Phase 1: Ensuring the Agent of Destruction was the Only Acceptable Candidate for the “Response”
What if . . . instead of looking for a political agent who freely moved in both worlds (the ChiComs and the Democrats), or even a “behind-the-curtain” business figure like George Soros, the agent of destruction was a medical professional? Let’s call this professional Dr. Fallacy. Our imaginary doctor has worked his way up to one of the highest positions in American medicine, as, say, the Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID).
Despite making serious errors during the fight against AIDs, our imaginary doctor has reached the top of the profession—he is THE government expert on infectious diseases, with all the prestige that job entails. His word is the Gospel. He even visited—of all places—Wuhan, China, where the China Virus first appeared in November 2019. NIAID was involved with Eco Health Alliance who provided funding to the Wuhan Labs. Between 2014 and 2019, the National Institutes of Health and NIAID gave $826,000 to the Wuhan Institute of Virology to test “bat coronavirus emergence” (i.e., the China Virus). In a newly released email, evidence showed that NIAID gave EcoHealth $3.6 million, of which $750,000 (on top of $75,000 already given) had gone to Wuhan’s lab.
This meant that, should Dr. Fallacy ever be questioned by a powerful Republican Senator, he could honestly say that NIAID did not fund research at Wuhan. “Oh noooo,” he could say, knowing that the money was given to Eco Health Alliance which then gave the money to the Wuhan lab (as had the U.S. military, which gave $39 million to counter and deter weapons of mass destruction).
What if the China-friendly doctor had come to the attention of the Chinese government over the years and was supported in his medical endeavors, feted, and given special access to Chinese labs? And what if this doctor was far less susceptible to money or power than he was to pride? Pride goeth before the fall. What if slowly this doctor was drawn closer and closer until a request was made that he take certain steps to “keep America really safe” should a Chinese Virus break out—even one that Dr. Fallacy himself might have discussed… in 2017: “a ‘surprise outbreak’ would occur during the Trump administration. In other words, he might know he would be called upon in the future. But to do what? To make sure America was extra-super safe, even if it meant seriously damaging the U.S. economy. To be the “savior of America.”
What if, even as late as February 2020, Dr. Fallacy told BS News “not to yield to unreasonable fear [about COVID-19]” or to “allow fear of the unknown” to distort the risks as he likened it to a seasonal flu. And what if, on this basis of these statements, a president was urged to take on Dr. Fallacy as his advisor?
What if the doctor then used his newfound position and power to ensure that he inevitably would be the one to handle such a medical threat. It would be as if a president wouldn’t even have to pick him—he would just conveniently be right there, . . . in the right place . . . at the right time. How could this happen?
And what if our president was, say, a hard-charging businessman who believed in finding solutions? What if he was particularly vulnerable to someone well outside his expertise—a doctor, even an “immunologist”—who could advise him on national policies to defeat the virus? Such a response might have to take into account that a hard-charging businessman would never shut down the United States for a year. But what if the doctor could convince the businessman to agree to “two weeks to flatten the curve?” And that coming from someone who had assured everyone in February that this was just a seasonal flu?
Now, for a moment, we will leave our imaginary doctor/advisor with the accomplishment of his initial goal: becoming the lead spokesman for the administration’s response. After insisting that Americans not have an “unreasonable fear” of the virus, he began inundating the public with terrifying numbers about ventilator or bed shortages unless the murderous curve is flattened; and convincing the well-meaning president that now a radical, but very short, mind you, lockdown would do the trick. Phase one, complete.
Phase 2: How did the Agent of Destruction get his Power?
Keep in mind that a compartmentalized operation would involve multiple lines of attack. Not only would they not know what the other was doing or see the connection at all, but that anyone individually might fail. Hence, the need for redundancy. Also, keep in mind that the individuals who play critical roles need not themselves be “agents,” “operatives,” or in any way directly involved in the operation: they can be unwitting actors, manipulated by more malevolent individuals. Or they can be fellow travelers in the Hive acting and reacting to events in ways they deem supportive of the overall objective (furthering the narrative to “get rid of Trump!”).
What was the goal? If we are correct, the goal from the ChiComs’ point of view was to ensure that someone ascended to the top of the China Virus response who would support measures sufficient to damage the U.S. economy and, more importantly, have a negative impact on Donald Trump’s public support. Dr. Fallacy fit that bill.
As we have seen, from the outset, he was going to be the logical person to ascend to that position—but President Donald Trump still would have been in charge of the national response. After seeing the disaster “two weeks to flatten the curve” brought, what if President Trump was ready to pull the plug (so to speak) and move the U.S. back to normalcy as quickly as possible? The ChiComs would strongly disapprove of such a response. Dr. Fallacy had to remain in charge. But that was a tough nut to crack. National epidemics, ever since the animal contagions of the late 1800s that the Bureau of Animal Industry handled, were considered fair game for national regulation even to the point of courts permitting quarantines at the behest of the federal government (See the book by Alan Olmstead and Paul Rhode, Arresting Contagion). Had Trump chosen to do so, he could have kept the China Virus response entirely a national policy, meaning that he would have canned the lockdowns after a few weeks. That had to be outflanked, and the perfect way to do it was to play on Trump’s federalist instincts to let the states be in charge of their own response.
What if the orchestrator of said flanking maneuver was publicly and theoretically committed to federalism? And what if someone—a staffer whose motivations were less than pure, i.e., a NeverTrumper—placed in said person’s ear a recommendation that he influence the President to make the response come from the states? Therefore, Trump would not look like a dictator; he could rightly deflect blame if the states screwed up, and he would be able to stay true to Trump’s genuine support of federalism (an article in and of itself).
And what if said person was guilty of the same vice as Dr. Fallacy—pride—and believed he should have replaced Trump in early 2017 or after the first impeachment? Therefore, was he predisposed to handcuffing Trump’s ability to deal directly with the virus to undercut his authority?
Let’s say the recipient of said advice; we’ll call him Tuppence, had a conversation with the President that went like this: “Mr. President, why don’t you devolve power over this virus response to the states. We know most Republican-led states will look better than most Democrat states, so that it will be a stark contrast for the election. It will help insulate you—after all, the states are in charge—and you can create a special task force that I head that will make it look like at the federal level we are still on top of things.” When Trump approved this approach, it removed most of the power he had to control anything about the China Virus response and put it not in the hands of the states but Dr. Fallacy’s hands. How you ask?
The states have their own medical “experts” (think Dr. Amy Acton in Ohio, one of the worst responders to the China Virus among Republican-led states, or Rachel Levine in Pennsylvania); however, none of them came close to having a virologist or immunologist at the level of a Dr. Fallacy. Their recommendations, inevitably, would always be subject to his. As the Center for Disease Control put out “guidelines,” the states meekly fell in line. Far from enhancing state power over the Virus, Trump’s move unwittingly put Dr. Fallacy in charge of everything.
Right where he intended it.
Again, the operation to influence Tuppence to decentralize the China Virus response—thereby de facto centralizing it under Fallacy—was compartmentalized. It was independent and apart from Fallacy’s own operation (presenting a mishmash of contradictory and conflicting solutions while ensuring he did everything possible to lock down the economy in the most damaging way). It was completely independent of the national fraud offensive with voting machines, early votes, and so on. None of these knew the other was working. It was likely assumed in Beijing that at least one, and possibly two of these offensives would fail, leaving only one. Beijing hoped one would be enough.
Phase 3: Push Trump to the Forefront
Now that the President was scarcely in charge of any actual response, it was time to position him for all of the blame. He—not the head of his Task Force, Tuppence—was giving the briefings, always with Fallacy and a second “expert,” Dr. Hit-the-Brix, by his side. Trump became the spokesman for medical science, immunology, and virology which he knew little about. Spoon-fed gobbledygook answers by Fallacy, the President inevitably used American shorthand and daily language to explain much more sophisticated medical terms and processes to the American people. (The notion that he endorsed injecting kitchen cleaner is just such an example. He had said that the idea or concept might be considered for applications to other treatments, but in everyday life, that comes out as “Maybe we can use that some time.”)
Meanwhile, Fallacy seemed fully insulated behind a snowstorm of data, case rates, death rates, infections, and equipment, always making sure to emphasize the number of cases and deaths and to deemphasize the percentage of deaths to infections. In that way, he threw the nation into the very “unreasonable fear” that just a month earlier, he had urged people to avoid.
What if the tech media played its dutiful role for their Chinese masters, with instant censorship of any discussion of alternative therapies or medicines (HCQ and ivermectin) that might render the China Virus’s effects minimal? What if they banned Doctors for Truth?” What if they blocked or removed any doctors, no matter what their qualifications, who more or less agreed with Fallacy’s earlier assessment—that it was a form of the flu?
Indeed, what if it was revealed that Dr. Fallacy told a certain tech billionaire who dabbles in “health” and “science” issues that he was “enthusiastic” about teaming up with that billionaire’s foundation for “synergistic and collaborative” pandemic response that advanced said billionaire’s vaccine agenda. Or, what if said billionaire’s foundation teamed up to develop a “COVID detection algorithm?”
Phase 4: Mission Accomplished
What if not one, not two, but all three of the ChiCom operations were successful? What if the states’ responses to the China Virus, which depressed the economy leading up to Election Day 2020, were the very ones Trump would have ended? What if the states managed to adopt policies that simultaneously did little to actually address medical solutions to the China Virus and instead imposed social solutions that empowered government and made the CDC the oracle of all knowledge? What if Trump, by the middle of 2020, realized that the lockdowns had assumed a life of their own while destroying the economy but found it impossible to actually end them? And what if the states, relying on CDC data, hysterically kept social controls in place for nearly another year—plenty of time to damage Trump’s reelection chances? Worst of all (and another article), what if the CDC data itself was jimmied to greatly expand both the number of China Virus cases and deaths? What if recovery and release numbers were downplayed and dismissed as irrelevant? And what if the Great American Steal had succeeded in overcoming a shockingly high turnout for Trump?