Connect with us

*Headline

Report: Jeffrey Epstein’s Lawyer Ordered Ex-Staffers to Say Bill Clinton Never Visited ‘Pedo Island’

Western Journal

Published

on

When Donald Trump defeated Hillary Clinton and won the United States presidency in 2016, many on the left were unwilling to accept defeat. Multiple investigations were launched into Trump’s victory, but none were able to undermine the result.

If a new report is any indication, it may have been the Clinton family who deserved investigation.

According to the U.K.’s Daily Mail, Miles and Cathy Alexander worked as residential managers at Little St. James, the infamous private island of convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, but they left their positions sometime around 2006.

Nearly 10 years later, Hillary Clinton was running for president. Given her husband Bill Clinton’s alleged ties to Epstein, it would stand to reason that she would be afraid of bad press regarding that connection.

Darren Indyke, a lawyer for Epstein, contacted the Alexanders during the time of Clinton’s campaign, the Mail reported.

Indyke reportedly requested they sign a sworn affidavit he had drafted saying they never saw Bill Clinton on “Pedo Island,” as Little St. James had come to be known.

It is unclear whether the Clintons contacted Indyke, but the Mail noted his intention was to ask the Alexanders “to do something that would be of particular benefit to Hillary Clinton and her campaign” by signing the affidavit.

Bill Clinton has not been proven to have set foot on the island, but alleged Epstein victim Virginia Giuffre said she had seen Clinton with “two young girls” on the island, the Mail reported.

Clinton has denied ever visiting the island or having any knowledge of Epstein’s crimes.

It is certainly possible that Clinton never visited the island, and Indyke’s request to the Alexanders was only to confirm this. It is also possible Clinton did visit the island, and Indyke asked the Alexanders to lie. That question may never be answered.

However, if the Mail’s reporting is correct, it is at least true that Indyke asked the Alexanders to sign the affidavit for the purpose of bolstering Hillary Clinton’s campaign. That would seem to warrant some concern.

In addition, it has been proven that Bill Clinton had numerous connections to Epstein. According to the Mail, White House visitor logs show Epstein visited the White House at least 17 times from 1993 to 1995.

In Epstein’s infamous “little black book,” Clinton’s name appears beside 21 phone numbers and “several” emails, the outlet reported.

According to the Mail, Clinton was listed as a passenger on Epstein’s aircraft at least 26 times from February 2002 to November 2003, and former Epstein pilot David Rodgers testified in court he had flown Clinton on Epstein’s plane.

“I have a picture of me and the crew with Bill Clinton on the plane,” Rodgers said, according to the Mail. “To the best of my knowledge it was the first time that we had flown him.”

Again, none of these facts prove Clinton ever visited the island or had knowledge of Epstein’s crimes. However, they do suggest the two had a close relationship, which is concerning in and of itself given Epstein’s history.

Indyke apparently knew how politically damaging this connection could be for the Clintons. Why else would he request a sworn affidavit from two employees who had not worked on Little St. James for nearly a decade in an attempt to clear Bill Clinton’s name?

The Daily Mail’s report may not prove Clinton committed any crimes, but the lengths to which Indyke reportedly went trying to help the Clintons should and will raise some eyebrows.

This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.

*Headline

DeSantis Unloads on Biden Administration for ‘Indefensible’ Ban on COVID Antibody Treatments

Western Journal

Published

on

Republican Florida Gov. Ronald DeSantis slammed the Biden administration Monday for ending its emergency use authorization of two major COVID-10 monoclonal antibody treatments.

The Food and Drug Administration announced earlier that day that it will permit the use of Lilly’s (bamlanivimab and etesevimab) treatment and Regeneron’s REGEN-COV (casirivimab and imdevimab) treatment only when a patient “is likely to have been infected with or exposed to a variant that is susceptible to these treatments.”

Referring to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention statistics indicating that omicron is the dominant COVID-19 strain in the United States, constituting 99 percent of cases nationwide as of Jan. 15, Dr. Patrizia Cavazzoni, director of the FDA Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, said that “data show these treatments are highly unlikely to be active against the omicron variant.”

Therefore, she said, “these treatments are not authorized for use in any U.S. states, territories, and jurisdictions at this time.”

“In the future, if patients in certain geographic regions are likely to be infected or exposed to a variant that is susceptible to these treatments, then use of these treatments may be authorized in these regions,” Cavazonni said.

The FDA decided to restrict the monoclonal antibody treatments to prevent “exposing patients to side effects, such as injection site reactions or allergic reactions, which can be potentially serious, from specific treatment agents that are not expected to provide benefit to patients who have been infected with or exposed to the omicron variant,” Cavazonni said.

The move is a revocation of a Trump-era emergency use authorization the agency implemented in November 2020 to fight the rising number of COVID-19 cases in the country.

According to The New York Times, when a wave of delta variant cases hit hospitals across the nation last year, the treatments could prevent hospitalizations provided health care workers administered them in time.

However, the Times reported in December, once omicron struck, the treatments failed to work against the virus, prompting health care systems such as New York City’s to withdraw them.

DeSantis’ office issued a scathing statement demanding that the Biden administration reinstate the authorization for the treatments, calling its decision to revoke them “sudden” and “reckless.”

“Without a shred of clinical data to support this action, Biden has forced trained medical professionals to choose between treating their patients or breaking the law,” the governor said.

“This indefensible edict takes treatment out of the hands of medical professionals and will cost some Americans their lives,” he said. “There are real-world implications to Biden’s medical authoritarianism – Americans’ access to treatments is now subject to the whims of a failing president.”

Florida Surgeon General Dr. Joseph Ladapo joined DeSantis in criticizing the FDA decision.

“In our field of medicine, when someone comes to you seeking a treatment that could save their life, it is essential to have treatment options to ensure health care providers can make the best decisions for their patients,” Ladapo said.

“The Federal Government has failed to adequately provide the United States with adequate outpatient treatment options for COVID-19,” he said. “Now, they are scrambling to cover up a failure to deliver on a promise to ‘shut down the virus.’”

Appointments for more than 2,000 Floridians scheduled to take the antibody treatments were canceled in compliance with the updates to FDA guidelines, according to DeSantis’ office.

“Rather than giving Americans the option for various COVID treatments, the FDA and the Biden Administration issued their royal decree, taking away the very thing that is proven to reduce hospitalizations and save lives,” Florida Lt. Gov. Jeanette Nuñez said in a statement.

“Monoclonal antibody treatments like Regeneron have had a positive impact for thousands of Floridians,” she said. “For the CDC and FDA, which have been consistently inconsistent throughout the entire pandemic, to restrict treatment does nothing but put individuals at risk.”

This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.

Republican Florida Gov. Ronald DeSantis slammed the Biden administration Monday for ending its emergency use authorization of two major COVID-10 monoclonal antibody treatments. The Food and Drug Administration announced earlier that day that it will permit the use of Lilly’s (bamlanivimab and etesevimab) treatment and Regeneron’s REGEN-COV (casirivimab and imdevimab) treatment only when a patient “is likely to have been infected with or exposed to a variant that is susceptible to these treatments.” Referring to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention statistics indicating that omicron is the dominant COVID-19 strain in the United States, constituting 99 percent of cases nationwide as of Jan. 15, Dr. Patrizia Cavazzoni, director of the FDA Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, said that “data show these treatments are highly unlikely to be active against the omicron variant.” Therefore, she said, “these treatments are not authorized for use in any U.S. states, territories, and jurisdictions at this time.” “In the future, if patients in certain geographic regions are likely to be infected or exposed to a variant that is susceptible to these treatments, then use of these treatments may be authorized in these regions,” Cavazonni said. Because data shows these treatments are highly unlikely to be active against the omicron variant, which is circulating at a very high frequency throughout the U.S., these treatments are not authorized for use in any U.S. states, territories, and jurisdictions at this time. — U.S. FDA (@US_FDA) January 24, 2022 The FDA decided to restrict the monoclonal antibody treatments to prevent “exposing patients to side effects, such as injection site reactions or allergic reactions, which can be potentially serious, from specific treatment agents that are not expected to provide benefit to patients who have been infected with or exposed to the omicron variant,” Cavazonni said. The move is a…

Continue Reading

*Headline

US to Begin Evacuating Family of Embassy Personnel from Ukraine Within Hours

Western Journal

Published

on

As fears grow that Russia is on the brink of invading Ukraine, the State Department is telling Americans to get out now.

The State Department has ordered families of U.S. Embassy personnel in Ukraine to start fleeing beginning Monday, according to Fox News. Ukraine is seven hours ahead of the United States’ Eastern Time zone, meaning evacuations could begin when it’s still Sunday in Washington.

Other Americans in Ukraine will be encouraged to start leaving the country next week on commercial flights, “while those are still available,” one official said, according to Fox.

A commentary piece published Friday by NBC, authored by Brett Bruen, a former director of global engagement in the Obama White House, argued that President Joe Biden last week undercut any expectations of a defense of Ukraine with a comment at a news conference that if Russia conducted a “minor incursion” into Ukraine, the consequences would be mild.

“This clumsy, cringe-worthy attempt to distinguish between minor and major invasions sent a clear signal to the Kremlin that if troops stopped short of a full-scale military operation, they might avoid a serious response from the West. This is an ideal outcome for Russia. In fact, it is its preferred path forward,” Bruen wrote.

Biden, he wrote, “said only what many had already speculated. But saying the silent part out loud is serious stuff in diplomacy. It’s been clear for months now that Washington would prefer not to get entangled in a significant spat with Moscow. During their summit in Geneva this summer, Biden essentially told Putin, and later the news media, that as long as he doesn’t meddle as much, we can live with it.”

“This is, unfortunately, part of a broader, more detached approach to foreign crises that the White House has taken. The Kremlin took it as a major moment to move ahead with an ambitious attempt to assert more control over its neighbors,” he wrote.

Republican Rep. Michael McCaul of Texas said Russia has a “very aggressive timetable” for invading Ukraine.

“My prediction is, you’re going to see Russia invading Ukraine in the next month,” McCaul said Friday, according to Fox News.

He said that Russia has concluded Biden is a “weak president” and Russia now has carte blanche to  “conduct what could be the largest invasion in Europe since World War II.”

“The key to addressing Russian aggression is deterrence,” McCaul said. “This administration has done far too little to deter Russia from further invading Ukraine.”

“Slow-rolling this type of assistance and support as Kyiv sits at the epicenter of what could be the biggest conflict since World War II is absolutely unacceptable,” he said.

Do you think Russia will invade Ukraine?

An article in The Washington Post on Sunday reported that British officials believe that Russia’s end game in invading Ukraine is to install a puppet government that would be subservient to Russian leader Vladimir Putin.

“The information being released today shines a light on the extent of Russian activity designed to subvert Ukraine and is an insight into Kremlin thinking,” U.K. Foreign Secretary Liz Truss said in a statement, according to the Post.

“As the U.K. and our partners have said repeatedly, any Russian military incursion into Ukraine would be a massive strategic mistake with severe costs,” Truss said.

This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.

As fears grow that Russia is on the brink of invading Ukraine, the State Department is telling Americans to get out now. The State Department has ordered families of U.S. Embassy personnel in Ukraine to start fleeing beginning Monday, according to Fox News. Ukraine is seven hours ahead of the United States’ Eastern Time zone, meaning evacuations could begin when it’s still Sunday in Washington. Other Americans in Ukraine will be encouraged to start leaving the country next week on commercial flights, “while those are still available,” one official said, according to Fox. The Department of State is preparing to approve the evacuation of some U.S. diplomats and diplomats’ families from the embassy in Ukraine, sources confirmed to @ABC News. https://t.co/F4aZ8UakrB — ABC News (@ABC) January 22, 2022 A commentary piece published Friday by NBC, authored by Brett Bruen, a former director of global engagement in the Obama White House, argued that President Joe Biden last week undercut any expectations of a defense of Ukraine with a comment at a news conference that if Russia conducted a “minor incursion” into Ukraine, the consequences would be mild. “This clumsy, cringe-worthy attempt to distinguish between minor and major invasions sent a clear signal to the Kremlin that if troops stopped short of a full-scale military operation, they might avoid a serious response from the West. This is an ideal outcome for Russia. In fact, it is its preferred path forward,” Bruen wrote. Biden, he wrote, “said only what many had already speculated. But saying the silent part out loud is serious stuff in diplomacy. It’s been clear for months now that Washington would prefer not to get entangled in a significant spat with Moscow. During their summit in Geneva this summer, Biden essentially told Putin, and later the news media, that as long…

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Best of the Week