10 NOV PM PATRIOT UPDATE – Counter Operations Continue… The Net is Tightening

By | November 10, 2020

10 Nov 2021 PM Patriot Update:

What, why and how?


Strategy: “Hold out baits to entice the enemy. Feign disorder, and crush him.”
Sun Tzu, The Art of War

Operations Update / Big Picture Plan




Lilly to start immediately shipping coronavirus antibody drug after emergency FDA approval – in second COVID-19 breakthrough in 24 hours following Pfizer vaccine

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration on Monday (FDA) authorized emergency use of Eli Lilly and Co’s experimental COVID-19 antibody treatment, which President Donald Trump has praised and vowed to make available free of cost for all Americans.

The FDA said its emergency use authorization was based on clinical trials showing that the treatment, bamlanivimab, reduced the need for hospitalization or emergency room visits in COVID-19 patients at high risk of disease progression.

Early results suggest it may help clear the coronavirus sooner and possibly cut hospitalizations in people with mild to moderate COVID-19.

The FDA approved its use for mild-to-moderate COVID-19 in adults and pediatric patients over the age of 12.

The drug will start shipping out ‘immediately’ to the major distributor AmerisourceBergen, Lilly said.

Last month, the US government signed a $375 million deal with Lilly for 300,000 doses of the antibody drug to be distributed over the two months following its emergency use authorization (EUA).

The government will have the option to purchase another 650,000 doses through June 30.

Although Lilly did not specify how many doses are currently ready to go, it had previously stated that 100,000 doses of the its antibody drug could be made available within days of its EUA.

Bamlanivimab will be allocated to states weekly, depending on how many confirmed cases are recorded in Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) data for each jurisdiction over the previous seven days, an Informa editor reported on Twitter.

Two weeks ago, Lilly revealed its coronavirus antibody treatment almost completely reduce viral loads in COVID-19 mildly or moderately ill patients patients to zero and lowered their risk of hospitalization.

Researchers found that mildly and moderately ill patients given a high dose of the antibody, LY-CoV555 (also known as bamlanivimab), had viral loads that were 3.4 times lower than those who received a placebo.

Additionally, those who received any dose of LY-CoV555 were four times less likely to need to be hospitalized.


Donald Trump has accused Fox News of ‘tampering with the election’ because its polls were ‘so inaccurate’

Donald Trump has accused Fox News of ‘tampering with the election’ because its polls were ‘so inaccurate’ along with those by other networks and newspapers. The president launched into a series of irate tweets Monday night where he threw the blame for his election defeat onto the media. He accused several outlets of ‘election interference’ because their polls were ‘so far off’ in several states. His singling out of Fox in particular, which has long been a close ally of the president, comes after the network and several other Rupert Murdoch-owned conservative outlets have changed their messaging in the days after the election much to Trump’s ire. ‘@FoxNews, @QuinnipiacPoll, ABC/WaPo, NBC/WSJ were so inaccurate with their polls on me, that it really is tampering with an Election. They were so far off in their polling, and in their attempt to suppress – that they should be called out for Election Interference,’ Trump blasted. He pointed to states including Wisconsin and Iowa where he said the media projected he would lose to Joe Biden. ABC/WaPo had me down 17 points in Wisconsin, the day before the election, and I WON! In Iowa, the polls had us 4 points down, and I won by 8.2%! Fox News and Quinnipiac were wrong on everything,’ he wrote. The worst polling ever, and then they’ll be back in four years to do it again. This is much more then voter and campaign finance suppression!’ This marks his latest attack on the media after he fumed about all the networks calling the election for his rival after the Democrat soared ahead in several swing states. Since when does the Lamestream Media call who our next president will be? We have all learned a lot in the last two weeks!’ Trump tweeted Sunday afternoon, around 24 hours after the media called the election for Biden Saturday. It is also the latest sign of his increasingly fractured relationship with Fox News and Murdoch. Murdoch and Trump have often rubbed shoulders in the same social circles and the media mogul’s right-wing networks have long sided with Trump. But when Fox became the first outlet to call Arizona for Biden Tuesday night, Trump reportedly called Murdoch in a fury ‘to scream about the call and demand a retraction’, a source told Vanity Fair. The 89-year-old media mogul refused to order his staff to retract the Arizona call. Several of Murdoch’s conservative outlets then changed their messaging as Trump’s chances of reelection slipped away last week, urging him to bow out with grace and all but declaring Biden the winner prior to the crucial state of Pennsylvania being called. Fox News host Laura Ingraham said Donald Trump should accept ‘the unfavorable outcome’ of the election with ‘grace and composure’ on her show Friday night. Meanwhile, the front cover of Saturday’s edition of the New York Post – which last month exposed emails from Hunter Biden’s laptop and in October publicly endorsed Trump on its front cover – all but declared Biden’s victory hours before it was called.


The voter fraud was Nationwide…

Wedding Was Hosted At a Polling Location After the Election — Look What They Found In the Trash (video)

Rupert Murdoch-Owned Media Turns on Trump, Urges Him to Cooperate With the Regime Coup Against Him

Multiple Rupert Murdoch-owned conservative media outlets in the United States have shifted their messaging in a seeming effort to warn readers and viewers that Donald Trump may well have lost the presidential election. The new messaging appears to be closely coordinated, and it includes an appeal to Trump to preserve his “legacy” by showing grace in defeat.

The message is being carried on Fox News and in the Wall Street Journal and the New York Post – all outlets avidly consumed by Trump himself, especially Fox. One Fox News host, Laura Ingraham, an intimate of the president ever since she spoke at the 2016 Republican national convention, made an astounding statement that seemed directed at Trump personally, advising him to accept defeat “if and when that does happen” with “grace and composure” and appealing to his sense of his own legacy. Ingraham said in part: “If and when it’s time to accept an unfavourable outcome in this election, and we hope it never comes, but if and when that does happen, president Trump needs to do it with the same grace and composure he demonstrated at that town hall with Savannah Guthrie. So many people remarked about his tone and presence. Exactly what he needs.”Now losing, especially when you believe the process wasn’t fair, it’s a gut punch. And I’m not conceding anything tonight, by the way. But losing, if that’s what happens – it’s awful. But president Trump’s legacy will only become more significant if he focuses on moving the country forward.”

Laura Ingraham criticizes Doug Ducey and Republican officials in Georgia

— Acyn Torabi (@Acyn) November 7, 2020. Laura Ingraham prepares her audience for the likely possibility that the President will lose the election pic.twitter.com/tG50EIHj6— Acyn Torabi (@Acyn) November 7, 2020. The Wall Street Journal has published an opinion piece with almost the exact same message. It is titled “The Presidential Endgame” and subtitled “Trump has the right to fight in court, but he needs evidence to prove voter fraud”.

“Mr Trump’s legacy will be diminished greatly if his final act is a bitter refusal to accept a legitimate defeat,” the piece warns.

Here is how the article opened: “Perhaps it was inevitable that Donald Trump’s re-election campaign would end as his presidency began: with the president claiming victory and his frenzied antagonists denouncing him as a would-be fascist. The reality is that the US can and probably will have a normal election outcome regardless of the shouting between now and then. “Mr Biden is leading in enough states to win the presidency, and if those votes survive recounts and legal challenges, he will be the next president. The New York Post – which before the election was the launch vehicle for wild and desperate attacks on Joe Biden’s son Hunter – has produced a front page that all but proclaims a Biden victoryThis is a significant front page – the Murdoch empire preparing for a transfer of power….. #election2020 pic.twitter.com/tUJE0CdFK4— Nick Bryant (@NickBryantNY) November 7, 2020.



  • Lots of Boom talk
  • Pentagon Top Policy Official Resigns After Clash With White House, Follows Esper Exit
    https://www.zerohedge.com/political/pentagon-2-resigns-after-clash-white-house-day-after-esper-exitThe departure of James Anderson, the acting undersecretary of defense for policy, potentially paves the way for Anthony Tata, President Donald Trump’s controversial nominee for the top policy job who was pulled from contention due to Islamophobic tweets, to take over the policy shop. Anderson’s resignation also comes one day after Defense Secretary Mark Esper was fired by Trump, also over policy disagreements.
  • Corps General Gary L. Thomas and @USMCSgtMaj laid a wreath in front of the United States Marine Corps War Memorial in honor of the Marine Corps’ 245th birthday. #HappyBirthdayMarines

  • It’s like we’re watching a movie or something….

  • Official who once called Obama a ‘terrorist leader’ takes over Pentagon policy
    The departure of James Anderson, acting undersecretary of defense for policy, potentially paves the way for Anthony Tata to take over the policy shop.
    Anthony Tata, a retired brigadier general whose nomination for a top Pentagon job collapsed this summer due to Islamophobic tweets and other controversial statements, began overseeing policy for the Defense Department on Tuesday.The move is part of a high-level civilian leadership shakeup that began on Monday when President Donald Trump fired Defense Secretary Mark Esper and continued on Tuesday with the departure of the Pentagon’s acting policy chief and the installation of a Trump loyalist as the new acting defense secretary’s chief of staff.A defense official confirmed that Tata, who had been performing the duties as the No. 2 for policy, is now running the organization following the Tuesday resignation of acting policy chief James Anderson, first reported by POLITICO.Anderson was confirmed in June as the No. 2 policy official but had been acting in the top job. He had been expected to be asked by the White House to resign in the next few days.

    “I am particularly grateful to have been entrusted with leading the dedicated men and women of Policy, who play a key role in our Nation’s security,” Anderson wrote in his letter of resignation. “Now, as ever, our long-term success depends on adhering to the U.S. Constitution all public servants swear to support and defend.”

    Anderson stepped down after repeated disagreements with the White House personnel office, according to current defense officials and one former defense official, who predicted that Anderson will be the first of several departures in the wake of Esper’s firing.

    A Pentagon spokesperson did not respond to requests for comment. A White House spokesperson said they don’t comment on personnel.


Global reset

Own Nothing and Be Happy in 2030

by Colin Todhunter

(abridged by henrymakow.com)

The World Economic Forum’s (WEF) annual meeting at the end of January in Davos, Switzerland, brings together international business and political leaders, economists and other high-profile individuals to discuss global issues. Driven by the vision of its influential CEO Klaus Schwab, the WEF is the main driving force for the dystopian ‘great reset’, a tectonic shift that intends to change how we live, work and interact with each other.

The great reset entails a transformation of society resulting in permanent restrictions on fundamental liberties and mass surveillance as entire sectors are sacrificed to boost the monopoly and hegemony of pharmaceuticals corporations, high-tech/big data giants, Amazon, Google, major global chains, the digital payments sector, biotech concerns, etc.

Using COVID-19 lockdowns and restrictions to push through this transformation, the great reset is being rolled out under the guise of a ‘Fourth Industrial Revolution’ in which older enterprises are to be driven to bankruptcy or absorbed into monopolies, effectively shutting down huge sections of the pre-COVID economy. Economies are being ‘restructured’ and many jobs will be carried out by AI-driven machines.

In a short video showcased on social media, the WEF predicts that by 2030, “You’ll own nothing and you’ll be happy.” A happy smiling face is depicted while a drone delivers a product to a household, no doubt ordered online and packaged by a robot in a giant Amazon warehouse: ‘no humans were involved in manufacturing, packaging or delivering this product’; rest assured, it is a virus- and bacteria-free – because even in 2030, they will need to keep the fear narrative alive and well to maintain full-spectrum dominance over the population.

The jobless (and there will be many) could be placed on some kind of universal basic income and have their debts (indebtedness and bankruptcy on a massive scale is the deliberate result of lockdowns and restrictions) written off in return for handing their assets to the state or more precisely the financial institutions helping to drive this great reset.

The WEF says the public will ‘rent’ everything they require: stripping the right of ownership under the guise of ‘sustainable consumption’ and ‘saving the planet’. Of course, the tiny elite who rolled out this great reset will own everything.

Hundreds of millions around the world deemed ‘surplus to requirements’ are to be robbed (are currently being robbed) of their livelihoods. Our every movement and purchase are to be monitored and our main dealings will be online.




Keep in mind. Interesting to see how this plays out.

TheDonald.win Claims to Have #s on ALL Dominion Switched Votes





PEDES GET IN HERE. I saw the video on The Gateway Pundit [ https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/11/breaking-huge-another-system-glitch-captured-live-cnn-election-night-20000-votes-swapped-trump-biden-video/ ] and I decided to do some digging of my own, into a more reputable source that can verify that the glitch was indeed real, and that it affected the votes, instead of it being just a display glitch on that news channel. So I went digging into the Edison data [ https://static01.nyt.com/elections-assets/2020/data/api/2020-11-03/race-page/pennsylvania/president.json] and I found this damning evidence [ https://i.maga.host/RNPN3Oz.png ]. As can be seen in the image, only 54 votes were added, but the ratio changed in Biden’s favor by a whole 0.6%! This is proof that not only did the glitch happen, but it doesn’t seem to have been reverted at all.

EDIT : BIG UPDATE, I made a script to run through the data and gather all instances where votes switched from Trump to Biden, Lost Votes means that the total amount of votes counted decreased by that amount throughout the counting. I’ve only done states that use Dominion Voting Systems so far.

EDIT 2: Added ALL the states, and separated by voting systems, although no state uses exclusively one system as far as I know.

Edit 3: Re-ordered the states, first by switched votes, then by lost votes.

Switched votes are votes that were taken from Trump and given to Biden.

Lost votes are voted that disappeared during the counting, from both candidates.

There might be a small overlap between Switched votes and Lost votes.

Dominion Voting Systems :

Pennsylvania : Switched : 220,883 Lost Votes : 941,248
New Jersey : Switched : 80,242 Lost Votes : 20
Florida : Switched : 21,422 Lost Votes : 456
Michigan : Switched : 20,213 Lost Votes : 21,882
New York : Switched : 18,124 Lost Votes : 623,213
Georgia : Switched : 17,407 Lost Votes : 33,574
Ohio : Switched : 14,965 Lost Votes : 5,102
Virginia : Switched : 12,163 Lost Votes : 789,023
California : Switched : 7,701 Lost Votes : 10,989
Arizona : Switched : 4,492 Lost Votes : 0
Minnesota : Switched : 2,766 Lost Votes : 195,650
Tennessee : Switched : 2,330 Lost Votes : 0
Louisiana : Switched : 2,322 Lost Votes : 0
Illinois : Switched : 2,166 Lost Votes : 54,730
Wisconsin : Switched : 2,078 Lost Votes : 3,408
Colorado : Switched : 1,809 Lost Votes : 0
Utah : Switched : 1,627 Lost Votes : 0
New Hampshire : Switched : 973 Lost Votes : 116
Iowa : Switched : 938 Lost Votes : 477
New Mexico : Switched : 268 Lost Votes : 4,610
Missouri : Switched 0 : Lost Votes : 20,730
Nevada : Switched : 0 Lost Votes : 0
Alaska : Switched : 0 Lost Votes : 0
Washington : Switched : 0 Lost Votes : 0
Hawaii : Switched : 0 Lost Votes : 0
Kansas and Texas use Premier Election Solutions, owned by Dominion Voting Systems.
Texas : Switched : 14,954 Lost Votes : 30,557
Kansas : Switched : 1,674 Lost Votes : 2,154
Election Systems & Software :
Nebraska : Switched : 30,086 Lost Votes : 50
Kentucky : Switched : 8,129 Lost Votes : 23,849
Arkansas : Switched : 3,664 Lost Votes : 20,748
South Carolina : Switched : 2,779 Lost Votes : 2,119
Montana : Switched : 2,330 Lost Votes : 1,276
South Dakota : Switched : 1,347 Lost Votes : 1
North Dakota : Switched : 234 Lost Votes : 681
Maryland : Switched : 203 Lost Votes : 0
North Carolina : Switched : 0 Lost Votes : 15
District of Columbia : Switched : 0 Lost Votes : 0


Nebraska : Switched : 30,086 Lost Votes : 50
Connecticut : Switched : 3,834 Lost Votes : 272
Massachusetts : Switched : 3,613 Lost Votes : 51
Oregon : Switched 2,557 Lost Votes : 0
Alabama : Switched : 1,170 Lost Votes : 408
Mississippi : Switched : 355 Lost Votes : 0
Maine : Switched : 271 Lost Votes : 35
Rhode Island : Switched : 6 Lost Votes : 13
West Virginia : Switched : 0 Lost Votes : 78,300
Idaho : Switched 0 Lost Votes : 0
Oklahoma : Switched : 0 Lost Votes : 0
Indiana : Switched : 0 Lost Votes : 0
Delaware : Switched : 0 Lost Votes : 0
Vermont : Switched : 0 Lost Votes : 0

NOTE : Lost votes are votes that disappeared, not only for Trump, but overall.


I went looking through the data I got from my script, trying to find if the moment the Antrim glitch happened in Michigan is there. And it is. Here is the Data. [ https://static01.nyt.com/elections-assets/2020/data/api/2020-11-03/race-page/michigan/president.json ]

And here is the specific part when the switch happened. [ https://i.maga.host/wGuVGZQ.png ]

You can see in that picture, that Trump lost 3,096 votes, those all went to Biden. BUT, Trump also lost 2,324 votes, that went nowhere.

SOURCES: Here is the data I used:

EDISON DATA: https://static01.nyt.com/elections-assets/2020/data/api/2020-11-03/race-page/pennsylvania/president.json


The data is from Edison Research, it is used for election coverage by at least ABC News, CBS News, CNN and NBC News. It is also used for the website of the NYT, and probably others as well.

I scraped the data from the NYT website, here [ https://static01.nyt.com/elections-assets/2020/data/api/2020-11-03/race-page/pennsylvania/president.json ] to check for other states, replace “pennsylvania” in the link with the state you want to check, for states that have spaces in their names, like new york, write new-york instead.

Take this picture for example. [ https://i.maga.host/RNPN3Oz.png ]

It’s like this:

Nr.187 : 2,984,468(Total votes) * 0.566(Trump share of the votes) = 1,689,208.888

Nr.188 : 2,984,522 * 0.56 = 1,671,332.32

Do the same thing for Biden, and you’ll see that he gained the votes that Trump lost.

I made a program that basically checks every single change in votes, does the above to check if votes were switched, then adds them all up to get the total amount of switched votes.

Here is the link to a rar file containing all the .json files for the states, and the fraudcatch.py file, you’d need to download python 3.8.2 to use it, click EDIT with idle, then in the window that pops up click Run, to check how many votes were switched from Trump to Biden in a state, you then type findfraud(‘hawaii’) for example, replace hawaii with the name of the file of the state you want to check, the file for new hampshire is named newhamp for example, so findfraud(‘newhamp’), to check the total lost votes (For both candidates) do lostvotes(‘newhamp’) for example.


Law Enforcement

Cruz Questions Andrew McCabe Hearing on Oversight of the Crossfire Hurricane Investigation. Boom!

Graham Questions Andrew McCabe at Hearing on Oversight of the Crossfire Hurricane Investigation

Sen Grassley Questions DOJ on Biden Family FARA Compliance Stemming from Business Deals with Chinese Communist-Backed Energy Tycoons

Nov 10, 2020 WASHINGTON – Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) is calling on the Justice Department to evaluate whether Hunter and James Biden should have registered as foreign agents for their business arrangements with the Chinese government-back energy company CEFC. The company was actively seeking to build influence in the United States when it partnered with the Bidens. The Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) is a content-neutral law that promotes transparency by requiring individuals to register with the Justice Department if they are acting as an agent of a foreign government or enterprise to influence U.S. policy or public opinion. In a letter to Attorney General William Barr, Grassley is seeking details on what steps, if any, the Justice Department has taken to determine whether the Bidens complied with FARA. “When the available evidence is taken as a whole, it is clear that CEFC intended to make inroads in the United States for the purpose of expanding its business and used Hunter Biden and his business associates to help effectuate that intent. In pursuit of its goals, it appears that CEFC may have taken action to influence U.S. policy and public opinion in its favor and gain access to several U.S. politicians in an attempt to curry favor for potential business transactions,” Grassley wrote. Grassley has long raised concerns about the Justice Department’s sparse and selective FARA enforcement, which is designed to aid policymakers in understanding the origins and beneficiaries of foreign influence campaigns. As then-Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Grassley raised concerns about lax FARA enforcement in 2015 regarding lobbying work by former Clinton administration officials for a Georgian political party, and again in 2016 regarding a Russian effort to overturn U.S. sanctions. Grassley also raised concerns about work for Ukrainians by Paul Manafort and the Podesta Group. Grassley held a hearing on the issue where Paul Manafort was subpoenaed to testify. Manafort was later indicted for FARA violations. Grassley also raised FARA concerns related to influence by Confucius Institutes on college campuses and reporting in the United States by foreign state-owned media outlets. In 2019, Grassley introduced the bipartisan Foreign Agents Disclosure and Registration Enhancement Act to strengthen FARA compliance and enforcement. Full text of Grassley’s letter to the Justice Department follows.


Linked Video. Soak in Brennan’s panic

Roberts, Kavanaugh signal willingness to preserve ACA in Supreme Court case

Nov. 10 (UPI) Two Supreme Court justices signaled a willingness to preserve the Affordable Care Act on Tuesday during arguments in a landmark case challenging its constitutionality. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh each suggested they were inclined to favor “severing” the so-called individual mandate from the rest of the ACA, which has provided affordable medical coverage to tens of millions of Americans over the past decade. In the case, California vs. Texas, the high court is seeking to determine whether eliminating the mandate the part of the law that required all uninsured Americans to buy health insurance through ACA exchanges or pay an income tax penalty – renders the entire healthcare law, known colloquially as Obamacare, unconstitutional.

Kavanaugh, considered a swing vote on the issue, suggested the ACA could still pass constitutional muster without the mandate. In an exchange with an attorney defending the law on behalf of the House of Representatives, Kavanaugh said, “I tend to agree with you this a very straightforward case for severability under our precedents, meaning that we would excise the mandate and leave the rest of the act in place.” Roberts later said he disagreed with a coalition of 18 Republican-led states headed by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, who argue the ACA was rendered unconstitutional by President Donald Trump’s 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which removed the penalty and declared it illegal. “It’s hard for you to argue Congress intended the entire act to fall if the mandate was struck down if the same Congress that lowered the tax penalty to zero did not even try to repeal the rest of the act,” he told an attorney representing Paxton.

Some experts and observers consider the matter the most important case the Supreme Court will decide this term, which began last month and ends at the end of June. Striking down the ACA would cost as many as 20 million Americans their medical coverage and bring a tax cut to the wealthy. Trump has been trying to repeal the ACA since he stepped into office while President-elect Joe Biden, who helped craft the 2010 law, said during his campaign that he would enhance and expand it. Biden plans to deliver a speech on Tuesday reiterating support for the law. The part of the ACA that required uninsured people to buy coverage has helped the law stand up to legal scrutiny in the past. The Supreme Court upheld the law’s constitutionality in a 2012 ruling, in which Roberts said the mandate was within Congress’ taxing authority. However, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals last year upheld a lower court ruling that said the individual mandate was unconstitutional as “it can no longer be read as a tax and there is no other constitutional provision that justifies this exercise of congressional power.” The Democratic-led House of Representatives and a group of 20 Democratic states have asked the Supreme Court to overturn the lower court decisions, arguing that the Trump administration’s stripping of the individual mandate had another impact on the case it made the tax issue entirely moot. “[The law] may encourage Americans to buy insurance, but it does not require anyone to do anything,” they wrote in their brief. “Individuals still have a choice: Buy insurance or don’t.” In addition to deciding if the individual mandate is unconstitutional, the court will also have to decide whether the provision invalidates the law as a whole. Republicans and the Texas-led coalition say it does.

They argue that Congress intended for the ACA to work as an integrated whole. The Democrat-led group, however, counters that Congress consciously decided to leave the rest of the landmark law intact three years ago when it agreed to remove the individual mandate. In previous Supreme Court rulings on the ACA, Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito Jr. said the law could not be separated or salvaged from the unconstitutional portions. Roberts and Kavanaugh, Trump’s second high court appointee, noted that the court must closely examine whether the remainder of the law can be severed from the unconstitutional part and remain in place. “Constitutional litigation is not a game of gotcha against Congress, where litigants can ride a discrete constitutional flaw in a statute to take down the whole, otherwise constitutional statute,” Kavanaugh wrote.