Not only did Sen. Bill Cassidy vote to convict President Trump of insurrection over the January 6 hoax back in 2021; not only did he call, in 2023, for Trump’s resignation from the 2024 race over the documents hoax; in fact, as late as September of last year, two months out from the election, Cassidy, a nominal Republican, refused to endorse his party’s nominee, instead offering the weaselly out that he was “not voting for Harris.”
Via Business Insider, September 15, 2024 (emphasis added):
Four of the senators who haven't endorsed Trump were among the original 7 Republicans who voted to convict Trump after the January 6 insurrection…
Louisiana senator [Bill Cassidy], who voted to convict Trump after January 6, has been strikingly coy about who he will vote for this year.
He has been staunchly critical of Trump over the last several years, including declaring a year ago that the former president should drop out of the race.
All the while, he has declined to say who he would eventually vote for in 2024, simply saying it would be "a Republican."
Over the summer, Cassidy said in a statement that he would "commit to working with President Trump if he is the next president—and it appears he is going to be—to make things better for all."
In September, when Business Insider asked Cassidy about who he would vote for this November — including whether he was ruling out voting for Trump — the senator repeated three times that he's "not voting for Harris."
Real team player, this guy.
With that background established, the entire HHS Secretary Kennedy Senate hearing two weeks ago was a debacle from start to finish. The Swamp monsters from both sides of the aisle — dear colleagues all, who prioritize class loyalty over any professed ideological conviction — never fail to reveal themselves during these spectacles for the pharmaceutical industry lackeys they are.
Sen. Bill Cassidy, one of its participants, true to form, gleefully piled onto the public tarring and feathering of Trump’s most effective and popular cabinet pick.
Consider how this dirtbag begins his interrogation of RFK Jr.: trying to pander to President Trump about the Nobel Peace Prize he deserves, hoping to trap Kennedy in a non-answerable:
- on the one hand, RFK Jr. knows, and has said publicly many times, that Operation Warp Speed was an unmitigated disaster;
- on the other hand, Cassidy understands that Kennedy would naturally hesitate to criticize the boss who has given him so much leeway in instituting their mutually agreed upon MAHA agenda.
This ego-massaging scheme as a way to nudge Trump in the industry’s preferred direction appears to be orchestrated. Trump recently, via Truth Social, for the first time ever, publicly expressed skepticism that the COVID-19 shots were the miracle their purveyors have claimed. So, Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla also came out to offer up Trump as a candidate for the Nobel Peace Prize for Operation Warp Speed, per Axios — a clear attempt at damage control via flattery.
Related: WATCH: Pfizer CEO Flops Attempting to Defend Vax Liability Shield
So it would appear that Cassidy got the same marching order from his handlers.
That’s how these people operate; none of their rhetoric, again, is about arriving at truth but rather posturing for the cameras and for the president, whom Cassidy desperately hopes won’t endorse his primary challenger.
One of Kennedy’s tactics during the onslaught of pharmaceutical industry talking points at the hearing last week — which I highly endorse — is to explicitly call out, using precise figures, “donations” (read: bribes) to these people posing as public servants.
Related: Elizabeth Warren DESTROYED by X Community Notes Over Pharma Corruption
Cassidy is one of the worst offenders.
According to Open Secrets, from 2019 through 2024, Cassidy took $1,313,974 in "donations" from individuals and PACs in the “Health Professionals” category and $712,504 from individuals and PACS in the “Pharmaceuticals/Health Products” sector.
These figures, of course, don’t account for so-called “dark money” funneled through Super PACs, the origin of which, as the name suggests, is unknown.
Via KFF Health News (emphasis added):
Pharmaceutical company PAC contributions are only part of the picture, though. Dollars from individual drug company employees may flow in the same direction, as well as “dark money” spending that often dwarfs what must be disclosed.
“The PAC contribution is a signal to other folks who are associated with the industry,” Billet said.
PhRMA gives hard-to-trace millions to American Action Network and other conservative groups that buy TV ads and robocalls and engage in other political advocacy.
The "donations" flowing to Cassidy, surely coincidentally, spiked once he was named the top dog on the Senate Health Committee.
Via Stat News (emphasis added):
Sen. Bill Cassidy’s new perch as the top Republican on the Senate health committee has attracted some attention — and some campaign cash — from the executives of pharmaceutical companies, federal disclosures show.
The slew of campaign donations from drug industry executives came about a week after Cassidy, a Louisiana Republican, officially became the ranking member of the Senate health committee.
The contributions all came on either Feb. 10 or 11, and included $5,800 from Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla, $5,000 from Eli Lilly CEO David Ricks, $2,900 from Bristol Myers Squibb CEO Giovanni Caforio, and $2,500 from Biogen CEO Christopher Viehbacher, all of whom sit on PhRMA’s board.
Pharmaceutical companies’ political action committees supported Cassidy during the rest of last quarter, as well. GSK’s committee gave $2,500, Boehringer Ingelheim’s gave $1,000, Novartis’ gave $1,000, Takeda’s gave $2,500, Alnylam’s gave $2,500, Bristol Myers Squibb’s gave $1,000, Astellas’ gave $5,000, Eisai’s gave $2,900, and Gilead’s gave $1,000. Individuals contributed, too — Gilead CEO Daniel O’Day gave $5,800, PhRMA COO Lori Reilly gave $1,500, and PhRMA Senior Vice President for Federal Advocacy Anne Esposito gave $1,000.
There’s plenty of policymaking coming up that is of interest to the pharma industry on Cassidy’s committee.
One has to ask: what do pharmaceutical industry PACs and executives see in Cassidy such that they’re eager to pull out their wallets to support his political aspirations? Are they merely impressed with his humble devotion to the citizenry? Do they not foresee any return on their investment? Are these people altruists?
Or are they buying performances like this, passionate defenses of industry under the auspices of a Senate seal?
Trump is reportedly mulling endorsing one of Cassidy’s primary challengers, the current frontrunner for the MAGA nod being Rep. Julia Letlow.I can’t promise Letlow won’t turn out to be a letdown, but it’s hard to imagine her failing more miserably to deliver for her constituents than Cassidy.
