Press "Enter" to skip to content


09 Feb 20 (SECOND article in a series)

The Convergence of circumstances and facts is awfully difficult to ignore. For an introduction to why GILEAD SCIENCES is relevant to the Cornoavirus scenario, see THIS article which established a direct line from Coronavirus to George Soros.

So here we are. We have a viral epidemic originating in China and with legitimate – very legitimate – arguments about whether this coronavirus is a natural occurrence or some leaked biological weapon. One Canadian biological warfare researcher of this precise specialty is already dead, evidence suggests 4 separate HIV insertions indicative or suggestive of the virus being bio-engineering, the CDC claims to be in the dark because China refuses to cooperate and all of it ties back to a nefarious oligarch whose tentacles reach far and deep into everything wrong, evil and corrupt – George Soros.

So, let’s take a look a closer look at Gilead Sciences, the developer of the drug Remdesivir. It’s veneer level stuff with deeper digging needed but let’s see what can we learn (SOURCE).

  1. Over the years, the company has specialized in the research and development of both anti-cancer and anti-viral treatments. It transitioned out of anti-cancer assets in 2002.
  2. Donald Rumsfeld was recruited to the board in 1988 and the company envelops a number of politicians and governmental figures from both sides of the aisle and with deep Harvard roots.
  3. Gilead debuted on the NASDAQ in January of 1992 and to the tune of $86.26 billion.
  4. Rumsfeld was appointed chairman in 1997 before leaving to become Secretary of Defense in 2001.
  5. By 2017, Gilead’s strong history of growth, performance and acquisitions had lost some of its luster and they needed new products to maintain profitability. Consider, “As of 2017, Gilead’s challenge is to develop or acquire new blockbuster drugs before its current revenue-producers wane or their patent protection expires.”
  6. Notice how the need ties directly to patents as outlined in the first article, which specifically pertained to patent pools? That’s important to remember when considering problem/solution scenarios.
  7. Gilead’s struggles were enmeshed in pricing controversies and ultimately tied to poor management that also funneled money into their own pockets, “To begin with, the evidence that Gilead itself uses its profits to “innovate” is thin at best. In 2016, the company reported profit of $13.5 billion. It spent $11 billion to repurchase its own shares, and about $2.5 billion on stock dividends. So the buybacks and dividends together came to $13.5 billion, in effect consuming 100% of the company’s profit.” (SOURCE)
  8. Oddly, Soros dumped his entire position in Gilead in the second quarter of 2014. (SOURCE)
  9. He did the same in the second quarter of 2016 and right before shares eventually rose by 45%. (SOURCE)

Here’s where that leaves us.

We have a company in Gilead that intimately ties back to Harvard and the federal government and which specializes in anti-cancer and anti-viral medications; especially HIV. It also ties directly to biological weapons. Moreover, the company is losing patent protections while it simultaneously engaging in patent pools. It’s also working to develop new products while illegally fixing the prices of its current ones; while also lining their own pockets illegitimately. At the same time we also have Unitaid, funded by billionaire investor George Soros, working to expand Gilead’s patent pool operations in China, which just so happens to be experiencing a viral outbreak with 4 anomalous HIV insertions. An outbreak in China whereby a Washington State doctor just used Gilead’s drug Remdesivir to demonstrate the first likely effective treatment. All of this against the backdrop of Soros moving out of his entire Gilead position more than once.

Does the federal government benefit from seeing China impacted economically and domestically from such a viral outbreak? Yes. Is the federal government tied to Gilead? Yes. Does Gilead have the capacity to plausibly bio-engineer the coronoavirus with HIV insertions? Yes. Does Gilead benefit from an outbreak in China? Yes. Does Soros have a history of manipulating his holdings with Gilead? Yes. Does Unitaid, which partners with Gilead in patent pooling, stand to benefit from a coronavirus epidemic in China? Yes. Could Soros-backed Unitaid be the conduit to for Gilead to open patent pooling for coronavirus ergo kick-starting Gilead back to financial success and all at the expense of China? Yes. That is a logical argument.

Is that all speculation? Yes. But its speculation rooted in a convergence of fact sets that are difficult to ignore. That said, it’s still speculation and speculation that is veneer level. Proving something like that is a different endeavor.

Or it all just happened by chance.


  1. Marko February 10, 2020

    #8 and #9 don’t mesh unless he purchased more shares in between. You can’t “dump all your shares” twice.

    • Political Moonshine March 11, 2020

      I would agree unless he was timing the market and bought back in prior to dumping it a second time, which is the most logical position. I looked in open-sourced info to find record for buying back in but couldn’t locate it – only so many hours available to read and research and these types of transactions (market, etc.) aren’t necessarily my area of expertise.

Leave a ReplyCancel reply