It recently occured to me, after reading this thread, that I may have been thinking about the smears of Ivermectin a bit too generously.
Obviously they don't want their narrative to collapse, they want the lockdowns to continue, they want the third/fourth/fifth jab rollouts, and they want the vaxx passports (to branch into social credit scores, and to try to push us out of society). Ivermectin puts a stop to all of this.
I've been assuming that any deaths they cause in the meantime, from their perspective, is an added bonus. Not the intended goal of their short-to-midterm plans.
With that said, they want de-pop, either by the jabs and/or at a later time by other means (which of these would become obvious with time, provided their plans aren't stopped).
There is an argument for why significant depop-by-jab isn't a good route for them to go down, yet, given they don't have full control yet and it has the potential to awaken the population against them before they can achieve their goals.
Given that Ivermectin would significantly reduce the rate of ADE amongst our jabbed population, it was thus reduce the rate of death and severe injury amongst our people.
These deaths, if allowed to occur (via the continued supression of Ivermectin and other treatments), would be spun as being the fault of the unvaxxed, for "producing the variants", and used as the "justification" for vaxx passports and further booster shots.
So perhaps there is another reason for the smears of Ivermectin. Perhaps they do want many of our vaxxed people to die, sooner-rather-than-later, to advance their current goals (i.e., they're timeline is being rushed).
At least some of the ivermectin smears may be a white hat op. The Rollling Stone article about the hospital in Oklahoma is so blatantly fraudulent that it's laughable and was quickly retracted, but it also brought tons of attention to ivermectin. In this environment, defending something the left is against is pointless, and smearing it is the only way a white hat op would get any traction, but it would have to be done in such a way that it would be quickly debunked, as this one was.
There seems to be an overall pattern of the corporate media setting up some figure as their newest hero, going all in on the guy, to the point of smearing and censoring anyone who questions their heroism, only to have the guy fall spectacularly in the public eye, in such a way that even the corporate brainwashed are forced to abandon them.
Examples: Mueller, Avenatti, Smollett, and now Cuomo. It also seems like Fauci is also being set up to follow this same path.
On some level the corporate brainwashed should just start to feel stupid when this keeps happening. Think about all these idiot liberal chicks who wanted to have Cuomo’s babies, and posted their worship of him all over their social media, then watching him have to resign for sexual assault, watch his Emmy be retracted, watch his book be cancelled, etc. The corporations might be able to brainwash them into jumping onto their newest hero and memory-holing their Cuomo worship, but that’s still a pretty embarrassing thing, and it’s already come after all the others. Like when you have to go back and erase all your Mueller Time posts, and all your Avenatti for President posts, and your I stand with Jussie posts, and I want to make Cuomo babies posts, they have to start feeling like a bunch of jackasses being yanked around by the media.