The Highwire with Del Bigtree - WHO WILL BE BLAMED FOR THE COVID CATASTROPHE?

Episode Date: February 11, 2022

WHO WILL BE BLAMED FOR THE COVID CATASTROPHE?Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-highwire-with-del-bigtree--3620606/support.

Over here in the U.S., speaking of covering your butt, it's scapego time. Let's check out first, Javier Becerra. He's the head of HHS here in the United States. And here's the headline out of Washington Post. It says White House frustrations grow over Health Chief Becerra's handling of the pandemic. It says here, White House officials have grown so frustrated with top health official, Javier Becerra, as the pandemic rages on, that they have openly mused about who might be better in the job, although political considerations have stopped them from taking steps to replace him,

officials involved in the discussion said. It goes on to read, several administration officials voiced similar displeasure with Becerra's leadership, although they would not do so on the record because they were not authorized to speak with the media. The health secretary, quote, is taking too passive a role in what may be the most defining challenge to the administration, said one of the senior administration officials. And now this story from the Washington Post, this story is based on. on interviews with 28 senior administration officials,

health agency officials, outside advisors and experts, most of whom spoke on the condition of anonymity to detail sensitive discussions. Now, just to recap, no one's doing anything because of politics and because they're too scared to talk to the media. All right, but hold on, what's so amazing about this, Jeffries? First of all, I think probably 90% of this audience,

including I kind of have to throw myself in there. Don't even know who Javier Bessera is. We're just like, wait a minute. I mean, I vaguely remember some guy named that. But, like, this is the guy that's our problem. A man who hasn't been on the news at all. Like, clearly is not making a single decision is going on. I know who Anthony Bouchy is.

You know, I know who Rochelle Willski is, but Javier is the one we're going to, like, I'm wondering, like, he's probably sitting in some dark closet at HHS back there eating like a jelly donut and the door swings open. He's like, huh? You know, powder all over his face. Like, what's going on? Get ready, Javier. We're about to throw you under the bus.

Me? Why? Just wait for it. I mean, it's like ridiculous. I mean, he's so far down the line, but this is how this starts, right? We got to throw somebody. None of the people that are actually involved in decision-making. This chucklehead that's hiding in a closet somewhere waiting for, you know, for his paycheck to come in.

I don't think it's coming in, Javier. They're in trouble. And they want to start pointing some fingers. Well, let's move to an agency you may have heard of. And this is the CDC. Now, again, mainstream here, Wall Street Journal. Embattled CDC rethinks pandemic response after criticism of guidelines. It says the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is looking to reassert itself in the country's COVID-19 response.

It made criticism. It has sown more confusion that it has offered answers. Get this, Dell. It says, among the first order of business, according to the agency, is upgrading data collection that has hobbled decision making and clearing up messaging that has confused many. It goes on to say the CDC hasn't had enough actionable information to respond in real time because its data collection methods are outdated. and it has operated like a slow-moving academic institution. Explaining complicated science to 330 million people is hard, said Ezekiel Emanuel, co-director of Healthcare Transformation Institute at the University of Pennsylvania and a former member of the Biden administration's disbanded coronavirus advisory board. It is also true that they have bungled a bunch of things.

Well, to Mr. Ezekiel Emanuel, it is hard to explain complicated science. We do this here at the high wire to millions of people every week, and we seem to actually get it right with about one, one millionth of the budget of the CDC. I mean, it's unbelievable. And I mean, this is what we've been complaining about, right? I've been saying, how is it that the United States of America, we are the home of Microsoft, we're the home of Apple.

I mean, these are things that we are, we have computer learning. This is the modern world. Yet we have the worst data collection, the slowest data delivery, which is why we keep showing you graphs out of the UK, out of Israel, out of other countries, because they're actually better at collecting data than the United States of America. It's embarrassing. It's horrible. And it's incredible to see how much money has been spent on this pandemic by this administration.

And the one thing they never did was collect proper data in the middle of what they said was a horrible pandemic. I mean, Wall Street Journal, clearly, Jeffrey, what's happening here is these are all news agencies that towed the line. They did what their rulers told them to do. They got behind the vaccine. They pushed it. They pushed the pandemic. They said we got a lockdown, and slowly but surely they find themselves standing out in the cold in Ottawa with no clothes on, freezing to death, saying, what happened here? We are pissed off. You're leaving us all hanging out to dry here. We supported you, and now you never had any decent data. And guys like Del Bigtree and Jeffrey Jackson, the high wire are making a laughing stock out of us. That's what's going on. And now these headlines, like, you know, the dog is off the least, if you will, as far as the government and how they've been treating media. Media is now stepping on. on its own. It seems pissed off that it should be.

Right. And let's talk about numbers here. So we heard throughout the entire pandemic of how bad the hospitals were doing. And then once they, they, the CMS healthcare worker mandate went through. They began obviously firing unvaccinated employees leading to a greater health care shortage. So the government was supposed to help these hospitals. Now let's look at stat news over the headlines here. The Biden administration used billions in hospital COVID-19 funds to pay drug makers. It goes on to this. to read, the Biden administration quietly took nearly $7 billion from a fund meant to help hospitals and clinics affected by the pandemic and use it to buy COVID-19 vaccines and therapeutics, according to a document obtained by stat. Now the hospital money, known as the provider relief fund, has run dry and has no new money left to allocate, according to the agency that administers it. Providers have only been able to submit requests for expenses incurred through March 2021, before both the Delta and Omicron surges battered the health care system. This seems like kind of a problem to me.

Yeah. I mean, it's probably why they're saying we're going to have to learn to live with it because the hospitals are bankrupt and the government doesn't have any more money to give them. We gave it all to the drug companies who are running off the party with tens of billions of dollars. And it's not just here in the U.S. In Germany, we have op-eds that look like this. This isn't one of Germany's biggest newspapers named Belina Zintong. This is the headline,

from a vaccinated person, why I have sympathy for the vaccine skeptics. Now, he goes on to talk about American social psychologist Leon Fetzinger, who coined the theory of cognitive dissidents and wrote the book when prophecy fails about a group called the Seekers that thought the world was going to end. And when it didn't, they kept adjusting their timeline to when it was going to end further and further and further out. So this author writes this. However, the way in which we are currently reducing our quote, cognitive dissidents with regard to the promise of vaccination, or I should say fail promise, appears to be much more problematic than in the historical example of the seekers, because we use one of the most unpleasant psychological mechanisms to vent our anger. We project it onto the

outsiders. In this case, the unvaccinated, whom we make scapegoats for having our hopes dash. Now he's talking to the vaccinated here. And it goes on to say, it is therefore obvious in all too humane to now target the unvaccinated. But is that really justified have quote skeptics and quote deniers thwarted the success of the vaccination campaign? Are they now the quote drivers of the pandemic? It's probably not that simple as the recent scandals about manipulated statistics in Bavaria, Hamburg, Saxony have shown there is there as the world found out people with unknown vaccine vaccination status were assigned to the unvaccinated to a large extent. We covered that last week here. Del, let's go over.

This is, in my opinion, one of the biggest stories that's happening right now. Let's go over to now to the UK, where we have health minister, Saji Javid. And he just came out with a bombshell statement. Take a look. Okay. I believe that it is no longer proportionate to require vaccination as a condition of deployment through statute. So Madam Deputy Speaker, today I'm announcing that we will launch a consultation

on ending vaccination as a condition of deployment in health and all social care settings. Subject to the responses and the will of this House, the government will revoke the regulations. Wow, I mean, just a couple of weeks ago, this guy was like a tyrant saying that no one was going to get to move forward without a vaccination, and now he's pulling the entire deal. It's amazing how they can just flip-flop without any emotion whatsoever. But thank God it's happening. Right. This guy's not. never talk like this. And here's the headlines here. Trust, this is an NHS, trust clear to use unvaccinated health staff amid reports of Javid U-Turn. Now that leads to articles like this in the U.S.

with the CMS health care mandate. Top dot calls for reinstatement of people fired over vaccine mandates. You can see the drum beginning to beat here in the U.S. But there's also a big investigation that's happening in the UK. And it's something we've reported on for a while and it's really come to a head here. So check out this headline. Government, this is a telegraph, by the way. government used grossly unethical tactics to scare public into COVID compliance. The MPs there have launched an investigation after a bunch of psychologists has criticized the tactics they used during that pandemic. And it says here in the article, the letters, 40 professional signatories led by Dr. Gary Sidley,

a retired clinical psychologist, said they opposed the use of dramatic adverts, which included slogans such as, if you go out, you can spread it. People will die. The letter added, quote, government science, deploying fear, shame, and scapegoating to change minds is an ethically dubious practice that in some respects resembles a tactics used by totalitarian regimes such as China, where the state inflicts pain on a subset of its population in an attempt to eliminate beliefs and behavior they perceive to be deviant. Now, what are we talking about here?

Let's go back all the way, and this is one of the things they were talking about, to March of 2020, a group of experts called, I believe, Cy B, brought this, brought this these options to the prime ministers for persuasion and discussion. So options for increasing adherence to social distancing measures. That was a big thing at the time. This was before all the vaccine mandates rolled out. So here's one of their options. It's under the headline, persuasion. Here's the option they actually went to go with. A substantial number of people still do not feel sufficiently personally threatened. The perceived level of personal threat needs to be increased among those who are complacent using hard-hitting emotional messaging,

which they did. To be a effective, they must also empower people by making clear the actions they can take to reduce the threat. So we're talking basically scare the heck out of them. And you know, the consequences of that, anxiety, depression, suicides. But at this point reading this, I hope the people who ran this op feel sufficiently, personally threatened by this new investigation that the MPs are launching upon them. And I really do hope we can report that justice will be served on this. I mean, we've been talking about it. I started talking about it last week. Of course, I had it in my speech when I was in Washington, D.C. It's time for the Nuremberg trials 2.0.

We need an worldwide investigation of those culprits that lied about the data that pushed faulty, you know, models, and then use fear tactics, psychological, you know, deranging fear tactics to scare people like screaming fire in a crowded room. You know, untrudes, mismanagement, you know, misleading statements, all to scare people into compliance to use a product that we now know is increasing. the risk of infection across this country. That's right. And now we noticed about two weeks ago, the UK opened up kind of out of nowhere, but now we're getting the story, the real stories coming out.

And much like in the US, Fauci admitted this a couple of weeks ago, the UK is also admitting it in its headlines. Majority of COVID-inpatients in England are not primarily ill with the virus for the first time ever. As experts say, worst pandemic now certainly over. So they're basically saying what Fauci has admitted

that going into the hospital, they were tested for a range of other things they went to the hospital for besides COVID. And they had found out, well, whoops, I have COVID as well. So we're just marking down for COVID. But check out this, check out this graph here or image. This is the percentages they found. So we're talking at some of the places, 57% of the percentage of COVID impations who are not primarily ill with the virus. 54%, 46%.

So it's like a coin toss at that point. So what would these numbers have been if they were reported, from the beginning of this pandemic. This is the thing we're really, we're really asking. And a group of citizens, they petitioned the Office of National Statistics in the UK for these numbers. They said, we wanna know how many people have died

with COVID on their death certificate, just COVID, not pneumonia, not heart disease, not cancer. And this is what they found. So this is the raw numbers here. And these are the number of deaths where COVID-19 was the only cause mentioned on the death certificate from February, 1st 2020 to December 31st, 2021. Now, if you notice this highlighted region, basically zero to 24 years old,

it's broken down in male and female columns there. It's only eight people. Only eight people have died. And males and females in this category from zero to 45, it didn't even break a hundred people in either one of those columns. And, you know, just to drive this home, because numbers are numbers, check out this chart. We have a chart we made of this, and it drives home a little more of this idea. So, you know, we're pushing vaccines on kids all the way, you know, look at basically less than one years old to, you know, 30 to 34, even 35 to 39 ages for male and females. There's almost nothing happening there in these COVID age groups. And then it goes on to go up to the older people, but still the numbers are so, so low. So this really puts into context some of things that I really hope we get this type of really forensic information here in the United States.