs, the head of the Center for Economic Justice at the Institute for Public Policy Research, explains how we are seeing a widening wealth gap, as the rich are getting richer:

“As we enter a once-in-a-generation cost of living crisis, the Sunday Times rich list shows us again that vast wealth often begets more wealth. That has proved particularly true during the pandemic, when the wealthiest accumulated more wealth than poorer people, who saved nothing,” he tells The Guardian.

“Now there are more billionaires in the UK than ever before and the collective wealth of the richest has grown again.”

According to the article, Dibbs is now calling on Sunak to bring in taxes in order to “redistribute the wealth gains of the richest to pay for higher social security benefits for those who most need them.”

Tyler Durden Thu, 05/26/2022 - 04:15

Read More

Continue Reading