Majority Are Already Immune Against SARS-CoV-2

The more data becomes available about SARS-CoV-2, the more obvious it becomes that the response to this pandemic has been grossly overblown. Fatality statistics1,2,3,4,5,6,7 from multiple sources, calculated in a variety of ways, show the risk of dying from COVID-19 is lower than your risk of dying from conventional influenza, at least if you’re under the age of 60.

Overall, the data8,9 also show that the overall all-cause mortality has remained steady this year and doesn’t veer from the norm. In other words, COVID-19 has not killed off more of the population than would have died in any given year anyway.

Several studies also suggest immunity against SARS-CoV-2 infection is far more widespread than anyone imagined, and that the threshold for herd immunity is far lower than previously estimated.

Most Are Already Immune to SARS-CoV-2 Infection  

Studies supporting the claim that widespread immunity against SARS-CoV-2 already exists include:

Cell, June 202010,11 This study found 70% of samples from patients who had recovered from mild cases of COVID-19 had resistance to SARS-CoV-2 on the T-cell level. Importantly, 40% to 60% of people who had not been exposed to SARS-CoV-2 also had resistance to the virus on the T-cell level.

According to the authors, this suggests there’s “cross-reactive T cell recognition between circulating ‘common cold’ coronaviruses and SARS-CoV-2.” In other words, if you’ve recovered from a common cold caused by a particular coronavirus, your humoral immune system may activate when you encounter SARS-CoV-2, thus rendering you resistant to COVID-19.

Nature Immunology, September 202012 This German study was initially posted on a preprint server in June 2020 under the title, “SARS-CoV-2 T-cell Epitopes Define Heterologous and COVID-19-Induced T-Cell Recognition.”13

It’s now published in the September 2020 issue of Nature Immunology with the slightly altered title, “SARS-CoV-2-Derived Peptides Define Heterologous and COVID-19-Induced T Cell Recognition.”14 Much like the Cell study above, this investigation also found that that:

Cross-reactive SARS-CoV-2 peptides revealed pre-existing T cell responses in 81% of unexposed individuals and validated similarity with common cold coronaviruses, providing a functional basis for heterologous immunity in SARS-CoV-2 infection.”

In other words, even among those who were unexposed, 81% were resistant or immune to SARS-CoV-2 infection. The term “heterologous immunity” refers to immunity that develops against a given pathogen after you’ve been exposed to a nonidentical pathogen.

Typically, this occurs when viruses are sufficiently similar or from closely related species. In this case, SARS-CoV-2 appears to be sufficiently similar to coronaviruses that cause the common cold, so that if you’ve been exposed to any of those coronaviruses, your immune system is also able to combat SARS-CoV-2.

The Lancet Microbe, September 202015,16 This study found that rhinovirus infection, responsible for the common cold, largely prevented concurrent influenza infection by triggering the production of natural antiviral interferon.

The researchers speculate that the common cold virus could potentially help protect against SARS-CoV-2 infection as well. Interferon is part of your early immune response, and its protective effects last for at least five days, according to the researchers. Co-author Dr. Ellen Foxman told UPI:17

“Infection with the common cold virus protected cells from infection with a more dangerous virus, the influenza virus, and [this] occurred because the common cold activated the body’s general antiviral defenses.

This may explain why the flu season, in winter, generally occurs after the common cold season, in autumn, and why very few people have both viruses at the same time. Our results show that interactions between viruses can be an important driving force dictating how and when viruses spread through a population.

Since every virus is different, we still do not know how the common cold season will impact the spread of COVID-19, but we now know we should be looking out for these interactions.”

Nature, July 202018,19,20 Originally posted on a preprint server in May 2020,21 this Singaporean study was published in the July 2020 issue of Nature.22 Here, they found that common colds caused by the betacoronaviruses OC43 and HKU1 might make you more resistant to SARS-CoV-2 infection, and that the resulting immunity could potentially be long-lasting.

Patients who recovered from SARS infection back in 2003 still had T cell reactivity to the N protein of SARS-CoV now, 17 years later. These patients also had strong cross-reactivity to the N protein of SARS-CoV-2.

The authors suggest that if you’ve beaten a common cold caused by a OC43 or HKU1 betacoronavirus in the past, you may have a 50/50 chance of having defensive T-cells that can recognize and help defend against SARS-CoV-2. According to the authors:

“These findings demonstrate that virus-specific T cells induced by infection with betacoronaviruses are long-lasting, supporting the notion that patients with COVID-19 will develop long-term T cell immunity.

Our findings also raise the possibility that long-lasting T cells generated after infection with related viruses may be able to protect against, or modify the pathology caused by, infection with SARS-CoV-2.”

Cell August 202023,24 This Swedish study, initially posted on a preprint server in June 202025 and now published in the October 2020 issue of the journal Cell,26 found that SARS-CoV-2-specific memory T cells likely provide long-term immune protection against COVID-19. According to the authors:27

“Acute-phase SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells displayed a highly activated cytotoxic phenotype that correlated with various clinical markers of disease severity, whereas convalescent-phase SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells were polyfunctional and displayed a stem-like memory phenotype.

Importantly, SARS-CoV-2-specific T cells were detectable in antibody-seronegative exposed family members and convalescent individuals with a history of asymptomatic and mild COVID-19.

Our collective dataset shows that SARS-CoV-2 elicits broadly directed and functionally replete memory T cell responses, suggesting that natural exposure or infection may prevent recurrent episodes of severe COVID-19.”

Innate and Adaptive Immunity

It’s important to realize you have two types of immunity. Your innate immune system is primed and ready to attack foreign invaders at any moment and is your first line of defense. Your adaptive immune system,28 on the other hand, “remembers” previous exposure to a pathogen and mounts a response when an old foe is recognized.

Your adaptive immune system is further divided into two arms: humoral immunity (B cells) and cell mediated immunity (T cells). The B cells and T cells are manufactured as needed from specialized stem cells. The graphs below are from my vitamin D report and will help you understand the components of these systems and their timing.

immunity diagram
immunity graph

If you have never been exposed to a disease but are given antibodies from someone who got sick and recovered, you can gain humoral immunity against that disease. Your humoral immune system can also kick in if there’s cross-reactivity with another very similar pathogen.

As you can see from the list above, in the case of COVID-19, evidence29 suggests exposure to other coronaviruses that cause the common cold can confer immunity against SARS-CoV-2. 

On the flip side, there’s a phenomenon known as viral interference, where exposure to one virus makes you more susceptible to another virus. Importantly, research30 has found that those who received the influenza vaccine were 36% more susceptible to coronavirus infection.

Mathematical Models Add Support for Widespread Immunity

If it’s true that a majority already have some measure of immunity against COVID-19 due to previous exposure to other coronaviruses, then we’ve probably already reached the threshold for herd immunity, and vaccinating every human on the planet (or close to it) will not be necessary.

Added support for the idea that herd immunity may already have been achieved in most countries comes from statisticians working with mathematical models. In June 2020, Freddie Sayers, executive editor of UnHerd, interviewed31 professor Karl Friston, a statistician who claims immunity against SARS-CoV-2, globally, might be as high as 80%, as reviewed in the video interview above.

Friston is credited with inventing a statistical parametric mapping technique that is now the standard for understanding brain imaging. As the pandemic erupted, he began applying this method of analysis (which he refers to as “dynamic causal modeling”) to COVID-19 data, coming up with a model that predicts far lower mortality rates than earlier models.

The reason for this is because the “effective susceptible population,” meaning those who are not already immune to COVID-19 and therefore at risk of infection, was never 100%. At most, it was 50% and most likely only around 20%.

Friston’s model effectively vaporizes claims that social distancing is necessary, because once sensible behaviors such as staying home when sick are entered into it, the positive effect of lockdown efforts on “flattening the curve” simply vanish. In all likelihood, the global lockdowns were completely unnecessary, and certainly should not continue, now or in the future.

Signs of Herd Immunity Emerge in Sweden

One country that bucked the global lockdown trend was Sweden, and they now appear to be head and neck ahead of most other countries in terms of herd immunity, while having a death toll that is very similar to nations that destroyed their economy and sacrificed the population’s mental health in the name of infection control.

Anders Tegnell, the chief epidemiologist in charge of Sweden’s coronavirus response, has stated32 he does not believe Sweden will see a second wave with widespread contagion as the country is seeing a rapid decline in positive tests, indicating herd immunity has been achieved.33

He told The Guardian34 that the primary goal was always merely to slow the spread to avoid overwhelming medical services. The intention was never to prevent infection from spreading altogether, which has indeed proven impossible.

This was in fact the original plan just about everywhere. But while Sweden stuck to the original goal, and by mid-September boasted all-time low infection rates,35 other nations have twisted response plans to prevent infection transmission altogether, even among those for whom the risk of such an infection is vanishingly minor, such as school-aged children.

The two graphs from The Guardian,36 below, show Sweden’s infection rate and deaths per million, compared to other countries that enforced stricter lockdown rules.

sweden's infection rate and deaths per million
swedens infection rate april

Herd Immunity Threshold Likely Below 50%

As reported in “Herd Immunity ‘Ahead of Schedule’” experts initially estimated that 70% of the population or more would need to be immune before herd immunity would be achieved. Now, more than a dozen scientists claim the herd immunity threshold is likely below 50%.

As stated earlier, if this is true — and as you can see by the studies reviewed, it appears a majority do have some level of immunity — then the need for a vaccine more or less vanishes.

Herd immunity is calculated using reproductive number, or R-naught (R0), which is the estimated number of new infections that may occur from one infected person.37 R0 of below 1 (with R1 meaning that one person who’s infected is expected to infect one other person) indicates that cases are declining while R0 above 1 suggests cases are on the rise.

It’s far from an exact science, however, as a person’s susceptibility to infection varies depending on many factors, including their health, age and contacts within a community. The initial R0 calculations for COVID-19’s herd immunity threshold were based on assumptions that everyone has the same susceptibility and would be mixing randomly with others in the community.

“That doesn’t happen in real life,” Dr. Saad Omer, director of the Yale Institute for Global Health, told The New York Times.38 “Herd immunity could vary from group to group, and subpopulation to subpopulation,” or even zip code. When real-world scenarios are factored into the equation, the herd immunity threshold drops significantly, with some experts saying it could be as low as 10% to 20%.

Researchers from Oxford, Virginia Tech and the Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine are among those that found39,40 when individual variations in susceptibility and exposure are taken into account, the herd immunity threshold dips below 10%.

Independent news source Off-Guardian also cited41 data from Stockholm County, Sweden, which shows a herd immunity threshold of 17%,42 as well as an essay by Brown University professor Dr. Andrew Bostom, who noted:43

“Lead investigator Dr. Gomes, from the Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, and her colleagues concluded: naturally acquired immunity to SARS-CoV-2 may place populations over the herd immunity threshold once as few as 10-20% of its individuals are immune.44

Separate HIT [herd immunity threshold] calculations of 9%,45 10-20%,46 17%,47 and 43%48,49 — each substantially below the dogmatically asserted value of ~70%50 — have been reported by investigators from Tel-Aviv University, Oxford University, University College of London, and Stockholm University, respectively.”

Declaration Urges Implementation of Herd Immunity Approach

All in all, there are many reasons to suspect that continued lockdowns, social distancing and mask mandates are completely unnecessary and will not significantly alter the course of this pandemic illness, or the final death count.

As reported by British Sky News,51 October 7, 2020, many respected scientists are now calling for a herd immunity approach to the pandemic, meaning governments should allow people who are not at significant risk of serious COVID-19 illness to go back to normal life. According to the article:52

“The so-called Great Barrington declaration, signed by leading experts from the universities of Oxford, Nottingham, Edinburgh, Exeter, Cambridge, Sussex and York, suggests herd immunity as a way forward.

The declaration states: ‘The most compassionate approach that balances the risks and benefits of reaching herd immunity, is to allow those who are at minimal risk of death to live their lives normally to build up immunity to coronavirus through natural infection, while better protecting those who are at highest risk. We call this focused protection.”

The declaration points out that current lockdown policies are having “devastating effects on short and long-term public health” that will result in excess mortality in the future, primarily among younger people and the working class.

The Pharma Façade: More Hidden Money Going to Nonprofits

In the U.K., patient organizations are nonprofits made up of patients and caregivers that offer support and advocacy for those afflicted by certain health conditions.

Although they’re widely perceived as patient-oriented groups that serve the public, they often receive funding from pharmaceutical companies — a significant problem since such organizations are also increasingly involved in policy decisions and research.1

In fact, according to researchers from the University of Bath in the U.K. and Lund University in Sweden, patient organizations are closely involved in drug development and appraisals of health technologies by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE),2 which in turn provides guidance to England’s National Health Service (NHS).3

What’s more, the financial relationships between patient organizations and drug companies are often not transparent, with the pharmaceutical industry under-reporting payments.4

Payments Between Patient Organizations, Pharma Under-Reported

In order to evaluate the under-reporting of payments made by drug companies to patient organizations, the researchers compared payment disclosures from 87 companies to 425 patient organizations from 2012 to 2016. While 63, or 72.4%, of the drug companies reported payments, 84 of them, or 96.6% of them, were mentioned by patient organizations.

Further, while the drug companies listed 425 patient organizations, only 200 of them, or 47.1%, reported receiving payments. The number of payments reported by the drug industry was also higher, by 259.8%, than those reported by the patient organizations, as was the value of the payments, by 163.7%.5

“Both donors and recipients under-reported payments. Existing donor and recipient disclosure systems cannot manage potential conflicts of interest associated with industry payments,” the researchers concluded, adding that actual extent of under-reporting is unknown since there’s no definitive list of payments available.6

Drug Industry Largest Donor to Nonprofits

In separate research, the University of Bath and Lund University used drug company disclosure reports, patient organization websites and charity regulator records to look into donations made from 2012 to 2016. During this period, $73 million was donated by the drug industry to such organizations, with the annual sum more than doubling during the study period.7

Overall, 4,572 payments were disclosed by industry, which represented just one-sixth of funding to health care professionals and organizations in 2015 alone, and the number and value of payments to nonprofit patient organizations increased during the study period. While 20% of the total value was represented by the top five payments, small payments occurred most often.

Half the payments were about $6,369 annually or less, but as the researchers noted, “Small payments are potentially important, as findings from the U.S. show that even smaller amounts might affect physicians’ prescribing.”8

For instance, a New England Journal of Medicine study found that although doctors typically receive less than $1,000 a year in such perks, they may still influence opioid prescriptions. In fact, physicians who received perks from drug companies increased their opioid prescription rates by an average of 9% in the year after the payment.9

Further, the University of Bath and Lund University researchers noted, as is the case with payments to health care professionals, the largest donors to patient organizations were drug companies.10

Commercially Driven Conditions Prioritized

As for what activities got funded, those related to public involvement, such as communication related to advocacy, campaigning and disease awareness, were a top priority, receiving 31.2% of funds. Research activities were also well funded, receiving 24.6% of payments, while support for patients received only 5.9% of payments, followed by organizational maintenance and development, which received just 2.8%.

The priorities of drug industry funding were clearly based on PR, not patients, and are also apparently commercially driven, as conditions with the most commercial potential received the most funding. The researchers wrote in the BMJ:11

“In drug discovery, the industry prioritises investing in some conditions over others based on their commercial viability. Cancer in particular has a privileged place.

Our data show a similar pattern: of the 30 condition areas (or their combinations), the top five accumulated £39 423 529 (68.8%), with neoplasms alone attracting 36.4%. The second category — endocrine, nutritional, and metabolic diseases — received 11.3%, and infectious and parasitic diseases 8.0%.

The hierarchy of funding within each condition area also reflected the industry’s commercial priorities. In neoplasms, multiple myeloma attracted £7 495 729 (35.9%), followed by breast cancer (19.6%); 26 other types of cancer attracted less than 10% of funding. Diabetes received £3 741 181 (57.6%), the most of any endocrine, nutritional, and metabolic disease.

The bulk of funding for certain infectious and parasitic diseases went to HIV (37.4%) and viral hepatitis (23.6%). Importantly, the biggest donors in these condition areas have recently launched several high priced drugs. Key examples include Pfizer (palbociclib for breast cancer), Takeda (ixazomib for myeloma), Lilly (dulaglutide for diabetes), Gilead (emtricitabine/tenofovir for HIV and sofosbuvir/ledipasvir for hepatitis C).”

Further, while 30 conditions were represented in the study, funding was concentrated to only a few nonprofits in each, with the top recipient getting an average of 65.6% of the funding within each condition area.12

US Nonprofits Also Heavily Industry-Funded

It’s worth noting that this isn’t a phenomenon that’s unique to the U.K. In the U.S., a 2017 study found that 67% of U.S. patient advocacy organizations, such as the American Cancer Society, the American Heart Association and the National Organization of Rare Disorders — nearly all of which are nonprofits — received funding from for-profit companies.13

Among them, 12% received more than half of their funding from industry. In this case, pharmaceutical, device and biotechnology industries made up a median of 45% of industry funding.14 As in the U.K., the researchers noted that the findings question whether nonprofits are maintaining their independence and raise serious concerns about potential conflicts of interest:15

“Patient advocacy organizations engage in wide-ranging health activities. Although most PAOs receive modest funding from industry, a minority receive substantial industry support, raising added concerns about independence. Many respondents report a need to improve their conflict of interest policies to help maintain public trust.”

The Sunshine Act Highlighted Drug Industry Influence

The Physician Payments Sunshine Act, which is part of the Affordable Care Act, went into effect in 2013. For the first time, the Act required drug and medical device makers to collect and disclose any payments of more than $10 made to physicians and teaching hospitals. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) is in charge of implementing the Sunshine Act, which it has done via its Open Payments Program.16

Using the online Open Payments Program from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, you can easily search to find out what (if any) payments your doctor has received from the pharmaceutical industry, along with the nature of the payments.

Investigative journalist Paul D. Thacker was instrumental in drafting and helping to pass the Sunshine Act. In a feature for the BMJ, he noted, “The Sunshine Act was congressional staff’s attempt to tackle many of the unseemly financial ties between physicians and industry that we kept uncovering when we examined problems with drugs and medical devices.”17

Since it was passed, global change has ensued and many other countries, including Australia, Canada, France, Japan, Scotland, Slovenia and Turkey, have passed or considered similar laws.18 “My concern,” however, Thacker noted, “is that we are spending too much time wringing our hands about disclosing conflicts of interest instead of tackling the well documented problem of financial influence itself.”19

Drug Industry Funding Is Corrupting Research, Public Health

The drug industry’s influence on science is also problematic. It’s no secret that academic research is often funded by corporations. Academia often claims that such funding allows for innovation and does not influence the outcome of the studies. Industry, too, claims that such relationships do not influence the scientific process.

In a tongue-in-cheek essay in the British Medical Journal, titled “HARLOT — How to Achieve Positive Results Without Actually Lying to Overcome the Truth,”20 it’s wittily explained exactly how industry insiders can help make their agenda, in this case drugs, look good:21

“Pairing their drug with one that is known to work well. This can hide the fact that a tested medication is weak or ineffective.

Truncating a trial. Drugmakers sometimes end a clinical trial when they have reason to believe that it is about to reveal widespread side effects or a lack of effectiveness — or when they see other clues that the trial is going south.

Testing in very small groups. Drug-funded researchers also conduct trials that are too small to show differences between competitor drugs. Or they use multiple endpoints, then selectively publish only those that give favorable results, or they ‘cherry-pick’ positive-sounding results from multicenter trials.”

Another trick used by the drug industry involves foundations. A foundation is a nongovernmental entity that is typically established to make grants to institutions or individuals for scientific and other purposes. Donors often give money to foundations instead of to the university itself, in part, because foundations have a fiduciary responsibility to represent the donor’s interest.

Money given to a foundation can be kept private in order to protect the donor’s identity and does not become public record.22 So, it provides the perfect opportunity for industry corporations to pay for research on their behalf without receiving any public scrutiny for doing so. Likewise, Thacker noted:23

“Researchers have documented corporate influence skewing research in food, synthetic chemicals, risk analysis, pesticides, air pollution, genetic technology, and climate change.

Unlike medicine, these areas of science do not have the same volume of peer reviewed literature documenting corporate influence on academics, journals, regulatory bodies, and research. But these scientific disciplines have an enormous impact on public health.”

The BMJ is among those calling for a reduction in commercial influence in health care moving toward transparency and has launched a global initiative toward that end. In a press release, BMJ’s editor-in-chief, Dr. Fiona Godlee, said:24

“Patients and the public deserve to have evidence they can trust. Commercial influence has no place in scientific research, nor in the education and guidance of clinicians, nor in decisions about diagnosis and treatment. We hope that people around the world support our call for fundamental reforms.”

The journal plans to add more content to the collection to further understanding of the conflict of interest between commercial Industries and medical decisions.

They brought together experts from eight nations in medicine, law and philosophy to propose fundamental cultural changes with the intention of moving away from commercial influence. Hopefully this will prompt an emerging and widespread trend toward independence.




Day 2: Senate Confirmation Hearing SCOTUS Nominee Judge Amy Coney Barrett



throwaway-5947375959 remarks about this image of PeLucifer:

You may laugh, but Pelosi and her fellow cult members literally believe that they are the reincarnations of Lucifer, a “Group Soul” or “Social Memory Complex”, that descended (fell) to Earth from “6th Density” (Heaven), after coming to an agreement with God that they would play the role of adversary to mankind, in order to assist us in our spiritual evolution. That’s how they rationalize their evil actions.



Too little. Too late. The Invisible Enemy is now going to distract us from going directly for the Queen, the Privy Council, and the Pilgrims Society (which will be done when Gina Haspel is busted for espionage – and, yes, she will be because she was part of the international – CIA coup attempt) by throwing us some political red meat. Heave ho, Hildabeast, the Queen is throwing your ass under the bus first. Little does the Queen Hag of Balmoral know that citizens around the world know all about the Rothschilds hiding up her nasty skirts.

CBS Obtains 94-Page Outline Showing FBI and Chris Steele Collaborative Use of Media Reporting

Then there was a video on some stale news coming from Gary Franchi and the Next News company who are always months and years behind real cutting truth and who gladly turn over their platform to push whatever narrative you want for just the right $$$$.

Is this all the swamp can offer to keep us Deplorables from uncovering all their corruption as revealed here at the American Intelligence Media? It would take YEARS for any of them to fully comprehend the level of information that we have left in the public domain about their crimes. Imagine your ordinary news reporter trying to decipher AIM and its contents this late in the information war?

Somebody please tell SES Mike Pompeo that this is not a drill. Deplorables Have gone live.

This is what an actual, real-time INFORMATION WAR looks like. Long before I started Truth News Headlines and the Cats, I was paying careful attention to the players in the internet. Our research had already determined that all corporate news, including Fox, was propaganda – an American version of Pravda – so I didn’t need to waste any time with them. Instead I paid careful attention to the actors of internet content like Alex Jones, Breitbart, Steve Quayle, Tracy Beanz, State of the Nation, Daily Caller, Q in its many iterations, …and so many, many more.

I carefully mapped out how each of these actors interacted with others to create their circles of influence. For example, if Steve Quayle posts articles, they will come from Dave Hodges, Neon Nettle, Lisa Haven, Paul Craig Roberts, and others. These circles of influence will have political ‘quality and flavor’ that you get to know over time.

Here’s an example that I have described several times. Drudge has always been an aggregator for the main stream media. Click on 95% of Drudge headlines and it will take you to corporate media pieces, which will have paywalls to keep you from reading the articles – so like what are they trying to do? You can’t really influence people if all your material is behind paywalls.

When I started seeing Drudge regularly click on to Alex Jones, I saw what “area” in the information space Alex held which had us find out who is the real money behind Jones which is the reason we rarely point to him or anyone in his “universe” of guests and actors.

I also paid attention to the actors that dissed us along the way, calling out AIM for being disinformation or worse, like Dave at X22, SGT Report Shaun, and other lesser-known actors. Isn’t it interesting that Dave has so much time on his hands to do videos – all that prep work and uploads, sometimes 2x a day? How does he pay his light and grocery bills? In information warfare, the warrior needs to know these things in order to avoid propaganda, disinformation, and spin.

Once I mapped out the internet news universe, I watched new players come in. If they are not up to speed with the American Intelligence Media reporting, I don’t pay them any attention. Thanks to the volunteers on ‘Betsy’s Team’, we keep an eye out on the newbies in case they have important information to add to our picture of truth. If it passes the AIM truth test, it is sent up to the Mothership for review and posting. If its old news or spin, we leave it for Gary Franchi to pick up for one of his stale Next News reports. (Yes, that is sarcasm.)

BTW – you do not count success with CLICKS or number of subscribers. In my next lesson of How to Win the Great Information War, I will teach you why clicks don’t mean shit. Content is King and Influence is Queen.


Gov. Cuomo wants 4,000-strong ‘social distancing’ enforcement unit as NYC restaurants sue for $2 BILLION over indoor dining ban


Rona Madness – Michigan’s Comrade Whitmer Declares COVID-19 Will Attack if Standing, But Not if Seated….


Facebook Bans Ads Questioning Safety Of COVID-19 Vaccines



Eli Lilly Suspends COVID-19 Antibody Therapy Trial Over “Potential Safety Concern”


Second verse, same as the first; A little bit louder and a little bit worse.


See the extensive thread inside this link.


Young folks being creative with China surveillance platform TikTok











International Claim of The Powerholder

 By Anna Von Reitz

The United States of America is more than competent to act as the Executive Power over all American Estates and is the Lawful and Legal Powerholder with respect to all interests in international or global jurisdiction related to its member States and the assets thereof.
The United States of America claims the pre-established and priority standing interest to control and direct the affairs of the several States in these foreign jurisdictions and is in no way encumbered or prevented from doing so.
No delegated authority stands between us and our agency of the sovereign interests of our members. All such delegations of powers have returned to The United States of America by Operation of Law. The Powerholder claims full and unimpaired executorship and agency rights in behalf of the State members of our unincorporated Federation and the people thereof.
There is no break in the continuance of the governance of this country and no reason for any Third Parties to claim either executive powers or control of substantial interests related to us, our States, and/or our people as the result of incompetence or insolvency of Third Party Subcontractors.
There is no reason to assume the existence of any continuance of contract or assumption of a new or successor contract with any foreign subcontractors under bankruptcy administration, any incorporated “governmental services corporation”, or purveyor of essential government services that is not approved of by The Powerholder.
The United States of America is owed peace from every other nation on Earth including Russia and China, and we insist that our treaties with them be honored in full and also insist that the two foreign Subcontractors causing these problems in our country be informed by their owner, the Pope, that they are not allowed to continue making war of any kind on our shores.
The issues that we face here are issues of criminal misadministration and are not political nor social in nature.
Signed by: Anna Maria Riezinger, Fiduciary
The United States of America

Asked by Sen. Cornyn to Show Her Notes, Judge Barrett Reveals Blank Notepad

(Douglas Braff) Judge Amy Coney Barrett, President Donald Trump‘s nominee for the Supreme Court, revealed that her notepad for jotting down her thoughts has been blank when prompted by Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) at Tuesday’s hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee on her appointment.

The post Asked by Sen. Cornyn to Show Her Notes, Judge Barrett Reveals Blank Notepad appeared on Stillness in the Storm.

Obama, Clinton, Biden and Brennan will “hang for treason” when this evidence comes out… BOMBSHELL recordings prove they had Seal Team Six EXECUTED to cover up deep state crimes

(Natural News) This story is rapidly unfolding and looks to be one of the most damning indictments of the deep state in modern U.S. history. According to numerous firsthand sources and witnesses, a treasure trove of audio, video and photographic evidence exists that reveals Obama, Clinton, Brennan and Biden to be complicit in outright treason…