☕️ TWO KARENS ☙ Saturday, June 3, 2023 ☙ C&C NEWS 🦠

A tale of two health agency Karens; news about news of Jamie Foxx; poignant and funny anti-Pride article; Target stock still sliding; Project Veritas' lawsuit against James O'Keefe; more.

Good morning, C&C! There’s a lot of news out there, but I have some pressing work issues and had to scrape up a quick roundup for you. We’ll get caught up on all the current events next week. Today’s roundup includes: A Tale of Two Karens — new directors for CDC and NIH, both women, both lockdowners, both overenthusiastic Fauci fans; terrific article from the Spectator perfectly tracks yesterday’s 2SLGBTQIA+ discussion; news about Jamie Foxx’s paralysis and blindness spreading despite corporate media’s best efforts to keep a lid on; Target stock continues sliding as people avoid the smells of fire and brimstone; Project Veritas sues James O’Keefe on weak, bogus claims; and a video with a moral about being in the right place at the right time.

🗞💬 *WORLD NEWS AND COMMENTARY* 💬🗞

🔥 As the sun sets on the tragic reign of terminally-fearful Rachelle Walenksy as the CDC’s director, the morbidly-obese, bureaucratic health agency found Walensky’s twin to take over as the agency’s top fearmonger. She is perkily named Mandy Cohen.

Now, she’s not Karen. Don’t even think that.

Here she is! Mandy’s tweet from August 2020 will tell you everything you need to know about the necessary qualifications for the CDC’s highest office:

Haha, she said “masks are our strongest tool to slow the spread.” Plus they’re fun! She also repeatedly tweeted that the jabs prevent covid infection. Apparently dismal failure is not a barrier to reaching the top job. It must be something else then.

Haha, yeah, it was fun times with those masks. It took me two seconds to find this example of the fun times back during Mask Mania:

The new CDC director got lots of glowing corporate media coverage as you would imagine. But there were some interesting admissions. In one example, a Politico story about Mandy’s appointment this week unintentionally dropped some fascinating facts:

The CDC is also in the midst of a strategic overhaul launched by Walensky last year; a longer-term project that Cohen would be tasked with managing in an effort to better prepare the agency for the next public health emergency.

Biden officials involved in the search came away from discussions with Cohen impressed by her … ability to manage the nearly 11,000-person agency and the broader political dynamics of an administration gearing up for Biden’s re-election run.

The next public health emergency? What do they have in mind? And, what ‘political dynamics?’ How will the CDC be related to Biden’s re-election run?

I should also point out that, at the time the “overhaul” was announced it was supposed to be aimed at restoring public trust in the agency. Now it’s morphed into preparing for the next pandemic. I can’t wait. Maybe it will be super monkeypox.

Here’s something weird. CDC wasn’t the only agency to get a perky new director. Meet Biden’s replacement for the head of the OTHER bloated health bureaucracy, the National Institutes of Health, Monica Bertagnolli:

Come on guys, Monica isn’t Karen either, don’t start. She’s just another short-haired, middle-aged, white female Fauci bootlicking, mask Nazi.

Oh. And, according to the White House’s own statement, in the six years between 2015 and 2021, Monica got THREE HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS from Pfizer in grant money, making up 90% of all her grant awards.

For those of you in the cheap seats, that sweet $300M paid Monica right through the whole jab development and deployment period.

Aside from their obvious similarities, there’s one other, not as obvious thing that Biden can count on from Mandy and Monica. Neither of the Karens, I mean ladies, will be saying anything embarrassingly critical about how the covid pandemic was handled. That is for sure. You can take it to the NIH’s grant bank.

🏳️‍🌈 This week, the UK Spectator ran a terrifically well-written and snarky piece about pride month titled, “Who is Pride really for?” It was written by Andrew Doyle, a gay conservative commentator and pretend news anchor. I’ll reprint one paragraph to give you a taste, and link both the story and his hysterical “Jonathan Pie” Youtube channel.

From his position “inside the movement,” Doyle, asked this critical question, a question that a lot of everyday gay people are probably also asking themselves:

All of which begs the question: who is Pride really for? With equal rights for gay people long established, Pride has gradually morphed into a self-satirising celebration of narcissism, where avaricious corporations can pose as virtuous by merely flying a flag and tossing off a few hashtags. Whereas the struggle for equality for those who are innately same-sex attracted was tangible and important, we are now expected to show solidarity for heterosexuals with a kink. This week the British Library decided to celebrate Pride by tweeting about hermaphroditic fish, and holding an event that will ‘celebrate nature in all its queerness’. The very concept of a ‘2SLGBTQIA+ community’ and all its attendant absurdities has made Pride a laughing stock.

Here is a link to Doyle’s article.

Here’s the link to his YouTube channel. He pretends to be a British news anchor named Jonathan Pie who is forced to cough up obnoxious woke pablum and then rants about it off camera. You can find tons of them. He started during the pandemic and was a reliably anti-mandate voice of reason.

Warning: generous helpings of adult language.

To be honest, Doyle’s article left me a little chagrined. Not from the quality of his writing, which I greatly admired, but because it showed how out of touch I am, that I have miserably failed to keep up with the latest exciting and groundbreaking additions to the LGBTQIA++ pantheon. In particular, the brand new prefix representing the latest under appreciated grievance group: “2S”.

So, don’t make my embarassing mistake, unless you want to microagress rainbow people, which is literal violence. You might as well stab them in the left eye with a fondue fork. So pay attention: The correct acronym appends the new “2S” to the front, to make the even longer and impossible-to-remember cryptograph — 2SLGBTQIA+.

I am even more humiliated to admit that I had to look up what the new 2S was for. It’s for “two spirited,” who are bisexual people identifying as Native Americans, and who enjoy integrating pagan old-world spirituality combined with crystal-decorated New Agism into their free-wheeling sex lives.

Please, try to keep up. It’s a terrible burden always being the one to have to explain everything to the group. I’m not complaining, I’m just saying.

And please recalll that, if you dare to suggest these nutjobs have jumped the shark on Fonzi's motorcycle and are now parodying themselves without any help from us, you could wake up someday to find your house repainted in candy-colored zebra stripes, the latest victim of the two-spirited mafia.

📈 Rumors about Jamie Foxx’s blinded, paralyzed condition spread like wildfire this week, outside of corporate media of course, with no professional reporters anywhere bothering to type two sentences to ask anyone any direct questions.

It’s not like the public isn’t interested. I saw the the article appearing on secondary news sites like Valuetainment, where it presently tops the most read list:

Here’s how corporate media treated the story, if they said anything about it at all, that is:

Not so much ‘false.’ Just ‘wildly irresponsible.’

The Yahoo Life story was unintentionally hilarious. It was 100% pure opinion, not even trying to provide any news. The article spent half its length “debunking” vaccine harms, poorly, by citing the CDC website and stuff, and the rest of its paragraphs dressing-down Dr. Drew for invading the Foxx family’s confidential medical spaces.

The Yahoo reporter completely failed to ask anyone for a denial or even a comment, not Foxx’s family, his doctors, Jamie himself (if he’s up and communicating and playing pickle ball) or even Dr. Drew, for that matter.

Yahoo’s excuse for not doing any journalistic work? Because the family “asked for privacy.”

Cue up the little ‘exploding head’ emoji.

And hold on just one minute. Is this the same corporate media that has literally hounded celebrities to death prying into their private lives? The same media that even created a whole new category of reporter, with a fancy Italian name, a pack of paparazzi to tenaciously track celebrities, trying to catch them disgracefully getting DUI’d, inartfully squabbling with their spouses, or unpleasantly perambulating without their makeup on, and other personal stuff like that?

Do I have this all right?

That’s the same media? The same media that has now suddenly become irreproachably circumspect about celebrity privacy, and is virtuously scolding everyone else for even being curious about Foxx’s medical condition, which clearly, everyone is?

Well powder my posterior. What has finally changed Media’s mind about celebrity privacy? What uncovered the better angels of their nature? What convinced them to now give respect to celebrities’ requests for privacy? Could it have been this easy the whole time? Could Lady Di have just asked for a little privacy, and still be alive right now, instead of being chased by unrelating reporters into a fatal car crash?

Or the media are disgusting cockroaches who say whatever they’re paid to say, truth be damned, and like Trump says, are the enemies of the people. They ‘report,’ you decide.

📉 Oh, dear. Target is squarely in Beelzebub’s bullseye of brimstone now. MarketWatch ran a heartwarming story Thursday headlined, “Target’s Stock, on Its Longest Losing Streak in 23 Years, Downgraded At JPMorgan.”

Downgraded is just what you DON’T want your stock to be. So far this year, Target’s stock has fallen -12.2%. It’s the retailer’s longest losing streak since an 11-day slide that ended February 24th, 2000.

The story allowed one short sentence to describe the public backlash against Target’s poorly-thought-out Pride Month campaign. And it linked to another defensive Marketwatch article published earlier this week, with the whiny headline: “Trans Designer in Target Anti-LGBTQ+ Backlash Says He Was ‘Dealt the Worst Hand’.”

The even more whiny sub-headline explained: “Erik Carnell says he believes Target pulled his work after false accusations that he was a Satanist.”

False accusations! False accusations he was a Satanist. False accusations that caused him tons of financial damages. So he should sue somebody, right? Where are the lawsuits?

Erik Carnell goes by the weird designer name Abprallen, which is probably some obscure occult reference, and is the same delightful lad who enjoys dressing up like the devil and making t-shirts that say things like Satan Respects Pronouns. Not a Satanist though. After proudly declaring he was a Satanist on his social media sites (just kidding), like the Apostle Peter denying his Lord three times before sunrise, Abprallen now denies the devil, which probably isn’t earning him many Beelzebub points.

Erik, I mean Abprallen, told a credulous, unquestioning Marketwatch reporter that, “My work was likely pulled following false accusations of being a Satanist and of marketing my work to children, both claims have been debunked numerous times but members of the religious right refuse to back down.”

Debunked? Back down? Members of the religious right? Who on Earth was that grotesque devil-worshipper talking about? Does he think Billy Graham is chasing him with a pop-up Revival Tent or something?

Anyway, poor Erik. Nowadays, if you want to be a transgressive transsexual social media influencer for Satan, you should expect to have to take the rough with the smooth from time to time.

🔥 Yesterday, Project Veritas filed suit in the Southern District of New York against James O’Keefe (and two other former employees). I took a look at the complaint. It’s nonsense.

First, whoever is running PV at this point claimed in the complaint that O’Keefe breached his employment agreement when he started OMG. They claim he was still working at Project Veritas, based on the ridiculous argument that the board’s refused to terminate O’Keefe’s employment even after he resigned, but kept him on “unpaid leave.”

Hint: if you’re not paying someone, they don’t work for you. It’s sort of basic.

PV said they kept James on staff, unpaid, “just in case” there was a way to settle their differences. Then they fired him. But during the middle, they claim James shouldn’t have started a new company yet.

Next, they claimed O’Keefe breached a non-disparagement provision by “falsely insinuating that” Pfizer was involved in his termination. Um. “Insinuating” sounds pretty weak, first of all, to support a six-figure damages claim for breaching a non-disparagement clause. Second, I bet discovery on this issue is going to be fun.

Next, they claimed O’Keefe breached a confidentiality agreement by taking some lists of unnamed donors and some unidentified, pending PV story material, and claimed that he was activity soliciting some other unnamed Project Veritas donors. They claimed O’Keefe improperly solicited unidentified PV employees when he said in a public video message, “I will need a bunch of people around me, and I’ll make sure, I’ll make sure you know how to find me.”

That generalized statement might evidence some future intent to solicit employees, but it cannot possibly uphold a claim of solicitation by itself.

As it happens, this case is squarely in my commercial litigation wheelhouse. I regularly practice “restrictive covenants” law, and have several cases going right now, much more complicated than this goofy lawsuit. So I can offer an informed opinion.

This lawsuit is bull puckey. I’d use stronger language but this is a family blog.

In other words, it’s thin. Super thin. So thin, there’s almost nothing there. For instance, although they claimed O’Keefe was soliciting PV donors, they never named a single donor he’s supposedly solicited and — more importantly — named any donor that stopped donating to PV because O’Keefe supposedly solicited them. Nor does the complaint identify ANY damages. It only claims entitlement to a $100,000 liquidated damages provision.

I haven’t looked into NY law, but in Florida, liquidated damages are disfavored and a suing party must still show the liquidated damages are based on something real, and aren’t just a made up number, which is called a penalty. Penalties are unenforceable.

Shame on the lawyers who filed this trash heap of a complaint.

You guys know that I’ve given Project Veritas the benefit of the doubt and have supported them post-breakup. I’ve run their stories in C&C. But this is a bridge too far for me. James may not be able to disparage them but I can. (Legal Note: I would never defame PV. But publishing truthful information is not defamatory. And, since the controversial organization is a public figure, publishing reasonable speculations should also not be defamatory.)

If the lawsuit isn’t dismissed, I hope James drives them insane with discovery.

🔥 Finally, enjoy today’s uplifting short video clip. It’s getting to be a recurring theme, but the moral is: sometimes you find yourself in the right place at the right time.

https://twitter.com/crazyclipsonly/status/1664368722138775552

So act more like the homeowner and less like the repairman!

Have a wonderful weekend, and I’ll catch y’all on Monday morning to start the week off the scrumptious, caffe-flavored, C&C way.

(Subscribers, I’ll see you guys tomorrow!)

Please consider joining 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: https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/p/-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
Emailed Daily Newsletter: https://www.coffeeandcovid.com