Quite frankly, if the American people could simply come to realize, accept and reconcile that essentially everything that is derived from our own federal government is fraudulent, or a product of enterprise fraud, uniting the country and getting it back would be virtually instantaneous. There exists a severe impediment to these processes; however, I’ve written about it frequently. That multifaceted impediment rests on a foundation of the Smith-Mundt Modernization Act of 2012 and the National Defense Authorization Act, which included the bipartisan bill “Countering Foreign Propaganda and Disinformation Act,” and which was signed into law in May 2016 by President Barack Obama.
Smith-Mundt revised World War II era policy on propagandizing foreign nations to allow propagandizing the American people domestically, and the NDAA provided the context to further weaponize it. That context overlays the exact timeline for the fraudulent “Russian collusion” narrative and its resulting Mueller Special Counsel operation targeting candidate and then President Donald J. Trump.
Go Ad-Free, Get Exclusive Shows and Content, Go Premium Today - $1 Trial
The net effect is the leveraging of perception management, which is the technical military term for “psychological operations.” This has occurred to the extent that a full-scale and weaponized propaganda machine that would make Joseph Goebbels blush has been deployed against Americans writ large. It has captured their minds and all but eliminated their ability to think independently and critically, making them functional slaves living in a false reality.
The mechanism to execute these operations against Trump is the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court [FISC] and the power of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act [FISA], which underpins it and permits the issuance of FISA warrants. Importantly, the FISC falls under the authority of none other than the compromised Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, John Roberts, and due to its legal framework, the FISC is America’s most secretive American court that we know of.
It was the issuance of FISA warrants against Trump and his inner circle that was the beginning of the end for Trump, and it all threads right through the heart of a bunch of old Moonshine: “Russian collusion,” FISA/FISC, two special counsel appointments, two fraudulent impeachments, a fraudulent COVID-19 pandemic, a stolen 2020 election as the mechanism to remove Trump with COVID serving as the mechanism to steal it, the resulting installation of a Chinese proxy into the Executive in illegitimate U.S. President Joe Biden, and two entrapment operations in the Capitol “insurrection” and the FBI raid on Mar-a-Lago.
The aspects of FISA/FISC are important and worthy of review because “diplomacy” and “global engagement” are central to foreign intelligence surveillance, and they represent the primary functions of the Penn Biden Center. Hold on to that notion as I overlay the Penn Biden Center with the FISC momentarily.
Get A Great Night's Sleep and Support RVM With Big Discounts From MyPillow - Use Promo Code RVM
Trump was immediately and directly targeted by the federal apparatus and intelligence community [CIA.] By targeting Trump with the FISC/FISA, they were able to circumvent Trump’s Constitutional protections since the evidentiary threshold for predicting a FISA warrant is a lesser standard than for predicting a criminal warrant. This is the crux of it, and the following is critical.
The initial counterintelligence investigation was opened against Trump in the name of Hillary Clinton’s construct of “Russian collusion,” which was approved by Obama and appeared in then CIA Director John Brennan’s handwritten notes. It permitted the federal apparatus and the intelligence community to circumvent Trump’s Constitutional protections before the investigation resulted in the appointment of Special Counsel Robert Mueller. Importantly, Mueller was nothing more than an avatar for the corrupt Andrew Weissmann, who was essentially running all of the Department of Justice at that time because Mueller’s Special Counsel operation enveloped and had jurisdiction over anything and everything of importance relative to Trump.
The fraudulent aspects of this are remarkable, and the analog for understanding it is money laundering.
In this sense, the federal apparatus, the DOJ, and the intelligence community laundered a counterintelligence investigation of Trump into a criminal investigation that ultimately resulted in a fraudulent impeachment process against Trump.
It’s critical to remember that in the first fraudulent impeachment, there was no basis of evidence to substantiate it, and so the impeachment charges were laundered again so that impeachment could go forward. This occurred when House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s impeachment managers transitioned Trump’s impeachment charges from “Russian collusion” to an entirely appropriate telephone call with Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko.
MORE NEWS: The Democrats Are Losing Their Minds… Defending The Indefensible – Rep. James Comer [VIDEO]
What was the basis for Trump’s call with Poroshenko? It was Biden’s corruption, crime, and treason in Ukraine that threads right through to the present war in Ukraine. In part, this occurs vis-a-vis Biden’s direct nexus to energy corruption in Ukraine via Burisma, Biden’s linkage to Metabiota and U.S. Department of Defense biolabs in Ukraine that tie directly to the enterprise fraud construct of COVID-19, and to Biden’s private equity deals relative to it all. Moreover, Biden was the largest beneficiary of the FTX/Sam Bankman-Fried money laundering operation based out of Ukraine.
Is it not remarkable how the same plays are run over and over by the same players in different ball games all over the globe?
It gets worse, though; much worse.
Back in early April 2020 and respective to FISC/FISA, I wrote this:
Is it possible that FISA could WORK BOTH WAYS in the sense that it could be used to: Discover a crim -or- Cover a crime. If a Globalist cabal of treasonous criminals sold-out the national security of the United States by selling its uranium to a military rival and superpower in Russia, what would stop them from sending a bioweapon to China to save their own asses? – Political Moonshine
These remarks were made before a full and comprehensive understanding of the COVID-19 enterprise fraud construct was made. They are laser accurate nonetheless and relative to what follows; and where “China/Harvard” refers to Harvard University Professor Charles Lieber conspiring on three occasions to send samples of SARS-CoV-2 to China using Harvard students who were Chinese military [PLA] officers. This occurred in the months running up to the “pandemic.”
Importantly, the crux of this is that in examining the China/Harvard/Lieber matter, I found a “FISA” marker attached to it. That’s enormously important for the positions here.
In addition to the FISA marker, note the agencies and departments that bear down in different contexts relative to FISC/FISA: the intelligence community, the Federal Bureau of Investigation Tactical Intelligence Report, the FBI Weapons of Mass Destruction Directorate, the Chemical and Biological Intelligence Unit and more. Note that the FBI Tactical Intelligence Report dates back to 13 Nov 19, which comports with the broader, overarching COVID-19 timeline recalling that Biden predicted an emerging pandemic on 24 Oct 19; some two months before the first MSM reporting of a viral outbreak in China beginning on 27 Dec 19.
This FBI Tactical Intelligence Report detailing the Harvard/Lieber smuggling falls under the purview of intelligence and national security, meaning that ex-officio members of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence were privy to it. That enmeshes folks like Nancy Pelosi, Adam Schiff, and Mitch McConnell, but that treasonous cartel was too busy driving the deflection construct away from COVID-19 – the fraudulent impeachment. I’m the only one to ever tell you evidence that the first impeachment was the deflection point construct away from the COVID-19 construct.
Consider all of that respective to further remarks from early April 2020 that analyze the importance of the FISC/FISA angles with granularity:
We know the Obama administration was having success in it’s broader spying operation with FISA and 702 abuses. Recall that I’ve long contended – as have others – that the Obama spying operation likely goes back to early in his first term. Ergo, so long as the 2016 election winner wasn’t a Deep State/Military Industrial Complex asset, there was always going to be something akin to what we’ve seen Trump endure since 2016.
So if the FISA mechanism was reliable, effective and controllable, why would Obama’s people decide to deviate from it? If they had something that they were already using with success and in-part because of the personnel they had put in place; then why would they deviate from that? They wouldn’t, or at least, I wouldn’t; not with the stakes at hand.
So then, is it possible that FISA works both ways and Obama and his team discovered that not only was it a great tool for spying but that due to it’s incredibly high security classification and compartmentalization, that it could also be a great cover-up mechanism?
FISA could possibly work both ways: to DISCOVER crimes -OR- to COVER crimes.
So, that’s the subjective, rationalization aspects of this consideration but what about the mechanisms and the technical aspects of it all? It hinges on this – the same weaknesses that facilitated the abuses are the same ones that could facilitate any cover-up.
Therefore, I want to know if the FISA application to the China/Harvard scenario is actually a cover-up mechanism. When you examine how the federal apparatus makes serious things go away forever (JFK, 9/11, etc.), look no further than to things like OIG reports. It often resembles something like a serious crime followed by a long and drawn-out investigation whereby the offenders admit to some mistakes and are held lightly accountable; but also that “no reasonable prosecutor” would actually pursue charges, which are then declined. Heard that before?
Here’s the important take away and again, it’s a monumental one. Understand what is actually going on in this scenario. It’s the opening of a investigation to VACUUM-UP ALL OF THE EVIDENCE AND SEAL IT AWAY FOREVER (or until those whom care are dead, I suppose.)
My point is, if Obama was abusing FISA to spy and he effectively controlled and manipulated that process confidently, could that same process have been used to hide crimes? That could be achieved by means of establishing a false predicate to open a sham investigation into specific targets – targets actually of interest to the larger operation. Or, it could even be that someone already under a 702 investigation and perhaps someone associated with the President’s enemies, contacted one of the couriers or someone from Harvard and the FISA authority extended and overlapped them. No matter and if so, it could be such that there is no intent to actually and legitimately investigate them or their activities, but rather to use the FISA classification to shield them and their activities behind the permanent veil of secrecy that a FISA classification provides.
Why wouldn’t they? These Globalists literally had nothing to lose and in order to do it, agents wouldn’t necessarily even have to defraud the FISA court.
We are focusing of section 702 of the applicable law and again relying on Jeff Carlson’s work HERE, with EMPHASIS added.
1- FISA Surveillance is a bit more complicated. Which makes FISA more susceptible to manipulation and abuse.
2- Section 702 – Subsection of Title VII – Procedures for surveillance of Foreign Persons outside the United States. Section 702 is effectively synonymous with Title VII.
3- Title VII of the FISA Act provides for the most common type of FISA surveillance.
4- Section 702 permits the government to target for surveillance foreign persons located outside the United States for the purpose of acquiring foreign intelligence information.
5- Oversight of Section 702 collection is conducted by the FISA Court, which reviews the government’s Section 702 certifications, targeting procedures and minimization procedures for compliance with statutory and Fourth Amendment requirements.
6- The DOJ’s National Security Division (NSD) maintains oversight of the Intelligence Agencies (such as the FBI) use of Section 702 authority. The NSD and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) jointly conduct reviews of the Intelligence Agencies Section 702 activities every 60 days.
7- The NSD – with notice to the ODNI – is required to report any incidents of Agency noncompliance or misconduct to the FISA Court.
8- Unlike Title I and Title III FISA surveillance, Section 702 collection is not subject to individual formal FISA Court approvals.
9- Due to frequency of collection, instead of issuing individual court orders, the FISC approves annual certifications submitted by the Attorney General and the Director of National Intelligence that specify categories of foreign intelligence information the government is authorized to acquire pursuant to Section 702.
10- The Attorney General and the Director of National Intelligence must also certify that Intelligence Community elements will follow targeting procedures and minimization procedures that are approved by the FISC as part of the annual certification.
Relevant to the extracts above, here’s the cast of players:
Foreign persons outside US: Chinese nationals
US target/s: Harvard personnel
FISA Court: overseen by Chief Justice Roberts (sole appointment authority)
Attorney General: Loretta Lynch
ODNI/NSA: James Clapper (until 20 Jan 17)> Mike Dempsy (until 16 Mar)> Dan Coats (until – 15 Aug 19)
DOJ National Security Division: John Carlin (until 15 Oct 16)> Mary McCord until Apr 17)
Intelligence/CIA: John Brennan
Intelligence/FBI: James Comey (until 09 May 17)> Andrew McCabe (until 02 Aug 17)
So the question becomes this – Is it possible that a cohort comprised of some or all of the above along with others could have conspired to use the FISA process to shield the exchange of bioweapons with China? As you consider your answer, recall the following:
1- FISA is the most extensively used type of surveillance making it the most susceptible to manipulation and abuse; also making it an entangled and nebulous environment in which to hide things.
2- The FISA parameters are contextually appropriate (foreign targets, US targets, etc.)
3- The FISA court is overseen by the USSC Chief Justice and this is important for three reasons: 1) he has sole authority to appoint all FISA judges, 2) all FISA violations get reported to him and 3) this all makes FISA a highly classified and compartmentalized CLOSED LOOP that stands behind the most stringent veil of secrecy.
4- Examining all of the players above, many already had exposure to legal jeopardy; perhaps in severe form, prior to our assertion coming to fruition; and in fact, if this assertion ever proves true, the planning aspects would have preceded the November 2019 timeline by considerable time thus backing it all up to the Obama administration.
5- 702 intelligence collections are NOT SUBJECT TO INDIVIDUAL FISA COURT AUTHORITY and this opens portals for abuse as we outlined. Instead, the authority to operate rests on an annual certificate. This equates to loose parameters, loose oversight and ample opportunity to stray far from the Constitution; even into criminal if not treasonous territory.
So, with all of that under consideration, I’ll ask you again –
If this Globalist criminal cabal defrauded the entire FISA process to target the President of the United States during his campaign, transition period and presidency under the stated objective to DISCOVER alleged crimes, then is it reasonable to think that this same cartel of criminals may have also used the same, effective, reliable and controllable FISA process to throw COVER to their criminal Hail Mary play, which hypothetically is COVID-19?
Nonetheless, during this very specific time frame of this intelligence report in November of 2019, the Democrats were apparently too busy to pay attention to national security. Rather they prioritized driving a fraudulent, unconstitutional and incomplete impeachment to inexplicably be done before Christmas; only to have Pelosi peculiarly and amateurishly slam on the brakes and not transmit the actual Articles of Impeachment to the Senate for over a month. – Political Moonshine
All of that and much more is already written at Moonshine, but nonetheless, it’s important to frame the discovery of classified documents at the Penn Biden Center because of the noted overlays.
Now consider this recent remark from Lt. General Michael Flynn: “In the coming months, among other serious problems (& there are many), we are going to learn the FISC has become a parallel Supreme Court but operates in almost total secrecy. In 1975, Church stated, “hiding evil is the trademark of a totalitarian government.”
Flynn is confirming what I postulated and evidenced back in early April 2020. The analysis is on the mark again.
This long and arduous review as an introduction to this piece is critical because not tying all of these strings together to comprehend what is certainly happening represents yet another fatal flaw in American thinking – or dearth of thinking – and the impeded failures to comprehend reality the resulting false reality and the weapons-grade propaganda machine responsible for all of it.
MORE NEWS: Joy Behar Can Barely Speak & Sunny Hostin Has To Beg For Applause Over Trump Indictment [VIDEO]
In addition to the noted direct overlays found in FISC/FISA jurisdiction, it’s the Mar-a-Lago entrapment operation that serves as a nexus here within the context of classified documents and their legal handling respective to laws applying to them and the National Archives. This context was fraudulently bent back against Trump to facilitate the entrapment scheme, and the very same context now bears down directly on Joe Biden since classified documents were recently found at his office in the University of Pennsylvania Biden Center for Diplomacy and Global Engagement.
Let’s allow common sense to prevail as the foundation for our examination of a problematic confluence of circumstances, entities, people, and evidence: Joe Biden, China, cash, and the Penn Biden Center are all overlaid by the recent discovery of classified documents in Biden’s office at the center and the purview and jurisdiction of the FISC.
Our common sense prevails in the form of questions:
- Were there any FISA warrants issued for Joe Biden during the time he exited the White House in January 2017 through to his entrance into the Executive in 2021 at a time his income increased from $396,456 in 2016 to $16,596,979 in 2017-2019 when he executed private equity deals with Chinese entities?
- If so, were any such FISA warrants designed to discover crimes or cover crimes committed by Joe Biden?
- If not, why not?
Let’s examine the Penn Biden Center for Diplomacy and Global Engagement and ask more common sense questions.
We begin with the new development:
Classified documents from Joe Biden’s tenure as Vice President were found in early November at the Penn Biden Center in Washington, CBS News reports, citing two sources with knowledge of an inquiry launched by Attorney General Merrick Garland.
“The classified material was identified by personal attorneys for Mr. Biden on Nov. 2, the day before the midterm elections, Richard Sauber, special counsel to the president confirmed. The documents were discovered when Mr. Biden’s personal attorneys “were packing files housed in a locked closet to prepare to vacate office space at the Penn Biden Center in Washington, D.C.,” Sauber said in a statement to CBS News. The documents were contained in a folder that was in a box with other unclassified papers, the sources said. The sources revealed neither what the classified documents contain nor their level of classification. A source familiar told CBS News the documents did not contain nuclear secrets.” [CBS News]
Remember when the DOJ raided former President Trump and made a huge deal about classified documents having been commingled with not-classified documents? – Zero Hedge
Is the investigation, which is being handled by Merrick Garland’s DOJ and specifically John Lausch, U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois [Obama’s home and home to Obama’s archive], being launched to give fidelity to prosecution or to conceal criminality in cover-up operations?
According to Trump, Obama took 33 million documents to his archive in Chicago, many were classified, and some presumably pertained to nuclear information so, how many classified documents were actually contained within the Biden Center, assuming that the ones discovered represent a sliver of the total and were mistakenly left behind?
To what degree have Obama and Biden sold us all out, and what is our exposure there presuming that it rests somewhere on a scale from severe to fatal?
The University of Pennsylvania is a private research university. The public-private interface is the primary mechanism for a corrupt federal apparatus to circumvent Americans’ constitutional protections by exporting functions to private entities and corporations. We see direct evidence of this in the Twitter files and the federal apparatus conspiring with Twitter to violate the First Amendment rights of Biden’s political opposition and dissidents, especially related to COVID-19.
Was the University of Pennsylvania selected for the Biden Center because it’s a private university, which provides a degree of shielding and insulation in accordance with the private:public interface position?
Now consider that “the University of Pennsylvania is extremely popular with Chinese students.
An analysis of student visa data suggests that in 2020 as many as 398,041 Chinese students came to the U.S. to study at American colleges and universities. From this pool of 398,041, UPenn was home to approximately 2,045 Chinese students.”
Could Chinese students have been used as intermediaries at the Biden Center to deliver classified information to China and the PLA in the same way that Charles Lieber used Chinese Harvard students to smuggle vials of SARS-CoV-2 to China and the PLA?
Do any FISA warrants exist as cover mechanisms for any such scenario?
Respective to the specific 2017-2019 timeline for the exponential increase in Biden’s income, consider that “a government watchdog has asked the US attorney investigating Hunter Biden to investigate $54.6 million in Chinese donations to the University of Pennsylvania – most of which happened after the university’s February 2017 announcement that it would create the Biden Center – and $23.1 million of which were anonymous and started in 2016, according to public records.”
From the same,
The center, which is located in Washington, DC., opened its doors in February 2018. Antony Blinken, whom Biden named as Secretary of State, briefly served as its managing director.
The Ivy League university received $15.8 million in anonymous Chinese gifts that year, including one eye-popping $14.5 million donation in May 2018, records show.
The flurry of donations may be related to Hunter Biden’s business interests in China, the National Legal and Policy Center, a Virginia-based watchdog, alleged in complaints sent in May and October 2020 to the Departments of Education and Justice. -NY Post – Zero Hedge/NY Post
In addition to its apparent function as a conduit to move classified U.S. information, could the UPenn Biden Center be a convoluted and contrived money-laundering hub?
Consider that the Biden Center opened approximately one year before Biden announced his bid for the 2020 election. On that timeline, a complaint from the National Legal and Policy Center charged that in 2017, $500,000 in donations were received from “anonymous donors” from a total of $7.7 million in donations from China.
Once Biden announced his bid, total donations increased to $27.1 million, with anonymous donors giving $15.8 million. Then in 2019, Chinese donors gave $26.9 million to the center, with another $6 million anonymously donated. Altogether, it represented a 400% increase in Chinese money to UPenn.
Is it merely a coincidence that China’s funding of the UPenn Biden Center increased 400% on the same timelines as Biden’s private equity deals with China and the emergence of the COVID-19 construct?
Will we find evidence of a mirror operation at the Biden Institute established in Biden’s home state of Delaware at the University of Delaware?
Does this arrangement have anything to do with the fact that before all of the “votes” were in, it was Pennsylvania that permitted the calling of the 2020 election for Joe Biden?
Bearing down on the public/private interface and if the Chinese donations do not represent a significant breach of national security, why is it that UPenn wouldn’t disclose their donors in front of the 2020 election?
Not surprisingly, the UPenn Biden Center issued an outright denial, “According to UPenn spokesman Stephen MacCarthy, “The Penn Biden Center has never solicited or received any gifts from any Chinese or other foreign entity. In fact, the University has never solicited any gifts for the Center.”
Consider the granular aspects of Biden’s involvement with the Biden Center where his presence was slim and where students had access to documentation while drafting memos and researching “foreign policy” [emphasis added]:
Since its opening, the Penn Biden Center’s office on Constitution Avenue in Washington, D.C., has housed the future secretary of state, the president’s top adviser, and, not surprisingly, the future president himself. But for an organization with such high-profile alumni and staff, its mission is surprisingly unclear. […]
In 2018, Biden announced the creation of the Penn Biden Center for Diplomacy and Global Engagement. The center became Biden’s “main office when he [was] in D.C.,” and Biden earned nearly a million dollars from the professorship in 2018 and 2019. But he did not teach any classes, and he only appeared on campus for a handful of events and speeches.
The center basically functioned as a foreign-policy think tank for Biden’s inner circle. It gave Penn a foothold in Washington—but as for day-to-day operations, the university was rather unspecific. […]
Biden had his own office, but “he was never there,” said one intern. Penn students working there spent their days drafting memos and research for foreign-policy conferences and op-eds and assisting senior staff, many of them Obama-era foreign-policy officials, with media appearances. […]
The center, it would turn out, was another holding pen for officials who would land senior positions in the Biden administration, like Tony Blinken and Steve Ricchetti. Blinken was the managing director of the center from 2017 to 2019; Ricchetti briefly succeeded him in the role. They’ve gone on to top roles in the Biden administration.
If anything, the Penn Biden Center offered Biden’s confidants a comfortable perch, a salary, and a title while they waited out the Trump administration. Blinken earned a salary of $80,000 from his time at the center, which consisted, according to his executive disclosures, of “academic research and program management” and overlapped with his work for WestExec Advisors. Richetti has yet to release his disclosures. – The American Project
Richetti is the Senior White House official that ex-CEO at FTX Sam Bankman-Fried met in relation to the stolen 2022 midterms and the FTX/Ukraine money laundering operation that positioned Biden as the primary beneficiary.
How is Biden’s $900,000 salary justified or was it just a cover for China funneling more money to Biden?
Would that salary be payment for receipt of the classified materials we know were in Biden’s office?
Since the scheduling of Joe Biden appearances was farmed out to Hunter Biden, does Hunter have a role in UPenn angles?
Did Penn students drafting memos and conducting research have access to the classified documents and information Biden and his cohort possessed at the center?
Do the salaries earned by Blinken, Richetti and other now Biden Administration officials represent direct payments from China laundered through the Biden Center to influence and control them now, as Biden Administration officials?
Did China actively participate in the formulation of the Biden Administration and did the UPenn Biden Center contribute to that process?
From the same,
“While President-elect Biden and other members of the staff took leaves of absence at the time of his candidacy, we are excited to move on with the next phase of the Penn Biden Center, where it will continue to operate as part of Penn Global,” a university spokesperson said in a statement. “Specific details regarding staffing and programming will be forthcoming.”
Even after Biden’s leave of absence, the center’s leadership has continued to testify to Congress as expert witnesses. Recently, fellows at the center have published foreign-policy analysis in Defense One, Foreign Affairs, and War on the Rocks.
And it seems the revolving door between the center and the administration has not closed. At the end of the year, Biden nominated a former strategic consultant to the Penn Biden Center, Colin Kahl, as a top Defense Department official.
In the video announcing the center’s creation, Biden speaks about the “young men and women who come through this program,” and how he’s “hoping that we are going to see some future secretaries of state and presidents and national-security advisers roll through this outfit.” When the center was created, the focus seemed to be on Penn students. But as Biden moved back into public life, it has taken on a new role as another stop on the Biden administration’s conveyor belt. – The American Project
Knowing that Penn Global’s only two articles on China attack Trump and former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson; and that Penn Global maintains a highly favorable position on China; and where Penn leveraged the Biden Center to establish a larger footprint in D.C., is China using the Biden Center and Penn Global as a D.C. footprint to influence U.S. politics?
With contexts in the domains of defense, foreign policy and war, how likely is it that the classified documents in Biden’s office and at the Biden Center generally pertained to those domains and more?
Now consider this headline from the National File: University That Funds Biden’s Think Tank And Hosts FactCheck.Org Has Contract With BioNTech, Gets Paid For Vaccine Sales And FDA Approvals.
From it, consider this [emphasis added]:
Documents obtained by NATIONAL FILE show that the University of Pennsylvania, which hosts and funds Joe Biden’s think tank called the Penn Biden Center, directly profits from the sale of Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna Coronavirus vaccines. The University gets more money if more vaccines are sold. The University of Pennsylvania also gets “milestone payments” when the Biden administration’s Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approves a Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, which represents a massive conflict of interest for Biden. BioNTech pays the University of Pennsylvania Board of Trustees directly, and the university is protected from civil liability if people try to sue for “bodily injury” or “death” caused by BioNTech vaccines. – National File
The basis of UPenn’s proceeds from the sale of Moderna and Pfizer vaccines for COVID-19 is found in a 2018 agreement signed in advance of the emergence of the pandemic that pays out billions to Penn in exchange for its mRNA research and proprietary knowledge that contributed to the development of the COVID vaccines.
It should be noted that Penn is also home to the pro-vaccine website FactCheck.org.
So, is it by mere coincidence that Penn is located in Philadelphia, which is one of the most politically corrupt election-stealing cities in the nation, and it accepts Chinese money from the same Chinese that delivered a bioweaponized SARS-CoV-2 virus in the context of a fraudulent pandemic that was leveraged to steal an election and install a Chinese proxy in Joe Biden; and where it also contributed essential proprietary knowledge to the development of the mRNA vaccines for that pandemic at the same time it was able to “fact check” the entire country about mRNA vaccine safety and effectiveness?
It’s all common sense, folks.
The media would like you to believe that there are profound differences between the classified documents staged in the Mar-a-Lago entrapment operation and the ones discovered in November in Biden’s then-primary office. One can read an example of that propaganda here.
What the media won’t tell anyone, because they don’t have the brains or the gumption to run it down and report it, is everything I’ve outlined for you in this substantial piece.
The FISC/FISA overlays all of this, and yet it only reared its head in targeting Trump for removal. Trump’s removal was necessary to get us to the status quo with 79.5% of the U.S. population “vaccinated” and millions injured, dying, or dead as a result of those “vaccinations.” In between, we have Joe Biden, Penn, cash, and, of course, China.
One last question. Why is it that every time we pull a string, it yanks the usual suspects?
On 05 Jan 17, Barack Obama authorized the “Russian collusion” investigation as the predicate for abusing FISC/FISA in a holdover meeting with Joe Biden, James Comey, Sally Yates, and Susan Rice.
On 11 Jan 17, Dr. Anthony Fauci publicly proclaimed that the Trump Administration would face a “surprise disease outbreak.”
On 12 Jan 17, Obama awarded Biden the Presidential Medal of Freedom.
The very next day, on 13 Jan 17, the outgoing Obama Administration inserted the pandemic construct into the incoming Trump Administration during compulsory presidential transition meetings facilitated by the Presidential Transition Office [Department of Homeland Security.]
Farther down the same timeline and funded by a mountain of Chinese cash, it was announced that The Penn Biden Center for Diplomacy and Global Engagement would open its Washington, DC office later in 2017.
On 08 Feb 18, Biden and Penn were officially open for business.
*This article was revised from its original version for greater accuracy.
Quick - Do This Before Biden “Fixes” Your Retirement Plan Next…
The opinions expressed by contributors and/or content partners are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of Red Voice Media. Contact us for guidelines on submitting your own commentary.
Join the Discussion
COMMENTS POLICY: We have no tolerance for messages of violence, racism, vulgarity, obscenity or other such discourteous behavior. Thank you for contributing to a respectful and useful online dialogue.