CORONAVIRUS UPDATE: March 27th

March 27, 2020

WRITER

Glenn gives the latest coronavirus numbers, updating YOU on everything needed to know as Americans and officials monitor China's new COVID-19 virus:

Daily Stats as of 5:30 AM CT (from John's Hopkins)

Total Confirmed Cases Worldwide: 542,478 (up from 486,702 Yesterday)
Total Confirmed Deaths Worldwide: 24,369 (up from 22,022 Yesterday)
Total Confirmed Recovered Worldwide: 125,490 (up from 117,448 Yesterday)
5% of Active Cases are considered serious (requiring hospitalization) UP from 4% Yesterday, but down from 19% in February
Note that 7% of US Confirmed Cases require Hospitalization
US has 85,749 Confirmed cases and 1,304 Deaths, up from 65,581 cases and 1,036 deaths yesterday
The United States of America now leads the world in total confirmed cases, with 4,409 more cases than China
US has 1,868 officially recovered, against 1,304 deaths

After Terrifying World Governments Into Committing Financial Suicide, UK Scientist Reduces His Death Forecast by 95% https://www.newscientist.com/article/2238578-uk-has-enough-intensive-care-units-for-coronavirus-expert-predicts/

The UK should now be able to cope with the spread of the COVID-19 virus, according to one of the leading epidemiologists advising the UK government.
Neil Ferguson at Imperial College London gave evidence yesterday to the UK's parliamentary select committee on science and technology.
He said that expected increases in National Health Service capacity and ongoing restrictions to people's movements make him "reasonably confident" the health service can cope when the predicted peak of the epidemic arrives in two or three weeks.
UK deaths from the disease are now unlikely to exceed 20,000, he said, and could be much lower.
His previous and dire prediction, from just 10 days ago, was that as many as 500,000 Brittons would likely die.
The need for intensive care beds will get very close to capacity in some areas, but won't be breached at a national level, said Ferguson.
The new projections are based on computer simulations of the virus spreading, which take into account the properties of the virus, the reduced transmission between people asked to stay at home and the capacity of hospitals, particularly intensive care units.
"We'll be paying for this year for decades to come," Ferguson said. "But if people follow the Government's guidelines, we'll be able to cope."

UK Prime Minister Positive https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-boris-johnson-tests-positive-for-covid-19-11964493

Boris Johnson, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, has confirmed he tested positive for COVID-19
"Over the last 24 hours I have developed mild symptoms and tested positive for coronavirus," he said via Twitter.
"I am now self-isolating, but I will continue to lead the government's response via video-conference as we fight this virus."
Mr. Johnson, whose partner Carrie Symonds is pregnant, will isolate for 2-weeks, a spokesperson confirmed.
"Together we will beat this. #StayHomeSaveLives."

"Poor People Are Immune" Claims Mexican Governor https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/26/americas/mexico-coronavirus-luis-miguel-barbosa-intl/index.html

The governor of the central Mexican state of Puebla told reporters Wednesday that poor people "are immune" from the coronavirus.
During his remarks, which broadcast live on YouTube and Facebook, Gov. Luis Miguel Barbosa posed a question, asking reporters which people were infected at the moment.
"The majority are wealthy people, you know," he said, answering his own question. "If you're rich you're at risk, but if you're poor, no, well us poor, we are immune."
There is no scientific evidence to suggest the virus affects people differently due to economic status. His remarks sparked an uproar on social media, with many questioning why a government official would spread information that has no basis in fact.
Barbosa noted that many of those who contracted the virus had recently traveled, suggesting a link between wealth and travel.

Trump: Maybe Don't Shake Hands Every Again https://ca.news.yahoo.com/trump-suggests-americans-shouldn-t-221802199.html

President Donald Trump suggested that Americans should consider giving up the tradition of greeting each other with a hand-shake -- forever.
Trump has set a goal of returning Americans back to work by Easter, despite the coronavirus outbreak, but he said at a White House news conference on Thursday that they shouldn't entirely abandon "social distancing" practices, especially shaking hands.
"Maybe people aren't going to be shaking hands anymore," Trump said, adding that he had discussed the practice with Anthony Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.
"He was saying the regular flu would be cut down by quite a bit if we didn't do that - if we didn't shake hands," Trump said.

Even In A Pandemic, Fake Meat Won't Sell https://dailycaller.com/2020/03/26/coronavirus-food-shopping-vegan/

Vegan and plant-based can be seen in proportions that appear recently stocked at grocery stores across the US.
"Not even in a crisis will folks buy the plant-based hot dogs," Tweeted one observant citizen with a picture of the frozen food aisle baren except for tofu hot dogs.
"Let's face it, they taste like crap. I'd rather starve," said another via Twitter. "Not enough mustard in the world to cover-up that stuff."
Another user closed the book on the topic, "Two observations today from the grocery store. Plant-based fake-meats are not desired - and people need to smile more! Good day!"

Patriot Thomas Massie Defends Constitution, Gets Persecuted https://www.foxnews.com/politics/extreme-precautions-ordered-in-house-ahead-of-historic-vote-on-largest-stimulus-package-in-us-history

In no small feat of bravery, Massie stands alone against a tyranny born of fear.
Furious lawmakers voiced serious concerns on Capitol Hill late Thursday that a Republican House member could "go rogue" and possibly scuttle a vote on the $2 trillion coronavirus stimulus package.
Fox News is told there is deep worry on both sides of the aisle that Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., could try to sidetrack House plans to quickly approve the coronavirus bill via a "voice vote" -- a verbal exercise in which those in favor shout yea, and those opposed holler nay. The loudest side would prevail.
"It's the Thomas Massie show," said one senior Republican source who asked to not be identified.
"He is going to do it," a senior Republican leadership source told Fox News, explaining that leadership had tried every type of arm twisting -- and it's not working.
The source said he was actively calling members and telling them to get on planes in the morning to come back to Washington so that a quorum of 216 members could be established if Massie were to demand one.
The source explained that Massie got a very forceful call from a member of the House Freedom Caucus urging him to allow the voice vote, but Massie won't budge.
The 880-page coronavirus stimulus package would amount to the largest economic relief bill in the history of the U.S. for individuals, large corporations, and small businesses -- and its unanimous passage in the Senate came despite grave concerns on both sides about whether it involved too much spending or not enough.
Massie did not respond to multiple requests for comment late Thursday. It was unclear exactly why he may want to delay the bill, which some lawmakers have said contains too much wasteful spending -- including $25 million for the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts in Washington, D.C. and $10 million to fund US Salmon hatcheries in Alaska.

GLENN

'Rage against the dying of the light': Charlie Kirk lived that mandate

BLOG

Glenn Beck resurrects the 9-12 Project to support Charlie Kirk's family

GLENN

The critical difference: Rights from the Creator, not the state

POLL: Is Gen Z’s anger over housing driving them toward socialism?

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

A recent poll conducted by Justin Haskins, a long-time friend of the show, has uncovered alarming trends among young Americans aged 18-39, revealing a generation grappling with deep frustrations over economic hardships, housing affordability, and a perceived rigged system that favors the wealthy, corporations, and older generations. While nearly half of these likely voters approve of President Trump, seeing him as an anti-establishment figure, over 70% support nationalizing major industries, such as healthcare, energy, and big tech, to promote "equity." Shockingly, 53% want a democratic socialist to win the 2028 presidential election, including a third of Trump voters and conservatives in this age group. Many cite skyrocketing housing costs, unfair taxation on the middle class, and a sense of being "stuck" or in crisis as driving forces, with 62% believing the economy is tilted against them and 55% backing laws to confiscate "excess wealth" like second homes or luxury items to help first-time buyers.

This blend of Trump support and socialist leanings suggests a volatile mix: admiration for disruptors who challenge the status quo, coupled with a desire for radical redistribution to address personal struggles. Yet, it raises profound questions about the roots of this discontent—Is it a failure of education on history's lessons about socialism's failures? Media indoctrination? Or genuine systemic barriers? And what does it portend for the nation’s trajectory—greater division, a shift toward authoritarian policies, or an opportunity for renewal through timeless values like hard work and individual responsibility?

Glenn wants to know what YOU think: Where do Gen Z's socialist sympathies come from? What does it mean for the future of America? Make your voice heard in the poll below:

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism comes from perceived economic frustrations like unaffordable housing and a rigged system favoring the wealthy and corporations?

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism, including many Trump supporters, is due to a lack of education about the historical failures of socialist systems?

Do you think that these poll results indicate a growing generational divide that could lead to more political instability and authoritarian tendencies in America's future?

Do you think that this poll implies that America's long-term stability relies on older generations teaching Gen Z and younger to prioritize self-reliance, free-market ideals, and personal accountability?

Do you think the Gen Z support for Trump is an opportunity for conservatives to win them over with anti-establishment reforms that preserve liberty?

Americans expose Supreme Court’s flag ruling as a failed relic

Anna Moneymaker / Staff | Getty Images

In a nation where the Stars and Stripes symbolize the blood-soaked sacrifices of our heroes, President Trump's executive order to crack down on flag desecration amid violent protests has ignited fierce debate. But in a recent poll, Glenn asked the tough question: Can Trump protect the Flag without TRAMPLING free speech? Glenn asked, and you answered—thousands weighed in on this pressing clash between free speech and sacred symbols.

The results paint a picture of resounding distrust toward institutional leniency. A staggering 85% of respondents support banning the burning of American flags when it incites violence or disturbs the peace, a bold rejection of the chaos we've seen from George Floyd riots to pro-Palestinian torchings. Meanwhile, 90% insist that protections for burning other flags—like Pride or foreign banners—should not be treated the same as Old Glory under the First Amendment, exposing the hypocrisy in equating our nation's emblem with fleeting symbols. And 82% believe the Supreme Court's Texas v. Johnson ruling, shielding flag burning as "symbolic speech," should not stand without revision—can the official story survive such resounding doubt from everyday Americans weary of government inaction?

Your verdict sends a thunderous message: In this divided era, the flag demands defense against those who exploit freedoms to sow disorder, without trampling the liberties it represents. It's a catastrophic failure of the establishment to ignore this groundswell.

Want to make your voice heard? Check out more polls HERE.

Labor Day EXPOSED: The Marxist roots you weren’t told about

JOSEPH PREZIOSO / Contributor | Getty Images

During your time off this holiday, remember the man who started it: Peter J. McGuire, a racist Marxist who co-founded America’s first socialist party.

Labor Day didn’t begin as a noble tribute to American workers. It began as a negotiation with ideological terrorists.

In the late 1800s, factory and mine conditions were brutal. Workers endured 12-to-15-hour days, often seven days a week, in filthy, dangerous environments. Wages were low, injuries went uncompensated, and benefits didn’t exist. Out of desperation, Americans turned to labor unions. Basic protections had to be fought for because none were guaranteed.

Labor Day wasn’t born out of gratitude. It was a political payoff to Marxist radicals who set trains ablaze and threatened national stability.

That era marked a seismic shift — much like today. The Industrial Revolution, like our current digital and political upheaval, left millions behind. And wherever people get left behind, Marxists see an opening.

A revolutionary wedge

This was Marxism’s moment.

Economic suffering created fertile ground for revolutionary agitation. Marxists, socialists, and anarchists stepped in to stoke class resentment. Their goal was to turn the downtrodden into a revolutionary class, tear down the existing system, and redistribute wealth by force.

Among the most influential agitators was Peter J. McGuire, a devout Irish Marxist from New York. In 1874, he co-founded the Social Democratic Workingmens Party of North America, the first Marxist political party in the United States. He was also a vice president of the American Federation of Labor, which would become the most powerful union in America.

McGuire’s mission wasn’t hidden. He wanted to transform the U.S. into a socialist nation through labor unions.

That mission soon found a useful symbol.

In the 1880s, labor leaders in Toronto invited McGuire to attend their annual labor festival. Inspired, he returned to New York and launched a similar parade on Sept. 5 — chosen because it fell halfway between Independence Day and Thanksgiving.

The first parade drew over 30,000 marchers who skipped work to hear speeches about eight-hour workdays and the alleged promise of Marxism. The parade caught on across the country.

Negotiating with radicals

By 1894, Labor Day had been adopted by 30 states. But the federal government had yet to make it a national holiday. A major strike changed everything.

In Pullman, Illinois, home of the Pullman railroad car company, tensions exploded. The economy tanked. George Pullman laid off hundreds of workers and slashed wages for those who remained — yet refused to lower the rent on company-owned homes.

That injustice opened the door for Marxist agitators to mobilize.

Sympathetic railroad workers joined the strike. Riots broke out. Hundreds of railcars were torched. Mail service was disrupted. The nation’s rail system ground to a halt.

President Grover Cleveland — under pressure in a midterm election year — panicked. He sent 12,000 federal troops to Chicago. Two strikers were killed in the resulting clashes.

With the crisis spiraling and Democrats desperate to avoid political fallout, Cleveland struck a deal. Within six days of breaking the strike, Congress rushed through legislation making Labor Day a federal holiday.

It was the first of many concessions Democrats would make to organized labor in exchange for political power.

What we really celebrated

Labor Day wasn’t born out of gratitude. It was a political payoff to Marxist radicals who set trains ablaze and threatened national stability.

Kean Collection / Staff | Getty Images

What we celebrated was a Canadian idea, brought to America by the founder of the American Socialist Party, endorsed by racially exclusionary unions, and made law by a president and Congress eager to save face.

It was the first of many bones thrown by the Democratic Party to union power brokers. And it marked the beginning of a long, costly compromise with ideologues who wanted to dismantle the American way of life — from the inside out.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Durham annex EXPOSES Soros, Pentagon ties to Deep State machine

ullstein bild Dtl. / Contributor | Getty Images

The Durham annex and ODNI report documents expose a vast network of funders and fixers — from Soros’ Open Society Foundations to the Pentagon.

In a column earlier this month, I argued the deep state is no longer deniable, thanks to Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard. I outlined the structural design of the deep state as revealed by two recent declassifications: Gabbard’s ODNI report and the Durham annex released by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa).

These documents expose a transnational apparatus of intelligence agencies, media platforms, think tanks, and NGOs operating as a parallel government.

The deep state is funded by elite donors, shielded by bureaucracies, and perpetuated by operatives who drift between public office and private influence without accountability.

But institutions are only part of the story. This web of influence is made possible by people — and by money. This follow-up to the first piece traces the key operatives and financial networks fueling the deep state’s most consequential manipulations, including the Trump-Russia collusion hoax.

Architects and operatives

At the top of the intelligence pyramid sits John Brennan, President Obama’s CIA director and one of the principal architects of the manipulated 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment. James Clapper, who served as director of national intelligence, signed off on that same ICA and later joined 50 other former officials in concluding the Hunter Biden laptop had “all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation” ahead of the 2020 election. The timing, once again, served a political objective.

James Comey, then FBI director, presided over Crossfire Hurricane. According to the Durham annex, he also allowed the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private email server to collapse after it became entangled with “sensitive intelligence” revealing her plan to tie President Donald Trump to Russia.

That plan, as documented in the annex, originated with Hillary Clinton herself and was personally pushed by President Obama. Her campaign, through law firm Perkins Coie, hired Fusion GPS, which commissioned the now-debunked Steele dossier — a document used to justify surveillance warrants on Trump associates.

Several individuals orbiting the Clinton operation have remained influential. Jake Sullivan, who served as President Biden’s national security adviser, was a foreign policy aide to Clinton during her 2016 campaign. He was named in 2021 as a figure involved in circulating the collusion narrative, and his presence in successive Democratic administrations suggests institutional continuity.

Andrew McCabe, then the FBI’s deputy director, approved the use of FISA warrants derived from unverified sources. His connection to the internal “insurance policy” discussion — described in a 2016 text by FBI official Peter Strzok to colleague Lisa Page — underscores the Bureau’s political posture during that election cycle.

The list of political enablers is long but revealing:

Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), who, as a former representative from California, chaired the House Intelligence Committee at the time and publicly promoted the collusion narrative while having access to intelligence that contradicted it.

Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif) and Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), both members of the “Gang of Eight” with oversight of intelligence operations, advanced the same narrative despite receiving classified briefings.

Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.), ranking member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, exchanged encrypted text messages with a Russian lobbyist in efforts to speak with Christopher Steele.

These were not passive recipients of flawed intelligence. They were participants in its amplification.

The funding networks behind the machine

The deep state’s operations are not possible without financing — much of it indirect, routed through a nexus of private foundations, quasi-governmental entities, and federal agencies.

George Soros’ Open Society Foundations appear throughout the Durham annex. In one instance, Open Society Foundations documents were intercepted by foreign intelligence and used to track coordination between NGOs and the Clinton campaign’s anti-Trump strategy.

This system was not designed for transparency but for control.

Soros has also been a principal funder of the Center for American Progress Action Fund, which ran a project during the Trump administration called the Moscow Project, dedicated to promoting the Russia collusion narrative.

The Tides Foundation and Arabella Advisors both specialize in “dark money” donor-advised funds that obscure the source and destination of political funding. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation was the biggest donor to the Arabella Advisors by far, which routed $127 million through Arabella’s network in 2020 alone and nearly $500 million in total.

The MacArthur Foundation and Rockefeller Foundation also financed many of the think tanks named in the Durham annex, including the Council on Foreign Relations.

Federal funding pipelines

Parallel to the private networks are government-funded influence operations, often justified under the guise of “democracy promotion” or counter-disinformation initiatives.

USAID directed $270 million to Soros-affiliated organizations for overseas “democracy” programs, a significant portion of which has reverberated back into domestic influence campaigns.

The State Department funds the National Endowment for Democracy, a quasi-governmental organization with a $315 million annual budget and ties to narrative engineering projects.

The Department of Homeland Security underwrote entities involved in online censorship programs targeting American citizens.

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

The Pentagon, from 2020 to 2024, awarded over $2.4 trillion to private contractors — many with domestic intelligence capabilities. It also directed $1.4 billion to select think tanks since 2019.

According to public records compiled by DataRepublican, these tax-funded flows often support the very actors shaping U.S. political discourse and global perception campaigns.

Not just domestic — but global

What these disclosures confirm is that the deep state is not a theory. It is a documented structure — funded by elite donors, shielded by bureaucracies, and perpetuated by operatives who drift between public office and private influence without accountability.

This system was not designed for transparency but for control. It launders narratives, neutralizes opposition, and overrides democratic will by leveraging the very institutions meant to protect it.

With the Durham annex and the ODNI report, we now see the network's architecture and its actors — names, agencies, funding trails — all laid bare. What remains is the task of dismantling it before its next iteration takes shape.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.