President Donald Trump was right about many things. New revelations about how Covid19 escaped suggest he was right about that too. The Slog investigates.
Shortly before a Presidential press conference on April 23rd 2020, Donald Trump came across the manufacturer of a chlorine dioxide formulation for medical use. The President listened to the bloke’s claims and test results. At the Presser, Trump said he was impressed with the use of small-dose water soluble CLO2 in attacking the virus Covid19.
Two hundred megatons of excrement were poured by the media all over the POTUS hairstyle.
Forbes ran a piece claiming bleach (chlorine dioxide) was a false cure for COVID-19. Every news agency around the world took the same stance. Frontiers In Political Science observed, “the world was horrified by the President’s suggestion of drinking household disinfectants to prevent COVID-19.…chlorine dioxide is not safe for human consumption.”
The New York Times saw the claim as evidence of The Donald’s scientific snake-oil mentality, and clear evidence of the “politicization of scientific misinformation.”
Trump did not, of course, say “drink bleach”. He merely quoted a ClO2-based formulation; but the episode became just another fake folklore put out by the US Libleft press.
Then a few weeks ago – April 2021 – The Journal of Molecular and Genetic Medicine issued the following evidence:
‘Statistics from Bolivia where the use of water-solubilized chlorine dioxide (ClO2) for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19 was approved by law in early August 2020, demonstrate a marked reduction in cases and deaths in that country. The highest peak recorded in Bolivia was epidemiological week 29 (10,939 cases), with cases falling to 670 in epidemiological week 45 – a 93% decrease. From a peak of 2,031 daily cases on August 20, 2020, cases dropped to 147 daily cases on October 21, 2020′
Trump ignored the Establishment on the subject of HCQ + Zinc combos as a potential resistance-building medicine against C19. When he and the First Lady contracted the virus, the Times said he’d be hors de combat for a month, and the Washington Post predicted ‘the second week will dictate his chances of survival’. He was back at his desk within six days.
Trump was 75, obese, unvaccinated….and almost completely unaffected. He also refused to wear a mask, which the BBC dubbed ‘really irresponsible’. The POTUS reiterated his already stated belief that the masks available were not effective against the virus. The vast majority of informed medics now share that view. I personally looked at the web and weft of various masks and compared them to the average size of a viral globule. Only one gave even the possibility of being efficacious….and it isn’t available to the public
The year before the virus took the media by storm, Trump issued a statement expressing very little faith in the CDC empire run by Anthony Fauci. He told aides he had been given ‘overwhelming evidence’ of an unhealthy relationship between health bureaucrats and Big Pharma.
Once again, media around the world jumped upon the Tangerine One’s head. But events since in the US, the UK, France, India and Australia have all borne out his opinion.
Now a new article by a highly respected journalist – Nicholas Wade – strongly suggests that President Trump may have been closer than anyone to the real ‘source’ reasons for the Wuhan outbreak.
Wade – a former NYT staffer from the days when it was a decent newspaper – has written a carefully crafted, superbly argued and painstakingly researched piece informed by his own scientific background. The following observation from his latest article is worth recording in full, because it sums up admirably the element that’s been missing from media coverage of the Coronavirus from Day 1:
‘A defining mark of good scientists is that they go to great pains to distinguish between what they know and what they don’t know. By this criterion, the signatories of the Lancet letter* were behaving as poor scientists: they were assuring the public of facts they could not know for sure were true.’
*Written by a group of virologists and others during February 2020, when (as Wade points out) ‘it was really far too soon for anyone to be sure what had happened’ in Wuhan
The assurance of which he writes was ‘We stand together to strongly condemn conspiracy theories suggesting that COVID-19 does not have a natural origin’. The letter was a fraud, not least because it claimed no conflict of interest – but was fronted by one Peter Daszac….now emerging as a central character in the mystery. Daszac (a Brit, but not a microbiologist) had been for years an enthusiastic driver of joint ops with American scientists in the Wuhan lab….constantly reassuring Washington that there was neither security nor ‘leak’ danger involved in the work there. In fact, there was a serious risk on both counts – for which Daszac could very easily be held culpable.
Mrs Shi Zhengli, the virologist running the labs at Wuhan insisted that there had been no Chinese military involvement in the work. This turned out to be an extremely doubtful assertion. In turn, Daszac insisted that Shi’s staff fulfilled ‘the highest levels of hygiene’ to ensure there were no unfortunate escapes. That too wasn’t true: the US requirement was Level 4, but her labs rarely exceeded Level 2.
For me, the key suspicion lies in this validated statement by Nicholas Wade:
‘It cannot yet be stated that Dr. Shi did or did not generate SARS2 in her lab because her records have been sealed, but it seems she was certainly on the right track to have done so’
If, as the Chinese have always claimed, they had neither oversight nor military intention to hide, why would they redact the Numero Uno evidence for the prosecution?
Going back to Donald Trump, the point is this: In October 2019, his administration chose to end the ten-year old joint programme championed by Daszac. This seems to have been on the basis of ‘rogue’ security advice given to the President, but Peter Daszac threw a major hissy fit. He told the media the decision would “leave the world more vulnerable to lethal pathogens from unexpected places, such as bat-filled trees, gorilla carcasses and camel barns….it is an approach to heading off pandemics, instead of sitting there waiting for them to emerge, and then mobilizing.”
With the benefit of cynical hindsight, the press (and CNN) again reviled Trump’s decision as ‘snatching defeat from the jaws of victory’. And Daszac was suspiciously quickly “proved right” when SarsCov2 appeared in January. But as Wade’s analysis strongly suggests, the natural habitats Daszac described were not the reason why the virus wound up at large. Further, as The Slog has written before, the virus was probably out there in October…and the German government knew that….hence their early order of control tests.
More likely is that the POTUS (as you’d hope) had an inside track on the dangers of Wuhan cooperation. He was, it now seems, absolutely right.
The fact is that when you conduct a sensible, objective audit, Donald Trump’s actions were exemplary: he wanted the Kennedy files opened, and he was right to want it. He said the EU wasn’t stumping up enough for NATO, and that was an accurate assessment. He said the EU should either give the US a better trade deal, or itself face massive import tariffs. He forced Juncker to fly over and grovel for a deal. It was an object lesson in how to deal with the Robber Barons of Brussels.
He didn’t trust reactions to the Covid outbreak or the motives of Big Pharma, and he was right about that. He didn’t think the US should be in Syria or throwing stones at Putin, and he was right about that. His judgement of Macron’s petulance and May’s Brexit “deal” were absolutely on the money. He was right to have lost faith in Fauci, and distrust the CDC. He predicted that postal ballots would be used to try and steal the election, and the massive evidence of this was completely rubbished or ignored by State legislatures, the FBI, the State judiciaries and the Supreme Court.
Since his departure, Biden’s Gestapo have been variously raiding and harrassing everyone involved in supporting or defending Trump. His term as President involved nonstop vilification, and now – in its aftermath – we see wholesale victmisation. The United States of America is in a sad, dark and bad place at the moment.
But it’s that broader observation that attracts me to Nicholas Wade’s piece – ‘A defining mark of good scientists is that they go to great pains to distinguish between what they know and what they don’t know‘. It’s a terrific Truth, and boils down my frustrations of the last decade into twenty-four sage words.
Cameron tried to call Osborne’s fiscal squeeze sound, but it wasn’t. May insisted that her Withdrawal deal was the most commercially attractive on offer, but it wasn’t. Labour Remainers say we cannot manage without the EU, but it’s the other way round – and always was. Johnson, Hancock and Whitehall say the vaccines have full approval, but they don’t; that they are vaccines, but they aren’t; and that they are completely safe, which is a lie.
All of this codswallop has been positioned as science, when it is in fact the quintessence of rigid ideological denial. It is then parroted mindlessly by hundreds of politicians, thousands of journos and millions of intelligent citizens who should know better.
But meanwhile, on this narrower road called Coronavirus Grove, we find ourselves once more with a pro-Chinese or Vietnam Brit at the centre of it all. Peter Dazsac now joins Peter Horby and Neil Ferguson in this odd coven of dictatorial, devious and lightweight leftists constantly flitting here and there in the corridors of Covidiocy.
The many-headed, ethereal monster of C19 mystery continues to fascinate us. Just one or two more clear links in the chain to Western influences in Wuhan may yet reveal enough to explain whether the virus was a mistake pounced upon by opportunists, or a cleverly unfurled false flag from the beginning.