A year and change into the Golden Age — a deep, and thus far unquenched, thirst for justice among a huge portion of the MAGA base notwithstanding — the administration has prosecuted precisely zero COVID criminals.
What’s more, the Department of Justice, when Pam Bondi isn’t promising to prosecute Americans for “hate speech” or rolling out new schemes to cover up the Epstein, hasn’t scrounged up the time or energy to bother even investigating any of them.
No prosecutions, no investigations, no press releases.
Nothing but radio silence.
The guy running HHS, RFK Jr. wrote a big, beautiful book elaborately detailing the rampant criminality of Fauci and many, many of his co-conspirators.
And yet, nothing.
Rather, AG Pam Bondi seems far more interested in prosecuting phantom “hate speech” crimes and covering up for the Epstein class.
Were she inclined to do the job the base that put her in office would like her to do, however, she would have a plethora of legal implements at her disposal.
It is true that, for some federal crimes that these people likely committed — and we’re only discussing federal crimes, setting aside state-level statutes under which these people could be targeted — the statute of limitations has run its course and the window for prosecution has elapsed, being over six years out since the start of the pandemic and even longer from the pre-planning (the tabletop exercise Event 201 coincidentally timed in October 2019, just a few months before the lockdowns began, the illicit gain-of-function work on coronaviruses in offshore labs, etc.).
Criminal conspiracy — which these people provably engaged in — typically has a five-year statute of limitations.
The key provision, though, is that the clock on the five-year statute of limitations window for criminal conspiracy only commences once the conspiracy has concluded.
As the conspiracy — the shot mandates, the forced masking, the business closures etc. — arguably continued deep into 2023 and arguably even beyond, we’d still be well within the five-year window for prosecution.
“Conspiracy is a continuing offense. For statutes such as 18 U.S.C. § 371, which require an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy, the statute of limitations begins to run on the date of the last overt act. See Fiswick v. United States, 329 U.S. 211 (1946); United States v. Butler, 792 F.2d 1528 (11th Cir. 1986). For conspiracy statutes which do not require proof of an overt act, such as RICO (18 U.S.C. § 1961) or 21 U.S.C. § 846, the government must allege and prove that the conspiracy continued into the limitations period. The crucial question in this regard is the scope of the conspiratorial agreement, and the conspiracy is deemed to continue until its purpose has been achieved or abandoned. See United States v. Northern Imp. Co., 814 F.2d 540 (8th Cir. 1987); United States v. Coia, 719 F.2d 1120 (11th Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 973 (1984).
An individual’s “withdrawal” from a conspiracy starts the statute of limitations running as to that individual. “Withdrawal” from a conspiracy for this purpose means that the conspirator must take affirmative action by making a clean breast to the authorities or communicating his or her disassociation to the other conspirators. See United States v. Gonzalez, 797 F.2d 915 (10th Cir. 1986).”
So, who should the Department of Justice be investigating, assuming it was serious about pursuing justice?
· Peter Daszak. Former EcoHealth Alliance who acted as the conduit through which Fauci funneled NIAID funding to the Wuhan lab (after the Obama administration outlawed gain-of-function on American soil)
· Deborah Birx. The so-called “Scarf Lady” who ran the Trump White House response (into the ground)
Entire books can, and in some cases have, been written about each of these seedy characters, whose depravity stretches far further back in time than COVID; indeed, their lack of morals or decency was the qualifying features that catapulted them to the top of the Public Health™ apparatus in the first place.
None of these people, for the record, benefitted from the flurry of pardons issued by whoever was running the Biden autopen on his way out the door, with the exception of Anthony Fauci. And even Fauci’s pardon, if indeed if was signed via autopen as it appears to have been, is highly suspect.
All of which is to say: there is no excuse for the total lack of effort to punish these demons who perpetrated the greatest scam in world history and killed untold millions of people, and perhaps billions in the aggregate, in the process.
Over the years, the true plot was buried in all sorts of deceptive narratives ranging from "climate change" and holes in the ozone layer to simple messaging that people are having "too many" babies for the planet to handle. In all of the narratives, the true underlying goal was always the same: mass depopulation.
One of the latest more-explicit calls for genocide came from Dennis Meadows of the globalist-led Club of Rome, who stated in no uncertain terms what the globalist plan for the world entails:
"We want to have freedom and we want to have high standards, so we're going to have a billion people. We're now at seven, so we have to get back down. I hope that this can be slow – relatively slow – and can be done in a way that is relatively equal."
In other words, "we," meaning the top 0.1 percent of the world's upper crust, want to live in a world without all of the rest of us "useless eaters." Such a world would have very "high standards," as opposed to today's low standards with so many extra people, so something has to change, in Meadows' view.
Not only did Meadows not beat around the bush concerning his intentions with the above statement, he also threw out some precise numerals illustrating just how many people have to go in order for he and the rest of the globalists to achieve their long-awaited paradise on earth.
"He wants the global population to go from 7 billion to 1 billion!" writes Daniel Bobinski on his "Keep the Republic" Substack. "He wants 6 billion people to disappear – equally. He also said he wants it to happen 'peacefully,' as in, 'without violence' ... Now, how might that happen?"
(Related: Canada, which has some of the world's most liberal euthanasia laws, now allows for the killing of infants and babies through its euthanasia program.)
Ready for the soft kill
Back in 2010, Mark Notaras and Darek Gondor of United Nations University (UNU) wrote a piece about Meadows explaining his plans to limit population growth in order to "save the world."
Meadows, a professor and co-author of "The Limits to Growth," made statements back then about how mass depopulation is the only way to ensure that the planet will remain inhabitable moving into the future.
"If the present trends in world population, industrialization, pollution, food production and resource depletion continue unchanged, the limits to growth on this planet will be reached sometime within the next 100 years," Meadows said at the time.
"Today, we are at a point in human history where habits that once worked well don't work anymore."
It has been nearly 14 years since Meadows was quoted by these two UNU writers as having made such statements, and even back then they said it "sounds reasonable" compared to how it would have sounded back in, say, 1972.
In 2010, much of the West had already been indoctrinated into climate cultism as the "final solution" to the problem of human industrial activity, which is supposedly "melting" the planet – or in today's vernacular, boiling the oceans. His solution? Kill off billions of people, albeit slowly and peacefully, i.e., through euthanasia.
A computer model developed by Meadows and several of his colleagues argues that the critical line for earth's human carrying capacity was exceeded back around 1980. Since that time, planetary conditions have degraded to the point that even more severe intervention is needed to fix things.
Mass depopulation is how the globalists intend to complete their endgame, allowing them to inherit the world through murder and force. Find out more at Genocide.news.
Why did Congress help craft a bill last summer called the “Disease X Act”
Do they know another bioweapon is about to be released?
By Ethan Huff
Posted on January 23, 2023
In June 2023, the United States Congress quietly passed a piece of legislation called House Resolution 3832, also known as the Disease X Act of 2023, that references a mystery contagion that just so happens to be the subject of a World Economic Forum (WEF) meeting that took place on Jan. 17, 2024.
At the WEF meeting, it was discussed that Disease X "could have 20 times more fatalities than COVID." We also know that talk of Disease X started at least as far back as 2018 when the WEF mentioned it in an article.
What we are more than likely witnessing with this new revelation is the stage being set for another round of COVID-like lockdowns, mask mandates and whatever else the powers that be throw at the world once they unleash their next pre-planned bioweapon, known as Disease X.
You can check out the contents of the Disease X Act of 2023 at this link.
Does Congress know something America doesn't?
In short, the Disease X Act of 2023 reveals plans to establish a new program at BARDA (Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority) to develop medical countermeasures for any future viral threats that have pandemic potential. In other words, there are more COVIDs coming down the pike.
The legislation is intentionally vague, which is certainly no accident. Vague legislation tends to be wide reaching in its scope once executed, which means the severity of its intentions are likely vast and far-reaching.
One report from UnHerd covering what took place at the WEF meeting on Disease X described what was discussed there as "worrying," noting that it shows "signs of the acceleration of technocratic tendencies in pandemic preparedness, which have only consolidated since Covid."
The panel-style meeting opened with a statement from WHO director-general Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, who tried to clarify all the "misinformation" about the panel itself, so-called misinformation being the number-one global threat right now, according to the WEF's Global Risks Report 2024.
Ghebreyesus insisted that nobody should be worried about Disease X, which is simply a placeholder name for future biological threats. He continued to ramble from there about strengthening healthcare and education and supporting communities as they prepare for a coming Disease X pandemic.
Only once did anyone on the panel even mention the word lockdown, and it came from a health executive from India by the name of Preetha Reddy who recommended that the next pandemic response should pull a page from how the army operates.
"At any time, anything can happen and we don't know what side it can come from," she said.
"Unfortunately, the focus on Disease X is indicative of a broader phenomenon: the rise of our new biomedical security state, best represented by the technocratic governance structures that drove emergency laws on lockdowns, mask and vaccine mandates, quarantines, school closures and censorship," reported UnHerd about the WEF meeting.
"This is interwoven into the semantic origins of Disease X, which was christened in the WHO R&D Blueprint in 2017 to assist prioritising research and development particularly for vaccines, treatments and tests. It has since become a core driving force for the proliferation of public-private partnerships (PPP) in the global pandemic preparedness industry."
In addition to serving as a placeholder name for future threats, Disease X is also a catalyst for transforming the future health response to be dominated by corporate, technological and state power rather than individual liberty and freedom.
Is another COVID-like "pandemic" about to be unleashed? Find out more at Plague.info.
