Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Trump’s Coronavirus Vaccine Timeline Vindicated, Corporate Media Hardest Hit

Trump’s Coronavirus Vaccine Timeline Vindicated, Corporate Media Hardest Hit

“But experts say that the development, testing and production of a vaccine for the public is still at least 12 to 18 months off, and that anything less would be a medical miracle,” NBC News reported in a May fact check.

https://youtu.be/jyjZZmgz__M

As I read today about how the first truckloads of the Pfizer Wuhan coronavirus vaccine were rolled out this morning for delivery and distribution to frontline healthcare workers and nursing homes, my thoughts turned to the media’s/left’s eight-months-long effort to undercut President Trump’s claims on various treatments for the virus as well as his touting of an accelerated vaccine timeline.

Since the pandemic started here in the U.S., the media and Democrats have fed frustrated Americans a steady diet of negativity in response to Trump talking about possible treatments for the virus, with their downplaying of the use of hydroxychloroquine among the more notable examples. They even suggested at one point early on that the sole reason Trump talked so often about the anti-malarial drug was not because he was so much interested in helping people recover but because he had a significant financial stake in it.

It’s hard to pinpoint which was worse: Trump’s detractors deliberately throwing cold water on hydroxychloroquine in spite of various studies and independent claims as to the drug’s effectiveness or their repeated attempts at discrediting Trump’s assertions that a vaccine for the virus would be ready by the end of the year.

The media “fact checks” on a fast-tracked vaccine for the virus started in early March, with the Washington Post citing two “medical experts,” with one of them being National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases director Dr. Fauci, shooting down the possibility of a vaccine being available before the end of the year:

Fauci said vaccine candidates will “likely go into clinical trials in a phase one study within about two months or maybe even six weeks. That would be a record. However, that is not a vaccine, because it will take about three months or more to show that it is safe. And then, if you show that it’s safe, you’ve got to put it into what’s called a phase two trial to show that it works. And the reason is — there’s medical, ethical and other considerations — is that we’d be giving this to normal people to prevent infection. So you must be sure, the edict of medicine: First, do no harm. We need to make sure that it’s safe and we need to make sure it works. That entire process will take at least a year and a year and a half. So when we hear talk about a vaccine’s going to be ready in a couple of months, it won’t be ready for being deployed. It’s going to take a while. So, we’re going to have a multi-step process.”

Regardless of their claims, Trump kept promoting the possibility of a vaccine rollout by the end of the year, including in this tweet:

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1260919777301798912

NBC News reported in a May “fact check” that “experts say [Trump] needs a ‘miracle’ to be right” about a vaccine being available by the end of 2020:

But experts say that the development, testing and production of a vaccine for the public is still at least 12 to 18 months off, and that anything less would be a medical miracle.

“I think it’s possible you could see a vaccine in people’s arms next year — by the middle or end of next year. But this is unprecedented, so it’s hard to predict,” said Dr. Paul Offit, a professor at the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania and the director of the Vaccine Education Center at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia.

Media efforts to undermine predictions of an end-of-year rollout went on for months, including in October, when during a presidential debate moderator Kristen Welker tried to suggest Trump’s timeline was unrealistic:

Let me follow up with you, and because this is new information — You have said a vaccine is coming soon, within weeks now. Your own officials say it could take well into 2021 at the earliest for enough Americans to get vaccinated, and even then they say the country will be wearing masks and distancing into 2022. Is your timeline realistic?

There was much more where that came from:

Reading all that and then knowing what we know now about the impending vaccine rollout, it’s not hard to understand why Trump didn’t always trust his taskforce’s “experts.”

In response to those on the left and in the media who don’t want to give Trump credit for the fact that this vaccine was approved and ready to be shipped out in record time, this Twitter user took the right approach:

Predictably, instead of giving credit where due to Operation Warp Speed and the Trump administration for their role in helping fast-track the vaccine, this was one of CNN’s more popular hot takes:

While Trump didn’t have a crystal ball to be able to know exactly when the vaccine would be ready, he did appear to understand that putting intense amounts of public pressure on Pfizer, Moderna, AstraZeneca, and others to keep their eye on the ball and get it done would aid in lighting the necessary fires that would ensure vaccine availability by the end of the year.

Assuming Joe Biden and Kamala Harris are certified the winners of the presidential election, the media and Democrats will work overtime to credit them for the vaccine all while ignoring their combined roles in whipping up skepticism for it.

But what shouldn’t get lost in all the fanfare over the vaccine’s continued rollout in a possible Biden-Harris administration is just who had a major hand in expediting the process from the very start via a targeted public relations campaign. Hint: It wasn’t Biden and Harris. It was the guy who the media and Democrats repeatedly said couldn’t get it done.

— Stacey Matthews has also written under the pseudonym “Sister Toldjah” and can be reached via Twitter. —

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

I read this somewhere, maybe even here. But this simple thought has been missing from the MSM and the left for the last 4 Years.

President Teddy Roosevelt said these words. I wish our press and the left could simply understand these simple words. “It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat. ”

I am almost willing to let Biden become president just to let the world see his policies fail and see him coach the economy. I guarantee if he does, my children will not suffer. As far as I am concerned the first night my children will go to bed hungry is the catalyst for me to start taking from them by force.

    notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to starride. | December 13, 2020 at 6:46 pm

    More Evidence Shows Total Deaths in 2020 Are No Different Than Prior Years – Open Up the Economy Democrats

    Gateway Pundit

      Actually the evidence is that circa 200,000 extra people have died in the USA in 2020.

        daniel in reply to mark311. | December 13, 2020 at 8:07 pm

        Mark, the one thing that a sensible person cannot say is what you said in your comment. Do you claim to be omnicient? Unless you know all, you cannot know that there is no evidence of anything at all. You may believe that there is no valid evidence, or no evidence you would ever accept, but even that is something you cannot know. That there is evidence that you do not believe is something you cannot know at all.
        But there is plenty of evidence. For example, my experience in life has taught me that those who seek to avoid investigations and to suppress unfavorable comment, are those who are not to be believed. You should believe that they are doing it for a reason and that reason is they have something to hide.
        For example, Trump, when investigated by the Mueller group, gave them everything they asked for. That convinced me that he had nothing to hide, and Mueller eventually concluded that.
        And now, who is demanding investigations and who is doing its best to prevent same? The press, the big time media, the Democrats are all trying to suppress news of investigations. If they have nothing to hide, they can get vindication by cooperating in investigations like Trump did. Their present posture will cost them plenty in the minds of most rational people.
        And there is physical evidence. There was the postal worker who said he brought a trailer truck full of ballots from Bethpage Long Island to Pennsylvania, where they had to be unloaded secretly after strange delays. There are the strange spikes in vote returns in various states (of hundreds of thousands of votes, almost all for Biden) that came in in the middle of the night after Republican poll watchers were said to have been sent home. there are stories that putting an equal number of Trump and Biden votes in a machine in Florida led to Biden leading by 20%. There is testimony by computer experts at serious flaws in the voting machines used in many states. There are claims that a charity sent out vast numbers of ballots with flaws in them, and counters were instructed to correct Biden votes but not Trump votes. There are stories that various ‘charities doubled the salaries of poll workers in exchange for doing such things.
        All of these things may be explanable or untrue so they may be false evidence. But they are certainly evidence. Only an investigation can establish their validity or falseness.
        For you to state that there is no evidence of massive fraud marks you as an imbecile.
        You may claim that all this evidence i

          mark311 in reply to daniel. | December 14, 2020 at 9:32 am

          Im not clear that you are replying to my comment above? Never the less in reference to what you say, actually their is very limited evidence. The spikes you refer too are because the mail in ballots are counted last and demographically democrats are far more likely to use mail in ballots than vote in person. This is well documented. With reference to the specific cases of irregularities can you explain why Trumps legal team have yet to actually submit any evidence to any court. Having followed some of the cases its quite apparent that what the legal team say in public and what they have presented to the various judges have been quite different. The comments regarding the voting machines have been widely debunked, if you are referring to the Dominion sub contractor – the evidence she presented was incoherent nonsense that didn’t really make any sense. She was unable to answer any questions when cross examined. I dont claim omniscience, it seems entirely reasonable when circa 50 legal cases fail miserable to establish any fraud at all to say that there wasnt fraud.

        DanJ1 in reply to mark311. | December 14, 2020 at 9:17 am

        John Hopkins published a report a few weeks ago that stated that deaths from the five leading causes of death in the U.S. were down between January 1 and the end of September this year, in about the same proportion as there were deaths reported from Covid. You can draw your own conclusions from this, I guess, but it’s hard to argue against the experts at John Hopkins when it comes to the numbers.

        Now where did you get the +200,000 figurs?

          mark311 in reply to DanJ1. | December 14, 2020 at 10:03 am

          I havent had a chance to read in detail but the John Hopkins article was retracted – see editors note on why https://www.jhunewsletter.com/article/2020/11/a-closer-look-at-u-s-deaths-due-to-covid-19

          The source for excess deaths is CDC website. I rounded down the figures – its a pretty broad spectrum between circa 225k and 275K. Its bound to be revised over time, as others have rightly said establishing Covid or another cause is a hot topic

          DanJ1 in reply to DanJ1. | December 14, 2020 at 10:49 am

          The retraction explanation was rather dubious. They cite 300,000 “additional” deaths but the link to the CDC website shows only that there have been 296,000 Covid deaths. It does not show total deaths from all causes as the statisticians show. The other link to a graph that has a big spike is not news and it does not relate to the underlying data set which you can access by clicking on a tab that shows that total deaths from January to December are actually over three thousand below the 2015 to 2019 average annual death from all causes. So yes there was a spike early but what the statistics (which I admit are very cold and impersonal) show that fewer people died later in the year than normally would have been expected statistically. Draw your own conclusions but the numbers are the numbers and no retraction is going to cancel the fact that more people died during during three of the five previous years than we are tract to seeing die in 2020.

          mark311 in reply to DanJ1. | December 14, 2020 at 11:14 am

          @DanJ1 – you can look at each individual time node on the graph https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/excess-mortality-raw-death-count?tab=chart&stackMode=absolute&region=World

          Looking at the graph its pretty clear that overall deaths are well in excess of previous years. Post Feb 16th the death toll is higher than previous year average. Bear in mind that the dataset ends Nov 8th and therefore a full comparison year on year isnt possible yet.

    gonzotx in reply to starride. | December 13, 2020 at 8:13 pm

    Thanks so much for posting that, beautiful
    He could have written this with our President Trump in mind along with himself and a very few others, such as Washington and Lincoln

    henrybowman in reply to starride. | December 13, 2020 at 9:07 pm

    “I guarantee if he does, my children will not suffer.”
    Until they try to go somewhere.
    Or buy something.
    Or say something.
    Or write something.
    Or have their assets seized.
    Or have their jobs rescinded.
    Or get beat up by their classmates for being “unmutual.”
    This is what concerns me, because it’s out of my control.
    I won’t be making promises I’ll be unable to keep.

The natural burn out of the virus (mostly) combined with some effects of the vaccine will result in COVID mostly gone by Jan 21. By end of January, Biden will be awarded at least two Nobel Prizes for having conquered COVID-19.

    mark311 in reply to lichau. | December 13, 2020 at 7:13 pm

    Its doubtful that the virus will burn out within 6 weeks given the highest recorded death rate of the year so far.

      Shorter mark: we’ll just attribute more gunshot wounds to Wuhan Flu.

        mark311 in reply to SDN. | December 13, 2020 at 7:30 pm

        If you are suggesting that the figures for Covid related deaths are made up you should cite a source. The figures seems plausible given the policies implemented by Trump. Besides the European experience is very similar and that’s unlikely to end anytime soon.

          Dathurtz in reply to mark311. | December 13, 2020 at 10:24 pm

          I can give you an anecdote. I personally know two people who have covid as their stated cause of death. One of them was 96 and died because he fell down and hit his head and had a brain bleed. The other one was in his 70s and bled to death due to lesions in his colon.

          Both listed as covid, neither one died from it. I know my sample size is small, but I hear a lot of people saying the same kind of thing.

          Lucifer Morningstar in reply to mark311. | December 14, 2020 at 8:24 am

          Will COVID-19 be the underlying cause?
          The underlying cause depends upon what and where conditions are reported on the death certificate. However, the rules for coding and selection of the underlying cause of death are expected to result in COVID- 19 being the underlying cause more often than not.[emphasis added]

          In other words, the “coding system” tends to over-attribute death to covid-19 and not the actual underlying cause of death resulting in exaggerated death numbers due to covide-19.

          Should “COVID-19” be reported on the death certificate only with a confirmed test? COVID-19 should be reported on the death certificate for all decedents where the disease caused or is assumed to have caused or contributed to death. Certifiers should include as much detail as possible based on their knowledge of the case, medical records, laboratory testing, etc. If the decedent had other chronic conditions such as COPD or asthma that may have also contributed, these conditions can be reported in Part II. (See attached Guidance for Certifying COVID-19 Deaths)[emphasis added]

          Assume covid-19 was the cause of death and report it as such on the death certificate. Again, resulting in over inflated death rates for the covid-19.

          The numbers are not made up but the whole reporting system was biased towards “covid-19 deaths” and therefore over-reported those deaths that actually occurred from other causes (asthma, heart problems). And the CDC and NVSS were aware of this bias (an actually encouraged it) as far back as March 2020.

          Source:
          Alert-2-New-ICD-code-introduced-for-COVID-19-deaths [PDF]

          ctgarric in reply to mark311. | December 14, 2020 at 8:45 am

          I’ll do you one better and tell you where you can go to get primary source information and decide for yourself. Go the the CDC website an look at what they have listed as ‘comorbidities’ and ask yourself if it makes sense that some one who dies under those conditions should be counted in the virus totals.

      lichau in reply to mark311. | December 14, 2020 at 3:14 pm

      Google Farr’s Laws. The rapid rise suggest a rapid fall is coming.

This reminds me of that great line Tommy Lee Jones asks the sheriff in The Fugitive right after they realize Harrison Ford is not actually dead:

“Do you want to change your bullshit story, sir””

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1tRhC_QTpfY

“Hardest hit?”

Hardly. They just stole the presidential election. Flat out stole it with their lies.

They should be treated as the enemy that they are, and dealt with accordingly.

    notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to Paul. | December 13, 2020 at 6:48 pm

    HUGE – “We Have Serious, Serious Foreign Influence with Dominion Voting Machines” – General Flynn Says “We Have Conclusive Evidence of Foreign Influence in US Election Right Now”

    Gateway Pundit

    mark311 in reply to Paul. | December 13, 2020 at 7:11 pm

    No offence but there is no evidence of fraud of the scale required to change the election result. Sure there might have been very limited amounts but no enough to swing the results to a different outcome. Indeed the court battles have indicated that the Trump legal team don’t really believe that fraud was prevalent either.

Agree “hardest hit” hardly, the Democrats Propaganda Ministry will pin it all on Sundowner after his 100 day turning into 120 day when vaccine will knock dow numbers.
I am undecided, never had a flu vaccine but might this.

The author of the article cites ‘various studies’ supposedly supporting the use of Hydroxychloroquine. This isn’t the case, firstly the various studies linked is actually only the one study. The Henry Ford Health System Study has been widely debunked. It was an observation study with no randomisation, had steroid use in the patients (which is known to alleviate and reduce severity of symptoms and the death rate). Hydroxychloroquine does not work.

    MarkS in reply to mark311. | December 13, 2020 at 9:16 pm

    Dr Stella Emmanuel claims that she has successfully treated over 300 covid patients with hydroxy, and that her office staff takes it as a preventative and not a one have gotten infected despite not wearing a mask. Wanna offer evidence that none of that is true?

      mark311 in reply to MarkS. | December 14, 2020 at 9:39 am

      Sorry that particular Dr isnt exactly a credible source. She claims many things including that Alien DNA is being used in medical experiments, believes in witchcraft etc. Whilst those things are perfectly fine to believe in (whatever floats your boat) they dont sit well within scientific discussion. I additionally point out that the trial of 350 people is a pretty small study and her results have not been replicated by large double blind trials.

    daniel in reply to mark311. | December 14, 2020 at 12:01 am

    Mark, as of two months ago there were about 50 studies that all showed that the medicine you disparage was effective, reducing cases and deaths by approximately 65% and maybe more if combined with zinc and an antibiotic, if given early.
    It is not effective if given to those already near death who suffer from other diseases that take advantage of the weakened immune system. Only two studies claimed it was not effective, both published in respected medical journals. One was a fake, by fraudsters who did no study whatsoever. The other was by people who gave huge doses of the stuff and claimed those getting it were harmed by it. As a result of that the international health organization ordered that it not be used. Switzerland which had been giving it stopped for about ten days. The death rate from covid, with suitable lag, in Switzerland jumped by a factor of three for ten days. When the health organization realized the article was phony, it changed its mind, and that is why Switzerland went back to using it and after ten days the death rate went right back down.
    Also, death rates from covid in Africa are way below what they are in Europe or Asia or here, in part because they take the medicine routinely to avoid dying from malaria.
    You should really learn about what you write about before you put down lies.

      mark311 in reply to daniel. | December 14, 2020 at 9:51 am

      Id be happy to take a look at the studies you cite, do you have a source?

      Covid death rates in Africa and Asia are way below Europe and the States because they have contained considerably better, therefore the overall amount of Covid cases are massively lower.

        Can you cite a source on how a third world continent like Africa could contain a virus better.

        Along with HCQ, another one given for River Blindness, etc in Africa that some doctors say is effective as a preventative and on early Covid is Ivermectin. I predict that these re-purposed drugs that US health authorities turned up their nose at, perhaps because there is no money in them, will eventually prove useful – Rutgers U is doing trials right now with HCQ on early Covid – and politically and financially motivated opposition will have killed a lot of people.

        As to death counts, compensation to hospitals is higher if the cause of death is Covid. Many hospitals are struggling because of the pandemic. It is 100% that deaths from Covid are overstated, for that reason and as illustrated by an earlier poster. However, I will be surprised if total deaths are not up, partly because of increases in deaths indirectly related to Covid, like suicide, drugs, medical neglect of other ailments, consequences of an enforced sedentary lifestyle, etc.

          mark311 in reply to jb4. | December 15, 2020 at 4:45 am

          Its from general reading, the african picture is quite complicated. As in there are probably a number of different factors as to why there death rate is a lot lower. As you rightly point out on the face of it third world countries should have suffered much bigger impacts than the developed world but that hasn’t happened. Various reasons are cited including there previous experience with Ebola which would necessitate the kind of rapid lockdown and contact and trace response required to prevent mass transmission. That said I’m sure there are numerous other factors such as behaviour poor transportation and poor reporting of figures.

          With regards to the drugs you mention I have yet to see a credible source demonstrating effectiveness of you could provide on that would be great

          jb4 in reply to jb4. | December 15, 2020 at 11:09 am

          https://trialsitenews.com/argentinas-ivercar-ivermectin-carrageenan-study-shows-positive-results-targeting-covid-19/

          “The study team recruited 1,195 health professionals of which 407 received no treatment and 788 self-administered ivermectin oral drops and an iota-carrageenan nasal spray five times per day over a 14 day period.

          The Results
          The Argentinian study team reported that the study data revealed that of the participants in the control group (e.g. not taking the study drug combination) 58% of the participants were infected with COVID-19 during the duration of the trial. The study team reported no contagions were recorded in the carrageenan and ivermectin arm, showcasing the compounds’ virucidal effects can potentially protect against COVID-19.”

          While this is not a randomized and blinded treatment protocol, the difference is stunning from a statistical point of view, on a relatively large number of participants. If 58% of the 407 control group got Covid, or 236 people, you would have expected 457 of the 788 in the treatment arm to have gotten Covid if the treatment was worthless, not zero. Why isn’t this on the front page of MSM, instead of having to be stumbled across?

          Here is the Rutgers U trial with HCQ – results not known – https://www.rutgers.edu/news/rutgers-leading-coronavirus-therapeutic-clinical-trial

          “This three-drug combination has been shown in experimental studies to be highly effective in suppressing viral replication. Participants will be given the drug combination or a placebo.”

How can someone be considered to have taken some kind of hard hit, when they completely ignore it?

There will be no accounting. No mea culpa or eating of crow. Remember, as far as the left is concerned, what counts is that their intentions were good. Results are irrelevant.

PDJT was amazingly prepared for a lot of things upon assuming office. He surprised me, and probably a lot of others with how well he did on a lot of issues.
Still not happy about the spending though. But I loved the SALT slash that hit the blue states so hard.

“referring to the Covid-19 vaccine as the “Trump Vaccine.”
“if fatalities and job losses should thus be referred to as the “Trump Death Toll”

No.
Trump spearheaded the vaccine, not the disease.
China spearheaded the disease.
Therefore, it should be referred to as the “Chinese Virus Death Toll.”
You’d run that on the news, wouldn’t you?
No?
Then GFY.

    randian in reply to henrybowman. | December 14, 2020 at 3:40 am

    Perhaps we should call it the Trump Death Toll. 250k deaths (and we all know that’s grossly inflated) is pretty darn good when the initial estimates were 2 million dead. Of course, Trump cannot be given credit for anything, so that’s right out.

      mark311 in reply to randian. | December 14, 2020 at 9:52 am

      Except that the USA has the worst death rate of the developed world. I wish I were in Australia, they don’t need a lock down because they have dealt with the Virus far more effectively.

        mailman in reply to mark311. | December 14, 2020 at 10:21 am

        I really do wish ignorant fucks like yourself would arm themselves with knowledge being talking shit. Australian States have been locked down tighter than a Nunn in a convent and has been enforcing that lockdown like crack whores on speed.

          mark311 in reply to mailman. | December 14, 2020 at 10:45 am

          No you are right my bad, it has had lockdowns. It has only had 908 Covid related deaths which is pretty good in comparison. I dont think being rude really achieves anything does it, no need for it.

        I believe you would be more accurate to say “The US has the worst *reported* death rate…”

        There are an inordinate number of deaths being reported as Covid right now which most probably should be “Covid and something else, but mostly something else” such as traffic accidents and such where Covid was only spotted post-mortem. I suspect in February the reporting criteria will be changed nationwide to only list Covid if it is the *primary* cause of death, which will cause the numbers to dive off a cliff, and the media to praise Biden like some massive chorus.

        Same goes for all the other countries and their *reported* death rates. There’s an immense amount of data-shuffling going on, and government pressure to keep their Covid numbers low so they don’t look bad.

        This is incorrect on its face, not even accounting for our jacked up numbers whereby pretty much everyone who died this year–including in car accidents, suicides, and homicides–has been listed as a WuFlu death.

        https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/data/mortality
        https://www.statista.com/statistics/1104709/coronavirus-deaths-worldwide-per-million-inhabitants/

OwenKellogg-Engineer | December 14, 2020 at 4:13 am

My apologies for this editorial comment. The second paragraph starts with:

“Since the pandemic started here in the U.S……..”

I would offer instead:

“By the time the pandemic reached the U.S. ….”

Carry on.

mark311 is a troll. Don’t feed it.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend