
Kung Fu
3.3K posts

Kung Fu
@Chart_Fu
a normie tackling macro economics, technical analysis and geopolitics.


The New Republic is at it again — turning a legitimate scientific debate into conspiracy. The CDC recently declined to publish a study in its flagship journal (Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report) that used an observational “test-negative” design to estimate COVID vaccine effectiveness last winter. Acting CDC Director Jay Bhattacharya and HHS cited concerns that the methodology gave an “inaccurate picture” of the vaccine’s real-world benefit. This is not suppression of “proof the vaccine works.” It’s a debate over scientific standards. The test-negative design is common for flu and respiratory viruses, but it has well-known limitations — especially with COVID, where prior infection, testing behavior, and seasonality can confound results. Bhattacharya and the MMWR editorial team wanted stronger evidence before putting the CDC’s name on it. The study authors reportedly refused to adjust the design. The New Republic immediately framed this as political censorship by RFK Jr.’s team — the same outlet that spent years pushing narratives with far less scrutiny. They conveniently omitted that the decision came after internal scientific review and focused on methodology, not safety or politics. This is classic reframing: any time the current administration applies higher evidentiary standards, it’s portrayed as anti-science. RFK Jr. and Jay Bhattacharya have been clear: they want rigorous, transparent science at the CDC and FDA — not automatic publication of observational data that may overstate benefits or understate risks. That’s not “blocking lifesaving information.” It’s responsible oversight after years of public health overreach and eroded trust. The real story isn’t conspiracy. It’s a long-overdue push for better standards at agencies that spent years demanding blind compliance while ignoring legitimate methodological concerns. The New Republic doesn’t want that conversation. They want the old narrative back. Americans deserve honest science, not politicized journals or activist media spinning every disagreement as dangerous. If the data are strong, let them stand up to scrutiny. If the methodology is weak, it shouldn’t wear the CDC’s seal of approval.That’s not anti-vaccine. That’s pro-science. RFK Jr.’s CDC Delays Report Proving the Covid Vaccine Worked | The New Republic share.google/F4U9wR4qDfSHCW…


The New Republic is at it again — turning a legitimate scientific debate into conspiracy. The CDC recently declined to publish a study in its flagship journal (Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report) that used an observational “test-negative” design to estimate COVID vaccine effectiveness last winter. Acting CDC Director Jay Bhattacharya and HHS cited concerns that the methodology gave an “inaccurate picture” of the vaccine’s real-world benefit. This is not suppression of “proof the vaccine works.” It’s a debate over scientific standards. The test-negative design is common for flu and respiratory viruses, but it has well-known limitations — especially with COVID, where prior infection, testing behavior, and seasonality can confound results. Bhattacharya and the MMWR editorial team wanted stronger evidence before putting the CDC’s name on it. The study authors reportedly refused to adjust the design. The New Republic immediately framed this as political censorship by RFK Jr.’s team — the same outlet that spent years pushing narratives with far less scrutiny. They conveniently omitted that the decision came after internal scientific review and focused on methodology, not safety or politics. This is classic reframing: any time the current administration applies higher evidentiary standards, it’s portrayed as anti-science. RFK Jr. and Jay Bhattacharya have been clear: they want rigorous, transparent science at the CDC and FDA — not automatic publication of observational data that may overstate benefits or understate risks. That’s not “blocking lifesaving information.” It’s responsible oversight after years of public health overreach and eroded trust. The real story isn’t conspiracy. It’s a long-overdue push for better standards at agencies that spent years demanding blind compliance while ignoring legitimate methodological concerns. The New Republic doesn’t want that conversation. They want the old narrative back. Americans deserve honest science, not politicized journals or activist media spinning every disagreement as dangerous. If the data are strong, let them stand up to scrutiny. If the methodology is weak, it shouldn’t wear the CDC’s seal of approval.That’s not anti-vaccine. That’s pro-science. RFK Jr.’s CDC Delays Report Proving the Covid Vaccine Worked | The New Republic share.google/F4U9wR4qDfSHCW…

"How do you put a hospice in a burrito stand?" Hospice advocacy group CEO says fraud is flourishing in California during congressional testimony.

The New Republic is at it again — turning a legitimate scientific debate into conspiracy. The CDC recently declined to publish a study in its flagship journal (Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report) that used an observational “test-negative” design to estimate COVID vaccine effectiveness last winter. Acting CDC Director Jay Bhattacharya and HHS cited concerns that the methodology gave an “inaccurate picture” of the vaccine’s real-world benefit. This is not suppression of “proof the vaccine works.” It’s a debate over scientific standards. The test-negative design is common for flu and respiratory viruses, but it has well-known limitations — especially with COVID, where prior infection, testing behavior, and seasonality can confound results. Bhattacharya and the MMWR editorial team wanted stronger evidence before putting the CDC’s name on it. The study authors reportedly refused to adjust the design. The New Republic immediately framed this as political censorship by RFK Jr.’s team — the same outlet that spent years pushing narratives with far less scrutiny. They conveniently omitted that the decision came after internal scientific review and focused on methodology, not safety or politics. This is classic reframing: any time the current administration applies higher evidentiary standards, it’s portrayed as anti-science. RFK Jr. and Jay Bhattacharya have been clear: they want rigorous, transparent science at the CDC and FDA — not automatic publication of observational data that may overstate benefits or understate risks. That’s not “blocking lifesaving information.” It’s responsible oversight after years of public health overreach and eroded trust. The real story isn’t conspiracy. It’s a long-overdue push for better standards at agencies that spent years demanding blind compliance while ignoring legitimate methodological concerns. The New Republic doesn’t want that conversation. They want the old narrative back. Americans deserve honest science, not politicized journals or activist media spinning every disagreement as dangerous. If the data are strong, let them stand up to scrutiny. If the methodology is weak, it shouldn’t wear the CDC’s seal of approval.That’s not anti-vaccine. That’s pro-science. RFK Jr.’s CDC Delays Report Proving the Covid Vaccine Worked | The New Republic share.google/F4U9wR4qDfSHCW…

The New Republic is at it again — turning a legitimate scientific debate into conspiracy. The CDC recently declined to publish a study in its flagship journal (Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report) that used an observational “test-negative” design to estimate COVID vaccine effectiveness last winter. Acting CDC Director Jay Bhattacharya and HHS cited concerns that the methodology gave an “inaccurate picture” of the vaccine’s real-world benefit. This is not suppression of “proof the vaccine works.” It’s a debate over scientific standards. The test-negative design is common for flu and respiratory viruses, but it has well-known limitations — especially with COVID, where prior infection, testing behavior, and seasonality can confound results. Bhattacharya and the MMWR editorial team wanted stronger evidence before putting the CDC’s name on it. The study authors reportedly refused to adjust the design. The New Republic immediately framed this as political censorship by RFK Jr.’s team — the same outlet that spent years pushing narratives with far less scrutiny. They conveniently omitted that the decision came after internal scientific review and focused on methodology, not safety or politics. This is classic reframing: any time the current administration applies higher evidentiary standards, it’s portrayed as anti-science. RFK Jr. and Jay Bhattacharya have been clear: they want rigorous, transparent science at the CDC and FDA — not automatic publication of observational data that may overstate benefits or understate risks. That’s not “blocking lifesaving information.” It’s responsible oversight after years of public health overreach and eroded trust. The real story isn’t conspiracy. It’s a long-overdue push for better standards at agencies that spent years demanding blind compliance while ignoring legitimate methodological concerns. The New Republic doesn’t want that conversation. They want the old narrative back. Americans deserve honest science, not politicized journals or activist media spinning every disagreement as dangerous. If the data are strong, let them stand up to scrutiny. If the methodology is weak, it shouldn’t wear the CDC’s seal of approval.That’s not anti-vaccine. That’s pro-science. RFK Jr.’s CDC Delays Report Proving the Covid Vaccine Worked | The New Republic share.google/F4U9wR4qDfSHCW…


The New Republic is at it again — turning a legitimate scientific debate into conspiracy. The CDC recently declined to publish a study in its flagship journal (Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report) that used an observational “test-negative” design to estimate COVID vaccine effectiveness last winter. Acting CDC Director Jay Bhattacharya and HHS cited concerns that the methodology gave an “inaccurate picture” of the vaccine’s real-world benefit. This is not suppression of “proof the vaccine works.” It’s a debate over scientific standards. The test-negative design is common for flu and respiratory viruses, but it has well-known limitations — especially with COVID, where prior infection, testing behavior, and seasonality can confound results. Bhattacharya and the MMWR editorial team wanted stronger evidence before putting the CDC’s name on it. The study authors reportedly refused to adjust the design. The New Republic immediately framed this as political censorship by RFK Jr.’s team — the same outlet that spent years pushing narratives with far less scrutiny. They conveniently omitted that the decision came after internal scientific review and focused on methodology, not safety or politics. This is classic reframing: any time the current administration applies higher evidentiary standards, it’s portrayed as anti-science. RFK Jr. and Jay Bhattacharya have been clear: they want rigorous, transparent science at the CDC and FDA — not automatic publication of observational data that may overstate benefits or understate risks. That’s not “blocking lifesaving information.” It’s responsible oversight after years of public health overreach and eroded trust. The real story isn’t conspiracy. It’s a long-overdue push for better standards at agencies that spent years demanding blind compliance while ignoring legitimate methodological concerns. The New Republic doesn’t want that conversation. They want the old narrative back. Americans deserve honest science, not politicized journals or activist media spinning every disagreement as dangerous. If the data are strong, let them stand up to scrutiny. If the methodology is weak, it shouldn’t wear the CDC’s seal of approval.That’s not anti-vaccine. That’s pro-science. RFK Jr.’s CDC Delays Report Proving the Covid Vaccine Worked | The New Republic share.google/F4U9wR4qDfSHCW…


The New Republic is at it again — turning a legitimate scientific debate into conspiracy. The CDC recently declined to publish a study in its flagship journal (Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report) that used an observational “test-negative” design to estimate COVID vaccine effectiveness last winter. Acting CDC Director Jay Bhattacharya and HHS cited concerns that the methodology gave an “inaccurate picture” of the vaccine’s real-world benefit. This is not suppression of “proof the vaccine works.” It’s a debate over scientific standards. The test-negative design is common for flu and respiratory viruses, but it has well-known limitations — especially with COVID, where prior infection, testing behavior, and seasonality can confound results. Bhattacharya and the MMWR editorial team wanted stronger evidence before putting the CDC’s name on it. The study authors reportedly refused to adjust the design. The New Republic immediately framed this as political censorship by RFK Jr.’s team — the same outlet that spent years pushing narratives with far less scrutiny. They conveniently omitted that the decision came after internal scientific review and focused on methodology, not safety or politics. This is classic reframing: any time the current administration applies higher evidentiary standards, it’s portrayed as anti-science. RFK Jr. and Jay Bhattacharya have been clear: they want rigorous, transparent science at the CDC and FDA — not automatic publication of observational data that may overstate benefits or understate risks. That’s not “blocking lifesaving information.” It’s responsible oversight after years of public health overreach and eroded trust. The real story isn’t conspiracy. It’s a long-overdue push for better standards at agencies that spent years demanding blind compliance while ignoring legitimate methodological concerns. The New Republic doesn’t want that conversation. They want the old narrative back. Americans deserve honest science, not politicized journals or activist media spinning every disagreement as dangerous. If the data are strong, let them stand up to scrutiny. If the methodology is weak, it shouldn’t wear the CDC’s seal of approval.That’s not anti-vaccine. That’s pro-science. RFK Jr.’s CDC Delays Report Proving the Covid Vaccine Worked | The New Republic share.google/F4U9wR4qDfSHCW…

NO lab grown meat will EVER have the “Product of USA” label. 🚫🧪🥩 @SecKennedy @calleymeans @DrMakaryFDA


@timburchett You still got it Tim! You're going to get called up to the show any day now!


NEW: Matt Walsh predicts top conservatives will be exposed for being paid by left-wing activist groups after it was revealed that the SPLC was secretly funding extremist groups like the KKK that they claimed to be battling. "The SPLC was not offering money to genuine conservatives who were effective at advancing conservatism." "The idea was to fund and prop up the alleged right-wingers who were useful to SPLC and the left." "And I suspect that soon... we're gonna find out that there are a fair number of alleged conservative figures, the most embarrassing and ridiculous ones, who've been getting paid by the forces they pretend to oppose." "There's a symbiotic relationship between left-wing activist groups and the supposedly right-wing grifters, and this relationship has always been obvious. Now we're learning about its financial dimensions." Video: @MattWalshShow

London’s Hidden Chain: How the Iran Conflict Is Finally Breaking It Most people see London as a stylish financial capital with historic buildings and red buses. But for the last century, the City of London has quietly acted like a heavy chain holding back the world.After World War I, the secret Sykes-Picot Agreement — a 1916 British-French deal — carved up the Ottoman Empire and drew messy borders across the Middle East. Those artificial lines created endless conflicts and resource fights. The result was built-in scarcity: expensive oil, jumpy gold prices, and constant tension that kept money flowing through London’s banks, insurance markets (Lloyd’s), and gold trading hub (LBMA). The LBMA, which dominates global gold and silver pricing, has long been accused of enabling artificial price suppression through massive paper trading and short positions. This kept metals undervalued for years, making it harder for ordinary people and producing nations to build real wealth from their resources. Instead of fair market signals encouraging investment and innovation, the system funneled gains back toward London’s financial insiders. London also built the Eurodollar market in the 1950s — an offshore dollar system that let the City influence global interest rates through LIBOR. For decades, the cost of borrowing dollars worldwide was partly set in London, not Washington. This gave London extra leverage over the global economy. The darker side is even clearer. Networks tied to Iran’s IRGC, Hezbollah, and Venezuela’s regime have moved billions through gold-smuggling routes and oil-for-gold swaps. Venezuelan gold and cartel money flowed through Toronto and London-linked banks. IRGC and Hezbollah used Turkish gold markets and London bullion channels to launder funds and finance operations. Lloyd’s itself flagged these IRGC/Hezbollah gold routes years ago, and U.S. sanctions in April 2026 again exposed the same networks — Iranian oil swapped for Venezuelan gold, sold on Turkey’s black market, with proceeds cycling back through familiar financial plumbing. Right now, the Iran conflict is ripping that chain apart in real time. U.S. and Israeli strikes began February 28, 2026. Iran choked the Strait of Hormuz, disrupting 20% of global oil. Prices spiked hard. But look at the futures market: WTI (the U.S. benchmark) went into extreme backwardation — prompt oil traded $20–$40+ above later contracts — and briefly traded above Brent (London’s benchmark). Traders are paying huge premiums for immediate, reliable barrels that don’t need Hormuz. The old London-centric pricing web is losing control. This isn’t random chaos. It’s the scarcity machine cracking. Europe still feels the echo — heavy regulations, energy squeezes, and policies that suppress local wages while flooding in immigrants. The Biden administration in the US mirrored this path almost exactly: record border encounters, expanded migration that increased labor supply and pressured wages for American workers, while layering on more institutional dependency mechanisms. Both sides kept the old scarcity playbook alive.The Iran conflict is doing what years of talk couldn’t: it’s forcing real trade to reroute away from London’s extractive plumbing. The chain held humanity back long enough. The multipolar world is finally shaking it loose.

Trump reads Scripture at MAGA Bible marathon @MaxBlumenthal visited a DC gathering of evangelicals who insisted that the notoriously sinful president had been chosen by God to "heal" the nation There, he probed them on the Iran war and Israel's assault on Christian communities


Trump Blinks, But Hormuz Blockade Blocks Further Talks x.com/i/broadcasts/1…






This is stunning: the "Unite the Right" rally in Charlottesville, VA, the most notorious of all the extremist displays of the last ten years, tiki torches and all, was actually a subsidized racket funded by the supposedly anti-hate SPLC. The DOJ has all the receipts. I'm not cynical enough to have imagined such a thing. x.com/Tyler2ONeil/st…


NEWS RELEASE: Federal Grand Jury Charges Southern Poverty Law Center for Wire Fraud, False Statements, and Conspiracy to Commit Money Laundering Between 2014 and 2023, the SPLC secretly funneled more than $3 million in donated funds to individuals who were associated with various violent extremist groups including the Ku Klux Klan, Aryan Nations, and National Socialist Party of America. Read more about the #FBI investigation: justice.gov/opa/pr/federal…





🚨HAPPENING NOW: Justice Department announces indictment against Southern Poverty Law Center ("SPLC"). Our indictment alleges SPLC secretly funneled MORE THAN $3 MILLION in funds to members of white supremacist and extremist groups.