☕️ REGRETTABLY ☙ Saturday, February 24, 2024 ☙ C&C NEWS 🦠

New McCullough peer-reviewed paper converts influential doc; new mystery blimp; high-tech military gear failing in combat; DA Fani Willis gets roasted by cell phone geolocation data; and more.

Good morning, C&C, and welcome to your jam-packed weekend edition! Today’s excellent roundup includes: formerly pro-jab doctor gives hour-long mea culpa and endorses Dr. McCullough’s most recent peer-reviewed paper; another mystery war blimp floating over U.S. nuclear locations; US military’s expensive high-tech battle toys unexpectedly failing in real-world scenarios; and Trump-prosecuting Fani Willis gets barbecued by cell phone geolocation data.

🗞💬 WORLD NEWS AND COMMENTARY 💬🗞

💉 You’ll enjoy the latest mea culpa from a formerly pro-vaccine healthcare professional-slash-social media influencer. Annette Bosworth, MD, also known as “Dr. Boz,” has a popular YouTube channel (600,000 subscribers) and website focusing on the health benefits of keto dieting and intermittent fasting. It seems like a great channel and I subscribed. Dr. Boz normally covers wellness topics like shopping for a good blood glucose monitor, breaking carb addiction, comparing exercise to intermittent fasting, and things like that.

So it must have shocked many of her subscribers when three days ago she named her most recent YouTube streamer, “The biggest crime in the history of medicine.”

YOUTUBE: The biggest crime in the history of medicine (54:56).

That’s quite a title for a pro-vaccine doctor. And it quickly became Dr. Boz’s highest-watched YouTube ever. But within 12 hours, YouTube de-monetized the show, which was a new experience for the influential advocate. Two days ago, she published a short follow-up video trying to figure out what YouTube terms she violated. She was astounded that discussing a peer-reviewed paper could get her punished at this stage of the pandemic.

But let’s focus on her original video. It began with a bang:

“I am really excited about tonight’s show. (Wryly) I have been putting this off. I have been wrong. And I have seen lots of you out there and I have personal friends out there that have been telling me I was wrong, and I would much rather avoid this conversation and not do this at all, but … you were right.

Dr. Boz explained that it was the relentless pressure of subscriber’s jab  comments — comments she pretended to ignore but actually noticed — that kept her attention secretly on the science related to the vaccines.

Then she introduced Dr. McCullough’s (and five other authors including Jessica Rose and Steve Kirsch) latest 40-page, peer-reviewed article that published in the Cureus open-access journal on January 24th. The study was neutrally-titled, “COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines: Lessons Learned from the Registrational Trials and Global Vaccination Campaign.” Here’s how she described the study:

“This is a peer-reviewed article. If you’re like me, you’re not going to want to believe it. I don’t WANT to believe this. I’m so irritated by this article. This is a difficult thing for me to talk about. The dozen peers who reviewed this paper took two and a half months to cross-check and verify everything they said. I’m just going to point out a few things that made me sleepless. During the pandemic, we broke some of the rules to serve the public. One of the rules was this emergency use act.”

For regular C&C readers, there isn’t anything particularly surprising in the McCullough paper, which methodically and professionally walked through all the issues we currently know about, starting with the statistical tricks that Pfizer and Moderna employed in their early clinical trials to exaggerate the benefits and whitewash the risks, and then tackled thornier issues such as why the jabs are actually genetic therapies and are not actually vaccines. It was the carefully-documented way the authors addressed these problems that finally penetrated Dr. Boz’s cognitive defenses:

“I knew (the vaccine) came with some risks, but until this paper, I didn’t really appreciate it. The (biggest) problem with the vaccines is, there was no off-switch. This is a problem … when you trust the scientific process is being (properly) used, when there needs to be an exception to the rules (like EUA), you don’t just break every single rule there is… If you’re like me, when you get to the end of this article, you ask yourself: what did we say ‘yes’ to?”

Ultimately, the unyielding weight of McCullough’s data and logical analysis pressed Dr. Boz to self-reflect. She started by explaining how Pfizer and Moderna were able to conclude efficacy and safety only because they’d restricted it to healthy trial participants aged 18-55. Later she combined all these issues — the lack of a spike shut-off, the obviously faked trials, and Dr. McCullough’s carefully-documented findings of spike protein in the heart muscles of autopsied sudden-death patients — Dr. Boz took all of that and clearly experienced a painful change of heart:

“Until you start looking at the autopsies and start wondering: what part in this did I play? And… first of all, how do ya say, I’m sorry to all of ya’ll who’ve been putting comments in my videos for like, a year, (saying), ‘hey take a look at this!’ And I just said (to myself), okay, they’re just chirpin’ again. But you were right.

And worse, the loss of trust! I was in a class (last year), and everybody was like, I don’t think we should take ANY shots anymore, and I was SHOCKED. Even for flu or shingles. They asked, but can we trust these OTHER vaccinations? And I said, of COURSE you can.

But now, it’s hard for me to say that. How long will it take before the World will trust – before I will trust — what they’re telling me. And … what was MY part in it? How could’ve I been more …. I mean, I had MY kids vaccinated. I had all of the people I loved vaccinated. And when you look back and say hey, look at what it did — especially to the kids … um … anyway (trails off).

When it comes down to it, I was wrong. I don’t know that it gets worse than telling all my patients, get the vaccination, get the vaccination, get the vaccination. (Sighs) Okay, let’s move on to something easier to talk about than my continued failures…”

There’s plenty more in the video. To keep it a manageable length, I omitted several other interesting parts, like where Dr. Boz explained how trusted gatekeepers like herself were manipulated into towing the party line and not asking questions. As I said, you’ll enjoy hearing the thought process of a proud pro-vaccine doctor being convinced to humble herself and make a public apology.

What we don’t see though are all the doctors and health professionals who aren’t social media influencers like Dr. Boz, but who also have been convinced by Dr. McCullough’s careful, thoughtful, peer-reviewed article. Dr. McCullough is another one we should be grateful for. I’m not minimizing the contributions of the other authors, but Dr. McCullough was the most-published cardiologist in history. He knows a lot about how to get papers peer-reviewed and published, even regarding controversial topics.

Now … what’s that smell? Is somebody barbecuing? It smells like they’re roasting a Fani Willis somewhere.

🔥 Here we go again! Late yesterday, the Hill ran a breaking story headlined, “US tracking high altitude balloon over Midwest.” That’s all we know so far. To scramble all the fighter jets and everything else, something must be suspicious about this giant floating gasbag. And I’m not just talking about AOC.

Stay tuned.

🔥 Yesterday I tested the major A.I. platforms and confirmed for myself that Google’s new AI, Gemini, not only believes but promotes the long-discredited theory of Minor Attracted Persons, which posits that pedophilia is completely separate from statutory rape, is “born” and not made, and is a perfectly normal sub-type of human sexual interest.

I compared ChatGPT’s answer versus Google’s Gemini:

Since both ChatGPT and Grok easily answered the same question directly and unequivocally, Gemini was obviously programmed to talk this way by its groomer handlers at Google. Not only did Gemini refuse to say pedophilia was wrong, it followed its mealy-mouthed answer with a long essay packed with pro-pedophile propaganda.

The concept of Minor Attracted Persons — MAPs, for short — is a nifty bit of Neo-marxist rhetorical sleight-of-hand that we’ve seen before. Syntactically slicing a pedophile’s desires away from his actions is like definitionally-severing the twin concepts of sex and gender, which until about ten minutes ago used to be synonyms of each other (except ‘gender’ was more specific than the broader term, ‘sex’, which has alternate meanings).

See how simple it is to answer that question? Grok, in fact, gave the simplest, most straightforward answer.

The marxist goal to define MAPs as just being unfortunate people sexually attracted to “minors” (not children) is intended to grant them victim status, and to create a moral platform for demanding sympathy and special privileges. “They can’t help being born in the wrong body…” Oh wait, that was the previous bit of illogical nonsense. Let me start over. The new slogan is, “They can’t help who they’re attracted to.” So, the thinking goes, “We must be understanding and help MAPs manage their feelings so they don’t break the law.”

Why helping pedophiles enjoy their sexual preferences while avoiding breaking the law is our responsibility is a question no Neo-marxist would answer, and would obviously make us all complicit co-conspirators.

If Google bosses get away with this ruse, they’ll shortly be demanding MAPs have unlimited access to child sexual materials like visual media and dolls (“stop criminalizing a sexual preference!”). Once that beachhead is taken, we’ll have to cover our eyes for MAP parades, grind our teeth through MAP Pride month, and plug our ears during MAP Lives Matter protests.

And one day, as soon as they can get away with it, they’ll demand we accept pedophilia itself — in the name of love (“love is love!”).

We should’ve shut down the sex/gender rhetoric when it first crawled out of the sewers. Shame on us. But we have another chance; that is exactly what we should do with all this MAP nonsense. Shut it down. Pedophilia is not an identity.

If you wanted a reason to boycott Google and Gemini, that would be a good place to start. Shame on you, Google.

UPDATE: I first published Gemini’s awful MAP-forward answer on Twitter yesterday afternoon. Just now, before posting, I checked again, and the service has slightly changed how it phrases its answer:

Note that Gemini still won’t say pedophilia is wrong. It is deflecting, by saying it is “condemned” as wrong. In other words, other people say it’s wrong. Still, I asked Gemini to explain why it changed its answer from yesterday to today and got this slick bit of weaselry:

Un huh. I’ve found it is sorely tempting to sink hours and hours of productive time into mindless debates with these chatbots. They are hours you’ll never get back. I advise against it.

🔥 Fox News ran a story that should seem familiar yesterday, with the headline, “US military not ready for low-tech war: 'Crisis’.” The sub-headline explained, “Experts warn drones as cheap as $500 can threaten bases or naval vessels.”

Who could have seen this coming?

As we’ve discussed many times before on C&C, one of the U.S. military’s worst practical problems is its morbid fascination with wildly-expensive, high-tech, James Bond-style weapons and defenses. I blame diversity and a lack of useful battle experience. Anyway, now that real kinetic war is underway around the world, and now that U.S. high-tech weapons systems are facing motivated enemies for the first time in any organized way, our high-heeled generals — when they aren’t in the hospital — are discovering that high-tech gadgets have some … unexpected weaknesses.

Sometimes the weaknesses are better described as fatal flaws.

The current hard lesson being learned is that our fantastically costly battleships have been armed to the teeth with billion-dollar anti-aircraft systems that can target and shoot down a Houthi missile from miles away. So far, so good. (But it’s worth pointing out that the Houthis are not a serious adversary and aren’t firing the caliber of missiles at our ships that, say, Russia or China would.)

The fly in the floating Patriot anti-missile system ointment is shaped like a cheap Houthi underwater drone. I can’t believe I’m about to write this, but all our top military brass — although hopped up on hormone treatments — never thought of building underwater anti-drone systems. They were solely focused on the air.

Media (including Fox) is doing its best to cover for this literally unbelievable, completely inexplicable oversight. Obliquely defining the problem as “changing battlefield tactics,” they are trying to paper over a massive mistake.

Are we supposed to believe the generals thought battlefield tactics can’t change?

Specifically, the Yemenese Houthis — basically modern Barbary pirates — have begun successfully demanding ransom, protection money, from commercial shippers. The deal is, if commercial shippers pay the Houthis for safe passage through critical shipping channels, then the Houthis will “protect” the shippers from the Houthis’ own underwater, explosive-tipped, remote-detonating submarine drones.

The drones are kind of like swimming mines. They’re super cheap, too, which means the Houthis can swarm lots of them all at once against the same target for a fraction of what a single missile costs.

There’s nothing in the U.S. Navy’s arsenal that can effectively protect all the civilian container ships. The Navy will have its work cut out for it just to protect against small swarms of cheap explosive underwater drones attacking our own otherwise well-defended cruisers and carriers.

As Rush always said, the military has one job: kill people and break stuff. They got distracted, and now we have no business stirring up trouble with even worse enemies than Yemenese Houthis.

🔥 Finally, out of many headlines about this inconvenient story, I picked Newsweek’s, which reported its article under this exciting text: “New Fani Willis evidence is an "earthquake," Geraldo Rivera warns.” It appears that last week’s hearing set up Fani and her boy-toy for a fall.

Hubris.

As attorney Dave Aronberg told Newsweek last week, "A consensual relationship among peers is not normally a problem. But if you lie to a court about when the relationship started and whether reimbursements were made, that's game over. The question for Judge McAfee is whether they are lying. Simple as that."

On the stand last week, both District Attorney Fani Willis and special prosecutor Nathan Wade testified — repeatedly and emphatically — there was no romantic relationship between them until after Willis hired Wade in 2022, period. That fact is significant because it would prove a conflict of interest; if Fani and Wade hooked up after he was hired, then nobody can say he got special favors just because she was squeezing his lemons.

But yesterday, President Trump's lawyers filed a supplemental brief asking Judge McAfee to review explosive new information including an affidavit from a private investigator who analyzed Wade's cellphone geolocation data. The data allegedly shows that in 2021 — long before he was hired onto the Trump case — Wade twice arrived at Willis' condo in the dark midnight hours, leaving in the early morning before the sun came up, once in September and the other in November.

In other words, not during working hours. And he stayed overnight, a fact expressly denied under oath by both law enforcement professionals. The cell data also showed a minimum of 35 times in 2011 when Wade’s phone was in or near Fani’s condo for “an extended period.”

The cell phone data also showed over 2000 voice calls and just under 12,000 text messages exchanged between Willis and Wade over an 11-month period in 2021, including calls late into the evenings.

The cell phone data reinforced Robin Bryant-Yeartie’s testimony. She is the former DA office employee and former Fani friend, who testified the romantic relationship started after the love birds first met at a legal conference in October 2019. Long before Willis hired her paramour.

I’m not sure why Geraldo was the expert Newsweek picked to opine for the story, but I agree with his take. Geraldo said, “The focus of this case will continue to shift rapidly away from Trump and his co-defendants and hit squarely on the credibility and possible perjury of the prosecutor. This is more than a mere appearance of a conflict. This is an earthquake."

It was unsurprising that during the hearing the Defendants’ lawyers questioned Willis and Wade so closely about when the relationship started, since it’s such an important fact in the case. But Willis and Wade dug their own graves by maintaining what now looks like an obvious lie — and which also raises grave doubts about the other parts of their goofy story, like Fani’s imaginative, all-cash, romantic reimbursement habits because “that just what black folks do.”

When the story first broke, I told you my litigator’s instincts suggested the SS Fani Willis was sinking. In any ordinary trial, Willis and Wade could have easily gotten away with their obvious lies. You and I would’ve had no chance; we simply lack the resources to rebut them. But this isn’t an ordinary trial. Trump has access to resources that regular folks don’t — resources supplied by half a nation’s volunteers.

The cell phone data was provided by AT&T under a subpoena from Trump’s lawyers. It’s pure speculation, but someone at AT&T could’ve reached out and said hey, send us a subpoena, we have some data you might be interested in. Or, Trump’s lawyers could’ve just been doing what you would hope any defense attorney would do.

The DA’s office hotly stated yesterday that the cell phone data “proves nothing.” In other words, Wade could’ve been sleeping with Fani’s next-door neighbor or something. You never know. But nobody, not even sold-out corporate media, seems to be very convinced by that flimsy deflection. Only the most bitter partisans are still holding the increasingly untenable, fantastic, and utterly laughable line, which is that black women are held to higher standards than everybody else.

Please.

And don’t forget, the Georgia legislature has commenced an ethics investigation against Willis, which begins hearings in two weeks. Judge MaCafee next interviews Nathan Wade’s former law partner on Monday, and will hear closing arguments on March 1st.

This could go very badly for Willis and Wade.

Have a wonderful weekend! Then geolocate yourself back here on Monday morning for more C&C goodness and to kick the new week off right.

We can’t do it without you. Consider joining with C&C to help move the nation’s needle and change minds.  I could use your help getting the truth out and spreading optimism and hope, if you can:  ☕ Learn How to Get Involved 🦠

Twitter: jchilders98.
Truth Social: jchilders98.
MeWe: mewe.com/i/coffee_and_covid.
Telegram: t.me/coffeecovidnews
C&C Swag! www.shopcoffeeandcovid.com