Why Is Charles Koch Funding the COVID Origins Cover-Up?
Koch's Relationship with Moderna’s Robert Langer Reveals His Role in the Plandemic
Just as Event 201 eerily predicted COVID-19 and delivered the pandemic playbook to policy makers, the COVID Commission Planning Group intends to write the official story of COVID-19, shaping whatever investigations a Republican-controlled Congress may launch after the 2022 elections. From the origin of SARS-CoV-2 to the impacts of lockdowns, banned treatments and forced injections, the COVID Commission Planning Group will shape Congress’s “#pandemic #storytelling.” The Planning Group is staffed by the same team that organized Event 201: the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security.
This article is about the billionaires who are backing the COVID Commission Planning Group, specifically why Charles Koch is funding it.
If you’d like more information on the Planning Group and its director Philip Zelikow, I recommend Edward Curtin’s “Second Stage Terror Wars,” James Corbett and James Evan Pilato’s “Philip Zelikow, Former Exec. Dir. Of 9/11 Commission, To Chair Covid Commission,” Covert Action Magazine’s “Philip Zelikow’s Role in Proposed Bipartisan COVID-19 Commission Raises Serious Doubts About its Credibility,” and Dr. Joseph Mercola’s “Coming COVID Commission Is a Gates-Led Cover-Up.”
The COVID Commission Planning Group is funded by some of the same billionaires who gave us the Plandemic.
Eric Schmidt, Jeffrey Skoll and Rajiv Shah funded the virus hunting and gain-of-function research that led to SARS-CoV-2. (Read my 2001 article, “Google's Eric Schmidt: Funding the Wuhan Lab & the COVID Origins Cover-Up.”)
But, there is a fourth funder, Charles Koch, who to my knowledge hasn’t funded virus hunting or gain-of-function research.
Why is Koch funding the COVID-origins cover-up?
The question stumped me for a year. There was a tangential connection through Jeffrey Epstein who “befriended” (a better word might be “entrapped”) both Metabiota’s Nathan Wolfe and Charles’ brother David Koch.
But, nothing that directly connected Metabiota with the Koch brothers.
I was so focused on the gain-of-function angle that that I nearly missed the Koch brothers’ relationship with the man identified early in the pandemic as the “Coronavirus Common Denominator”:
You might not have heard of him, but you’ve likely heard of his inventions. He has a jaw-dropping 138 companies listed on his 2020 Conflicts of Interest disclosure, including Monsanto.
In addition to Moderna’s mRNA COVID-19 gene-modifying injections, Langer also developed the microneedle vaccine delivery system known as quantum dot tattoos that store vaccine records under the skin. (I wrote about this in “Bill Gates: The Billionaire Who Puts Vaccine Profiteering Above Human Life.”) Langer’s paper on the invention is “Biocompatible near-infrared quantum dots delivered to the skin by microneedle patches record vaccination.” His patent is “Microneedle tattoo patches and use thereof.”
This viral video of Dr. Carrie Madej talking about Langer’s quantum dot tattoos was attacked by fact-checkers, but she was right to fear that Moderna’s COVID-19 injections would be administered via microneedles, given the technologies were developed by the same person. (The complete video is available on Dr. Madej’s website.)
Langer is currently working with Charles Koch to manufacture “smart” implantable devices that can complete medical diagnostic and drug delivery tasks via artificial intelligence in a “touchless” manner—without the involvement of human beings. Their technologies could be so disruptive that they could displace doctors and pharmacists. As the World Economic Forum and the Rand Corporation explain, this is the Internet of Bodies.
Langer is on the board of ImmunAI, a Koch Disruptive Technologies company that "uses single-cell genomics and machine learning to discover and develop novel therapeutics that reprogram the immune system."
He’s on the advisory board of Phillips-Medicize, a company in Koch Industries’ Molex division that provides the sick care industry's "connected drug delivery" market with implantable medical devices including "autoinjectors."
In a fascinating news report from a decade ago, Langer explained how his implantable medical devices—he calls them “microchips” here—could be used for remote-control delivery of “precision medicine” via cell-phone. Note that when the Bristol Myers Squibb rep talks about “precision medicine,” she uses the term as a euphemism for “gene therapy” or, more accurately, genetic modification.
What are some of the applications of the transhumanist technologies developed by Langer and Koch?
Here’s one that’s perfect for their eugenicist agenda: Langer’s remote-controlled lifetime supply of birth control, implanted in the body. Hat tip to Dr. Joseph Mercola:
Need to get your booster shot, but don’t want to leave the house because you’re afraid of getting COVID? Here’s Langer’s 3D printing technology that allows you to “receive a single injection that, in effect, would have multiple boosters already built into it.”
If it’s already occurred to you that these technologies could be used as bioweapons, your Spidey sense is on target.
As Whitney Webb reports in “Coronavirus Gives A Dangerous Boost To DARPA’s Darkest Agenda,” this mRNA “reprogramming” of human cells with “synthetically created genetic instructions” has been and is funded by the Pentagon.
Why would the Pentagon want to hack the software of life by reprogramming human cells with synthetically created genetic instructions?
Langer’s Moderna was famously funded by DARPA, but vaccines are not the endgame for this technology or the Department of Defense.
They’re working on human gene editing. One way to deliver gene editing tools like CRISPR into the human body is through mRNA.
In its Safe Genes program, DARPA has Nobel Prize winner Jennifer Doudna figuring out how to use anti-CRISPR proteins to defend people against “unwanted gene editing activity.”
Unwanted gene editing activity? Gene editing as a bioweapon? How would that even be possible?
DARPA has a word for it, a Horizontal Environmental Genetic Alteration Agent.
If gene editing were to be used as a bioweapon, mRNA would be the ideal genetic alteration agent, especially if it could be delivered in an inhalable form, which is exactly what Langer has been working on. (See “Engineers create an inhalable form of messenger RNA.”)
Understanding that Koch is Langer’s patron, investor and business partner, puts Koch’s pandemic profiteering in context.
2020 was Koch’s third-most profitable year. By October 2021, Koch’s net worth had grown to an estimated $51 billion. That’s up 33.5 percent and more than $12 billion from his estimated net worth of $38.2 billion at the start of the pandemic.
A page on his website that highlights “How Koch is Fighting COVID-19” lists ways his companies are thriving in the COVID economy, including:
Infor’s COVID testing and vaccination tracking: “More than 85 percent of COVID-19 tests in the United States are being done at labs using Infor’s Cloverleaf healthcare IT platform to manage the data. Infor and MphRx introduced a global solution to help healthcare organizations manage COVID-19 vaccine inoculations and track vaccinations & outcomes.”
Molex’s ventilator parts and connectivity products: “Molex worked closely with their customers to quickly provide component parts for life-saving medical technology like ventilators. As social distancing and work from home has become our new way of life, Molex’s connectivity products for data and telecommunications infrastructure and defense communications are essential to keeping business operating and ensuring that the world stays connected.”
i360’s government-to-citizen communications: “Multiple municipalities across the country are using i360’s platform and its mobile phone database of US adults to communicate with citizens with latest information and steps needed to help flatten the curve.”
LearnEverywhere.org’s online education tools: “[L]aunching new digital tools through LearnEverywhere.org to help parents teach their kids at home, funding innovative education models through VELA Education Fund, supporting an initiative to assist university and college professors transition to online instruction.”
Charles Koch is a COVID profiteer who’s been using the lockdowns to roll out Koch Industries’ 4th Industrial Revolution technologies, but he didn’t just seize the opportunity that lockdowns provided, he helped shape lockdown policy by giving his support to pro-lockdown authorities.
Anthony Fauci is the face of U.S. lockdowns, and the “science” he used to justify the policy was funded by Charles Koch.
Fauci relied on the work of Neil Ferguson of Imperial College London, as reported in the March 19, 2020, Financial Times article, “The shocking coronavirus study that rocked the UK and US.”
In his book The Real Anthony Fauci, Robert Kennedy, Jr., called Ferguson a “scammer and pandemic fabricator” who “overestimated US deaths by 525 percent” and “the epidemiologist who produced the wildly exaggerated COVID-19 death forecasts that helped ratchet up the COVID-19 fear campaign and rationalize draconian lockdowns.” Kennedy writes:
Ferguson is the modeling impresario at drumming up phony pandemics. His curriculum vitae includes:
In 2001, a published Imperial College projection by Ferguson sparked the mass culling of eleven million sheep and cattle during an outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease.
In 2002, he projected human deaths of 136,000 in the UK from mad cow disease. The UK government slaughtered millions of cows. The actual number of deaths was 177.
In 2005, Ferguson predicted up to 150 million people could be killed from bird flu. Only 282 people died worldwide from the disease between 2003 and 2009. [To this day, according to the Centers for Disease Control, there have only been 860 human infections, with about 53 percent of those resulting in death. No one in the U.S. had ever tested positive, until April 28, 2022, when it happened to a prisoner culling a flock “with presumptive H5N1 bird flu.” The CDC admits, "it is possible the detection of H5 bird flu in this specimen is a result of surface contamination of the nasal membrane." For more, read my report “Stop Plandemic Bird Flu.”]
In 2009, Ferguson projected swine flu would kill 65,000 Brits. Swine flu killed 457 people in the U.K.
In 2020, Ferguson famously predicted up to 2.2 million COVID-19 deaths in the United States in 2020 alone. Dr. Fauci, and many Western countries, used Ferguson’s projection to justify lockdowns and other draconian mandates.
In March 2020, the Charles-Koch-funded Mercatus Center at George Mason University awarded an Emergent Ventures grant to Ferguson for "good policy thinking," but Ferguson isn’t the only lockdown authority supported by Charles Koch.
At his Charles Koch Foundation, he’s been building the political case for lockdowns by funding the research of economist Joseph J. Sabia, Director of the Center for Health Economics & Policy Studies at San Diego State University. Beginning in April 2020, Sabia published a series of studies in support of lockdowns that claimed:
In the month following California’s initial lockdown order, there were 1,661 fewer COVID-19 deaths than there would have been without the policy.
In Texas counties that were the first to order lockdowns, COVID-19 case growth fell by 19 to 26 percentage points in two-and-a-half weeks.
Statewide lockdowns were associated with a reduction in coronavirus-related deaths.
Lockdowns violate fundamental human rights and their imposition is a form of violence that inflicts mental and physical suffering to the extent that there can be no justification for lockdowns. Lockdowns are simply unethical and cannot be allowed in the name of “public health.” It doesn’t make sense to study, as the Charles Koch Foundation has done, whether lockdowns reduced COVID cases or deaths, without including data on the public health harms and human rights abuses of lockdowns.
However, it is also important to point out that the government tally of COVID cases and deaths is rife with fraud. So, even if it did make sense to simply measure COVID cases or deaths avoided via lockdowns, that couldn’t be done without correcting inflated and falsified data. Dr. Henry Ealy and his team have exposed the Center for Disease Control’s data deception and filed a grand jury petition demanding justice. For more information, read “The Data Didn't Lie... People Did.”
Disturbingly, the Charles Koch Foundation isn’t just interested in perpetuating the lie that fundamentally unethical lockdowns can somehow be justified. Koch is fascinated by the impact of lockdowns as a psychological operation. Koch’s economist Sabia investigated how lockdowns, even when temporary and imperfectly enforced, cause longterm changes in human perception and behavior that carry their impact forward. He showed that lockdowns often remained effective, even when they were breached by large events and even after they were lifted, because of the “stickiness in individuals’ risk-related beliefs.” Sabia found that:
The Black Lives Matter protests following the May 25, 2020, police murder of George Floyd, President Donald Trump’s June 2020 campaign rally at the indoor Bank of Oklahoma arena and the January 6, 2021, Capitol protest did not increase COVID cases because net stay-at-home behavior increased along with these events, consistent with the hypothesis that non-participants shifted their activity in response to the perceived heightened risk of contagion. Similarly, when the Wisconsin Supreme Court abolished the state’s “Safer at Home” order on May 13, 2020, and when Texas became the first state to abolish its mask mandate and fully lift capacity constraints for all businesses on March 10, 2021, the termination had little impact on social distancing and there is no evidence that the change impacted COVID case growth. “Together, these findings underscore the persistence of late-pandemic era private behavior and stickiness in individuals’ risk-related beliefs, and suggest that reopening policies may have impacts that are more muted than policymakers expect.” By contrast, the August 2020 Sturgis Motorcycle Rally did increase COVID cases, and generated public health costs of as much as $12.2 billion, because stay-at-home behavior among local residents, as measured by median hours spent at home, fell.
The data for these studies came from anonymized cell phone data via SafeGraph.
The Charles Koch Foundation also funded Josh Grubbs to write two papers arguing that political opposition to lockdowns and non-compliance with lockdown measures were explained by "libertarian and neoliberal elements within Christian nationalism" and "xenophobic" beliefs within these groups: “Culture Wars and COVID-19 Conduct: Christian Nationalism, Religiosity, and Americans’ Behavior During the Coronavirus Pandemic” and “Save the Economy, Liberty, and Yourself: Christian Nationalism and Americans’ Views on Government COVID-19 Restrictions,”
Nevertheless, many people still associate Koch with libertarianism and there’s a myth being perpetuated that he is an opponent of lockdowns.
If you Google “Charles Koch lockdowns” you won’t find any of the evidence that I’ve presented that Charles Koch is profiting from and promoting lockdowns and funding a COVID origins cover-up. Instead you’ll find a report by Walker Bragman and Alex Kotch, and several amplifications of it, called “How The Koch Network Hijacked The War On COVID.”
Ironically, for their claim that "lockdown measures drove down cases in the U.S." Bragman and Kotch used Charles Koch funded studies!
Apparently, they didn’t notice this, as they rushed towards the main purpose of their report, which was to link the Great Barrington Declaration, and its authors Stanford University professor Jay Bhattacharya, former Harvard Medical School professor Martin Kulldorff, and Oxford University professor Sunetra Gupta, to Koch.
The evidence Bragman and Kotch used to connect the Great Barrington Declaration to Koch was cribbed from a David Gorski and Gavin Yamey opinion piece on a BMJ blog, “Covid-19 and the new merchants of doubt.” The BMJ made them print a correction on September 23, 2021:
The phrase, “this is not the first time billionaires aligned with industry have ‘funded’ proponents of herd immunity was changed to “‘provided support'” to proponents of herd immunity; to clarify that the GBD arose out of a conference hosted and heavily promoted by the AIER instead of being sponsored by the AIER; that the AIER received funding from the Charles Koch Foundation rather than being part of a network of organisations funded by Charles Koch; and that Scott Atlas’s association with AIER was as a contributor.
Bragman and Kotch took no heed of these corrections when they republished Yamey’s initial accusations.
And, they never mentioned that Yamey gets his funding from Bill Gates:
Competing interests: GY has received research funding from Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance (Gavi) and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, both of which support COVID-19 vaccine development and deployment. He was an unpaid member of the World Bank’s COVID-19 Vaccine Development Taskforce and an unpaid adviser to Gavi in the design of COVAX. He has written articles, including in TIME, in support of public health measures to curb COVID-19 (including masks; test, trace, isolate, and support; distancing; workplace and school safety measures; and ventilation of buildings). He was a co-author of a Lancet correspondence, “Scientific consensus on the COVID-19 pandemic: we need to act now” (Lancet 2020;396:E71-E72) that was the basis for the Jon Snow Memorandum.
Predictably, in “Scientific consensus on the COVID-19 pandemic: we need to act now,” Yamey and his co-authors rest their assumptions on the work of Koch-funded scientist Neil Ferguson.
For a full rebuttal of Yamey, see Martin Kulldorff’s “Covid, lockdown and the retreat ofscientific debate.”
Unlike his fellow funders of the COVID Commission Planning Group, Charles Koch, to my knowledge, did not fund the virus hunting and gain-of-function research that likely caused the COVID-19 pandemic. However, his involvement in the Planning Group makes perfect sense given the evidence that he is making money off lockdowns, supporting the fabricated “science” that justifies their imposition, toying with their psychological impact and attempting to marginalize lockdown skeptics.
Disturbingly, his partnership with “Coronavirus Common Denominator” Robert Langer to roll out products for the World Economic Forum’s Internet of Bodies, shows that Koch’s vision goes far beyond this pandemic or even the next. If Koch gets his way, each one of us will have inserted into our bodies what amounts to tiny doctors offices and pharmacies operated via remote control and artificial intelligence. Koch is already making use of how the psychological impact of lockdowns softened resistance to his implantable medical devices and surveillance systems.