With a collective yawn, mainstream news outlets reported yesterday the abrupt shuttering of the Biden Cancer Initiative (BCI), a nonprofit offshoot of the White House Cancer Moonshot, itself a segment of the 21st Century Cures Act, a $6.3 billion piece of 2016 legislation aimed at addressing a host of health issues, conceived as a cherry atop the Obama legacy. The Biden initiative was born of the sad loss of Biden's son Beau to a rare brain cancer in 2015, an overwhelming event that ultimately derailed Biden's designs on a presidential run.
Biden is of course back, leading the Democratic field despite a host of controversies. He and his wife quietly resigned from the Biden Cancer Initiative two weeks ago, and yesterday, the president of BCI, Greg Simon, made the following statement: “We are suspending activities given our unique circumstances. We remain personally committed to the cause, but at this time will have to pause efforts.”
And not one major news outlet is scratching its head?
From the NYT to the NY Post, all the news was the same: Biden's focusing on his campaign. Nothing to see here. It begs the question, why not at least keep the doors nominally open? Provide minimal staffing for the sake of continuity? After all, the cause is unimpeachable: ending cancer. Nothing partisan about that, and the association with his late son rightly inspires real sympathy among voters, a deep well from which politicians are rarely allowed to draw water.
So why did Biden resign a few days prior to a big piece of political housekeeping, the Hunter Biden exposé in The New Yorker, a rip-the-band-aid-off strategy to avoid political death by a thousand cuts, as reported by CD Media?
Initiative...where have we heard that word before? Ah yes, the Clinton Global Initiative (CGI). Whereas the Clinton Foundation has been associated with pay-for-play scandals, its offshoot, CGI, was conceived as a global outreach and aid arm of the foundation, a U.N.-style vehicle without all the bureaucracy. Bill and Hillary, with their accumulated wisdom in international affairs, would direct a laser focus on global humanitarian issues.
Shut down in April of 2017, the mainstream reported at the time that CGI "donations dried up" in the wake of Hillary Clinton's loss in her most recent presidential bid. But the truth runs deeper than that. As The Observer notes:
"WikiLeaks revealed several criticisms of the Clinton Foundation were true, as pay-to-play schemes and the foundation’s corrupt management were exposed. On October 26, The Washington Post reported a memo detailed how the Clinton Foundation was used to boost Bill Clinton’s income."
Further, as William Craddick points out, the Prime Minister of New Zealand resigned in 2016 over outrage regarding the initial taxpayer-funded payment of $7.7 million (over $13 million was pledged) specifically to the CGI arm of the Clinton Foundation.
Similarly, that same year, Norway was scandalized upon learning of a 584 million kroner gift to CGI, and months later, the unmasking of a 51-person pedophile ring. As Craddick writes:
"Norway also was rocked by a child abuse scandal which came to light in November 2016. On November 20, the Associated Press reported that 20 individuals had been arrested and 31 more were being sought as part of an investigation known as “Dark Room” which began in 2015. Many of the suspects were described as being highly educated and the arrestees included lawyers and politicians. Investigator Hilde Reikrås told the Norwegian press that further arrests beyond those currently charged were expected. American media outlets such as the New York Times, ABC News, and The Washington Post initially ran reports on the arrests. However, within a few weeks of the news breaking, these news corporations removed any mention of the Norway child abuse ring from their webpages."
It falls short of a direct link between the events, but this reporting deeply echoes the Haiti scandals related to CGI involvement. The Clintons conspired to get Laura Silsby a drastically reduced sentence after she was caught trying to transport 33 Haitian children across the Dominican Republic border--where she claimed they were going to start an orphanage (though Dominican officials had received no such request for a permit) --following multiple natural disasters in 2010. This came after she had already been caught with 40 Haitian children on another occasion. It seems that wherever CGI went, donations to the fund were made, and children were abused or went missing.
Lastly, the pattern of scrubbing articles from websites that Craddick mentions is one thing. It's passively dishonest, an attempt to hide a story that doesn't fit editorial politics. More broadly, the tactic of curating internet searches in a politically biased manner is one employed solely by the left. Technocrats Google, Facebook, Twitter, and other content engines are notoriously left-leaning, even sharing common cause with the Southern Poverty Law Center.
Here's a quick media bias demonstration: do an internet search on Google or Bing: "clinton global initiative closes." Note that the usual first-page-result suspects--NYT, WaPo, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, Reuters, Bloomberg, WSJ--are all absent. Not until page 10 of the Google search do we find this incredibly generous headline from Bloomberg.com:
"Clinton Global Initiative Ends With Some of Shine Worn Off"
The situation is better but still clearly altered on Bing: not until the bottom of the sixth page do we see any MSM article specifically about the closing of CGI, and when we do, it's the same Bloomberg article.
It's not as though the major outlets didn't write about the closing of the foundation at the time--of course they did. But their articles have been swept away. An average web surfer might think the CGI story is a conspiracy theory given all the bloggers and "newspunch.com" -type outlets listed in search queries. To add to the confusion of the average, the Clinton Foundation is still in business. It's as if the media were conspiring to create an illusion: That CGI thing? Just a figment of your imagination.
The same applies with many topics fraught with leftist deception. Above, I mentioned content sites and their bias. Go ahead, search "facebook google twitter amazon leftist bias" on Google.com. Below is a screenshot of the top results.
Laughable. How does President Trump come up not once but twice in the first four hits? Google's bias is transparent: if they search leftist bias, we give them Trump.
Bing.com is slightly better (in this particular search, anyway). Still, look at the names of the sites they give top billing to--not exactly confidence inspiring outlets. Same exact search terms:
This is the opposite side of the suppress-conservative-media-outlets coin. In this case, oddball blogs are given top billing, creating the appearance of a fake event, as if they were the only ones kooky enough to cover said event. Electronic implied revisionist history. It's brilliant, and terrifying.
As the NY Post noted, "While Hillary was secretary of state, her younger brother, Tony Rodham, was appointed to the advisory board of VCS Mining, a US-based company that received a gold-mining contract in Haiti." In other words, Tony sat on the board of a company that landed a gold mining deal in Haiti after Bill and Hillary Clinton directed millions into post-earthquake relief.
As USA Today reported last month, "Rodham had numerous financial difficulties, including failed businesses, a string of shaky investment projects as well as nagging child support payments...He also drew scrutiny as co-chairman of Haiti's recovery commission, following the devastating 2010 earthquake, for allegedly seeking a multimillion dollar deal to rebuild homes in the ravaged country with funding from the [CGI]."
Tony would be a useful person to ask about Haitian CGI involvement, but he died unexpectedly last month at age 65. No cause of death has yet been announced. One cannot help but recall Monica Peterson, investigative journalist seeking to uncover CGI involvement in Haitian child trafficking, who turned up dead as Hillary's 2008 presidential campaign heated up. No cause of death was ever announced in that case either.
Which bring us to Jeffrey Epstein, close confidant of the Clintons (even the New York Times is skeptical of Bill Clinton's recent distancing act) and alleged founder of the Clinton Foundation. It isn't a stretch to think that Biden, the vice president for eight years of Hillary's secretary of state tenure wasn't taking notes on how to set up a foundation for personal enrichment and power brokering after public office. Perhaps as parting gift for agreeing to abandon his presidential campaign, the grieving Biden was handed the reins to the Biden Cancer Initiative.
Why did he close its offices? One idea with meat on the bone, two without:
Biden has proven time and again that he makes faulty decisions, especially as it concerns his family. With Hunter on the rocks and his namesake, Joseph "Beau" Biden buried, it may be that Biden has blundered again, seeking to make hay from all the misery. Time will tell if this is another of those instances.
Subscribe to our evening newsletter to stay informed during these challenging times!!
Very good article that lays out a lot in a short summary of what is going on. Those who have been paying attention 8 hours a day 7 days a week for going on 3 years now, knows this author has his timeline, and possibilities, in a row. It's coming. And, this wasn't called the 'Big Ugly' since way back when, for no reason.