Connect with us

Government

The Propaganda That Is Selective Science

The Propaganda That Is Selective Science

Authored by Lori Weintz via The Brownstone Institute,

I am calling for a halt of the use of mRNA…

Published

on

The Propaganda That Is Selective Science

Authored by Lori Weintz via The Brownstone Institute,

I am calling for a halt of the use of mRNA Covid-19 vaccines.

Dr. Joseph Ladapo
Florida Surgeon General
January 3, 2024

It is hard to believe Dr. Ladapo actually issued that statement.

Dr. Paul Offit
Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia
January 5, 2024

For those who are not doctors, which happens to be most of us, we depend on those few who have dedicated years of their lives to the scientific and medical fields to help inform us so we can make good decisions about our own health. Heading into the pandemic, a public largely jaded toward media and the government still placed high trust in their doctors. That trust has largely been betrayed during the Covid-19 pandemic years. CDC and FDA consultant Dr. Paul Offit’s response to concerns that the mRNA Covid shots may not be safe is an example of that betrayal.

In this specific case, the Florida Surgeon General, Dr. Joseph Ladapo, called for an end to the use of Pfizer and Moderna mRNA Covid-19 shots, due to the discovery of DNA fragments in the vaccines, including the SV-40 promoter, which is associated with cancer. The concern is integration, which is when foreign DNA becomes incorporated into chromosomal DNA, becoming part of the human genome. 

Dr. Ladapo wrote to the FDA on December 6, 2023 asking if the proper assessments have been conducted on the mRNA shots to address the following risks, identified by the FDA in a 2007 publication about plasmid DNA vaccines:

  • DNA integration could theoretically impact a human’s oncogenes – the genes which can transform a healthy cell into a cancerous cell.

  • DNA integration may result in chromosomal instability.

  • The Guidance for Industry discusses biodistribution of DNA vaccines and how such integration could affect unintended parts of the body including blood, heart, brain, liver, kidney, bone marrow, ovaries/testes, lung, draining lymph nodes, spleen, the site of administration and subcutis at injection site.

The FDA’s December 14, 2023 response was basically this: That 2007 document you cite is irrelevant because mRNA vaccines aren’t DNA vaccines, besides “it is quite implausible that the residual small DNA fragments…could find their way into the nucleus…and then be incorporated into chromosomal DNA.” The FDA claims to have made a “thorough assessment of the entire manufacturing process” and is “confident in the quality, safety, and effectiveness of the Covid-19 vaccines.” 

The FDA sounds like a parent telling a child, “Don’t worry. Everything will be all right.” But we are not children, and the concerns the FDA so arrogantly dismisses are valid. For example, a 2023 study of people suffering from Long Covid analyzed their cellular DNA, and unexpectedly found genes uniquely specific to the Pfizer Covid vaccine in their blood cells. In other words, mRNA Covid vaccines permanently integrate into the DNA of some Covid-vaccinated people.

Yet the FDA claims to have “global surveillance data on over one billion doses of the mRNA vaccines that have been given, and there is nothing to indicate harm to the genome, such as increased rates of cancers.” When an ostrich buries its head in the sand, the danger isn’t gone. The FDA completely ignores the millions of Covid vaccine injuries and deaths that continue to be reported around the world, and instead claims that the real danger is the “ongoing proliferation of misinformation and disinformation about these vaccines which results in vaccine hesitancy that lowers vaccine uptake.”

Dr. Ladapo notes the FDA’s failure to provide data or evidence to support its claims, and correctly states, “If the risks of DNA integration have not been assessed for mRNA Covid-19 vaccines, these vaccines are not appropriate for use in human beings.”

But Dr. Paul Offit, advisor to the FDA during the Covid-19 vaccines approval process, says Dr. Ladapo is wrong. In a January 5 rebuttal to Ladapo’s call for a halt to mRNA vaccination, Offit provides a stark example of propaganda – long on claims and short on facts. Offit either ignores or denies the shocking rise in myocarditis, pericarditis, strokes, neurological injuries, rapidly progressing and/or returning cancers, and lowered birth rates worldwide since the rollout of the vaccines. Offit continues to call the vaccines “safe and effective” and claims that the benefits of Covid vaccination outweigh the risks.

So there. That’s all you need to know, as far as Dr. Offit is concerned. He sounds much like then prime minister of New Zealand Jacinda Ardern who said during the pandemic, as she enforced unprecedented and unscientific brutal Covid policies on her citizens, that they should consider the government and its mouthpieces their “single source of truth,” and should “dismiss everything else.”

But the FDA, Dr. Paul Offit, and the others whose reputations and financial benefits are entwined in the official Covid narrative, practice Selective Science. That is, they tell us only what they want us to hear, and they present only the data that supports their narrative, which is in a word: Propaganda.

Physician and biochemist Dr. Robert Malone, a pioneer in mRNA technology in the 1980s, has been an outspoken critic of the failed Covid-19 vaccines, which do not prevent infection or transmission of disease. Malone notes that Offit apparently has no detailed training in molecular virology, gene therapy technology, or genetic vaccines. Malone finds Offit’s supposed “debunking” of Dr. Ladapo’s concerns both “childish and absurd…It is hard to imagine that this person has been trusted to provide FDA or CDC advice on these mod-mRNA products.”

Dr. Malone points out that the lipid nanoparticle delivery system, new to the mRNA shots, does indeed carry the DNA fragments into the human cells. Retired professor of microbiology in the UK, Dr. David Livermore, notes that most DNA fragments that reach the cytoplasm are likely degraded; however if some of the nanoparticles remain intact within the cytoplasm, transfection could occur.

Dr. Malone states, “The issue is whether there is a safe threshold for DNA fragment contamination when co-delivered via self-assembling cationic lipid nanoplexes together with modified-mRNA. If so, show us the data which proves that this is a safe level of adulteration. [Dr. Ladapo] asked the FDA to show those data, and FDA’s director of CBER (Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research) Peter Marks responded with lies, falsehoods, gaslighting and a complete failure to disclose such data – which apparently do not exist. Much like the approach used here by Offit.”

Dr. Offit seeks to put DNA fragments into perspective as harmless, by pointing out that the trillions of bacteria living on your body are also foreign DNA. “Assuming you live on this planet and you eat animals or plants on this planet,” says Offit, “you are ingesting foreign DNA.” Offit also states that all vaccines are made in cells, and “any viral vaccine that’s made in cells will have residual quantities of DNA…There is no avoiding that.”

Dr. Livermore counters that Dr. Offit is essentially comparing apples to oranges. Naturally occurring DNA is not the same thing as the fragments found in the Covid shots. Livermore states, Dr. Offit “omits the point that the mRNA and any contaminating DNA [from the Covid mRNA shots] is contained inside lipid nanoparticles, designed to cross biological membranes. These deliver their payload into cells. Ergo any contaminating DNA reaches the cytoplasms.” Transfection is not only possible, it is a reality. (see here and here)

However, Dr. Livermore believes that the Covid shots are of concern for greater and more common reasons than transfection:

[T]he simpler good reasons to avoid these vaccines and to stop their use in the vast majority of people are that (i) they simply don’t provide any lasting protection, (ii) repeated boosters may distort innate immunity so as to increase vulnerability and (iii) most of us have achieved, through infection, the same sort of immune equilibrium we ‘enjoy’ with other respiratory coronaviruses. Why take anything with some potential hazard and no lasting benefit?

Gastroenterologist Dr. Lisbeth Selby states, “The most fundamental reason to dispute the way the COVID vaccines were used is that the studies were not conducted to assess even medium term safety signals since the placebo groups were basically dissolved way before the proposed end dates for the studies….If the [pharmaceutical] companies cannot be trusted to follow the plans they laid out for initial study, why would they feel compelled to follow good manufacturing practices?” (see here and here)

The continuing controversy of the Covid mRNA shots centers on multiple regulatory agency failures to comply with long-established protections for the public. From the truncated clinical trials and the suppression of serious adverse reactions that occurred in 1 out of every 800 shots given, to the concerted effort to ignore abundant proofs of massive vaccine harms, to the dogged (and incorrect) claim that Covid vaccines have saved millions of lives, the public has been denied accurate information regarding the Covid-19 shots.

Retired physician Steven Kritz notes that there are valid reasons why full vaccine evaluation, prior to release for general use, usually takes 5-10 years. Operation Warp Speed was not a miracle of modern medicine. It was a rush job to release a product that still needed years of work before being proven safe for mass administration to the population. Dr. Kritz states, “To recommend/mandate the jab for people at virtually zero risk from the virus, and it was known early on who was at greatest risk and who was at almost zero risk…amounts to assault and battery.”

Internal medicine physician Clayton J. Baker says the matter of whether or not the Covid shots should continue to be administered is a simple “No,” for two main reasons: 

1) The jabs are adulterated with the DNA that isn’t supposed to be in there…Adulterated medical products, by law and by any ethical standard, should be pulled from the market. 

2) Nobody, not Paul Offit or anyone else, really knows the dangers of this DNA contamination. Anyone can say they do, or can say injury is highly unlikely, or conjure up odds of harm, but they don’t know. The burden of safety is on the MANUFACTURER, not the consumer. Full stop.

We are in an information war, and medicine is one of the battlegrounds. It might be easy to dismiss Dr. Offit as simply an incompetent government official, and move forward. However, Offit is part of something very ugly that seeks to control the population of the world through top-down “emergency mandates” declared due to a virus, or climate change, or civil unrest, or international conflicts. Any emergency will do.

Evolutionary biologist Bret Weinstein points out in a January 5, 2024 interview that the mistake the elites made during Covid is that they “took all of the competent people, all of the courageous people, and shoved them out of the institutions where they were hanging on.” They “created in so doing, the Dream Team – every player you could possibly want on your team to fight some historic battle against a terrible evil.”

The small group of dissidents upended their narrative. Uptake rates on the new boosters are in the low single digits…Now I’m troubled by the fact that at the same time, we don’t see a massive majority acknowledging the vaccination campaign was a mistake in the first place…It’s important to stand up and say “I was had,” and I think all of us were.

Bret Weintsein, PhD
Evolutionary biologist

The deciding factor is distilled down to this: Do you want your future ability to participate in the public square to be based on which medicines and injections you take?

If that sounds like a preposterous question to you, you have forgotten that during the Covid-19 pandemic, the ability to work, to travel, and to participate in society, was largely based on two medical interventions: wearing a face mask, and showing proof of Covid vaccination. Many complied so as to not make waves, or in the hopes that if they conformed, they would get their lives back. But unfortunately, a pattern was set by those who will try it again. 

The World Health Organization is attempting to revise the International Health Regulations treaty in a manner that dissidents will be silenced the next time there is a pandemic (see here and here). Weinstein explains that the WHO’s pandemic plan is designed to be confusing and hard to understand, making the changes sound minor and procedural, but they’re not minor. Weinstein states, 

I think it is fair to say that we are in the middle of a coup…We are actually facing the elimination of our national and our personal sovereignty…

That is the purpose of what is being constructed…

Come May of this year your nation is almost certain to sign onto a [WHO] agreement [in which] a public health emergency which the director general of the World Health Organization has total liberty to define in any way he sees fit, in other words nothing prevents climate change from being declared a public health emergency that would trigger the provisions of these modifications…

...the provisions that would kick in are beyond jaw dropping.

Weinstein says what has been proposed are a number of measures that would be imposed by the WHO in the event of an arbitrarily declared “public health emergency,” including mandated gene therapy injections, vaccines, no travel without a vaccine passport, and forbidding the use of medications other than those authorized by the WHO. Central to the plans under discussion is the control of “misinformation,” which of course, is anything that goes against the official narrative.

People like Dr. Paul Offit are squarely in the camp of silencing dissent and mandating medical interventions as soon as they can drum up the next emergency. However, there are more people who do not want the life that the technocrats, corrupt government officials, and globalists are planning for us, than those who do. As tired as we are of thinking about the pandemic, we have a moral responsibility to push back and preserve our freedoms and way of life for ourselves, and especially for future generations.

Tyler Durden Sun, 01/14/2024 - 17:30

Read More

Continue Reading

Government

Mike Pompeo Doesn’t Rule Out Serving In 2nd Trump Administration

Mike Pompeo Doesn’t Rule Out Serving In 2nd Trump Administration

Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Former Secretary…

Published

on

Mike Pompeo Doesn't Rule Out Serving In 2nd Trump Administration

Authored by Jack Phillips via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said in a new interview that he’s not ruling out accepting a White House position if former President Donald Trump is reelected in November.

“If I get a chance to serve and think that I can make a difference ... I’m almost certainly going to say yes to that opportunity to try and deliver on behalf of the American people,” he told Fox News, when asked during a interview if he would work for President Trump again.

I’m confident President Trump will be looking for people who will faithfully execute what it is he asked them to do,” Mr. Pompeo said during the interview, which aired on March 8. “I think as a president, you should always want that from everyone.”

Then-President Donald Trump (C), then- Secretary of State Mike Pompeo (L), and then-Vice President Mike Pence, take a question during the daily briefing on the novel coronavirus at the White House in Washington on April 8, 2020. (Mandel Ngan/AFP via Getty Images)

He said that as a former secretary of state, “I certainly wanted my team to do what I was asking them to do and was enormously frustrated when I found that I couldn’t get them to do that.”

Mr. Pompeo, a former U.S. representative from Kansas, served as Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) director in the Trump administration from 2017 to 2018 before he was secretary of state from 2018 to 2021. After he left office, there was speculation that he could mount a Republican presidential bid in 2024, but announced that he wouldn’t be running.

President Trump hasn’t publicly commented about Mr. Pompeo’s remarks.

In 2023, amid speculation that he would make a run for the White House, Mr. Pompeo took a swipe at his former boss, telling Fox News at the time that “the Trump administration spent $6 trillion more than it took in, adding to the deficit.”

“That’s never the right direction for the country,” he said.

In a public appearance last year, Mr. Pompeo also appeared to take a shot at the 45th president by criticizing “celebrity leaders” when urging GOP voters to choose ahead of the 2024 election.

2024 Race

Mr. Pompeo’s interview comes as the former president was named the “presumptive nominee” by the Republican National Committee (RNC) last week after his last major Republican challenger, former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, dropped out of the 2024 race after failing to secure enough delegates. President Trump won 14 out of 15 states on Super Tuesday, with only Vermont—which notably has an open primary—going for Ms. Haley, who served as President Trump’s U.S. ambassador to the United Nations.

On March 8, the RNC held a meeting in Houston during which committee members voted in favor of President Trump’s nomination.

“Congratulations to President Donald J. Trump on his huge primary victory!” the organization said in a statement last week. “I’d also like to congratulate Nikki Haley for running a hard-fought campaign and becoming the first woman to win a Republican presidential contest.”

Earlier this year, the former president criticized the idea of being named the presumptive nominee after reports suggested that the RNC would do so before the Super Tuesday contests and while Ms. Haley was still in the race.

Also on March 8, the RNC voted to name Trump-endorsed officials to head the organization. Michael Whatley, a North Carolina Republican, was elected the party’s new national chairman in a vote in Houston, and Lara Trump, the former president’s daughter-in-law, was voted in as co-chair.

“The RNC is going to be the vanguard of a movement that will work tirelessly every single day to elect our nominee, Donald J. Trump, as the 47th President of the United States,” Mr. Whatley told RNC members in a speech after being elected, replacing former chair Ronna McDaniel. Ms. Trump is expected to focus largely on fundraising and media appearances.

President Trump hasn’t signaled whom he would appoint to various federal agencies if he’s reelected in November. He also hasn’t said who his pick for a running mate would be, but has offered several suggestions in recent interviews.

In various interviews, the former president has mentioned Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.), Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.), Vivek Ramaswamy, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, and South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem, among others.

Tyler Durden Wed, 03/13/2024 - 17:00

Read More

Continue Reading

International

Riley Gaines Explains How Women’s Sports Are Rigged To Promote The Trans Agenda

Riley Gaines Explains How Women’s Sports Are Rigged To Promote The Trans Agenda

Is there a light forming when it comes to the long, dark and…

Published

on

Riley Gaines Explains How Women's Sports Are Rigged To Promote The Trans Agenda

Is there a light forming when it comes to the long, dark and bewildering tunnel of social justice cultism?  Global events have been so frenetic that many people might not remember, but only a couple years ago Big Tech companies and numerous governments were openly aligned in favor of mass censorship.  Not just to prevent the public from investigating the facts surrounding the pandemic farce, but to silence anyone questioning the validity of woke concepts like trans ideology. 

From 2020-2022 was the closest the west has come in a long time to a complete erasure of freedom of speech.  Even today there are still countries and Europe and places like Canada or Australia that are charging forward with draconian speech laws.  The phrase "radical speech" is starting to circulate within pro-censorship circles in reference to any platform where people are allowed to talk critically.  What is radical speech?  Basically, it's any discussion that runs contrary to the beliefs of the political left.

Open hatred of moderate or conservative ideals is perfectly acceptable, but don't ever shine a negative light on woke activism, or you might be a terrorist.

Riley Gaines has experienced this double standard first hand.  She was even assaulted and taken hostage at an event in 2023 at San Francisco State University when leftists protester tried to trap her in a room and demanded she "pay them to let her go."  Campus police allegedly witnessed the incident but charges were never filed and surveillance footage from the college was never released.  

It's probably the last thing a champion female swimmer ever expects, but her head-on collision with the trans movement and the institutional conspiracy to push it on the public forced her to become a counter-culture voice of reason rather than just an athlete.

For years the independent media argued that no matter how much we expose the insanity of men posing as women to compete and dominate women's sports, nothing will really change until the real female athletes speak up and fight back.  Riley Gaines and those like her represent that necessary rebellion and a desperately needed return to common sense and reason.

In a recent interview on the Joe Rogan Podcast, Gaines related some interesting information on the inner workings of the NCAA and the subversive schemes surrounding trans athletes.  Not only were women participants essentially strong-armed by colleges and officials into quietly going along with the program, there was also a concerted propaganda effort.  Competition ceremonies were rigged as vehicles for promoting trans athletes over everyone else. 

The bottom line?  The competitions didn't matter.  The real women and their achievements didn't matter.  The only thing that mattered to officials were the photo ops; dudes pretending to be chicks posing with awards for the gushing corporate media.  The agenda took precedence.

Lia Thomas, formerly known as William Thomas, was more than an activist invading female sports, he was also apparently a science project fostered and protected by the athletic establishment.  It's important to understand that the political left does not care about female athletes.  They do not care about women's sports.  They don't care about the integrity of the environments they co-opt.  Their only goal is to identify viable platforms with social impact and take control of them.  Women's sports are seen as a vehicle for public indoctrination, nothing more.

The reasons why they covet women's sports are varied, but a primary motive is the desire to assert the fallacy that men and women are "the same" psychologically as well as physically.  They want the deconstruction of biological sex and identity as nothing more than "social constructs" subject to personal preference.  If they can destroy what it means to be a man or a woman, they can destroy the very foundations of relationships, families and even procreation.  

For now it seems as though the trans agenda is hitting a wall with much of the public aware of it and less afraid to criticize it.  Social media companies might be able to silence some people, but they can't silence everyone.  However, there is still a significant threat as the movement continues to target children through the public education system and women's sports are not out of the woods yet.   

The ultimate solution is for women athletes around the world to organize and widely refuse to participate in any competitions in which biological men are allowed.  The only way to save women's sports is for women to be willing to end them, at least until institutions that put doctrine ahead of logic are made irrelevant.          

Tyler Durden Wed, 03/13/2024 - 17:20

Read More

Continue Reading

Government

RFK Jr. Reveals Vice President Contenders

RFK Jr. Reveals Vice President Contenders

Authored by Jeff Louderback via The Epoch Times,

New York Jets quarterback Aaron Rodgers and former…

Published

on

RFK Jr. Reveals Vice President Contenders

Authored by Jeff Louderback via The Epoch Times,

New York Jets quarterback Aaron Rodgers and former Minnesota governor and professional wrestler Jesse Ventura are among the potential running mates for independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the New York Times reported on March 12.

Citing “two people familiar with the discussions,” the New York Times wrote that Mr. Kennedy “recently approached” Mr. Rodgers and Mr. Ventura about the vice president’s role, “and both have welcomed the overtures.”

Mr. Kennedy has talked to Mr. Rodgers “pretty continuously” over the last month, according to the story. The candidate has kept in touch with Mr. Ventura since the former governor introduced him at a February voter rally in Tucson, Arizona.

Stefanie Spear, who is the campaign press secretary, told The Epoch Times on March 12 that “Mr. Kennedy did share with the New York Times that he’s considering Aaron Rodgers and Jesse Ventura as running mates along with others on a short list.”

Ms. Spear added that Mr. Kennedy will name his running mate in the upcoming weeks.

Former Democrat presidential candidates Andrew Yang and Tulsi Gabbard declined the opportunity to join Mr. Kennedy’s ticket, according to the New York Times.

Mr. Kennedy has also reportedly talked to Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) about becoming his running mate.

Last week, Mr. Kennedy endorsed Mr. Paul to replace Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) as the Senate Minority Leader after Mr. McConnell announced he would step down from the post at the end of the year.

CNN reported early on March 13 that Mr. Kennedy’s shortlist also includes motivational speaker Tony Robbins, Discovery Channel Host Mike Rowe, and civil rights attorney Tricia Lindsay. The Washington Post included the aforementioned names plus former Republican Massachusetts senator and U.S. Ambassador to New Zealand and Samoa, Scott Brown.

In April 2023, Mr. Kennedy entered the Democrat presidential primary to challenge President Joe Biden for the party’s 2024 nomination. Claiming that the Democrat National Committee was “rigging the primary” to stop candidates from opposing President Biden, Mr. Kennedy said last October that he would run as an independent.

This year, Mr. Kennedy’s campaign has shifted its focus to ballot access. He currently has qualified for the ballot as an independent in New Hampshire, Utah, and Nevada.

Mr. Kennedy also qualified for the ballot in Hawaii under the “We the People” party.

In January, Mr. Kennedy’s campaign said it had filed paperwork in six states to create a political party. The move was made to get his name on the ballots with fewer voter signatures than those states require for candidates not affiliated with a party.

The “We the People” party was established in five states: California, Delaware, Hawaii, Mississippi, and North Carolina. The “Texas Independent Party” was also formed.

A statement by Mr. Kennedy’s campaign reported that filing for political party status in the six states reduced the number of signatures required for him to gain ballot access by about 330,000.

Ballot access guidelines have created a sense of urgency to name a running mate. More than 20 states require independent and third-party candidates to have a vice presidential pick before collecting and submitting signatures.

Like Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Ventura is an outspoken critic of COVID-19 vaccine mandates and safety.

Mr. Ventura, 72, gained acclaim in the 1970s and 1980s as a professional wrestler known as Jesse “the Body” Ventura. He appeared in movies and television shows before entering the Minnesota gubernatorial race as a Reform Party headliner. He was a longshot candidate but prevailed and served one term.

Former pro wrestler Jesse Ventura in Washington on Oct. 4, 2013. (Brendan Smialowski/AFP via Getty Images)

In an interview on a YouTube podcast last December, Mr. Ventura was asked if he would accept an offer to run on Mr. Kennedy’s ticket.

“I would give it serious consideration. I won’t tell you yes or no. It will depend on my personal life. Would I want to commit myself at 72 for one year of hell (campaigning) and then four years (in office)?” Mr. Ventura said with a grin.

Mr. Rodgers, who spent his entire career as a quarterback for the Green Bay Packers before joining the New York Jets last season, remains under contract with the Jets. He has not publicly commented about joining Mr. Kennedy’s ticket, but the four-time NFL MVP endorsed him earlier this year and has stumped for him on podcasts.

The 40-year-old Rodgers is still under contract with the Jets after tearing his Achilles tendon in the 2023 season opener and being sidelined the rest of the year. The Jets are owned by Woody Johnson, a prominent donor to former President Donald Trump who served as U.S. Ambassador to Britain under President Trump.

Since the COVID-19 vaccine was introduced, Mr. Rodgers has been outspoken about health issues that can result from taking the shot. He told podcaster Joe Rogan that he has lost friends and sponsorship deals because of his decision not to get vaccinated.

Quarterback Aaron Rodgers of the New York Jets talks to reporters after training camp at Atlantic Health Jets Training Center in Florham Park, N.J., on July 26, 2023. (Rich Schultz/Getty Images)

Earlier this year, Mr. Rodgers challenged Kansas City Chiefs tight end Travis Kelce and Dr. Anthony Fauci to a debate.

Mr. Rodgers referred to Mr. Kelce, who signed an endorsement deal with vaccine manufacturer Pfizer, as “Mr. Pfizer.”

Dr. Fauci served as director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases from 1984 to 2022 and was chief medical adviser to the president from 2021 to 2022.

When Mr. Kennedy announces his running mate, it will mark another challenge met to help gain ballot access.

“In some states, the signature gathering window is not open. New York is one of those and is one of the most difficult with ballot access requirements,” Ms. Spear told The Epoch Times.

“We need our VP pick and our electors, and we have to gather 45,000 valid signatures. That means we will collect 72,000 since we have a 60 percent buffer in every state,” she added.

The window for gathering signatures in New York opens on April 16 and closes on May 28, Ms. Spear noted.

“Mississippi, North Carolina, and Oklahoma are the next three states we will most likely check off our list,” Ms. Spear added. “We are confident that Mr. Kennedy will be on the ballot in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. We have a strategist, petitioners, attorneys, and the overall momentum of the campaign.”

Tyler Durden Wed, 03/13/2024 - 15:45

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending