patrick.net

"Fake News" Propaganda Deployed To Undermine MAHA

The Shabby Media’s $176M Canard

Moderna itself announced the reward last July. ...

In other words, this supposed breaking news was old news, suddenly resurrected by U.S. News as if it were new. For no apparent reason. The supposed journalists who wrote the story, Robin Foster and Stephanie Brown, are said to work at HealthDay. They have no contact information and my email to the site has not been yet answered.

So far as I can tell, if such a contract did exist, it is now cancelled or on pause.

What the breaking news stories did do was circulate widely in the health freedom movement, cited as an example of how RFK and Trump are betraying their base. I personally received probably half a dozen contacts from people who sent the U.S. News story to me.

Several mentioned it on the phone without recalling the source.

It is now widely believed that the Trump administration has approved $176 million for Moderna even though there is no credible or new source on this at all. The canard is already burrowed into the brains of the people who matter.

Is this how medical news works?

The story gets even better. The $176 million number from last spring was upped in January 2025 to an incredible $600 million. The widely reported story appeared on January 17, 2025.

Yesterday afternoon, I was going about my daily business, in the middle of recording yet another podcast (Tom Woods), when the cell rang. As usual when broadcasting, I reached over and clicked the text message button, “Sorry, I can’t talk right now”. Once Tom and I were through, I returned to that text message.



Apparently, the call came from an unknown reporter with the usual sense of urgency and entitlement. I had received no recent email inquiry from the press, so this could be yet another phishing operation. Lately, I have been getting a lot more of these. Usually, some variant of “Hi there, how are you, did you forget about me?” and when I write back “who is this” I get a bizarre response demonstrating that this is just some random bot trying to get me to engage. But this particular inquiry had the veiled threat frequently used by junior journalists- translated from the journalese, it reads, “call me back and answer my questions or we will publish a hit piece on you anyhow.” So I punched the call-back button.

A chirpy female voice self-identifies, “This is Lauren Weber with the Washington Post”. I respond - “Hello Lauren, this is Robert Malone, I assume you are preparing some sort of hit piece on me?” She responds “Well, not from my point of view.”

Uh, yeah. Sure. Here we go, just as I anticipated. Lesson learned over the last four years: when a corporate news reporter engages like this, what is going on is that their editor has told them that before they publish a smear article, they are supposed to get a comment from the target.

At this point, the smear is essentially already written, and this is their lip service effort at “fair and balanced”. You are going to get smeared, whether you answer their questions or not. If you don’t, they will publish that they attempted to get a response, but that you did not reply. If they do get you to reply, they will selectively edit whatever you say to help make their point. These are the rules of today’s “gotcha” version of journalism.

I then asked Lauren Weber to what email address she had sent her “questions” for me to answer. Response - “your substack email”. Which I check pretty much never. I have many email accounts and was not really aware that this included a “substack” email address. With about 360,000 subscribers to this substack, I can hardly imagine how much email traffic that address generates. I can hardly keep up with my (historic) GMail and (current) Protonmail accounts!

I asked her to send her questions to my GMail address. This is what I received-

From: Weber, Lauren Lauren.Weber@washpost.com
Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2025 10:11 AM
To: rwmalonemd@substack.com
Subject: Washington Post comment request
Lauren Weber, Washington Post health reporter here.
I am reaching out as I was curious about the following questions regarding this substack post: https://www.malone.news/p/breaking-news-another-texas-child:
How did you publish about the second measles death before anyone else?
The family of the girl who died said they had not spoken to you - how did you know about her medical care?
Why do you believe medical mismanagement is to blame?
My deadline is today at 4 EST. Happy to hop on the phone if easier to discuss.
Thanks,
Lauren Weber
Health & Science Accountability Reporter
The Washington Post
@LaurenWeberHP
202.709.9178

“accountability reporter focused on the forces promoting scientific and medical disinformation.”

Yup, intuition confirmed, smear incoming.

Turns out it is a classic wrap-up smear, based on a primary smear article that some obscure reporter named Pooja Salhotra (of the “Texas Tribune”) wrote in which she accused me of the crime of “misinformation”, repeating (yet again) the NY Times published accusation of reporter Davey Alba; “news of Daisy’s death came from the highly-charged writings of vaccine critic Dr. Robert Malone, a physician once labeled by The New York Times as a “Covid misinformation star.” Alba, previously employed by the NYT as a mis- and dis-information specialist, had extremely detailed knowledge of CIA affairs, and left the NYT immediately after the hit piece.

Alba, Salhotra, and Weber are examples of the current foot-soldier caste of narrative enforcers employed by the censorship-industrial complex. For some reason, this new sector of that growing industry seems to be staffed mainly by young women, usually recently minted journalism school grads with virtually no scientific or medical training. Which appears to be a feature, not a bug. Ignorance of the subject matter at hand apparently makes it easier to swallow whatever the promoted narrative of the day is.

Relevant to today’s discussion is that the Washington Post derives a large fraction of its 174 million dollar advertising budget from the Pharmaceutical industry (down from 190M$ total last year). As to the “Texas Tribune”, this is an entirely on-line, subscriber-based outlet that does not publish its circulation. One website ranks it #9 out of the top 10 Texas “newspapers” by circulation. The next largest Texas newspaper has a daily circulation of approximately 6,878 (a little over 200,000 per month), so one can infer that the “Texas Tribune” has a lower circulation. At best, an obscure regional niche on-line outlet. Just for contrast, Malone News has a daily circulation of between 300,000 and 600,000 (views) and a monthly circulation of between 9 and 10 million views. ...

According to various studies, medical errors are estimated to cause between 250,000 and 440,000 deaths annually in the United States. One study published in the BMJ in 2016 estimated that more than 250,000 deaths per year are due to medical errors in the U.S., making it the third leading cause of death after heart disease and cancer.

Historically, from 2001 to 2022, among the 4,056 measles cases reported in the United States, 727 (18%) were hospitalized, and only three deaths were reported.

The real story here, for any “journalist” with an ounce of insight or integrity, was that there was a concerted attempt to position these tragedies as rare “Measles” deaths, when, in fact they were yet another example of the shockingly common category of medical error deaths. ...

Alba, Salhotra, and Weber are examples of the current foot-soldier caste of narrative enforcers employed by the censorship-industrial complex. For some reason, this new sector of that growing industry seems to be staffed mainly by young women

Corporate media’s op-ed sections serve various political purposes and exclude the quaint, archaic notions of balance or fairness. Timely deployed op-eds can manufacture an illusion of fairness, whitewashing an especially biased news cycle, sort of like cramming a lego under one corner of a thumping, unbalanced dryer.

But other times, the op-eds are where the media surfaces it limited hangouts, safe places where corporate media’s failed narratives can be carefully euthanized without creating too much cognitive dissonance. Sometimes op-eds become ladders, helping media climb down from their most extreme positions. For instance, they trotted out TV doctor Leana Wen in the opinion section to begin unwinding their experts’ advice to wear masks while jogging outdoors. Eventually, that became “common sense,” and the media’s credibility was preserved.

By all appearances, this op-ed suggests we can plant our farewell kisses on the media’s forecasts of Trump-tariff doom. “Armageddon,” author Gerard Baker parsimoniously conceded, “has been deferred.” The market-crashing Great Depression 2.0 that was predicted by “almost all economists and by even more non-economists, has so far failed to materialize.”

Imagine that. ...

In other words, discontented non-elites (that’s us) demanded populist change, ignored our experts, and so we got Trump tariffs. What the experts somehow missed, according to Baker, was the public’s ravenous appetite for eating globalism alive and spitting it out in bloody chunks. “If we see deglobalization not as a catastrophic act of self-harm but as a choice—even a rational one,” Baker suggested in a moment of rare generosity, “we can position ourselves better to deal with its consequences.”

“We,” apparently, referring to globalists like himself and the rest of the editorial staff and its squadrons of cherry-picked experts. They need to re-position themselves to avoid getting run over on the populist freeway, like cute little reptiles in the game Frogger.

In sum, this op-ed stands as a weathervane, signaling a changing narrative climate, the rapidly failing expert guidance that Trump’s tariffs were the most backwards, destructive, and strikingly incompetent economic plan since North Korea issued guidelines for approved hairstyles. In face-saving desperation, they’ve decided to throw globalism under the Trump bus.

And that, dear readers, is progress.

Yesterday, the New York Times ran an unintentionally hilarious and hyperbolic hit piece headlined, “RFK Jr. Swims in Washington Creek That Flows With Sewage and Bacteria.” At first, when they said “creek” I thought it was a pointed metaphor for Washington DC. But they actually meant a proper creek...

Germaphobic Times reporters went into full Hazmat-mode on Sunday, after Kennedy posted a few innocent pictures of himself stepping through Rock Creek with his grandkids tree-climbing nearby. Instead of running a wholesome headline like, “HHS Secretary Pauses Bureaucracy to Celebrate Mother’s Day,” the Times dove headfirst into municipal water reports. Apparently, Rock Creek has a swimming advisory due to elevated E. coli levels.

Fair enough. But here’s the kicker: the government put it there. DC’s Water Authority dumps over 40 million gallons of raw sewage into Rock Creek every year. If you did that, they’d build a new Supermax prison named in your dishonor. But when the local bureaucrats do it, it’s just Tuesday.

Alas, his creek’s contamination wasn’t the story. That’s not what this was about. It was really about three things— all of which spoke volumes more about the Times than about Kennedy.

First, come on. This isn’t news. It’s a performative public scolding over a Mother’s Day Instagram post. Yesterday’s top story was essentially “Man Gets Dirty With Kids Outdoors.”

Second, it showed just how deeply the pandemic scrambled the brains of progressive newsroom staff. The mere thought of stepping into a creek with non-sterile water — no Purell, no masks! — flung them into a frothing moral panic. What if there’s Covid in the water! they probably shrieked behind their plexiglass face shields.

Third, and most revealing, was the tone: naggy, moralizing, anxious. It wasn’t journalism. It had all the emotional energy of a clucking school nurse combined with a helicopter mom. “Robert, don’t you know there’s bacteria in there?” It wasn’t any masculine critique. It wasn’t even political. It was dark maternalism.

It made me wonder. Back in the 80’s during my rebellious year in journalism school, it was celebrated insider knowledge that j-school’s gender composition was 84% female. Great dating odds, but perhaps also a red flag. So I checked— and admit I was wrong. The creek-germs piece was written by a man (allegedly):




So maybe the problem isn’t that there are too many lady reporters, or too few men.

Maybe the problem is that the weak men at the Times are indistinguishable from its OCD’d women — and not in a good way. At this point, you could swap out half the bylines for housewives from a 1980s Lysol commercial and nobody would notice the difference.

Kennedy, barefoot in a sewage creek, looks like a gladiator compared to the media’s fearful, bleach-your-groceries worldview. Our new Health Secretary is literally wading through Washington’s crap — a metaphor made manifest. And that, more than anything, is why they can’t stand him.

In the wake of cackling Kamala’s catastrophic loss, lead CNN anchor Jake Tapper has published what may be the most mendacious, revisionist, and self-serving book ever written, and that includes Tony Fauci’s autobiography, copies of which can still be found in some Turkmenistani travel stops. Tapper’s odius opus bears the insufferably long title, “Original Sin: President Biden's Decline, Its Cover-Up, and His Disastrous Choice to Run Again.” ...

Apparently, no one person should be blamed. It was an unblameably vast leftwing conspiracy. Oh, Tapper waves angrily in a general direction towards “the family,” “the Politburo,” “some aides,” “donors,” “journalists,” “strategists,” even Biden’s pollsters— but not a single actual name was, apparently, fit for print. Even the whistleblowers couldn’t be named— most of the book’s contents are anonymously sourced. “In an authors’ note,” the Times reported, “they explain that they interviewed approximately 200 people, including high-level insiders, ‘some of whom may never acknowledge speaking to us but all of whom know the truth within these pages.’”

So … in Tapper’s Original Sin diarama, who plays Eve? Tapper won’t say. Somebody handed Tapper the apple, but he won’t tell who.

That was the tell: Jake is still too chicken to actually name names. That just highlighted the point that while Jake and his allies were tricked into eating the apple by a nest of anonymous serpents, the rest of us had no trouble spotting Biden’s incompetence. Try as he might, Tapper can never erase the fact that half the country long knew Biden was mentally AWOL, while he and his media allies tried to cancel us. ...

Despite all their podium-pounding speeches about saving it, the lizard-lipped Democrats risked global thermonuclear destruction and tried passing off the greatest lie in history because they fear democracy. They selected Biden because he was a doddering meat suit— and thus controllable. Being controllable was Biden’s chief qualification.

In other words, to the Democrats, Biden’s dementia wasn’t an inconvenient bug. It was a feature. Only when checked-out Biden couldn’t win, they selected Kamala— a tittering nitwit who would also have completely depended on her handlers.

We were this close. And they’ll do it again, if we let them.

Operation: Pretend It Didn't Happen

In a historic event witnessed by 59 YouTube viewers, a handful of diligent X users, and at least one intern from The National News Desk, Senator Ron Johnson convened a hearing this week of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations—which apparently is a real thing and not a make-believe entity Johnson anointed with a wax seal and an AI-generated logo. The purpose: to discuss [the appalling, widely known lack of] Covid-19 vaccine safety.

Again.

The title of Senator Johnson’s latest hearing was The Corruption of Science and Federal Health Agencies: How Health Officials Downplayed and Hid Myocarditis and Other Adverse Events Associated with Covid-19 Vaccines, which sounds compellingly, scandalously newsworthy to me. Unfortunately, the proceedings occurred only in a parallel dimension where journalism hasn't been replaced by pharmaceutical press releases.

CNN? MIA.
USA Today? Totally mum.
Fox News? Nada.
The New York Times? Too busy covering the Slop Life.
The AP? The Atlantic? Newsweek? Reuters? Quieter than a ghost in a graveyard.
Even The Onion completely ignored it, which frankly stings the most.

Once again, it is time for your regularly scheduled lesson in journalistic malpractice. Behold the latest widely-covered magical jab story! This morning’s particular example appeared in the UK Daily Mail below the guffaw-producing headline, “Scientists create new coronavirus jab that even works on viruses they haven't discovered yet in a bid to beat the next pandemic.” ...

Pre-clinical vaccines make page one. But massive adverse events registries appear on page … none. The inconvenient truth —forgotten among peer-reviewed case studies and declining (or negative) efficacy research— somehow never interests the media, even though otherwise they always love a good health crisis.

But only when they can blame you, for gobbling fast food, having a second chardonnay, or scrolling to much. It’s never the shots.

💉 Not only that, but by this point we’ve lost count of the banker’s boxes of case reports that have been published showing things like people growing tumors on their eyeballs (or even more inconvenient places) after getting various vaccines. Take, for one example, this case report, which didn’t get a single mention on CNN, NBC, or anywhere else outside of PubMed. It reported a case of Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia following a bivalent mRNA booster — just one more grain of sand on a growing seashore of “rare coincidences.”

There was not a word in corporate media warning about possible lymphoblastic leukemia. Don’t even bother looking. Reporting it wouldn’t “boost confidence.” But … possible octo-valent magic juice that blocks future viruses from alternate dimensions? Sure! Let’s lead with that!

Studies throwing shade on jabs never make the news cycle. If the study flatters Big Pharma while whispering sweet nothings about safety, it’s splashy headline material. If it questions the holy jabs, it’s “misinformation,” “just a mouse model,” or “anecdotal,” and it promptly gets memory-holed, nevermore to be seen.

Call it one-sided, biased, slanted, psyops, or whatever you want. Folks, this isn’t journalism. It’s fake news; press releases dressed in dollar-store lab coats. The sad truth is that whenever we see positive science news these days, we must assume someone paid for placement. It’s most likely just a strategically timed PR push for a grant cycle, IPO, or political narrative. ...

But instead of any speculation about what else —besides “traveling,” hardly a new development— might have caused 700 British victims to succumb to this latest outbreak of a well-controlled, third-world bug, instead media tearfully informed readers of their own carelessness— while peeking between their fingers to see if we bought it. It would be infuriating if it weren’t so laughably obvious.

We really don’t hate the media nearly enough.

A few weeks ago there was a massive conference in my home city of Stockholm. Top doctors from around the world came to give lectures and speak truth about covid and warn about the failures of the mRNA shots.

The conference was massive. About 1000 people in attendance to hear people like Dr. Robert Malone, Dr. Aseem Malhotra, Dr. Pierre Kory and more speak.

Naturally it was completely ignored by the mainstream media, almost like it didn’t happen at all. But it did happen and now you can watch the lectures for yourself!

Drug advertising also buys influence over news outlets, according to Children’s Health Defense CEO Mary Holland. Holland said:

“Drug companies use advertising to do more than just sell more drugs. The billions Big Pharma spends on ads, especially for TV and legacy print media, guarantee that network news decision-makers will run only favorable news stories and veto any reporting that casts drugs or drugmakers in a negative light.

“We saw this clearly during the pandemic, when not a single major news outlet did any real critical reporting on COVID vaccines. Instead, they parroted pharma’s ‘safe and effective’ propaganda, while ignoring the waves of injuries and deaths that followed the rollout of the shots.”

Prescription drugs accounted for 30.7% of ad minutes across evening news programs on ABC, CNN, Fox News, MSNBC and NBC last year through Dec. 15, according to The Wall Street Journal (WSJ). Last year, Big Pharma spent more than $5 billion on TV ads alone. ...

New Zealand is the only other country that allows direct-to-consumer marketing of prescription drugs.

In the U.S., the practice has been ongoing for decades, drawing criticism from advocates like Kennedy, researchers, the American Medical Association and other doctors’ associations, and even mainstream health news outlets, including STAT News.

In recent years, Pharma has thwarted efforts to regulate drug ads, claiming a ban would violate their First Amendment rights.

When the first Trump administration tried to require drugmakers to list drug prices in TV ads, the industry took it to court. A federal judge blocked the move, ruling that HHS lacked congressional authority to compel drug companies to disclose drug pricing.

The Wall Street Journal ran the story below the headline, “Supreme Court Allows States to Restrict Transgender Treatments for Minors.” ...

The paper might have announced the earth-shaking decision the same way the vast majority of sane adults will see it: as good news for the most vulnerable —kids— who can be persuaded to try almost anything...

But no. The Journal’s glass-half-empty sub-headline was a stinker: “By 6-3 vote, justices say Tennessee ban is constitutional, the latest setback to transgender rights.” They could have just as easily called it the latest victory for parental rights. They didn’t even shoot for balance.

The Journal found only bad news in the decision. ...

Yesterday, the top court held (6-3) that transgender identity is not, in fact, a suspect class under 14th Amendment Equal Protection. In other words, transgenderism is not like race, sex, or religious belief.

The implications of that decision ripple far beyond mere medical regulations. ...

That perennial debate —what is a woman?— forms the razor-sharp crux of the discord between the two sides. The majority started from the premise that biological women are women, and many laws often vary by sex without violating Equal Protection, like laws banning exhibitionist gals from going topless on public beaches. ...

like laws banning exhibitionist gals from going topless on public beaches. ...

Welp, in hindsight, it seems inevitable. The Washington Post ran a great story late yesterday headlined, “RFK Jr. wins his fight against a rare, safe flu-shot ingredient.” The new ACIP vaccine committee voted to recommend against vaccines with mercury in them, and WaPo had a surprising take.

In a migraine-inducing narrative whiplash, WaPo’s story reported that hardly any vaccines include thimerasol anyway, so the decision barely moves the needle. But you’ll recall media’s hysterical predictions of mass death just yesterday.

But today: meh, it’s nothing but a symbolic victory for anti-vaxxers.

“The vote to no longer recommend influenza vaccines that contain the preservative thimerosal,” WaPo explained, “is likely to have limited impact because the vast majority of flu shots are thimerosal-free.” Now they tell us.

The vote, merely a recommendation by the advisory committee, has no binding authority. It must be adopted by the CDC. But the CDC currently has no confirmed director, leaving the final decision up to Secretary Robert Kennedy, who in 2015 edited an anti-thimerosal book. So.

The only panel member to vote no, Cody Meissner, argued it would limit the availability of flu shots. Oh, no. Last year’s shots had a woeful 33% efficacy. Just saying.

This morning, CNN ran the latest terrific TAW story, headlined, “Paramount settles Trump’s dubious ‘60 Minutes’ lawsuit with $16 million payout and no apology.” It might’ve been cheaper had they said they were sorry. Oh well. ...

CNN’s pathetic sneering started in the very first sentence, in which —in a supposedly straight news story, mind you— it sandwiched the scornful descriptor “legally dubious” between the words “settle a” and “lawsuit.” So much for objective reporting.

Despite CNN’s twitchy insistence that the lawsuit was “legally dubious,” the merits were anything but. Trump accused CBS of creatively editing Kamala Harris’s interview with Lester Holt to conjure a digitally improved description of Biden’s Gaza policy —during the heat of an election cycle— airing different clips on different shows, then refusing to release the full transcript. It wasn’t routine editing; it was message management.

A media that delights in spotting everyone else’s “cheap fakes” saw no problem at all with what amounted to an AI-grade rewrite of Kamala’s signature word salad. CBS’s video editors transformed a meandering diplomatic mush into something that almost sounded like coherent policy. The same outlets that cried foul over TikTok deepfakes couldn’t be bothered when 60 Minutes edited the Cackler like a Marvel trailer, snipping out the painful dead air and scads of “ums” until the final cut sparkled with keen insight.

But hey, as long as the manipulation flatters the right candidate, it’s not “disinformation”—it’s just editing for time.

When CBS finally coughed up the raw footage under FCC pressure, the evidence confirmed that, yes, key context was missing. Whoops. CNN’s witless morons called the claim “legally dubious,” but a Texas judge denied CBS’s motion to dismiss— meaning the court found the claim had merit. Period, full stop, as Justice Jackson would say. That didn’t stop CNN’s unidentified “legal experts,” who allegedly “maintained that Trump’s suit was frivolous and that CBS was on solid ground to fight and win the case in court.” ...

But, if the lawsuit survived a motion to dismiss, by definition it isn’t frivolous. “Frivolous” is a legal term of art, not just a spicy insult tossed around on cable news. A frivolous case is one so lacking in legal merit that it cannot reasonably be argued under any existing law. Courts can sanction parties and even lawyers for filing them. Yet Trump’s lawsuit cleared the plausibility bar at the dismissal stage, went to court-ordered mediation, and ended with a $16 million check. That’s not frivolous; it’s expensive. ...

But even worse, and proving why the media is, in fact, the enemy of the people, the 60 Minutes edits were exactly the kind of selective curation that, if reversed, would’ve had the media shrieking about “election interference” louder than a CNN chyron during a Trump presser on the Gulf of America. They would have pounded the anchor room conference tables and demanded criminal sanctions. But election interference is only seditious when you can accuse your political enemies of doing it. Apparently. ...

Back in December, ABC/Disney quietly shelled out $15  million (plus $1  million in legal fees) to Trump’s future presidential library after libelously claiming he was “found liable for rape” in the E.  Jean Carroll case— a defamation lawsuit that ABC resolved with cash and a “statement of regret.” In January, Meta coughed up a cool $25  million ($22 million to the library) for suspending Trump’s Facebook account on January  6th, with Mark Zuckerberg personally negotiating the deal during a Mar‑a‑Lago sit-down. Today’s settlement with Paramount (CBS/60  Minutes) added $16  million more, rounding out a trifecta of $56 million so far recovered from corporate media morons.

Trump has more pending lawsuits in the pipeline, including one against the Des Moines Register and another against various pollsters and survey reporters for pushing fake polls right before the election.

We are rapidly approaching the point where one wonders whether Trump might ultimately claw back all the fines, judgments, and penalties extracted by progressive lawfare during the wilderness years of judicial persecution. As they say, two can play Cards Against Humanity, or the worm always makes a squiggly U-Turn, or words to that effect. I can’t remember.

According to Fox News, the settlement includes a $16 million upfront payout covering legal fees, case costs, and funding for future charitable or presidential library endeavors, at President Trump’s discretion.

In addition, sources close to the case say the network will allocate a mid-eight-figure sum toward “advertisements, PSAs, or similar transmissions” promoting conservative causes, a notable shift for one of the legacy media’s most liberal networks.

The New York Times pretends that all this is “a mystery” because to tell the truth would inculpate them in the ongoing criminal racketeering operation of their patron, the Democratic Party.

They all know what the truth is in this matter: that Robert Westman became insane, at least in his time of puberty, possibly earlier, and that his parents resorted to persuading their child that he was born in the wrong body — as the trendy theory goes — to remedy his psychological distress. He was thereafter influenced to play-act as a female. Possibly, he was induced to go through some stage of medical “treatment” to supposedly advance his transition to the opposite sex — for instance, a hormone regimen. This has not yet been reported. (Has it even been investigated by police or the news media?)

Of course, “gender-affirming medical care” is a vicious fraud, as is the preposterous idea of “sexual assignment at birth” (as if it is some kind of error-ridden clerical function). Males cannot be changed into females no matter how much their hormones are altered or how much surgery they endure. It is all just costuming and makeup, to an extreme degree, to enhance the game of pretend. It is also bound to be nightmarishly disappointing to the person undergoing such malign rigors. ...

Westman evinced stark rage and despair over the poor choice he was induced to make at a time in his life before the judgment region of his brain had fully developed. “I’m tired of being trans,” he wrote. “I wish I had never brainwashed myself.” It was hardly his own fault, though. He was pushed to do it by his own family and strongly supported by the culture that surrounded him in Tim Walz’s “trans refuge state” of Minnesota — the state that also gave us George Floyd, the fake martyr to black victimhood, whose death provoked a years’ long national race-hustle.

Diana (Somewhere in Maryland)

The media is of course ignoring the biggest bombshell from yesterday: Senator Ron Johnson holding up a VAERS report admitting 30k died worldwide right away or within two days of getting a Covid shot. Absolute crickets!!

The media is of course ignoring the biggest bombshell from yesterday: Senator Ron Johnson holding up a VAERS report admitting 30k died worldwide right away or within two days of getting a Covid shot. Absolute crickets!!

Westman evinced stark rage and despair over the poor choice he was induced to make at a time in his life before the judgment region of his brain had fully developed.