By Jeff Childers
Good morning and Happy Friday, C&C! Today’s roundup includes: an essay on ‘peer review’ to honor the release of our favorite covid docs from Twitter jail; Trump’s major announcement costs $99; Grant Wahl’s sudden and unexpected cause of death is released, and you’ll never guess what it was; famous former SEAL dramatically de-transitions; Norwegian lesbian faces three years in prison for saying men can’t be lesbians; another CNN producer pleads guilty to pedophile crimes; and Elon Musk goes postal on doxxing leftwing journalists.
🗞*WORLD NEWS AND COMMENTARY* 🗞
🔥 To celebrate the release from Twitter jail of Doctor McCullough, the most-cited and most censored covid doctor in the world, and Dr. Malone, the actual inventor of mRNA tech, I’m going to write a little about the so-called “peer-review” process. I have personal experience with the phenomenon, since I was forced to fight in court about studies that either were or weren’t peer-reviewed.
The whole process was a painful ordeal. What should a judge do with claims that studies are better or worse because of peer review? Is one mask study better because it IS peer-reviewed? Should another mask study be completely ignored because it WASN’T peer-reviewed?
For a long while, judges were mostly deferring to peer review. But did that make any sense?¹
On this blog I have often alleged there are many scientists who are not scientists at all, but prostitutes, white-coated pretenders servicing big government and big pharma, happily supplying studies to satisfy eager institutional customers’ needs; always for a fee, euphemistically called “grants,” which of course must be paid in advance.
I didn’t just read that somewhere. I watched it happen with my own eyes, in real time. There were zero covid mask studies when I started litigating the mandates. Then the studies started coming out. We carefully reviewed every single one. None of the real studies could get peer-reviewed. Only the garbage, fake pro-mask studies showed up peer-reviewed in the journals.
It was vexing.
You can’t believe how horrible most of the pro-mask studies were. Every time the NIH stuffed grant money into their mouths, fake scientists excreted another “study” purporting to “prove” that cut-up t-shirts somehow filtered a nanoscale virus and stopped transmission.
In one study that was widely feted in corporate media and used against me in court, the “scientists” took a styrofoam head, stuck a plastic tube in its mouth, jetted air through the tube, and then measured the air velocity coming out — with and without a cotton mask strapped onto the dummy head.
Because they found air velocity reduced with a cotton mask on, the scientists, employing a tortured chain of reasoning comparable to an excited teenager arguing for a later curfew, concluded that masks must also reduce covid spread BECAUSE the cotton mask reduced the amount of expelled air. (Two masks reduced it even more!)
The problem was, the moronic fakers only measured air velocity right in front of the dummy head. They ‘forgot’ to measure the air flowing UP, DOWN, and SIDEWAYS. They lied. The airflow wasn’t “reduced.” Of COURSE the air came out. It had to go somewhere! The masks didn’t ABSORB the air! In other words, the masks didn’t change the AMOUNT of air coming out; only its direction. And worse, masks didn’t even reduce the expelled air’s speed; although forward air velocity was reduced, the velocity to the sides, up and down was INCREASED when wearing a mask.
Masks actually INCREASE the spread of viral particulate. But it passed peer review!
Allegedly, peer-review is a quality certification process. Studies are ranked and rated whether they have been reviewed and blessed by an anonymous panel of scientists in the same discipline. That’s supposed to be how to tell if the study is any good. Recently, for example, the State of Florida studied its medical data, finding jabs increased myocarditis in young people under 40. Critics whined that Florida’s research project wasn’t peer-reviewed, and therefore it was useless.
Do the critics have a point?
Probably not, according to Lancet editor-in-chief Richard Horton, who in a brief flash of honesty said out loud what a lot of other scientists have been thinking for a long time. That is: peer review is not in fact a quality control; it is just a way for establishment scientists to police and enforce orthodox narratives.
Specifically, Dr. Horton wrote:
The mistake, of course, is to have thought that peer review was any more than a crude means of discovering the acceptability—not the validity—of a new finding…We portray peer review to the public as a quasi-sacred process that helps to make science our most objective truth teller. But we know that the system of peer review is biased, unjust, unaccountable, incomplete, easily fixed, often insulting, usually ignorant, occasionally foolish, and frequently wrong.
In 2015, Dr. Horton even dared to criticize science itself, because the scientific literature — and he should know — has become UNRELIABLE:
The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness.
But why? In 2014 — well before the pandemic — Editor-in-Chief Horton admitted that “Journals have devolved into information laundering operations for the pharmaceutical industry.”
Isn’t that interesting. Who would have ever thought.
But HOW does the pharmaceutical industry launder false information through the journals? Harvard Medical School’s Dr. Marcia Angell was the Editor-in-Chief at the New England Journal of Medicine for 20 years. After twenty years of editing and publishing scientific papers, she has become deeply skeptical, not only about peer-review, but about the entire process of journals and even about “experts.” She said:
It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine.
Read that again. The former chief editor of the New England Journal of Medicine said it is NO LONGER POSSIBLE TO RELY ON THE JUDGMENT OF EXPERTS.
She said it, not me. I’m just a lawyer.
But WHY is science broken? Dr. Marc Girard, a member of the editorial board of the journal ‘Medicine Veritas,’ explained that science is broken because of MONEY:
The reason for this disaster is too clear: the power of money. In academic institutions, the current dynamics of research is more favourable to the ability of getting grants—collecting money and spending it—than to scientific imagination or creativity.
The problem isn’t new, either. Back in 2005, Dr. John Ionnidis — an early and important member of Team Reality who experienced censorship and cancellation firsthand — said “Most scientific studies are wrong, and they are wrong because scientists are interested in funding and careers rather than truth… Claimed research findings may often be simply accurate measures of the prevailing bias.”
It’s a club. A well-paid club.
The point is, all these criticisms of science and peer-review were well-known within the scientific community long before the pandemic hit. But those lying liars gaslit us, and told us WE were crazy for not blindly relying on their feckless, brokered opinions and judgments. Opinions and judgments which quickly turned out to be wildly wrong, not that any of them are admitting it.
In the words, or lyrics, of my favorite covid artist, Dr. Doctor McHonkHonk:
Science lies, mate
That what its’ always done, is doin’, and always will do
It’s more dangerous than any disease
Time to rise, eh?
I’d rather die while standing up than live on my knees
We’ve got to walk away now
I’m not happy about any of this. It’s not my new hobby to attack science or anything. But science needs to clean up its own house, and get out of our hair.
Anyway, Twitter is better now because the heterodox scientific voices are back. Much better.
🔥 Well, President Trump unveiled his widely-promoted “Major Announcement” yesterday. He actually made two announcements, but the one labeled “Major Announcement” left Trump-watchers speechless.
It was a commercial. He’s selling digital artwork, of himself in dramatic superhero poses, for $99.
I don’t know what to say about this without sounding critical. So I’m going to leave it alone, except to note that these “non-fungible tokens,” or NFTs, which is what Trump is selling, seem like a scam. Not Trump’s NFT’s in particular. The whole NFT industry feels sketchy. But what do I know, I’m just a lawyer, not a digital artist or whatever.
Apropos of sketchy digital investments, here’s my favorite simple explainer for bitcoin:
Separately, Trump released a second video that was more serious, which described his campaign’s “free speech platform.” It’s a series of policy objectives aimed at protecting Americans’ free speech rights, by issuing executive orders forbidding government from wading into the censorship business, and focusing on protecting social media speech in particular.
EXCLUSIVE VIDEO: I have obtained a copy of President Trump unveiling the major planks of his official Free Speech Policy Proposal This is the first video drop in a series to come from his 2024 presidential campaign
Don’t get me wrong, it’s great, but the thing is, we already have a law — a good one; it’s called the Constitution. The Constitution forbids the government from collaborating with social media companies to censor speech. We just need the courts to enforce the First Amendment, and at least one major case is already underway: Missouri v. Biden.
To be fair, many folks were pleased with Trump’s announcement. Revolver News’ Darren Beattie, whom I greatly respect, tweeted yesterday “This is by far the most substantive and important message from Trump since the announcement.”
So. You decide.
💉 More information is surfacing about that sports reporter, Grant Wahl, who died suddenly and unexpectedly in Qatar in the middle of the World Cup the other day. The Wall Street Journal ran a story Tuesday headlined, “Soccer Journalist Grant Wahl Died of Aortic Aneurysm, His Wife Says.”
Wahl’s wife, Dr. Céline Gounder, disclosed that her late husband, 49, died from an “aortic aneurysm that ruptured.” She thinks his brand-new condition was probably “just one of these things that had been likely brewing for years. For whatever reason, it happened at this point in time.” Dr. Gounder emphasized, “His death was unrelated to vaccination status.”
That’s very broad-minded of Ms. Gounder.
But diligent independent researchers discovered what corporate media couldn’t find even if it had been tied to a string that was super-glued to their greasy little fingers:
Oops. The trial’s description reports the “time to have Aortic aneurysm rupture from when people get Pfizer BioNTech Covid Vaccine:”
* on the same day: 16.67 %
* in the first week: 33.33 %
* in the first 30 days: 16.67 %
* after 30 days: 33.33 %
That’s not all. Grant’s broad-minded widow is also a member of Joe Biden’s vaccine-happy Covid-19 Advisory Board. Here’s her twitter bio:
We offer Ms. Gounder our sympathies for her tragic, sudden, and unexpected loss.
🔥 The International Business Times ran a story early this week headlined, “Retired Navy SEAL Who Came Out as Transgender is Transitioning Back after Calling Sex Change ‘Worst Mistake of My Life’.” The sub-headline explains, “Kristin Beck, 55, is now switching back to the sex of his birth and will be reverting to his previous and original name Chris Beck.”
Beck, a decorated SEAL Team Six member, blames trans activists for taking advantage of his mental condition about ten years ago when he “transitioned.” According to Beck, changing his sex was the “worst mistake” of his life, after being given hormones following a ONE-HOUR consultation on sex change.
He explained, “Everything that happened to me for the last ten years destroyed my life. I destroyed my life. I’m not a victim. I did this to myself, but I had help.”
In a recent interview, Beck described how he was taken advantage of by radical pro-trans doctors. He said, “I was used … I was very naive, I was in a really bad way, and I got taken advantage of. I got propagandized. I got used badly by a lot of people who had knowledge way beyond me. They knew what they were doing. I didn’t.”
Beck says not to believe anything he’s ever said in any post-transition interview. He’s now calling on Americans to “wake up” about how transgender health services are hurting kids.
Welcome back to Team Reality, Chris!
🔥 The Post-Millennial ran a story this week headlined, “Woman Faces 3-Year Prison Term in Norway for Saying It’s ‘Impossible’ for Men to Be Lesbians.”
Tonje Gjevjon, a lesbian artist in Norway, was notified on Nov 17th that she was under investigation for hate speech crimes, because of a Facebook post she wrote on October 1st. “It is just as impossible for men to become lesbians as it is for men to become pregnant,” Gjevjon said in her Facebook post. “Men are men regardless of their sexual fetishes.”
According to the Post Millennial, in 2020, Norway added “gender identity and gender expression” to the country’s hate speech laws, ignoring warnings that the laws would injure free speech. Imagine that.
It’s a good thing Norwegians have the government to protect them from being criticized online. The horror!
🔥 In another article this week, the Post Millennial headlined, “Disgraced CNN Producer Pleads GUILTY to Child Sex Crime.” The sub-headline quoted from the criminal charge: “The defendant solicited young girls, including the minor plaintiff, for the purpose of knowingly persuading, inducing, enticing and coercing them to engage in sexual activity.”
Former CNN senior producer John Griffin, 49, pleaded guilty in federal court last week after being charged with child sex crimes. Specifically, Griffin pleaded guilty to “using interstate commerce to entice and coerce a NINE-YEAR-OLD GIRL to engage in sexual activity at his Vermont ski house,” according to the Associated Press.
The indictment says that between April and July 2020, Griffin used online messaging platforms such as Google Hangouts to contact parents with underage daughters, and among other things, told them “that a ‘woman is a woman regardless of her age,’ and that women should be sexually subservient and inferior to men.”
In papers filed in the case, the U.S. Attorney alleged, “Griffin later transferred over $3,000 to the mother for plane tickets so the mother and her 9-year-old daughter could fly from Nevada to Boston’s Logan airport. The mother and child flew to Boston in July of 2020, where Griffin picked them up in his Tesla and drove them to his Ludlow house. At the house, the daughter was directed to engage in, and did engage in, unlawful sexual activity.”
I have omitted many other salacious details. Griffin faces up to life in prison, and up to $250,000 in restitution.
I reported this story not just because Griffin is a lefty news shill, but also because this is good news, an example of the government actually working well in pursuing child trafficking cases. We need a lot more of this.
🔥 Twitter is burning hot today, on fire, a veritable out-of-control tire yard inferno, after Elon Musk jailed a bunch of lefty journalists. The horror! I’m still putting the story together, but I wanted to give you some important missing context.
The whole thing started after several journalists retweeted somebody following Musk’s car and reporting its location in real time. After journalists published the doxxer’s thread, Musk’s car was attacked by activists who jumped on the hood and tried to get inside.
But the doxxer was wrong. Musk wasn’t in the car. One of his kids was. A nanny was driving.
Musk was furious. So Musk promptly created a new rule about doxxing people, which resulted in a whole bunch of lefty journalists being banned. Normally they love rules, except when rules are applied fairly, or when the rules don’t hurt conservatives somehow. Anyway, the journalists are now fainting from faux outrage and hysterically clutching their pearls, and CNN, former home of the pedo producer, is threatening to rage-quit Twitter.
I’ll try to have more on this developing story tomorrow, if it’s interesting.
Have a fabulous Friday! I’ll see you back here in the morning, for the weekend edition.
C&C is moving the needle and changing minds. If you can, I could use your help getting the truth out and spreading optimism and hope: https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/p/-learn-how-to-get-involved-
For part of this post, I relied on the terrific article, The Failure of Peer Review by the Global Freedom Movement; https://globalfreedommovement.org/the-failure-of-peer-review/.
The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official position of Citizens Journal Florida.