Who Was Responsible for the Botched Pandemic Response?

A 2016 study by Johns Hopkins Medical Center concluded that medical errors kill approximately 250,000 people a year in the United States and are our the third leading cause of death.  I personally believe the figure should be higher, especially when you consider the severe diseases that arise as a consequence of poor medical management. 

Any form of medicine that seeks to change the disease process will be inherently dangerous, and while modern medicine is unnecessarily dangerous, a certain number of deaths are unavoidable regardless of the medical system you employ.  One solution to this issue that is frequently utilized in hospitals is known as a “root cause analysis,“ where an attempt is made to identify what caused the medical error to happen, and what procedural changes could be made that will prevent it from happening again. 

In the first part of this series, I attempted to show that the measures that were utilized to address the pandemic were highly ineffective to the point of being nothing more than theater that primarily functioned to create a hysteria around Covid, while in the second part, I identified equally feasible measures that could have been enacted and would have been far more effective in actually addressing the pandemic.  I attempted to make the case that most of what I outlined was common sense that did not require a sophisticated scientific background to grasp, and I showed that many besides myself had likewise advocated for the same policies to be enacted.

For these reasons, the catastrophic mishandling of the pandemic response is inexcusable, and I would argue requires a root cause analysis.  I now will attempt to perform one, with the disclaimer that this is a complex subject books upon books could be written over, so many important aspects to the story will not be discussed here.

Medical Corruption

Historically, major powers undergo cyclic periods of institutional buildup and institutional decline.  Much of this process is encompassed by the maxim “Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And weak men create hard times.”

Presently, the United States is undergoing a period of institutional decline which is marching hand-in-hand with a rapid proliferation of corruption throughout every institution.  Normally, the only thing which can break the cycle of corruption is the corruption being so damaging it creates a cataclysm which then creates motivation within the population to purge the sources of that corruption (tens of millions dying from an controversial vaccine would be one such cataclysm).

One of the fundamental problems in American democracy is that campaign finance reform has never been enacted despite being repeatedly proposed and debated in Congress. For this reason, virtually all political decisions made by elective representatives (excluding the few honest apples such as Ron Johnson who are relatively powerless within this sea of corruption) are to appease the financial donors of the politicians rather than to address the needs of their constituents or the country.  This is because bribery and corruption are legal within America.  Since “bribery“ and “corruption” are nebulous terms, one of my goals on this substack has been to clearly illustrate exactly how this corruption occurs, because until you understand the problem, you cannot fix it.

I would like to briefly request you watch this 2015 Video that in 5 minutes summarizes exactly why the “Pandemic” happened (note: I make no endorsement for or against the action proposed at the end of the video):

The incredibly sad thing about this video is that it was made in 2015, and things have become much worse since the time of its publication.

In addition to Congress being systemically corrupt, even worse corruption occurs within the branches of the federal government where bureaucratic officials are nominated rather than elected, serve for decades, and have no accountability for their actions.  For example, corrupt officials are arbitrarily appointed to serve on “unbiased“ panels that craft policy guidelines everyone else follows. 

Within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), this means that many guidelines for the practice of medicine (which for all practical purposes are law) are directly written by unelected bureaucrats who have been paid off by pharmaceutical manufacturers.  These guidelines are typically highly inaccurate.  For example, as discussed in this article, the committees that created the guidelines for managing COVID-19 was directly appointed by Anthony Fauci, an extraordinarily corrupt lifelong bureaucrat.  

Each of his committee members in turn was paid off by Big Pharma and actively worked to suppress therapies the industry could not profit off.  Subsequent investigations by both the agency specifically responsible for investigating government corruption and a non-profit watchdog group likewise confirmed this systemic corruption within each federal agency responsible for the pandemic response.

Overall, I believe the best description to summarize what has happened with the pandemic response is “war profiteering.”  As the goal with war profiteering is just to make money rather than achieve any specific objective, whenever a profiteering war starts, approaches will be chosen that indefinitely prolong the conflict. The trillions being spent in the Middle East over the past few decades for Bush’s wars which failed to achieve any positive outcomes represents one clear example of this concept.

Profiteering can also occur with responses to domestic problems, and there have been countless epidemics in the past where effective measures to address epidemics were suppressed. Because of this, many suffered from either from being denied treatment for the disease itself or as a direct result of the harmful management strategy implemented to address the disease.

One of the best examples of this disease profiteering is what happened to the gay community in the early days of HIV.  Like many others I was able to predict much of what happened with COVID-19 because I notice the same people who were in power during the AIDS crisis were still in power now and I made the educated guess they would treat the general population the same way they treated the gay community.  There is a strong case to be made that much of what went wrong with HIV could have been corrected if corruption within the HHS have been dealt with at the time.  Instead it was allowed to metastasize and gave us the horrific pandemic response everyone has had to suffer through for the last few years.

Modern Leadership

A major concern by the ruling elite has been the lack of effective leaders emerging in Western democracies, and as a result the nations the elites depend upon for their own power gradually weakening because of these ineffective leaders.  Similarly, the committee model that is widely used in the public and private sector to craft policy has likewise been identified as no longer being effective for the policymaking traditionally assigned to these committees. 

I believe this decline in leadership is the result of three central factors:

•Systemic corruption that results in leaders being elected on the basis of their loyalty to special interests rather than their competence.
•Systemic corruption within the mass media which makes it extraordinarily difficult for anyone without donors that have also paid off the media to become elected.
•No longer having a merit based educational system or an employment system that hires on the basis of merit (this is currently being done to satisfy diversity initiatives, but to be clear, this issue preceded the recent societal focus on “social justice”).

Robert Malone has done an excellent job bringing attention to the World Economic Forum’s Young Leaders program, a highly corrupt consortium of global leaders that has been used to advance pandemic agenda globally.  A lesser appreciated fact about the program was that it was initially created to address the extreme deficit of competent leaders for Western Democracies-unfortunately, like many other things, it then became subsumed by the pervasive corruption present within our society.

One of the frustrating things in both medicine and politics is that individuals in positions of  power will often duck out of taking responsibility for a difficult decision the power and privilege they hold obliges them to address.  In politics, this has allowed our leadership to escape responsibility for doing nothing that actually addressed the pandemic. In medicine, this frequently translates to the lazy or malpractice adverse doctor always referring difficult cases to a specialist, which often then results in the specialist referring patient to another specialist and so forth. 

As a result, there are many patients with challenging medical issues who have seen dozens of healthcare practitioners without any improvement.  Because of this, when I have challenging patients, I am upfront about the referral options (especially the necessary ones), and likewise do my best to address their issue because I know if I refer the case to someone else, I am most likely doing a disservice to the patient by placing them on the referral train that often leads to nowhere. 

This approach has benefited my patients and my medical knowledge has greatly increased through being forced to struggle with challenging cases rather than taking the easy option and passing them off to someone else. Unfortunately, this willingness to take risks and embrace challenges has likewise been gradually removed from the educational system and our societal value system.

One of the greatest challenges many people have is failing to recognize other people may not necessarily possess the same knowledge they do, and as a result a problem which seems incredibly simple from one’s own perspective is actually very difficult for someone who does not share their knowledge base.  Over the years, I and my colleagues have gradually come to the realization that most elected officials and governments understand very little about science or medicine (this is one reason why it is so important to elect honest doctors to political positions). 

As a result, many concepts I think are patently clear especially when the evidence for the position is effectively presented are not possible for elected officials to directly understand. Instead, these officials will typically defer to a trusted scientific advisor to assess the claims they are presented with, and these advisers typically will have a strong bias to not suggest anything that challenges the existing scientific narratives or the financial conflicts which the corrupt advisor has.

Thus, because most politicians and bureaucrats are not willing to take responsibility for the negative outcomes of public policy decisions they make, they instead will default to following the advice of a trusted expert.  This is a much more politically safe option (as they can say “I was just following the experts!”), but in most case results in a terrible job being done that neither they nor the “expert” have any accountability for. This is also why it is often impossible to introduce critical innovations to the medical field.

I am hesitant to endorse any U.S. politician, but Ron DeSantis deserves significant credit for breaking outside of this model. During the pandemic, while almost everyone else was deferring to useless or harmful advice from trusted authorities like Fauci, DeSantis, who did not have a scientific background, made the decision to independently examine the data and craft an appropriate policy to address the pandemic.  Instead of asking outside experts to tell him what to do, he simply consulted them to make sure he had not misinterpreted anything within the scientific literature and to check there were no major errors in the thought process he used to arrive at his conclusion (all of this was detailed by Scott Atlas). 

As a result, DeSantis took a very different approach to handling the pandemic, and he received an enormous amount of pushback in the media for doing so.  Nonetheless, DeSantis stayed the course on this decision, and as a result Florida thrived during the pandemic and has now become arguably the most popular states in the country. 

Had the risks DeSantis took failed, he likely would have ended his political career, but because DeSantis was willing to take responsibility for making a risky decision, he was able to make the decision that ultimately proved to be correct. I suspect one reason why Ron DeSantis was able to act the way he did was because DeSantis is a member of the middle class and at least according to his financial disclosures unlike most governors has not used his elected position to enrich himself through bribes.

The reason I chose to highlight DeSantis’s record is not to focus on his accomplishments, but rather to emphasize that it should represent the bare minimum standard we expect from elected officials. Because elected officials are not held to this standard, they are instead permitted to cause catastrophic harm to the general population in order to enrich themselves and their corporate donors.  I this argue that to prevent a repeat of the botched pandemic response, it will be necessary to both conduct actual campaign finance reform and prioritize electing competent officials who are willing to take responsibility for their actions.

Legacy Media

One of the tremendously frustrating experiences I have had during my lifetime has been watching an amazing candidate run for president, be widely liked by the voting base because of their excellent track record in standing up for the working class, and then watch the media systematically torpedo each and every one of their campaigns. 

The only person I have ever seen who was able to address this dilemma was Donald Trump, as he took a rather unorthodox approach where he campaigned on the basis of the media being evil.  As a result, each time the media gave him negative attention it helped rather than hindered his campaign, and before long he was able to pull the mass media into a symbiotic relationship where it could not help but continually provide oxygen to Trump’s campaign.  

The upside of this approach was that it provided Trump with the freedom to advance populist positions that went against the vested interests of the financiers of the corporate media, something very few other presidents have done.  The downside of this approach was that it was incredibly polarizing, and divided the country to the point that the left was willing to force through vaccine mandates as a way of getting back at the right.  While it is important to advance populist positions that go against entrenched interests (and to expose the systemic corruption within the media), there was a tremendous cost to the political polarization this approach created we will likely be stuck with for years to come.

Something that is often not appreciated about the media is that their business model is based upon getting as much viewership as possible and to provide content that appeases their advertisers. For this reason, content that is critical of any sponsor is never allowed to air.  As a result most media programming is meaningless stories that do not challenge any vested interest and are emotionally hyped up as much as possible to antagonize the audience so that the audience is drawn into caring about them.

Given that the largest sponsor of the mainstream media is the pharmaceutical industry, it is not surprising that all news content aggressively promotes the pharmaceutical party line (the only occasional exceptions I know of are Tucker Carlson and Laura Ingraham).  One of the ethical journalists who has spoken out the most on this issue is Sharyl Atkinson, who in one interview specifically noted that she observed a variety of major changes occur in the media that coincided with her suddenly being forbidden from ever discussing vaccine safety concerns on air.

It is difficult to assign blame for the botched pandemic response to any single party. However, if I have to identify the key culprit, I would argue that the rigid censorship by the mainstream media, big tech and the academic publishing institutions was what allowed the insane pandemic policy is to march forward despite being clearly in opposition to most existing scientific evidence. In the same way that pharmaceutical corruption has gradually taken over the legacy media (the Gates Foundation for example frequently gives media grants to ensure their massages dominate the airwaves), these other media venues are likewise highly susceptible to pernicious influence, which is why independent media platforms are so critical moving forward.

Key Failures Leading Up to the Pandemic

I cannot reveal my source, but I am relatively certain Donald Trump’s youngest son developed a high functioning form of autism from a childhood vaccination, and I suspect that Trump’s statements that he observed the same thing occurring in a few of his employees were also truthful.  For this reason, when Trump first ran for president, he was willing to speak out against vaccinations and at the presidential debates did not back down when he was challenged on the issue. 

Once Trump was elected, he then pledged to make a vaccine safety commission with RFK, and at start of the process during the transition period RFK was invited to the Trump Tower to lay the groundwork for this.  Not long after the entire effort was scrapped, which as best as I can gather resulted from Bill Gates directly telling Trump to terminate it (Gates has admitted this on tape) and most of Trump’s administration being opposed to this commission. 

If that commission would have been allowed to proceed (there are numerous major safety issues with childhood vaccines), it is highly unlikely much of what has happened with the pandemic response could have occurred. Likewise, Bill Gates would not have been able to make the mass a power grab he made from the pandemic.

Trump campaigned on draining the swamp, and I believe like many discovered that the swamp was so thick that he was relatively powerless challenge it.  Much of what I know on this issue arises from reading Peter Navarro’s account and Dr. Scott Atlas’s account of what occurred during the pandemic alongside my own observations of the political process and my own team’s interactions with the Trump White House.

Both of these authors showed that one of the major issues Trump had was attracting qualified talent to fill the executive branch who were not committed to entrenched political interests.  Because Trump could not attain sufficient numbers of these personnel (and honest independent individuals who filled these roles were frequently targeted for removal by the media, professional organizations and even the FBI), many positions could only be filled with personnel that actively tried to sabotage Trump’s agenda.  As a result, many of the policies Trump sought he was not able to enact as he lacked sufficient support within the executive branch for them.

One of the things which made me extremely hopeful for the Trump administration was his choice to nominate a doctor who belonged to the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons as the Secretary of Health and Human Services.  While AAPS is often maligned as an ultra-conservative group, their primary focus has been standing up for the individual rights of doctors to practice without government interference, and to challenge entrenched medical dogmas.  AAPS has done a lot of good work over the years, and they were one of the initial organizations that proposed early outpatient Covid treatment protocols. AAPS also went to bat for patients being denied early treatment for Covid because “there was no evidence“ for any of these protocols.

Not long after being nominated to the position, a political hit job was done on Tom Price over his scandalous choice to use government plans for personal transportation and he was forced to resign, ultimately serving the shortest tenure in the history of the department.  Given the aggression for with which the media jumped up on this and how quickly he was forced to leave office, the only conclusion I could draw was that Price really upset the vested pharmaceutical interests.

Price’s replacement, Alex Azar originally served as general counsel in George W. Bush’s HHS (which is relevant because the Bush family was in bed with Eli Lilly and George H.W. Bush I was responsible for getting Eli Lilly’s Prozac, a drug that should have never ever been approved onto the market).  Azar then went to work directly for Lilly, eventually becoming president at a time when Lilly worked hand-in-hand with the FDA to aggressively suppress widespread evidence of severe harm and homicidal psychosis that regularly resulted from Eli Lilly’s flagship drug Prozac. 

I wrote a detailed summary of the FDA’s gross malfeasance with the SSRI antidepressants because it was the closest parallel I have been able to find to their abhorrent conduct with the Covid vaccines.  It is hence not surprising that Azar played a pivotal role in the disaster that occurred over the last few years.  For example, to quote this previous article on corruption within the COVID response:

Early in the pandemic, despite highly questionable evidence of safety or efficacy, Azar signed a deal to buy the entire supply of remdesivir for approximately 3200.00 per treatment course. It was estimated the fair price for each course was 310.00 (while the production cost was approximately 10.00). An estimated 500,000 doses were purchased, and this resulted in well over a billion dollars going to Gilead. Typically, when the government makes an investment of this scale (both in the development and acquisition of remdesivir), it will always do everything it can to utilize the investment (this likewise is one reason there has been such a push to “use” all the vaccines the government already paid for).

Suffice to say, had Trump not allowed Price to be fired by the media, it is unlikely most of the malfeasance that occurred during Operation Warp Speed could have happened.

In early 2018, US diplomats became alarmed at how poor the safety controls were at the Wuhan Institute of Virology and sent urgent warnings to the United States that there was a high risk of a pandemic being released from the lab if the safety issues were not addressed.  These concerns were of course ignored. 

This failure to followup on their warnings may have been because Anthony Fauci and Ralph Baric at the time were secretly working behind the scenes to conduct illegal gain of function research in the Wuhan lab which was ultimately responsible for creating the rapidly mutating SARS-CoV-2 (Igor Chudov David E. Martin have done an excellent job compiling the evidence these experiments occurred).  

There are a variety of explanations for how SARS-CoV-2 escaped the Wuhan lab.  I have looked at every single explanation alongside more evidence than I can count, and while there are many potential explanations, I believe the most consistent narrative is that it was an accident and once it occurred everyone (the NIH leadership, the Wuhan Lab, Wuhan’s government, and China’s central government) tried to cover it up so that they would not get in trouble.  Had someone within the Trump administration acted upon the early warnings to address safety within the Wuhan lab, it is very likely the entire pandemic could have been prevented or drastically mitigated. 

Since I do not work within the federal government, I do not know how hard it is to go from receiving repeated diplomatic cables of a concern to something being done. However, with what I do know, I view the failure to follow up on these cables as a catastrophic failure that was largely responsible for the pandemic occurring.

The Covid Task Force

Something that still baffles me was that from reading reports I stumbled across on anonymous online message boards, was that in December of 2019 I know that Covid was going to turn into a global catastrophe, yet it was not until late March 2020 that this was recognized by the U.S. government.  During this period, Peter Navarro shared that he repeatedly tried to warn the Trump administration that the virus in China was going to turn into a large problem they needed to prepare for, but each time he brought it up, he was dismissed as being too negative and his concerns were hence not listened to.  Based on Navarro’s experience, I am inclined to believe that a collective denial and unwillingness to consider something extremely uncomfortable was occurring is a key reason why the initial stages of the pandemic were catastrophically mishandled.

Trump did eventually acquiesce to Navarro’s advice (when he decided to take a great political risk to enact a highly controversial travel ban which was of course sabotaged by members of his administration and officials from democratic states which subsequently were the worst impacted by COVID-19 in the country).  From that point forward, the entire pandemic response was highly politicized and became extremely difficult to conduct any type of sensible policy.

In most cases to get a high level position within the federal government, you are required to spend years supporting the vested interest throughout the federal bureaucracy and competency in your position typically disqualifies you from rising up the ranks (the Comptroller General is the only exception I know of to this rule).  The key members of Trump’s Covid task force, Deborah Birx, Robert Redfield and Anthony Fauci were friends that shared a history of gross incompetence and malfeasance stretching all the way back to HIV (they had also made a pact to all quit if one of them was dismissed by Trump).

Because they were incompetent, they produced poor quality guidelines that led to an ineffective pandemic response.  Because of this, they regularly provided advice that clashed with Peter Navarro (for example Fauci insisted Covid was not going to turn into a problem and there was no basis for a travel ban), but due to their status as “experts“ the entire Trump administration regularly deferred to them.  It is my belief that if Trump had recognized Navarro was consistently correct while Fauci and Co. were consistently erroneous and chosen to follow Navarro suggestions, many of the challenges with the pandemic would not have been occurred.

Eventually, Trump was convinced to seek outside assistance from Scott Atlas M.D. who was that appointed to the Covid task force.  Atlas’s memoir was extremely illuminating, and required reading for anyone who wants to understand what went wrong inside the White House during the pandemic response.

Show of the key points from Atlas were as follows:

•The task force members, particularly Fauci and Birx were extremely incompetent to the point they would have failed a medical residency due to their inability to grasp simple concepts within scientific publications.  I have low expectations of public officials, but I was nonetheless jaw dropped when I read some of the accounts Atlas shared.

•One of the most important characteristics of the virus was that it spared the young and was primarily dangerous to the elderly. For this reason, a targeted approach that changed depending on one’s age was by far the most appropriate way to handle the pandemic (children were excellent candidates for developing herd immunity within the population and should have never been locked at home, whereas protecting the elderly in nursing homes should have been prioritized).  Despite Atlas repeatedly banging his head against a brick wall for these policies, the rest of the task force refused to consider his position, and most of the public never knew their actual risk of dying from Covid.

•Birx was fanatical about testing as many people as possible and using the case numbers from that testing to push for lockdowns.  For all practical purposes, she refused to consider any other option, and often got extremely confrontational when her approach was challenged. Birx likewise overtime upset governors across the country for failing to provide any advice beyond testing and separating people.  Atlas argued Birx rather than Fauci was actually the individual most responsible for creating a catastrophic pandemic response.

•Atlas appeared to have been appointed because Trump likewise believed the pandemic policies were causing significantly more harm than good for the country.  However, rather than directly taking action to change them, Trump appointed Atlas to the task force and gave him the job of going against the entire executive branch to advocate for the appropriate pandemic policies to follow. Not surprisingly Atlas, despite his best efforts was unsuccessful.

•As was highlighted in a previous section, because the pharmaceutical industry owns the media, the media will aggressively promote whatever narrative benefits that industry.  As a result, grossly incompetent officials like Fauci (who long ago sold out to the pharmaceutical industry) are continually presented with a glowing halo regardless of how egregious or nonsensical their mistakes were. Similarly, whenever any policy can have the potential to challenge the medical industrial complex is considered, the media will often be created to prevent the policy from ever being considered or implemented.  Atlas repeatedly ran into this issue as each time he appeared to be gaining any degree of traction with correcting a bad policy from within the Covid Task Force, someone would “leak” his proposal and a media would emerge that ultimately prevented Atlas’s suggestions from being acted upon.

One of the best examples was Atlas repeatedly being branded as a murderer for advocating for a herd immunity strategy that would cause many to die (despite the fact that, as discussed in the previous part of this series actually would have saved lives).  As a result, any option that Atlas suggested to the task force besides harsh lockdowns for the entire population was subjected to this hysterical narrative, and sensible policies which would have been far more effective were not allowed to even be considered.

In a recent interview on the Dark Horse podcast Geert Vanden Bosssche echoed Atlas’s sentiments and provided his opinion that the “medical experts” on the Covid task force were entirely incompetent in the fields of virology, immunology, vaccinology, molecular biology, and evolutionary biology. As a result, their narrow focus was placed on freeing up hospital beds in the short term and ignoring the inevitable and predictable consequences of their actions described in the first and second part of this series. Bosssche most importantly noted that decisions for the pandemic response should have been made by a team of international experts collaborating in these fields and something was very wrong that Fauci with the aid of the media was able to become a public health dictator.

A quotation from a review of Atlas’s memoir perfectly summarizes much of the what happened within the White House during the pandemic response:

When he resigned from the Task Force in a telephone call to Trump, Atlas writes, the president told him, “You were right about everything, all along the way. And you know what? You were also right about something else. Fauci wasn’t the biggest problem of all of them. It really wasn’t him.” Trump meant that it was Birx, and Atlas couldn’t resist a parting shot at the aides who had been so afraid of her. Knowing that they were listening on the speakerphone in the Oval Office, Atlas said, “Well, Mr. President, I will say this. You have balls. I have balls. But the closest people around you—they didn’t. They had no balls. They let you down.” They let down the rest of the country, too.

Concluding Thoughts on the Task Force

In my eyes, there were two major shortcomings of the Covid Task Force.  The first was that the task force never made an effort to directly develop or recruit another group to develop treatment guidelines for COVID-19.  The NIH, who should have been responsible for this task likewise failed to fulfill it.

One of the main reasons why Covid killed so many people was because the majority of healthcare providers were not willing to go against the existing guidelines, and no serious effort was ever made to develop treatment guidelines, especially for patients who had not been yet been hospitalized. Throughout the pandemic, I can remember desperate healthcare providers soliciting each other for guidelines that had been developed by academic institutions, but they were never willing to go out on a limb to try developing their own treatment protocols.

Given that Anthony Fauci held a senior role in both the NIH and the Covid Task Force, and profited immensely from a lack of treatment guidelines being developed, I suspect Fauci was the party largely responsible for these guidelines never being produced. 

Although failing to produce treatment guidelines was problematic, overall, I believe the largest mistake made by the Covid Task Force occurred at the very start. In one of the first announcements of the pandemic, Trump detailed the measures his administration was taking to confront this extraordinary crisis.  One of these was to have Medicare cover all cases of Covid for those without health insurance. 

On the surface, that seemed like a great idea because it was critically important for those stricken by this virus to receive medical care and for them to not infect those around them (i.e. their household). However, in reality it was a terrible policy decision because it incentivized to the entire medical field to classify everything as Covid, thereby massively inflating the number of Covid cases and deaths. 

Within a few months of this announcement, it was standard practice at most healthcare facilities to code as many things as possible as being related to Covid because there were no issues with insurance providers rejecting Covid related claims.  In the early days of the pandemic, the diagnostic criteria for Covid was extremely subjective (as there were not any tests for it) and once PCR test became available, those tests had such a high false positive rate, that the over diagnosis issue remained largely unchanged. This is a key reason why assessing impact of the pandemic (and the highly dangerous spike protein vaccines) must be done through changes in the total number of people who died rather than the deaths that were attributed to COVID-19.

I completely understand why this issue would not have been apparent to Trump when he enacted the policy, as it is only something you can grasp from having worked within the medical system.  However, I am highly doubtful Fauci and Birx were not aware a massive inflation of COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations and deaths would be the direct consequence of that policy.

In the same vein, the decision to have Medicare provide higher reimbursements for hospitalized Covid patients requiring ventilation without requiring providers to meet any type of criteria prior to initiating ventilation was also a terrible idea.  It was easy to anticipate this policy decision in conjunction with Medicare covering all cases of COVID-19 would result in a large number of unnecessary ventilations occurring.  Given that information was available within the first month of the pandemic that ventilation often increased rather than decreased the risk of death, and that Medicare nonetheless refused to institute stricter criteria for making ventilation be eligible for coverage, I can only draw the conclusion that some of the individuals involved in that policy decision were seeking to increase the death rate. 

The dead giveaway on all of this for me was the fanatical coverage that occurred in the media at the start of the pandemic regarding the desperate shortage of ventilators in New York (the governor was regularly calling Trump a murderer for failing to provide ventilators) and the “heroic” effort our country went through to provide more ventilators.  All of this suggested to me that the extra ventilators had minimal medical value and were primarily being used as part of yet another propaganda campaign to suck the American public into the pandemic narrative.

When I considering everything that occurred within the task force, the only explanation I can see that explains Fauci and Birx’s egregious unscientific conduct (along with a tendency to complain to the press if Atlas interfered with their agenda) was that their goal was to make COVID-19 as damaging as possible so that this could be used as leverage for vaccinating the entire population.  Given that Fauci had a large financial conflict of interest with Moderna, it is quite likely that was the motivation for his unethical conduct.  I was unable to locate any information on Birx’s is financial entanglements, so I cannot comment on what her ultimate motivation might have been.

Crimes Against the Elderly

I will admit, I am still not sure what the best way to write this section is, so please forgive me for how this came out.

Throughout my life, I have observed there is a willingness by the ruling elite to sacrifice human lives if it is to their benefit.  For some reason, Americans tend to have a great deal of difficulty believing this could be possible, while simultaneously closing their eyes to all the civilians we kill overseas to financially support the military industrial complex.  My best guess is that it is subconsciously assumed by many that something evil occurring out of sight and out of mind to people who are not “Americans,” could never also happen in our homeland. 

Since most of my family was killed by genocide, I am much more open to the possibility things like this can occur. I also adamantly believe the rights of the most vulnerable and marginalized members of society must be protected because if that does not occur those rights will eventually be taken away from everyone.

One of the central problems policymakers within Western democracies have struggled with is what to do with the elderly.  This is because the nature of our medical system causes it to be prohibitively expensive to take care of the elderly near the end of their life and the structure of our retirement system requires numerous parties to pay large amounts of money to financially support them after retirement.

I personally believe the solution to this problem is to develop a different medical system which allows the elderly to maintain their health, independence and functionality into an old age (there are multiple ways this can be done).  I sincerely believe this can be done with a high degree of success, but it requires a radically different paradigm to be accomplished. For this reason, I plan to completely avoid the medical system in old age and I have worked to cultivate the ability to take care of myself independently until the day I die.

Unfortunately, because our monopolized medical system is extremely hostile towards anything that threatens its revenue, the model of medicine I am suggesting has never been implemented.  The primary approach instead is to sell as many (often harmful) medical treatments to the elderly as possible, prematurely shorten their lifespan, and warehouse them in abysmal living centers until they pass away.  Because we have an increasing number of elderly adults in the population, the existing approach is on the edge of no longer being sustainable, and as the years go by, suggestions to address the problem through mass euthanasia continually increase.

With the pandemic, there is significant evidence to suggest deliberate euthanasia of the elderly occurred in certain States and within England.  It is entirely possible this occurred in other areas, but I have no knowledge of the subject.  The most common way this occurred was by discharging patients with COVID-19 from hospitals to nursing homes rather than having them wait out the last part of their disease process in the hospital. 

The rationale for this policy was to keep the hospitals from becoming overloaded with patients (for context early in the pandemic everyone was freaking out about the hospitals becoming overloaded and doing whatever they could to quickly get patients out the door).  However, this approach didn’t make any sense because it consistently resulted in infections occurring at the nursing homes and significantly more patients ultimately being hospitalized because of those infections.

The other side effect of this policy was that a large number of elderly patients died. In fact, it is arguable that most of the deaths that occurred during the peaks of the pandemic were a direct result of nursing home policies.  When I learned of Covid in December 2020, my first thought was “this will be catastrophic if it gets in the nursing homes,” and it over the next few months many other doctors came to the same conclusion emphasized the urgency of keeping Covid out of the nursing homes.

Curiously however, top-down policies were enacted which sent infected patients back to their nursing homes.  Malcolm Kendrick, a English doctor repeatedly discussed the madness of this policy in his blog and his continual unsuccessful attempts to oppose it.  Within the United States, this policy also occurred, but curiously it only happened in certain states: California, Michigan, New Jersey, New York and Pennsylvania.  This conduct was egregious and in many cases was investigated by Trump’s Department of Justice. Some of the figures involved in this scandal are shown below:

Two particularly concerning things stand out about this euthanasia period.  The first what is that the high death count that was amassed by placing the Covid patients in nursing homes was then subsequently used to justify the hysteria around Covid and the draconian policies that followed from it (sadly there is a past precedent for the government sacrificing civilians so their deaths can be used to promote a narrative).

The best examples I know of occurred in Pennsylvania, where Rachel Levine lead the state COVID-19 response as the state secretary of health, and was widely criticized for enacting policies that killed a large number of the elderly in nursing homes. 

On March 18, 2020, Levine directed nursing homes to admit new patients, including "stable patients who have had the COVID-19 virus” despite the warnings of nursing home trade groups that such policies "could unnecessarily cost more lives." Although the stated purpose of this decision was to alleviate overcrowding in "acute care settings”, according to a team of reporters from the USA Today Network and Bucks County Courier Times, hospitals in most Pennsylvania counties were not experiencing overcrowding at the time. Spotlight PA, also noted that, under Levine, Pennsylvania had a "robust and aggressive" plan to protect nursing home residents but it "was never fully implemented". Spotlight PA also repeatedly reported on erroneous reporting of COVID deaths and other data by state officials.

On May 12, 2020, WHTM reported that following the change in nursing home admissions policies, Levine had moved her own mother out of a nursing home. Levine defended the move: " 'My mother requested, and my sister and I as her children complied to move her to another location during the Covid-19 outbreak,' Levine said. 'My mother is 95 years old. She is very intelligent and more than competent to make her own decisions.' "By the summer of 2020, around 70% of COVID deaths in Pennsylvania were in nursing homes, leading to renewed criticism that state officials were "letting infected patients back into nursing homes" and also that the state had stopped health inspections nursing homes.

Levine then used these deaths to justify requiring last minute mail-in ballots throughout Pennsylvania (which was in violation of Pennsylvania’s state constitution), and other last-minute voting changes that resulted in Joe Biden winning the state when he most likely would not have done so otherwise.  Levine was subsequently appointed as Assistant Secretary for the HHS and was commissioned as a four-star admiral in the U.S. Public Health Service Commissioned Corps. 

These appointments were controversial because Levine was not qualified for either position and because Levine was one of the first openly transsexual officials in the United States government (and a strong advocate for “gender-affirming” care for minors highlighted by Rand Paul’s questioning during Levine’s confirmation hearings):

CSPAN @cspan

Exchange between Sen. @RandPaul and Dr. Rachel Levine on on Gender Transition.

 I felt the actual issue was that Levine’s appointment to each of these positions was most likely a pay-off for murdering a large number of elderly individuals in order to get Biden elected.

In England, something equally concerning occurred. Midazolam is a commonly used sedative in medical practice (ie. when someone needs to go under) that also has the side effect of reducing reduces respiration, which is something quite problematic in those with impaired respiratory function from Covid or old age. Because many Covid patients were sent to the nursing homes, it resulted in many Covid cases and suspected Covid cases within the nursing homes that were incorrectly managed and lead to numerous deaths.

For some reason in England, a large amount of midazolam was ordered during the first wave of COVID-19 and was then administered (likely in an excessive dose) to a large number of elderly patients in nursing homes (38,352 prescriptions were administered in April 2021 compared to a baseline level of 15,000 a month). This action is suspected to be responsible for many of the Covid deaths that occurred (as many patients who likely would have been fine died after being sedated with Midazolam), and has resulted in groups within England of filing murder charges against the government for this policy.
(Note: this section on midazolam was worded erroneously in the original version of this article, I apologize for this)

Operation Warp Speed

The classic Republican view is that regulations are the root cause of everything that is wrong in the world, and if you get the government out of the way, a lot of things become possible and everyone prosperous.  On many levels, Operation Warp Speed which sought to do just that (isn’t it odd it shares an abbreviation with Occupy Wall Street?) was an incredible feat that made it possible to accomplish many things which would normally have been impossible within the federal government. 

However, I do not believe the individuals who crafted OWS had the medical knowledge that was necessary to fully appreciate the consequences of their actions.  For example, although it is true that government regulation significantly delays new drugs being able to come to market, in most cases that regulation is woefully inadequate to properly evaluate the drugs for safety or efficacy, and as a result many medications are approved that should never have been let out (for a more comprehensive evidence-based summary of this problem, please see this reader’s comment).  As a result, it was reasonable to expect that drastically shortening the evaluation process would inevitably lead to exceedingly dangerous medications being put on the market, and FDA whistleblowers spoke out on this issue throughout OWS.

One of the major challenges that emerged during the early days of the pandemic was how difficult it was to conduct clinical trials or receive Emergency Use Authorizations for off-patent therapies.  I, along with many other parties attempted to do so and eventually gave up once it became clear the FDA was only interested in approving expensive medications everyone could profit off of. 

My own belief is that it was within the authority of the executive branch to expand the scope of the recently passed Right to Try law so that studies of cheaper therapies could have been conducted (although this never happened).  It was also within the executive branch’s authority to conduct studies of off patent therapeutics within the military.  Had these trials been initiated, there likely would have been multiple effective treatment protocols developed a few months into the pandemic and none of what followed would have been necessary.

The largest mistake that occurred during OWS was pushing through the mRNA vaccines.  Many officials in the Trump administration appeared to have allowed themselves to be boxed in by the fear of promoting a therapy the media would eviscerate them for (with the pushback received for advocating hydroxychloroquine or the use of disinfectants being the best examples).  My team encountered this fear firsthand when members of the Trump administration told us they thought our proposals were a very good idea but they could not touch them because the media would have a field day.

Because of the fear they would be lynched by the media for any “non-scientific“ (whatever that means) approach to treating COVID-19, the Trump Administration focused on the most socially acceptable approach – developing vaccines for COVID-19.  As was discussed in this recent article, it was clear to anyone with a scientific background that this was a very bad idea that was likely to worsen rather than solve the pandemic, and according to Paul Alexander who worked in the HHS at the time, many government employees alongside Pfizer and Moderna employees felt the same way but were not willing to take the risk to state their concerns publicly.

The entire Trump administration thus got sucked into pinning their hopes on being able to deliver a miracle and have a vaccine enter the market right before the election, so they made enormous investments on their end to make that happen.  Trump ultimately learned why it is bad to make a deal with the devil, as at the last minute Pfizer deliberately delayed their vaccine so that it could not be approved until right after the election concluded and then worked in lockstep with the Biden administration to force vaccine mandates onto the American population. 

My personal opinion is that unless Trump is willing to disavow the vaccines he brought to market, it will not be possible for him to win the 2024 election, since by that time the harms from these vaccines will likely be abundantly clear to everyone.  Unfortunately, Trump appears to have gotten stuck on the fact his administration performed a “miracle” to get the vaccines to market as quickly as they did, and is unable to see that he was played by the pharmaceutical industry.  This is particularly sad given that, as discussed above, Trump already had decades of personal experiences with vaccine injuries being gaslighted by the government and medical establishment. 

In our petitions to the White House from the very start, we stated that unless the Trump administration was able to develop an effective treatment protocol for Covid, they would not win the 2020 election.  I ultimately believe the reason this did not occur was because like most public officials, the Trump administration deferred to the advice of medical experts rather than attempting to figure out the problem themselves. 

Interestingly, Peter Navarro, who was not a doctor and had no medical background, often did a better job of identifying appropriate therapeutic interventions for COVID-19 then the medical personnel on the Covid Task Force.  However, because most of the Trump administration still operated under the paradigm of trusting the experts, Navarro’s advice was never listened to and clearly corrupt bureaucrats were allowed to craft a pandemic response they profited massively off of.

I hope this was a helpful summary of my own interpretation over what happened behind the scenes during the past few years.  My sincere hope is that by bringing awareness to these issues, it will motivate future political candidates to avoid committing the same mistakes and provides a working framework for us to move forward with. I thank you for taking the time to read through this series and share it with people you believe can benefit from it.