GOLIAD, Texas—Sheriffs in Texas are experiencing the impact of the border crisis in their counties every day—whether it’s armed cartel operatives smuggling illegal immigrants, vehicle pursuits resulting in crashes and deaths, or drug overdose deaths from fentanyl brought across the southern border.
In Goliad, Sheriff Roy Boyd sits 200 miles from the Texas–Mexico border, between McAllen and Houston—a major transport corridor of illegal immigrants and illicit goods.
As a 29-year law enforcement veteran in the region, Boyd said he’s never seen a border crisis so bad or border-related crime so egregious.
“There’s no end to it,” he told The Epoch Times on June 23. He monitors 16 cartel-operated sites in his county that are currently dormant, but have been used to stash illegal immigrants on their way to Houston. Currently it’s mostly carloads of illegal immigrants being smuggled straight through his county to the city.
“It’s a movement of individuals from third world countries, all over the place, into our country. But the farther you get into it, the more you realize it’s all done by design—and it’s at the design of the federal government.
“We’re in a transformation of America from a free Republic to moving to something that’s more of a Marxist state.”
Goliad County Sheriff Roy Boyd checks a site used by cartels to smuggle illegal immigrants through Goliad County, Texas, on Nov. 23, 2021. (Charlotte Cuthbertson/The Epoch Times)
Since resident Joe Biden took office in January 2021, border authorities have apprehended more than 3.2 million illegal border crossers, according to Customs and Border Protection data. An additional 800,000 or so have been detected, but evaded capture.
When asked how allowing millions of people from more than 160 countries through the southern border results in the transformation to communism, Boyd harkened back to the 1960’s and President Lyndon B. Johnson’s “war on poverty.”
“LBJ sold the war on poverty to the Democratic National Party … and the DNC’s response was, ‘Why would we give those people something for nothing?’” Boyd said.
LBJ responded by saying he’d have them voting Democratic for 200 years, Boyd said, paraphrasing an infamous quote that has been widely attributed to the former president.
“This is nothing but a replication of the soft enslavement of people through entitlement,” Boyd said. “Because if you understand psychology and you look at the history of things, this is how it functions. Once it starts, it’s hard to stop.”
Trevor Loudon, a communism expert and contributor to The Epoch Times, said in a previous interview that the communists’ main enemy is the United States.
“And if you can’t bring it down through nuclear weapons, you bring it down through illegal immigration, which is maybe just as effective in the long run,” Loudon said.
“This is an orchestrated, communist assault on America, to destroy America’s borders, to create confusion in America, to overwhelm the system politically.”
Loudon said an additional 15 million to 25 million Democratic voters would ensure perpetual Democrat control of government.
“You will have a one-party state in America. And that is the plan. That is why they are doing this,” he said.
“This is Marxist. This is Leninist. And this goes back to American politicians cooperating with hostile foreign powers in the destruction of America. And their No. 1 weapon is illegal immigration and overwhelming the border.”
in Goliad County, Texas, on Nov. 24, 2021. (Charlotte Cuthbertson/The Epoch Times)
Traditionally, noncitizens have voted about 80 percent Democratic and 20 percent Republican, according to a 2014 study by Old Dominion University.
“We find that some non-citizens participate in U.S. elections, and that this participation has been large enough to change meaningful election outcomes including Electoral College votes, and Congressional elections,” the study concluded.
“Non-citizen votes likely gave Senate Democrats the pivotal 60th vote needed to overcome filibusters in order to pass health care reform and other Obama administration priorities in the 111th Congress.”
Now, the number of non-Hispanic illegal aliens entering the United States is increasing at the same time that Hispanics are skewing more Republican, as evidenced by Rep. Mayra Flores’s recent win in south Texas.
It’s illegal for non-U.S. citizens to vote in federal elections, however, for years there’s been a push for municipal elections to accept noncitizen voters, including visa holders.
Loudon said Eliseo Medina, a labor union activist and former immigration consultant to President Barack Obama, is a main driver of the illegal immigration movement.
In 2009, Medina spoke at the America’s Future Now progressives’ conference in Washington.
“[If] we reform the immigration laws, it puts 12 million people on the path to citizenship and eventually voters,” Medina said. “Can you imagine … [even] if we get 8 million new voters that care about our issue and will be voting—we will create a governing coalition for the long term, not just for an election cycle.”
Fourteen municipalities currently allow noncitizens to vote, including 11 in Maryland, two in Vermont, and one in San Francisco.
A recent court ruling quashed a New York City law that would have allowed at least 800,000 noncitizens to vote in municipal elections.
New York City Mayor Eric Adams allowed the measure to become law on Jan. 9.
“I believe that New Yorkers should have a say in their government, which is why I have and will continue to support this important legislation,” Adams said in a statement at the time. “I believe allowing the legislation to be enacted is by far the best choice, and look forward to bringing millions more into the democratic process.”
Hans von Spakovsky, manager of the Heritage Foundation’s Election Law Reform Initiative and former member of the Federal Election Commission, said allowing noncitizens to vote “cheapens and diminishes” the concept of citizenship.
“The whole point of the open borders crowd is to do two things: one, extinguish the line between legal and illegal aliens in this country. And second, to frankly get rid of the whole concept of citizenship,” Spakovsky said in a previous interview.
Biden has said he wants a pathway to citizenship for all illegal immigrants in the United States.
A sign depicts the Goliad County line in Goliad, Texas, on Nov. 23, 2021. (Charlotte Cuthbertson/The Epoch Times)
Boyd said the Biden administration is working hard to purge conservative and constitutional thinkers at the federal level and replace them with people with a socialist mindset.
“But always remember, as Stalin said, the aim of socialism is communism,” Boyd said.
He said his focus remains in Goliad to protect his county and make it an unwelcoming place for criminals. The sheriffs in the region try to work together to “help each other to fight this massive wave of criminal activity,” he said.
“We don’t deal with immigration, we’re not tasked with it, we’re not authorized with it, we don’t want anything to do with it.
“But we’re fighting all the felonies that are being brought to our doorstep as a result of the national policy that’s causing this problem. And to be quite honest with you, I have no faith in the federal government.”
“My faith is in our Lord and Savior. One day we’re going to meet the end and we’re going to have to answer for what it is we’ve done, and so I want to have a good answer when I get there.”
Major cities across the United States saw a violent Fourth of July weekend, with reports saying that at least 50 people were shot in Chicago, children being shot in Houston, and more in Baltimore.
Authorities told NBC Chicago on Monday that nine people died and another 48 were shot across Chicago over the weekend. Last year, more than 19 were shot and killed and 100 more were injured during the same time period.
That included a mass shooting in Chicago’s Parkway Gardens on the 6500 block of South Martin Luther King Drive Monday morning, according to officials. A 17-year-old was counted among those who were shot, authorities said.
Authorities in Indianapolis, Indiana, told WISH-TV said that 11 people were shot in 10 incidents over the Fourth of July weekend.
And the Baltimore Police Department said it is investigating separate shootings in the city that left nine people shot and two dead over the weekend, according to WBAL.
A 14-year-old boy was injured in one of the shootings, officials told the Baltimore Sun. Police say the boy, who was not named, was shot in his hip at around 4 p.m. while he was in the backyard of a home.
In Houston, a 5-year-old was killed in a drive-by shooting that also left an 8-year-old injured in the Greenspoint neighborhood, police told ABC13.
From Friday night through Sunday night, there were 24 shooting incidents across New York City, officials told PIX11. That’s a 60 percent increase over last year’s numbers, where there were 19 victims shot.
The St. Louis Metropolitan Police Department said that at least 16 people were shot and five were killed since Friday, according to KMOV.
2 More Kids Shot
Two children were among six people who were wounded Saturday night in an apparent drive-by shooting, police in eastern North Carolina said.
Officers responded to a home for a report of shots fired around 9:30 p.m. Saturday, the Clinton Police Department said in a news release. They found six people suffering from apparent gunshot wounds.
A preliminary investigation suggests the suspects arrived in a car and drove past the home, where people were gathered outside. They circled the block and then opened fire toward the home, striking the victims in what appeared to be a targeted attack, according to the news release.
Last year, the FBI said that homicides in the United States in 2020 increased nearly 30 percent over the previous year, representing the largest single-year jump since the agency started keeping track of statistics.
Homicides and non-negligent manslaughters climbed an estimated 29.4 percent to 21,570, an increase of 4,901 over 2019, FBI data showed. It is the highest estimated total since the early 1990s, when homicides stayed above 23,000 a year as drug wars played out in many places in the United States.
Your gift will help protect parents and teachers, and stop discrimination against children!
After working for more than a decade in schools outside of Washington, D.C., Emily Mais and her family moved to Albemarle County in Virginia in search of a simpler life and a close-knit community.
The public schools in Albemarle had an excellent reputation. And that made it a perfect fit for Emily because she was a teacher and administrator. In fact, for as long as she can remember, all Emily wanted to be was an elementary school teacher.
In October 2018, she began working as Assistant Principal of Agnor-Hurt Elementary School in Charlottesville, Virginia.
She had no idea that she’d be turning to Alliance Defending Freedom three short years later. She’s filed a lawsuit after being forced out of her job because she questioned the school district’s program, rooted in critical race theory (CRT), that scapegoats, stereotypes, and divides people based on race.
Emily is one of a growing number of teachers across the nation who are finding themselves harassed and punished because they dissent from radical CRT-based policies.
In 2019 and 2020, the Albemarle County School District introduced a controversial policy and mandatory teacher training based on critical race theory.
The goal was laudable-to eliminate “all forms of racism.”
But it produced the opposite result. And what happened to Emily is exhibit A.
The school district introduced this policy and training just as public schools returned to in-person learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. Teachers and administrators were balancing a whole host of new challenges, including adhering to health and safety rules and helping students who had fallen behind during virtual learning.
Not only could the policy and training have not come at a worse time, but Emily had massive concerns with what they taught.
Emily witnessed firsthand how the training actually instructed teachers to be racist. It taught them to view each other and their students solely through the lens of race.
Emily believes that every person is made in the image of God, deserving to be treated equally and with respect.
During the teacher trainings, she also saw how white staff members who wanted to participate were shut down or dismissed. In fact, all staff members were encouraged to “speak their truth.” But when white staff members did speak up, they were told by facilitators that they couldn’t possibly understand the topic because of the color of their skin.
They were dismissed and harassed based on their race.
During the trainings, it was suggested that anyone who opposed the new policy was racist. One administrator said teachers needed to consider whether they were on the “antiracism school bus, or if you need help finding your seat and keeping your seat, or if it’s time for you to just get off the bus.”
Even more disturbing: When parents expressed concerns about the curriculum at a school board meeting, an assistant superintendent said in a meeting the next day that he received the parents’ comments as if they were slave owners who had raped his mother and sister, beaten him, and were now telling him not to talk about it.
Emily could not believe the growing hostility of the culture within the school system. But when she made one small slip of the tongue, she found out just how nasty things could get.
The group discussed the school district’s race-related hiring practices during one training session.
Emily made a comment on the topic, intending to use the phrase “people of color.” But, she accidentally said “colored” instead. She immediately apologized-profusely and repeatedly-but one staff member wouldn’t accept her apology and proceeded to berate her in front of the entire group.
After this, abuse rained down on Emily for months.
Again and again, she was accused of being a racist for this slip of the tongue. No apology would ever satisfy. Other employees openly cursed about her and called her vulgar names at work, including “white racist b-ch.”
Some coworkers came to Emily in tears about what was happening to her. But they dared not support her in public for fear of what would happen to themselves.
When Emily had simply had enough and was not willing to endure the abuse any longer, she left her job-a job that she loved.
But before she could leave, administrators orchestrated a final apology meeting to further humiliate, shame, and traumatize Emily for her slip of the tongue.
The message was clear for other employees: This is the type of punishment you can expect if you dare question the new radical, CRT-based training program-which is racist at its core.
Emily was retaliated against for her speech, discriminated against for her point of view, and subjected to a work environment bitterly divided by race.
Teachers like her don’t surrender their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse doors-or when schools adopt radical, racist policies.
But this is happening to a growing number of teachers and other Americans across the country.
Emily is taking a stand to not only correct the injustice against her, but to encourage the other teachers and parents who have been vilified for speaking the truth.
She loved her job and received glowing review after glowing review. She believed in fairness for everyone. She took great pride in serving families.
Every child deserves to be treated equally and fairly.
Students in some public schools are being indoctrinated in the teachings of a radical ideology sometimes called “critical theory” or “critical race theory.”
Children are being told that:
They are “oppressed” or an “oppressor””—good or bad—based solely on the color of their skin.
Their race determines their outcome in life.
The American system of government must be replaced.
CRT, an offshoot of Critical Theory, cynically views rights and freedoms—like free speech—as mere tools for the “powerful” to control the “oppressed.”
Students and teachers who dissent from these race-based indoctrination programs are threatened with punishment..
This isn’t just happening in big-city schools. It’s not just in certain states. It’s all over the nation. And it’s a problem that should concern us all.
Schools shouldn’t be ideological battlegrounds. No child should be indoctrinated. Especially not in theories that tell them should be treated differently because of the color of their skin.
Racism is wrong. Every person is created in the image of God and deserving of equal treatment and respect.
But the solution to racism isn’t more (or different) racism.
The U.S. Constitution forbids racially discriminatory treatment of students, as do state constitutions and state laws. Schools with policies that promote racism are in direct violation of the law.
With the help of Ministry Friends like you, Alliance Defending Freedom is challenging these tools of indoctrination in public schools, including by:
Filing a lawsuit against the Albemarle County School Board in Virginia on behalf of multiple families for its racist and discriminatory policy.
Filing a second lawsuit against the Albemarle School Board for creating a racially hostile work environment that forced an assistant principal to leave her job.
More lawsuits are on their way to fight this problem that students nationwide are facing.
But this is no small undertaking. We need your help to fight these crucial cases to victory.
With a gift today, you can help fund this multi-pronged legal strategy designed to stop the indoctrination of kids in radical ideologies and protect the rights of parents to direct the upbringing of their religious freedom, free speech, and the rights of parents..
Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas on Sunday said his department will continue to warn migrants to not show up at the U.S.-Mexico border, as the current “Remain in Mexico” policy is not going away for “several weeks.”
Appearing on CBS’ “Face the Nation,” Mayorkas was asked whether the border enforcement agencies have the manpower and resources needed to handle “thousands of people who departed on Friday and are moving towards the U.S. border.” He responded by blaming “exploitative smugglers” who use “false information” to motivate migrants to illegally cross the border.
“We have said repeatedly and we continue to warn people not to take the dangerous journey,” Mayorkas told CBS’ Margaret Brennan, noting that his department is working with “our partners to the south” to “break up very often” migrant caravans. “We continue to enforce immigration law, as is our legal responsibility.”
“These migrants receive false information from smugglers,” he added. “They put their lives, their life savings, in the hands of these exploitative organizations, these criminal organizations that do not care for their lives and only seek to make a profit.”
Brennan pressed Mayorkas about the effectiveness of the Biden administration’s methods, pointing out that even last week’s tragedy, during which 53 illegal immigrants were found dead in a tractor-trailer in San Antonio, Texas, didn’t seem to deter people from coming to the border en masse.
“Those words are not being heard—people are moving right now, so the efforts to stop the root causes are not stopping them,” she said, referring to resident Joe Biden’s strategy to “address the root causes of migration in Central America.” “Are you predicting that this is only going to get more significant from here, that we’re going to go beyond the record surge in migrants?”
“No, I’m not predicting that at all,” the secretary replied. “We’re working with our partners to the south because this is a regional challenge that requires a regional response.”
Mayorkas was also asked about the fate of the Trump-era Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP), which requires foreign nationals who claim to be asylum seekers to stay in Mexico while their cases are being processed. On Thursday, a divided U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Biden administration has the authority to end MPP, which is commonly known as “Remain in Mexico.”
According to Mayorkas, MPP will continue to be enforced for now because it takes time for the lower court to lift its injunction that prevents the Biden administration from ending the protocol.
“In light of the favorable Supreme Court ruling, we have to wait for that ruling to reach the district court that issued an injunction preventing us from ending ‘Remain in Mexico,’” he told Brennan. “So we have several weeks to go before the district court lifts its injunction and until then, we are obligated by the district court’s ruling to continue to implement the ‘Remain in Mexico’ program, and we will do so in accordance with law.”
In a 5–4 ruling, the Supreme Court ruled against Texas and Missouri, which had argued that the Biden administration violated the federal immigration law by rescinding MPP. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh joined the three liberal justices in the majority.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said the case was “wrongly decided” and will only “make the border crisis worse.” He said he agrees with the dissenting opinion penned by Justice Samuel Alito, who said the government can’t guarantee that those who have already been released into the United States for later processing will show up for their scheduled asylum hearing to decide if they qualify for asylum.
“In fiscal year 2021, the Border Patrol reported more than 1.7 million encounters with aliens along the Mexican border,” Alito wrote. “When it appears that one of these aliens is not admissible, may the Government simply release the alien in this country and hope that the alien will show up for the hearing at which his or her entitlement to remain will be decided?”
“Congress has provided a clear answer to that question, and the answer is no.”
Analysts with JP Morgan Chase said the price for a barrel of oil could more than triple if Russia decides to cut its output amid record-high gas prices.
The current price for a barrel of oil stands at around $110, but that could increase to a “stratospheric” $380 per barrel if Russia acts to cut output, JP Morgan’s analysis wrote in a note, according to Bloomberg News.
“It is likely that the government could retaliate by cutting output as a way to inflict pain on the West,” the analysts wrote in what they described as a worst-case scenario. “The tightness of the global oil market is on Russia’s side.”
JP Morgan analyst Natasha Kaneva said that Russia cutting production by 3 million barrels a day would push global prices to $190 per barrel. And the worst-case scenario, she added, would be if Moscow cut 5 million barrels per day, which could send the price to $380.
Since the start of the Ukraine conflict on Feb. 24, Western nations have hit Russia with punishing sanctions. However, Russia supplies much of Europe with oil and natural gas. The United States, meanwhile, has blocked all Russian oil exports since March.
JP Morgan’s analysts added that if the West continues to target Russia’s oil industry, the Kremlin may not play along.
“The most obvious and likely risk with a price cap is that Russia might choose not to participate and instead retaliate by reducing exports,” the note said, according to Bloomberg.
Data from AAA shows that the nationwide average for a gallon of regular gas currently is hovering around $4.81 as of Sunday, a slight decline of about 10 cents from the previous week.
US Response
Last week, when asked about how long Americans should expect to pay high gas prices, President Joe Biden claimed that they will continue to be elevated as long as the conflict takes to resolve.
“As long as it takes so Russia cannot in fact defeat Ukraine and move beyond Ukraine,” Biden told reporters on June 30. “This is a critical, critical position for the world. Here we are. Why do we have NATO? I told Putin that in fact, if he were to move, we would move to strengthen NATO. We would move to strengthen NATO across the board.”
White House economic adviser Brian Deese said that Americans should pay high prices because it “is about the future of the liberal world order, and we have to stand firm.”
Biden also attempted to shift the blame to gas stations for the higher prices, writing on Twitter: “My message to the companies running gas stations and setting prices at the pump is simple: this is a time of war and global peril. Bring down the price you are charging at the pump to reflect the cost you’re paying for the product. And do it now.”
He did not provide any examples of how gas stations could “bring down the price.” It’s also not clear if he was writing to individual gas station owners, companies, or individuals who own many franchises.
A day later, Pentagon press secretary John Kirby defended the Twitter post in a Sunday morning interview with Fox News.
“If everybody cooperates on this, we can bring the price down at least by about a dollar a gallon,” Kirby remarked, “so he’s working very, very hard to do this because he knows the impact that high gas prices have on the American household.”
The DMED, one of the best databases in the world, shows a disturbing trend with post-COVID jabs – dramatic increases in medical visits for malignancies, neurological and autoimmune diseases, and infertility. But after being exposed, DMED was shut down and its data spikes washed clean.
In the wake of the COVID jab rollout and additional boosters, a number of health conditions are on the rise, including cancer, most notably cancers of the uterus, endometrial cancers, and very aggressive blood and brain cancers
Cancer has been on the rise for decades, thanks to dietary factors, but the COVID jabs appear to dramatically accelerate the disease process. Many doctors report cancer patients with stable disease, and those who have been in remission for years, will suddenly and rapidly develop Stage 4 disease
A military whistleblower has come forward with data from the Defense Medical Epidemiology Database (DMED) database showing dramatic increases in medical visits for cancers and other conditions, post-jab
For neurological side effects of the shot, four remedies that can be very helpful are fluvoxamine (an antidepressant that blocks cytokine production in neural tissues), pharmaceutical grade methylene blue (improves mitochondrial respiration and repair), near-infrared light (triggers production of melatonin in your mitochondria) and hyperbaric oxygen therapy (boosts mitochondrial function, decreases inflammation and much more)
The COVID jabs also downregulate toll-like receptors 7 and 8, which allows latent viruses such as herpes EBV4 — Epstein-Barr, aka, mononucleosis — to flourish that would otherwise have been kept in check
Dr. Ryan Cole, an anatomic clinical pathologist with a subspecialty in skin pathology and postgraduate Ph.D. training in immunology, has been on the frontlines exposing the fraudulent COVID narrative.
Since 2004, he’s been operating his own business, a pathology laboratory, which gives him rare freedom and flexibility to comment on what he’s seeing. Most others would lose their jobs for speaking out the way Cole has.
Truth Telling Is a Risky Business
That doesn’t mean he hasn’t paid a price for speaking out about and defending real science though. He’s triple board certified and has 12 state licenses, and because of his stance against COVID recommendations, some of the credentialing organizations have taken action against him.
“I’ve seen 500,000 patients diagnostically in my career through the microscope. So, I have a long track record of diagnostics. I have not had a patient care complaint against me in 26 years of being a physician,” he says. “I still don’t, and this is what’s fascinating.
Of those 12 licenses, four were under attack, three are still under attack — in Washington, Arizona and Minnesota — [yet there’s] not a single patient care complaint. All the attacks against me have been political complaints to boards of medicine, which is not legal for them to do. Not a single one of those complaints is from a patient.
And then — really the most egregious thing — was ex parte, without me being present, without even sending a certified letter, the College of American Pathologists removed my fellowship status, which is defamatory.
I went back and found their complaint and looked at what they did, and I actually have a wonderful defamation lawsuit against them, because everything they did was anti-scientific. So, they can either restore [my fellowship] now, or just pay me a big check down the road. One or the other.”
He’s also lost about half of his business, as two insurance companies canceled him for “unprofessional behavior,” i.e., for sharing and discussing the science of COVID, and one of his best friends, whom he’s worked with for 12 years, canceled their business relationship as he didn’t want Cole’s outspokenness to affect his business. “All because of the defamation by the media, so to tell the truth in this day and age is a dangerous thing,” he says.
Suspicions Arose Early On
From his Ph.D. work in immunology, Cole was very aware of SARS-CoV-1 and MERS, having studied both, so when the warp speed program to develop a pandemic SARS-CoV-2 vaccine was announced, he became immediately suspicious.
“I thought, wait a minute, you can’t vaccinate against corona viruses!” he says. “This family of viruses is not amenable to vaccination, based on mutation rates. So, my concern was very high, early on.”
Cole’s lab ramped up PCR testing, using a cycle threshold (CT) of 35, rather than the recommended 40 to 45, as he knew that high a CT would result in 98% false positives. On a side note, pathologists not only assess tissue samples and biopsies, they’re also in charge of testing. The head of every major clinical lab is a pathologist. They’re basically in charge of quality control.
“As pathologist, we’re constantly looking at patterns, be it under the microscope or be it in lab data. We’re looking at blood reports. We’re looking at what’s out of range on blood reports. We’re looking at microbiology. We’re looking at molecular biology. We’re looking at cultures. We’re looking at pap smears. We’re looking, across the board, at those clinical parameters in addition to tissue biopsies,” he explains.
“I have 70 employees, and if there’s a blood smear that looks unusual, they bring it to me. If there are parameters on a test that look widely out of range, they bring it to me. And I call and talk to the clinician — [I’m the] doctor to the doctor. We have a consultation practice with the clinicians so I can help them understand what’s happening with their patient, and then they can make clinical decisions going forward.”
Post-Jab Cancer Explosion
One of the apparent side effects of the COVID jab that Cole has been warning and talking about is cancer. He explains:
“Obviously, during COVID, we saw some parameters change in blood tests. There was a concern about clotting. We saw elevated clotting factors. We know that the early variants were pretty severe in terms of inducing clotting, which was a shame because the whole world should have been simply using anti-inflammatories, steroids and anti-clotting agents, and so many more people would’ve lived.
My colleague, Dr. [Shankara] Chetty in South Africa, was having phenomenal success with antihistamine steroids and anti-clotting agents. So anyway, that first year, we saw drops in white blood cell counts, we saw decreases in certain subsets of T-cells. But when the shots rolled out, things changed.
At first I noticed kind of an innocuous little bump that we see usually in children. It’s a little virus called molluscum contagiosum [that causes] a little white bump.
Usually, by the time you’re a tween or early teen, you’ve built immunity to that and you never get them again, or rarely get them again. But after the shots rolled out, all of a sudden, in 80-year-olds, 70-year-olds, 60-year-olds, 50-year-olds, I started seeing literally a 20-fold increase in this little innocuous viral bump. And I thought, ‘Uh oh, this means they’ve lost immune memory’ …
Those subsets of T-cells that keep viruses in check are very important for keeping cancer in check. And this is where immunology jumps into the picture. All of us have some atypical cells, and we have the ‘Marines’ of our immune system, our natural killer (NK) cells. They’re on the frontline circulating. We have about 30 billion T-cells circulating in our blood, many of which are killer cells and NK cells.
Our other innate cells are our macrophages, monocytes and dendritic cells. They’re on that frontline. They’re shaking hands with every cell in your body all day long saying, ‘Friend or foe? Friend or foe? Oh gosh, this one has some mutations, it’s now a foe.’ They’ll poke a little hole in it, throw in a little enzyme called a grandzyme — a ‘hand grenade’ — blow up that cell, and we’re good.
But what happened after these shots rolled out is that many of those cell subsets started decreasing in number. The first cancer I saw uptick was cancers of the uterus, endometrial cancers. Usually, I would see maybe two endometrial cancers a month. All of a sudden, a few months after the rollout of the shots, I was seeing two or three a week.
Another subspecialty area of focus for me is melanoma. And I started seeing melanomas, not only in younger patients, as the shots dropped down in age cohort, but they were thicker. The other fascinating thing was they’re more aggressive in terms of how many dividing cells was present in each tumor. I’m still seeing this.
Beyond that … I’ve been traveling the country and the world quite a bit … and wherever I go now, I have doctors and nurses approach me saying, ‘What you’re saying, we’ve been seeing.’
I was having a conversation with a chair of a large oncology department in Tallahassee, and he said, ‘I usually see an aggressive brain cancer in a young patient maybe every decade.’ After the boosters rolled out, he saw five astrocytomas, five aggressive brain cancers, in one month.
Then, I’m in Jacksonville the next day, having a conversation with a family doctor. He said, ‘Gosh, it’s strange, I usually see a kidney cancer in a young patient every decade or so. I’ve seen five in the last month.’
Then I was in the UK a couple weeks ago. I had a doctor from Ireland who’s been a practicing family doc, GP, for 36 years, and he said, ‘I have seen more cancer in my young patients ever since the shots rolled out, and the booster, than I have ever seen in my entire career.’
Same thing, a nurse that works emergency department in the UK, [said she’s seen] not only the heart inflammation in young children, but cancers in young patients and aggressive leukemias. So everywhere I go, I have doctors confirming my observations … I’ve had many of them approach me and say, ‘Hey look, I’m seeing what you’re saying, but I can’t say it because I’ll get fired.’”
Cancer Spike Is Being Covered Up
Aside from what Cole has seen in his own lab, a military whistleblower has also come forward with data from the Defense Medical Epidemiology Database (DMED) database showing dramatic increases in medical visits for cancer, neurological diseases, infertility, autoimmune diseases and several other conditions, post-jab.1
The DMED is one of the best databases in the world, as the Department of Defense keeps very close tabs on what’s happening with our troops. This DMED data was presented during a hearing led by Sen. Ron Johnson. A week after that hearing, the DoD froze access to the DMED, and when it reopened a week later, the data were all changed to eliminate the data spikes.
“That’s what was really shocking,” Cole says. “I think this is basically fraud to the level of Watergate, in terms of [there being] somebody behind the scenes, and then the private company that actually manages that database … manipulated it.”
The DoD has tried to explain this suspicious activity claiming a “bug” in the system had resulted in underreporting of medical conditions in the five years prior to 2021. The number of cancers and other health problems were actually higher in 2015 through 2020 than initially indicated, they said.
However, how can a program error cause data corruption for five consecutive years and then self-correct, resulting in perfect numbers for 2021? And how did they not notice the error earlier? Again, this is one of the best-kept databases in the world. And how come this “bug” only affected conditions that also just so happen to be known and/or suspected side effects of the jab?
Future Prognostication
Clearly, cancer has been on the rise for decades, thanks to dietary factors, but the COVID jabs appear to dramatically accelerate the disease process. There are no published studies to help us foretell the future, but based on what Cole has found so far, how long does he think it’ll be before conditions like cancer spiral out of control?
“That’s a great question,” he says. “One of the important findings I’ve heard from many of these clinicians is that many of their patients who have been cancer-free for three, four, five years, their PET scan looks great, no detectable disease, and after that second or third shot, all of a sudden there’s Stage 4 disease. It’s like wildfire.
And this goes back to immune suppressive mechanisms, the damage that the persistent spike protein and the persistent modified RNA (mRNA) cause. So, aggressive cancers arising very quickly are one thing we’re seeing. Because it’s a dose-dependent poisoning curve — in terms of the more spike you have circulating, the worse your immune system seems to be doing — the No. 1 thing is, don’t get another shot.
Because it is causing that immune suppression that’s allowing those cancer mechanisms. Over time … I would say we’re going to see a consistent twofold to threefold increase in certain cancers, endometrial cancers, breast cancers, cancers of the prostate, cancers that are testicular or ovarian, neurologic cancers.
This spike protein has a propensity to cross the blood brain barrier and invade neural tissues. We know what it does to mitochondrial activity in terms of inhibiting it, blocking it, ruining cytochrome C oxidase systems, decreasing ATP.
Cancer is a hypoxic state. When you don’t have good cellular activity and cellular respiration and hypo-oxygenation, you end up with mechanisms that can induce more aggressive cancer. So, I think, at a minimum, [there’ll be a] two- to threefold [increase] … over the next year or two.
We can only hope that the immune system can normalize and we come up with enough interventions and treatments that will reverse some of this, what some people call spikeopathy, or the different diseases that are being caused by this persistent spike. ‘I don’t know’ is the honest answer, but that would be my projection based on I’ve seen.”
Excess Mortality Has Dramatically Increased
Abnormal blood clotting is another commonly reported side effect of the jabs. Post-mortem investigations have revealed thick, extremely long rubbery clots, including in the arteries, which is rare. The longest Cole has seen was about two feet. We’re also seeing a lot of micro-clotting, heart inflammation (myocarditis), strokes and heart attacks — all of which can have lethal consequences.
It’s highly concerning that we have regulatory agencies allowing the most dangerous medical product ever released on humanity to persist in the marketplace.
— Ryan Cole, dr
In early January 2022, OneAmerica, a national mutual life insurance company, announced2 the death rate of working-age Americans (18 to 64), in the third quarter of 2021, was 40% higher than prepandemic levels. And this excess mortality was not due to COVID infection. Many of those deaths were in fact cardiac deaths and strokes, which fits the injury profile of the COVID shots.
“After they came forward, additional insurance companies said, ‘We’re seeing anywhere from 30% to 50% increase in claims as well.’ They have no horse in the race. They’re just observing. And I say that as a pathologist too. Look, I don’t create disease. I don’t prevent disease. I’m a reporter at the scene of the crash.
My job is simply to report patterns, and then we can scientifically confirm those data patterns. And the all-cause death is increased in those who’ve gotten two, three shots. Again, it’s a dose-dependent curve. The more spike your body is making, the worse people tend to do over time.
Even Walgreens came out a couple weeks ago and showed their data. Individuals that got shots are getting COVID at higher rates. Even the mainstream media finally, last week — I think it was Good Morning America — said, ‘It’s looking like the boosters are a bad idea because it’s immune suppressing people.’
So, we’re finally making some progress and getting traction in the mainstream where at least the narrative is cracking. There’s a crack in the dam and it’s starting to leak. Hopefully it’ll rush forward and people will go, ‘Whoa, this was a bad idea. Let’s stop this chaos.’ But the FDA is trying to roll it out on [infants] of all things now … It’s really tragic.”
Why Was the Most Toxic Part of the Virus Chosen?
Considering autopsies have shown spike protein is still present at least four months after their last shot, it seems reasonable to assume that severe health problems can arise months or even years down the road. In fact, we still don’t know if the body ever stops producing spike protein once this genetically modified mRNA is injected.
“We know the spike is the inflammatory aspect of the virus, and our cells are made into spike toxin factories,” Cole says. “Studies out of the Salk Institute show that the spike is the cytotoxic aspect of [COVID-19], so we’re giving a shot that makes the toxic part of the virus, and it’s persisting.
That’s why I think we’re going to see this consistent elevation of different diseases related to the spike, be it cardiac, strokes, chronic clotting conditions, individuals dying from pulmonary emboli … It’s highly concerning that we have regulatory agencies allowing the most dangerous medical product ever released on humanity to persist in the marketplace.”
Strokes in young people and children are also on the rise. Media are now trying to convince you that this is “normal,” but it is anything but. Historically, children and teens do not die from strokes. This is a brand-new phenomenon, courtesy of the COVID jabs.
Microvascular clots (microvascular infarcts) are also a known contributing factor, in the long term, to early onset dementia. So, that’s yet another potential health avalanche in the making.
Four Helpful Remedies
I’ve quickly become a fan of pharmaceutical grade methylene blue, as it’s been shown to improve mitochondrial respiration and aid in mitochondrial repair. At 15 to 20 milligrams a day, it could potentially go a long way toward resolving some of the fatigue many suffer post-jab and post-COVID. It may also be helpful in acute strokes. The primary contraindication is if you have a G6PD deficiency (a hereditary genetic condition), in which case you should not use methylene blue at all.
Another important remedy is near-infrared light. It triggers production of melatonin in your mitochondria3 where you need it most. By mopping up reactive oxygen species, it too helps improve mitochondrial function and repair. Natural sunlight is 54.3% near-infrared radiation,4 so this treatment is available for free.
For neurological side effects of the shot, a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) antidepressant called fluvoxamine may be helpful. Cole explains the mechanism behind it:
“[Fluvoxamine] upregulates a receptor called sigma-1, which blocks another receptor called inositol-requiring enzyme 1, which is a precursor for cytokines. So, fluvoxamine will block cytokine production in neural tissues. And that’s why [it works]. It’s not because of its antidepressant effects. It’s a cytokine precursor blocker. So, you actually are decreasing a cytokine storm in neural tissues.
This is why one uses fluvoxamine. There are other SSRIs, but this mechanism is very specific to fluvoxamine. It’s a tough to tolerate drug for some people. It makes some people anxious and agitated, but if you can tolerate it for two weeks, you can really turn down those inflammatory pathways in many patients. I’m not going to say everybody, but I’ve seen it work in many patients.”
A fourth treatment suggestion is hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT). This too can be phenomenally helpful for strokes, heart attacks, autoimmune diseases and neurodegenerative disorders. To learn more, see “Hyperbaric Therapy — A Vastly Underused Treatment Modality.”
IMPORTANT: COVID Shots Are Not Pharmaceutical Grade
Seneff also warned about potential unknowns arising from fragmented mRNA and impurities, as tests have shown these jabs really are NOT pharmaceutical grade, as you’d expect. Cole comments:
“These aren’t pure products, and I think this is a very important point. When Pfizer submitted vials to the European Medicines Agency to look at purity … they were in the 50% range … The TGA in Australia looked at it and said, ‘Look, these are only about 60% pure.’
This means you have a lot of fragmented sequences of mRNA that don’t have a stop or a start code on. They’re not coding for what you think they’re coding for. They’re coding for other tinier, shorter fragments. Are those mitogenic? Probably, but we don’t know. Can those reverse transcribe into our own DNA? Studies out of Sweden … show yes, they can …
And then, when they manufacture, they can’t spin and agitate these, so you get all these lipids that collect at the top of these big vats. So now you get some batches that are hyperconcentrated and some are hypoconcentrated. It appears about 5% of the batches are responsible for about 80% of the harms.”
Autoimmune Diseases of All Kinds Are To Be Expected
As explained by Cole in the interview, there’s a reason there’s never been a successful mRNA gene therapy product brought to market, despite 20 years of research effort. The persistence of synthetic mRNA with pseudouridine always caused too many problems in the animal trials to move into human trials. It caused autoimmune disease. It caused mutations. The manufacturers don’t even know if the nanolipid used to protect the mRNA is safe in humans.
“Based on the animal trials, we know there were problems and we can only predict that that’s going to happen in humanity. I want to be wrong, but from a basic immunology point of view, I don’t think I am,” Cole says.
“The nanolipid particles vary in size, interestingly. I’ve looked at some under the microscope. Some of them congeal and some of them stay tiny. But because of the fatty nature of them, they will carry their little mRNA and fractionated mRNA package to any cell in the body. And that’s the biggest concern. Now it has turned any cell in your body to a potential target [for your immune system].
An important paper came out in the European Journal of Immunology just about a month ago by Dr. Hagemann. There’s a condition called antibody dependent cellular cytotoxicity. What that means is that [the mRNA] sequence gets into your cell [and] that cell now becomes the spike factory.
That spike is on the surface of your cell. Now your NK cells that I talked about earlier say, ‘We better blow that cell up.’ So now, because there’s that spike on the surface, your immune system will destroy your own cells. This is another one of the detrimental effects.”
Pipeline Now Filled With Risky mRNA Shots
Making matters worse, even though the COVID shots have been shown to be a complete disaster, the drug industry is already working on dozens of different mRNA “vaccines,” thinking they now have carte blanche to put out whatever they want using this platform.
And the reason for this continued insanity is because our health and regulatory authorities are corrupted to the core. They are completely dishonest. They’re covering up the shocking harms, and unless something radically changes, they will allow dozens of equally dangerous mRNA gene transfer injections to be put out.
Reactivation of Latent Viruses
The COVID jabs also downregulate pattern receptors in your body called toll-like receptors. Specifically, toll-like receptors 7 and 8 are downregulated by the mRNA and pseudouridine in these shots. What does that do? It allows latent viruses to flourish that would otherwise have been kept in check.
“We’ve seen a big uptick in herpes family viruses, especially herpes EBV4, which is Epstein-Barr virus [aka] mononucleosis,” Cole says. So, for those with post-COVID or post-jab fatigue, long-COVID and those with MS-like symptoms, he recommends checking for Epstein-Barr.
About 80% of MS patients have high Epstein-Barr titers. “You will find that a lot of these individuals will have reactivated mono,” he says. For reactivated mono, methylene blue, HBOT and nebulized peroxide would all be indicated.
Fertility Under Attack
In the interview, Cole also reviews the potential impacts of the COVID jabs on the reproductive system. Menstrual dysregulation appears extremely common, as is the inability to become pregnant, despite trying for months, and spontaneous abortions are off the charts. The DMED database also showed a strong signal for fetal malformation before it was frozen and altered.
“What we’re doing to society and humanity with a previously never before used modality and product is causing horrendous harm to the human race, with no regard for science, with no regard for scientific integrity. It’s a machine gone amuck,” Cole says.
“There are darker forces behind it. A lot of people are making billions, but they’re killing people to do it. And it’s just so unethical what we’re experiencing societally. Yes, we’re causing infertility. Yes, we’re causing mutations in cancers. Yes, we’re causing heart attacks and strokes. Yes, we’re destroying the longevity of a younger generation. It is horrendous.
There’s no justification for any doctor who can look themselves in the mirror and say, ‘I feel comfortable giving this experimental product to my patients all day long.’ They need to reflect and realize they’ve lost their mind, [their] critical thinking skills.”
More Information
Sadly, almost everyone who’s credible and trustworthy has been censored and deplatformed at this point, so finding them can be a challenge. To follow Cole’s work, be sure to bookmark his website, RColeMD.com. You can also find him on the GlobalCovidSummit.org forum.
If you are vaccine injured, the Global COVID Summit has a blockchain-based forum where you can share your experience and it will never be taken down. You can’t be censored or deplatformed. Cole is available to answer questions in that forum.
They’re also starting up another website to compete with WebMD and similar pharma-run medical sites. It will eventually be available on DMED.com, which stands for “decentralized medicine.” This site is not yet live, but you can try it later. Cole will have a page there as well.
Other thought leaders worth tracking down and following include Dr. Peter McCullough, Dr. Robert Malone, Dr. Pierre Kory, Dr. Paul Marik, Dr. Richard Urso, Dr. Paul Alexander, and Dr. Kirk A. Milhoan, a pediatric cardiologist, and his wife, Dr. Kim Milhoan, just to name a few.
“These have been wonderful leaders in this movement for truth and sharing science,” Cole says. “All of us are part of the Global COVID Summit. We are 17,000 doctors strong and it’s very important that people understand that.
I mean, that’s more doctors than they have at the CDC or the FDA or the NIH. This is a group of critical thinking people standing up for your health, your freedom and your right to your own bodily autonomy.
I think, going forward, as people are starting to wake up and part of this narrative is cracking, let’s come back together, let’s communicate, let’s be kind, let’s help each other get back to a more loving, peaceful, communicative society. I think if we can forgive — obviously, there are things we don’t want to forget, because we don’t want this to happen again — but try to forgive people and try to help people ‘come to’ again.
Just come back together in community. I think it’s important that we really try to circle the wagons again as humanity, and hopefully come back to our senses. That’s a hopeful message I would like to share.”
Video footage surfaced online that appeared to show a crowd of people at a Somali cultural event in Minneapolis booing “Squad” member Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) over the weekend.
Omar, who came to the United States as a Somali refugee, made an appearance at a concert featuring Somali singer Suldaan Seeraar at the city’s Target Center. As soon as she arrived on stage, the boos began, according to footage posted online.
Some yelled at her, “Get out!” and “get the [expletive] out of here.”
“It was an honor to welcome you to our incredible city,” the Democratic congresswoman said in a Twitter post alongside a 14-second clip. The clip ended moments after the audience started to boo loudly.
Longer videos suggested that the crowd booed her for about a minute after she and her husband came onto the stage. “OK, OK, OK, OK, OK, we don’t have all night,” Omar said at one point as the crowd kept booing.
Unclear Why
Some people suggested that it’s because of Omar’s support for Roe v. Wade, a Supreme Court decision that decriminalized abortion nationwide, support for LGBT causes, and other left-wing causes. Omar is currently the whip of the Congressional Progressive Caucus.
It’s not clear what prompted the response, and neither Omar nor her office has issued a public comment about the matter. The Epoch Times has contacted Omar’s office several times for comment about the boos.
Following last month’s Supreme Court decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, Omar said she would fight to codify it into law. She’s also publicly backed proposals to expand the Supreme Court and end the Senate filibuster to pass abortion laws.
“In almost half of this country, states are ready to ban abortion,” Omar said during a protest following the decision. “Outright ban abortion.”
And several weeks ago, amid dismal polls, Omar told reporters that she will “of course” back resident Joe Biden if he decides to run for president in 2024.
“This’s what she gets for trading her Godly, Conservative values for the sinful LGBTQIA’s & the promiscuous abortionists,” wrote Shukri Abdirahman, a Republican Somali refugee and military veteran who is running to unseat Omar from her 5th Congressional District
Another Republican candidate, former NBA player Royce White, suggested that Somalis in Minnesota were upset with Omar because “they’re being misrepresented by bourgeois puppets, chosen by the establishment to exploit identity politics. In other words, Ilhan Omar is a sellout and I called it months ago.”
An Israeli study assessed the effectiveness of BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccination (Pfizer) against the Omicron variant in children 5 to 11 years old using a large health care database and found the vaccine effectiveness (VE) to be 48 percent 7–21 days after dose 2 for symptomatic infection.
People with evidence of prior COVID infection by PCR, antigen, or serology test were excluded.
A U.S. study of a lesser scale found that VE in children declined from 60 percent to 28.9 percent from month 1 to month 2 after the second dose of Pfizer.
Cardiologist Sanjay Verma concluded that “therefore, if this Israeli study were to follow the children beyond 21 days, it is probable the VE would be lower than 48 percent.”
The authors of the study noted that assessment of “vaccine effectiveness against more severe outcomes such as hospitalization were not possible, because they were very rare in the study population.”
“In the US, American Academy of Pediatric data note a hospitalization rate of 0.7 percent in children based upon officially confirmed PCR+ infections. This study and this study previously found that 40 percent of pediatric COVID+ hospitalizations may have been over estimated when differentiating those hospitalized for COVID pneumonia versus those who were hospitalized for other causes but had incidental COVID+ testing during routine surveillance,” Verma noted.
“Therefore, the true hospitalization rate may actually be 0.42 percent of children infected with SARS-CoV2. CDC seroprevalence data report 75 percent of all children have already been infected (4.5 times more than officially confirmed PCR+ results). Perhaps the true SARS-Cov2 hospitalization rate for children then is as low as 0.09 percent. With such low incidence of COVID+ hospitalizations in pediatric population, most trials are not large enough to detect a statistically significant difference in COVID+ hospitalizations (or deaths) between vaccinated and unvaccinated children,” he concluded.
The study notes that 17 percent of the children were obese or overweight, while for the U.S. study, 35 percent of the children were so.
For the Israeli study, 43 percent of the population had received at least three doses of influenza vaccine in the past five years, while in the United States, an estimated 58 percent of children receive an annual flu vaccine, and some schools require the influenza vaccine.
The Israeli study also notes that “many of the children in our study cohort did not receive a second dose within the study follow-up period.”
“mRNA COVID-19 vaccinations do have a known risk of myocarditis and other rare severe adverse reactions. To better contextualize the risk-benefit analysis it would be helpful to know why the children did not receive the second dose,” Verma added.
“Statistics show the rate of COVID-19 associated hospitalization among children aged 5 to 11 is 0.0008 percent,” writes Dr. Joseph Mercola. “In real-world terms, that’s so close to zero you basically cannot lower it any further. Yet, despite such reassuring data, children in this age group are urged to get two to three doses of the COVID jab, even though side effects of the injection could harm them for life, or kill them.”
Elon Musk ended his unusual period of Twitter silence on July 1, reemerging with a picture of himself meeting with Pope Francis.
The Tesla and SpaceX CEO is often active on the social media platform, which he has offered to buy in a transaction worth around $44 billion. But he had not posted anything to his account since June 21.
“Honored to meet @Pontifex yesterday,” wrote Musk, with a photo where he can be seen standing next to Pope Francis. Musk’s four teenage sons were also pictured.
The location or other details of the meeting were not immediately known.
The new post broke the billionaire’s nearly two-week-long silence: he didn’t post or respond to a single tweet.
During the period of absence, he superseded 100 million followers on Twitter, joining a handful of individuals who reached the milestone on the microblogging platform.
Unlike others who have amassed a massive following on Twitter, Musk is usually a prolific user. He had made about 21 posts and retweets each day over the five weeks leading up to June 16, according to Axios.
On that day, SpaceX employees wrote an open letter complaining about Twitter posts from Musk, the company’s chief executive, for being “a frequent source of distraction and embarrassment,” The New York Times reported.
Musk is among a slew of tech giants leaders that Pope Francis has met. The head of the Catholic Church has previously met with Apple chief executive Tim Cook, Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg, and former Google boss Eric Schmidt.
Twitter Deal
Musk’s is still in the process of purchasing the social media platform.
On June 21, Musk said there were “still a few unresolved matters” with his plan to buy Twitter when asked about the deal at the Qatar Economic Forum. The issues include Musk’s doubts about the number of spam users, shareholder approval, and debt financing.
According to a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) dated June 17, Musk’s acquisition of the social media platform has been unanimously approved by the board, which recommended that stockholders vote for the adoption of the merger agreement.
I vividly remember the day in October 1991 when the Senate voted to confirm then-U.S. Court of Appeals Judge Clarence Thomas as the next associate justice of the Supreme Court. Following a bitter confirmation battle, Thomas had won confirmation by a 52-48 margin.
Following Thomas’ nomination by then-President George Bush, allegations were leaked to the press that he had sexually harassed a female subordinate, lawyer Anita Hill, during his service as Chair of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and prior to that time, as the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights at the U.S. Department of Education. (Yes, Hill followed Thomas to the EEOC.)
Although Thomas strenuously denied the allegations, the Senate confirmation hearings — presided over by then-Sen. Joe Biden, who chaired the Senate Judiciary Committee — turned into a public spectacle rivaled only by the brutal hearings that preceded Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s ascent to the Court in 2018. The brutality and the injustice of the Democrats’ treatment of Thomas cannot be overstated.
Two years after his tumultuous confirmation process, The New York Times writer Neil Lewis published an article entitled “2 Years After His Bruising Hearing, Justice Thomas Can Rarely Be Heard.” The piece essentially said Thomas was still angry over the experience and that he was “no longer gregarious.”
“Last year, his second full year on the Court, Justice Thomas began inviting clerks from other justices’ chambers to meet with him, sometimes over lunch. A clerk who went to one meeting recalled how everybody had an unspoken understanding that they would not say anything referring even remotely to the confirmation battle,” Lewis wrote.
“But several said they were stunned when Justice Thomas brought it up himself. And he did so in a way that sought to elicit sympathy, even indignation, at his ordeal.”
One of the clerks, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, told Lewis, “[Thomas] clearly wanted to talk about what happened. He wants some kind of vindication. He really wants people to agree with him that something outrageous happened.”
Another said, “Many of us were quite uncomfortable.”
Thomas warned them never to subject themselves to a Senate hearing, according to the clerks.
Lewis wrote that “at a few public appearances, he [Thomas] has disputed the notion that he is an angry man, and some of his friends concur that he is not.”
The article cites Thomas’ longtime friend, Clint Bolick, who said, “There’s no question that for the first year he was angry over what happened and did not have a chance to catch his breath before he assumed his new position. But to a large extent, he has moved beyond that, and I think a sense of optimism and ebullience has returned. He’s really gregarious again.”
“It’s clear he has not been permanently scarred by the Hill incident,” Bolick added.
Lewis was not quite convinced. He pointed to a conversation Thomas had had with two of his law clerks. He told them he planned to retire in 2034.
Asked why, Thomas, who was 43-years-old at the time of his confirmation, replied that by then, he will have served a 43-year term. According to the clerk, Thomas said, “The liberals made my life miserable for 43 years, and I’m going to make their lives miserable for 43 years.”
Lewis is probably right that Thomas was still angry in 1993. And, although the rage he felt at the time of the hearings has dissipated, I would bet that deep resentment continues to reside not too far beneath the surface. The abusive treatment he endured at the hands of Biden and his Democratic colleagues on the Judiciary Committee would take an average person a lifetime to get over.
In the video below, Thomas addresses the committee members. He equates the hearings to a “high-tech lynching for uppity blacks.”
“This is a circus. It’s a national disgrace,” he said. “And from my standpoint, as a black American, as far as I’m concerned, it is a high-tech lynching for uppity blacks who in any way deign to think for themselves, to do for themselves, to have different ideas. And it is a message that unless you kowtow to an old order, this is what will happen to you. You will be lynched, destroyed, caricatured, by a committee of the U.S. Senate, rather than hung from a tree.”
Powerful as his remarks were, the spectacle on Capitol Hill continued.
While President Biden’s foolish rebuke of the Supreme Court from overseas last week may have reopened those old wounds, Thomas’ future court rulings won’t come from a place of anger.
His decisions will come, as they always have, from his conservative beliefs and his interpretation of one of the finest documents ever written, the U.S. Constitution.
A former governor of New York said Sunday that Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York has far less influence on voters than the media leads people to believe.
Former Democratic Gov. David Paterson dismissed any influence Ocasio-Cortez might have during a Sunday interview on WABC radio’s “The Cats Roundtable,’ according to the New York Post.
Paterson served as New York’s governor from 2008 through 2010 after the resignation of scandal-plagued Gov. Eliot Spitzer.
During the show, Paterson was asked by host John Catsimatidis about the results of Tuesday’s Democratic primaries in New York state. As noted by the New York Post, far-left Democrats endorsed by AOC fared poorly in the contests.
After Catsimatidis asked if the losses marked “the rise and fall of AOC,” Paterson replied, “I don’t know if there ever was a rise, John.”
“I think AOC defeated a congressman who was notably absent from his district a lot, so she outworked him and she beat him, and then she became this overnight, national success,” Paterson said.
Paterson was referring to former Rep. Joe Crowley, who was defeated by Ocasio-Cortez in a June 2018 primary.
“But really, there’s no evidence that it had any coattails, not in this 2022 primary, but not even in the 2020 elections,” Paterson said. “I think she is really a phantom of the media. The media projects her.”
Paterson noted the easy win by Democratic Gov. Kathy Hochul in the primary last week as evidence that moderation is more important to New Yorkers than extremism.
“If you look at the gubernatorial primary, Hochul got 66%, [New York City Public Advocate] Jumaane Williams gets 16%, and so she beat the progressive by 50 points, and the other 18% or so went to [moderate US Rep.] Tom Suozzi,” Paterson told Catsimatidis.
Paterson also said Ocasio-Cortez deserves neither sole credit nor blame for Amazon not coming to Queens in 2019.
“She was given credit for stopping Amazon from coming into New York. It had nothing to do with her,” Paterson said. “It had to do with the legislators being angry that Governor [Andrew] Cuomo had never told them that he was negotiating with them and took all the credit for himself.”
As the show ended, Paterson gave a summary.
“My overall thought to your original question about AOC,” Paterson said, “is [that] AOC are just three letters in the alphabet.”
A second referendum on any possible influence could come in August, when New York voters face primaries for congressional seats, according to The New York Times.
Ocasio-Cortez is backing Democratic challenger Alessandra Biaggi over the more moderate incumbent Rep. Sean Patrick Maloney in New York’s 17th District.
As the show ended, Paterson gave a summary.
“My overall thought to your original question about AOC,” Paterson said, “is [that] AOC are just three letters in the alphabet.”
A second referendum on any possible influence could come in August, when New York voters face primaries for congressional seats, according to The New York Times.
Ocasio-Cortez is backing Democratic challenger Alessandra Biaggi over the more moderate incumbent Rep. Sean Patrick Maloney in New York’s 17th District.
Fans at a concert featuring Somali singer Suldaan Seeraar weren’t too happy to see far-left squad member Rep. Ilhan Omar take the stage at the Target Center in Minneapolis on Saturday night.
“How’s everybody doing in Minneapolis?” shouted the congresswoman. Audience members at the sold-out venue responded with boos and calls for Omar to “get the f**k out of here” and to “go home.”
The calls began anew every time Omar tried to speak. I guess they’re not as proud of her as she is of herself.
WARNING: The following video contains vulgar language that some viewers may find offensive.
Ilhan Omar got booed onstage at a concert featuring Somali singer Soldaan Seraar in Minnesota last night. People in the crowd chanted “Get out!” & shouted “Get the f*ck out of here!”. pic.twitter.com/sggii7h6sO
Although Omar must have been quite beside herself, she continued smiling through the humiliating reception. According to one account, she was booed for nearly ten minutes.
— Shukri Abdirahman (@ShuForCongress) July 3, 2022
Omar is best known for hating America, her anti-Semitic tweets, marrying her brother so he could obtain U.S. citizenship and describing 9/11 as “some people did something.”
She was widely criticized in April for mocking a group of Christians who sang worship songs on an Easter flight.
I think my family and I should have a prayer session next time I am on a plane. How do you think it will end? pic.twitter.com/5696Erwsl5
The moment I formed my opinion about Omar came in February 2019, just one month into her first term in Congress. Her sense of moral superiority and her complete lack of grace was on full display as she questioned then-U.S. Special Envoy to Venezuela Elliott Abrams during a House Foreign Affairs Committee hearing.
During the exchange, Abrams tried to explain his answers and Omar repeatedly cut him off, with a sharp, “Yes or no.”
“Yes or no. Do you think that massacre was a fabulous achievement that happened under our watch?” she asked Abrams.
“That is a ridiculous question, and — no,” Abrams answered.
“I will take that as a yes,” Omar said.
Many Americans find it appalling that someone with such unpatriotic and disrespectful feelings toward our country sits in the U.S. House of Representatives.
Unfortunately, Omar is expected to cruise to victory in November. Politico rates MN-5 “Solid Democratic.”
Anyway, watching this repellent woman get taken down a peg by her own people was simply delicious and couldn’t have happened to a more deserving person.
Director of the National Economic Council Brian Deese took to CNN on Thursday to tell Americans they’re going to have to put up with high gas prices for as long as it takes to back the Ukrainian war effort.
When asked what the Biden administration had to say to families who can’t afford skyrocketing fuel costs, Deese replied, “This is about the future of the Liberal World Order and we have to stand firm.” He said, however, that gas prices are “unacceptably high.” His comments mirrored sentiments expressed at a recent NATO summit by resident Joe Biden, who said in a speech Americans will have to endure inflated gas prices for “as long as it takes” to resolve the conflict with Russia.
CNN: “What do you say to those families that say, ‘listen, we can’t afford to pay $4.85 a gallon for months, if not years?’”
BIDEN ADVISOR BRIAN DEESE: “This is about the future of the Liberal World Order and we have to stand firm.” pic.twitter.com/LWilWSo72S
Biden’s historically low approval ratings may be a sign his administration’s priorities are out of step with the American people’s. Domestic oil production has declined under Biden, which has been a factor in numerous gas price records being broken during the president’s tenure. On Friday, the average price for a gallon of gas in the United States was $4.84.
A majority of Americans believe the nation’s economy should be prioritized over sanctioning Russia, according to an AP-NORC poll conducted in May. Support for combating Russian aggression relative to achieving economic growth has also been declining over time.
‘Defund the police’ advocate Cori Bush says her vehicle has been shot at three times since 2014
The controversial congresswoman, a proud member of “The Squad,” has shelled out tens of thousands of dollars on private security while continuing to advocate for “defunding the police.” Bush’s critics, she said, need to “suck it up.”
In any event, she is clearly not doing enough to protect the security of her vehicle, according to an analysis by Twitter user @JusticeDemWatch. Based on news reports and Bush’s posts on social media, her car has been attacked on at least five occasions since 2014, when she claimed a bullet was fired through the trunk of her car during a protest in Ferguson, Mo.
In June 2019, the congresswoman posted a series of bizarre tweets in response to what she described as a suspicious encounter with a black vehicle.
“The black car with tinted windows sent to crash into me the other day was yet again, an unsuccessful attempt to stop me,” wrote Bush, who was a candidate for Congress at the time. “So tell ya boss & ya buddies I only get more fired up each time.”
The congresswoman had a message for the “cowards” who tried to get her: “I’M NOT AFRAID OF YOU & I’M NOT GOING TO STOP!” Bush proceeded to announce that she was not suicidal and asked her followers to demand an investigation should anything happen to her.
“If I choke, fall down stairs, die in my sleep, car accident, ‘accidental’ shooting, suicide etc. INVESTIGATE,” she said. “I don’t need sympathy, I need people to know this stuff is real and it has never stopped. Not a conspiracy theory.”
Bush’s car was allegedly shot a second time in June 2020. “My car took the bullets. I am safe,” she wrote in a Twitter post that included photos of a white Hyundai SUV with a flat tire and a damaged door handle.
“A bullet went through my door handle on one side of the car, another went through my tire on the other side,” she wrote. “I’m committed to taking us from ‘surviving St. Louis’ to ‘living it.'”
Two months later, Bush’s SUV was allegedly broken into and ransacked. The only item missing was the bullhorn she often used at anti-police protests. The Washington Postreported Bush’s account of the incident, describing it as “the kind of not-so-subtle message of intimidation that the activist turned congresswoman-elect has gotten used to over six years of being a leading Black Lives Matter organizer.”
Bush’s car was shot again in January 2022 in St. Louis. Her spokesman told CNN the congresswoman was not in the car at the time and there was no evidence that she was targeted. “Any act of gun violence shakes your soul,” Bush wrote in a Twitter post thanking supporters for their concern. “That’s why our movement is working to invest in our communities, eradicate the root causes of gun violence, and keep everyone safe.”
It is not clear how defunding the police would accomplish any of her stated goals.
Hunter Biden was lying from the moment he met his future wife, Kathleen Buhle, in 1992. The less-favored son of Joe Biden, then chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, insisted he came from a normal middle-class background. During her first visit to the sprawling Biden estate in Delaware, Kathleen explained to Hunter that “a kid from a middle-class family does not have a ballroom.”
The only member of Buhle’s family who saw any red flags was Grandpa Dutch, who served prison time for armed robbery. “What does he want from us?” he wondered after meeting Hunter. His first impression of the Biden estate: “Who’s buried here?” Game recognize game, as the saying goes.
If We Break is Buhle’s account of how becoming a Biden changed her life—for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, till divorce they did part. The book is quite obviously the product of years of therapy, candid self-reflection, and recovery from trauma—one of the many ways it differs from Hunter’s crack-centric memoir, Beautiful Things, which opens with a quote from Bukowski and likens the author to an artistic genius in the mold of Hunter S. Thompson and Jim Morrison.
Buhle quickly came to realize being a Biden had its perks. Six months after marrying Hunter, she gave birth to their daughter Naomi and was ushered into a large private room—”a gift from the hospital”—where the doctor asked her to deliver a letter to her father-in-law. If that all sounds a bit legally and ethically dubious, keep in mind that Bill Clinton was president so casual grifting was the vibe. Shortly thereafter, Hunter “met with someone to get career advice” and returned with a lucrative job offer (including signing bonus) from the Delaware-based credit card firm MBNA, as in “the senator from MBNA,” aka Joe Biden. An early addition to a résumé composed entirely of peddled influence.
The author’s clear-eyed assessment of her privileged status, among other things, makes her more reliable and relatable as a narrator than Hunter, whose own memoir suggests his admission to Yale Law School had nothing to do with his father’s prestige and everything to do with the quality of the poem he included with his application. She enjoyed the perks of being a Biden: living in big houses, driving fancy cars, sending the kids to expensive private schools. Hunter’s career really took off after Joe became vice president, and Kathleen jetted off to Europe, Asia, Africa, and South America on the taxpayer’s dime. She peddled influence in her own right, bringing Joe along as a special guest to help raise money for her friends’ nonprofits.
Life was good, until it wasn’t.
Hunter comes across as an insufferable prick at the best of times, a spoiled rich kid who “listened to Johnny Cash’s working-class ballads but drove a Porsche” and constantly expressed his “disdain for the showiness of new money.” As tragic as his story is, he is not a sympathetic character. At the worst of times, he was an absolute monster.
Buhle thoughtfully recounts the hell Hunter put her through when his addiction spiraled out of control, her efforts to keep it all a secret, and her gradual descent into madness while attempting to “solve” his drinking problem—she didn’t find out about the crack and the (many, many) prostitutes until much later. Anyone who has loved an addict will relate to her struggle with codependency. The frantic searches for empty bottles, the paranoid stalking, the propensity to forgive. The endless lies.
There are, perhaps inevitably, some major discrepancies between Kathleen’s and Hunter’s version of events, which is a polite way of saying that Beautiful Things did not undergo an extensive fact-check. It could be that Hunter was not even aware that, according to Kathleen, she wasn’t the first to learn about his affair with Hallie, his brother Beau’s widow, by finding text messages on his iPad. It was his daughters. Maybe he doesn’t remember. Maybe he would rather forget.
The divergence is downright comical at times, a Rashomon saga for degenerate élites. For example, they both agree they had a frank conversation while hiking along the Potomac River on their 22nd anniversary in 2015, and met with a couple’s counselor the following day. According to Hunter’s version of the counseling session, Kathleen shot down his suggestion that the hike had been “cathartic” and told him, “I’m never going to forgive you.” He stormed out of the session and “drained” a bottle of vodka.
Kathleen’s version is slightly different. “Hunter, I forgive you,” she recalls saying. “Yesterday’s hike was a turning point for me. … We never need to discuss your infidelity again.” To which Hunter responded, “Thank you. I’m sorry. I have to get back to the office,” and walked out. The next morning she found Hunter passed out on the couch and a broken crack pipe in his ashtray. Allegedly. Who’s to say which one is telling the truth—the crackhead or the woman scorned?
Joe, meanwhile, is conspicuously absent from this telling. He appears early on, introducing himself to Kathleen by putting “his hands on my cheeks and [looking] me in the eyes, his nose almost touching my own.” Classic Joe. He shows up again years later, heroically attempting to stop a woman from playing in a golf fundraiser because she’d never swung a club in her life. “Honey, you can’t golf if you’ve never played before,” he told Kathleen. For once, he wasn’t wrong. Otherwise, the Biden patriarch looms over the entire story as the source from which Hunter’s lifelong immunity from consequence flowed.
Kathleen’s former family, which once kicked her out of a photo restricted to “Biden blood only,” was presumably happy to let her bear the brunt of Hunter’s burden, especially after the death of the other, better son. As president, “Sleepy Joe” seems to have adopted a similar approach to the nation’s problems. Whether due to age, incompetence, temperament, or all of the above, his leadership in a time of crisis leaves much to be desired. Kathleen Buhle dropped the “Biden” in 2019 and seems to be doing well. America may yet recover, too.
If We Break: A Memoir of Marriage, Addiction, and Healing By Kathleen Buhle Crown, 304 pp., $21.99
House Republican Study Committee (RSC) chairman Rep. Jim Banks (R-Ind.) and 15 GOP colleagues are challenging the legality of State Department grants—of as much as $500,000 each—to international “organizations committed to the practice and spread of atheism and humanism.”
Their challenge is contained in a June 30 letter to resident Joe Biden and Secretary of State Anthony Blinken concerning the department’s competitive grant process issued in April 2021 for “Promoting and Defending Religious Freedom Inclusive of Atheist, Humanist, Non-Practicing and Non-Affiliated Individuals” in South Central Asia, the Middle East and North Africa.
“To be clear, atheism and ‘humanism’ are official belief systems.
“As an initial matter, therefore, we would like to know what other United States government programs supported with appropriated funds are being used either to encourage, inculcate, or to disparage any official belief system—atheist, humanist, Christian, Muslim, or otherwise,” Banks and the other signers told Blinken.
“It is one thing for the department to be tolerant and respectful of a wide range of belief systems, and to encourage governments to respect the religious freedom interests of their citizens. It is quite another for the United States government to work actively to empower atheists, humanists, non-practicing, and non-affiliated in public decision-making,” the signers continued.
“Any such program—for any religiously-identifiable group—in the United States would be unconstitutional.
“In addition to its constitutionally dubious legal foundation, we also question how such a grant or cooperative agreement program advances the foreign policy interests of the United States,” the signers wrote.
A State Department spokesman could not be reached for comment.
In addition to Banks, the signers include Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-S.C.), Rep. Randy Weber (R-Texas), Rep. Glenn Grothman (R-Wisc.), Rep. Claudia Tenney (R-N.Y.), Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-Texas), Rep. Lisa McClain (R-Mich.), Rep. Doug Lamborn (R-Colo.), Rep. Daniel Webster (R-Fla.), Rep. Alex Mooney (R-W.Va.), Rep. Tim Burchett (R- Tenn.), Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.), Rep. Tim Walberg (R-Mich.), Rep. Barry Moore (R-Ala.) and Rep. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.).
In countries with a dominate religious culture such as the Middle East and parts of North Africa where Islam dominates, the signers warned Blinken that providing U.S. tax dollars to groups promoting non-Islamic faiths is likely to be perceived by local populations as subversive funding ”from a foreign power designed to shatter local religious and cultural relationships.”
In addition, the signers told Blinken they have reviewed other similar official State Department Notices of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) documents that “violate both the Establishment and Free Exercise clauses, but also the No Religious Test Clause of Article VI of our nation’s constitution.”
The funding provided to the organizations selected by the department would be used to support building “networks and advocacy groups” for atheists, according to the official notice.
“This would be analogous to official State Department promotion of religious freedom ‘particularly for Christians’ in China, with the express goal being to build a corresponding missionary network,” the signers told Blinken.
“Obviously, this goal that would never pass constitutional muster and would be derided by radical Leftist bureaucrats in your agency as completely out-of-bounds.
“So why is this atheist NOFO not viewed with similar objection,” the signers asked.
“Americans rightly discern this as a part of the broader effort on the part of your administration to promote radical, progressive orthodoxy abroad. Atheism is an integral part of the belief system of Marxism and Communism,” the signers said.
The letter to Biden and Blinken regarding State Department grants to support atheism and other religious belief systems follows revelations last week that officials are preparing to appoint a Special Representative for Equity and Justice.
The appointment is part of Biden’s government-wide “Equity Action Plan” that mandates all federal departments and agencies to appoint such officials.
Congressional Republicans criticize the plan as a thinly disguised effort to use the federal government to promote Critical Race Theory (CRT), the controversial view that the color of an individual’s skin determines their values and how they perceive people of other ethnicities.
In addition to the U.S. Embassy in Germany flying a Black Lives Matter flag, the Republicans pointed to the U.S. Vatican City Embassy flying an LGBT pride flag, which they describe as “a transparent provocation at tenets of Christianity,” and the State Department’s creation of a new gender classification for use on passports for individuals of “unspecified or another gender identity.”
The governors of Virginia and Maryland responded to a letter from the Supreme Court’s top security official calling on them to provide more police resources to prevent protests outside the homes of justices following the landmark ruling to overturn Roe v. Wade.
Left-wing protesters have continued to appear outside their homes since the ruling. Over the July 4 weekend, more protesters were seen picketing outside the justices’ homes, located in suburban areas in Virginia and Maryland.
“The governor agrees with the Marshal that the threatening activity outside the Justices’ homes has increased,” Virginia Gov. Glenn Youngkin spokesperson Christian Martinez said in a statement after Supreme Court Marshal Gail Curley called on the governor to “enforce state law” that prohibits demonstrations outside the homes of justices.
“He welcomes the Marshal of the Supreme Court’s request for Fairfax County to enforce state law as they are the primary enforcement authority for the state statute,” the statement added, adding that Attorney General Merrick Garland needs to “do his job” by enforcing federal laws.
“Every resource of federal law enforcement, including the U.S. Marshals, should be involved while the Justices continue to be denied the right to live peacefully in their homes,” according to the statement. However, from the statement, it’s not clear if Youngkin’s administration is going to take concrete steps to provide more law enforcement at their homes.
Another Response
After receiving Curley’s letter on Friday night, a spokesman for Republican Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan responded by saying that Garland needs to act.
Pro-abortion activists protest in Portland, Ore., on June 24, 2022, following the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade. (John Rudoff/AFP via Getty Images)
“Two months ago, Governor Hogan and Governor Youngkin sent a letter calling on Attorney General Garland to enforce the clear and unambiguous federal statutes on the books that prohibit picketing at judges’ residences,” Hogan spokesman Michael Ricci wrote on Twitter. “A month later, hours after an assassination attempt on Justice Kavanaugh, the Department of Justice finally responded, declining to enforce the laws.”
The spokesman was referring to an incident involving 26-year-old Nicholas Roske, a California man who was arrested at Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s home last month and allegedly told officials that he was plotting to kill the justice because he would support overturning Roe v. Wade and support expanding Second Amendment protections.
“Now a different federal official is writing to us with conflicting information,” his statement continued. “Had the marshal taken time to explore the matter, she would have learned that the constitutionality of the statute cited in her letter has been questioned by the Maryland Attorney General’s office.”
Hogan has instructed Maryland State Police to further review law enforcement options after the letter was sent, Ricci said.
Federal law stipulates that it’s illegal to attempt to influence a judge’s ruling or interfere with their duties. But the Department of Justice has, so far, failed to take action against the constant protests outside the homes of Republican-appointed justices including Clarence Thomas, Amy Coney Barrett, and Kavanaugh.
The demonstrations, meanwhile, come amid rampant vandalism and arson attacks against churches, pregnancy centers, and pro-life groups. Some left-wing extremist groups have said they will carry out more attacks if their demands aren’t met. Last weekend, dozens of people were arrested across the U.S. following the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe.
Amazon founder and multi-billionaire Jeff Bezos criticized the Biden administration’s messaging around gas prices and rising inflation.
On Saturday, resident Joe Biden suggested on Twitter that gas stations across the United States charge customers less for gasoline to offset historically high gas prices.
“Ouch,” Bezos wrote in response. “Inflation is far too important a problem for the White House to keep making statements like this. It’s either straight ahead misdirection or a deep misunderstanding of basic market dynamics.”
Earlier, Biden’s Twitter account wrote that he has a “message” to gas stations: “This is a time of war and global peril. Bring down the price you are charging at the pump to reflect the cost you’re paying for the product. And do it now.”
From the Twitter post, it’s not clear how gas stations might accomplish Biden’s Twitter demand, which was praised by a Chinese Communist Party media account. Others, however, criticized the president’s post.
“You know as well as everyone that the Federal Reserve actually sets the prices—through rampant inflation,” wrote the Libertarian Party’s account. “When 40 percent of the dollars in the world was printed in one year, inflation sets in and prices skyrocket. Just yesterday you were blaming [Russia]. We see through your scam.”
Added California gubernatorial candidate Michael Shellenberger, “At a time of war, Biden could have leveled with the American people and united the country through an ‘all-of-the-above’ clean energy strategy that included oil & gas. Instead, he has repeatedly lied about the causes of the energy crisis and divided the country.”
Data released by auto club AAA on Sunday shows that the national average price for a gallon of regular gas currently stands at $4.81, down about 10 cents from a week ago. In mid-June, the average price hit $5 per gallon for the first time.
Biden and fellow Democrats have shifted from blaming Russia and its leader, Vladimir Putin, for the spike in gas prices to blaming oil companies and gas stations in recent days. The president sent a letter to the top oil companies in the United States, demanding that they bring down prices while accusing them of price-gouging.
ExxonMobil, one of the firms, fired back by suggesting that federal policies have contributed to rising prices.
“In the short term, the U.S. government could enact measures often used in emergencies following hurricanes or other supply disruptions—such as waivers of Jones Act provisions and some fuel specifications to increase supplies,” the oil giant wrote in a news release.
The federal government, it added, “can promote investment through clear and consistent policy that supports U.S. resource development, such as regular and predictable lease sales, as well as streamlined regulatory approval and support for infrastructure such as pipelines.”
Republicans and some analysts have said the higher prices are caused by Biden having issued a series of executive orders last year suspending new drilling leases on federal lands, fossil fuel subsidies, and killing off the Keystone pipeline.
We are currently in an information war with the mainstream media. In order for the truth to come to light, we the people must be the voice for all J6ers who are being silenced and slandered. We want to appeal to Big conservative media hosts and journalists to report and help bring awareness to this cause. Fill out the form below to receive more information on how you can help get the truth out!
January 6th Truth & Light Freedom Festival
America has forgotten what Independence Day is all about! Unbeknownst to many, we have political prisoners in the United States and their constitutional rights are being severely violated! We truly have a two-tiered justice system where American citizens are being persecuted based on their political beliefs. Some are still unjustly and cruelly incarcerated, on home arrest awaiting trial, pushed to take an unfair plea deal, subjected to a sham of a trial in the DC swamp. The families and loved ones of these politically persecuted patriots are suffering after losing, in many cases their primary source of income. Many of those who are not incarcerated, have nevertheless lost their jobs or businesses. YOU cannot let these wonderful American patriots be forgotten! We are holding a festival/retreat in Missouri July 2-3, 2022 to raise awareness for the January 6th Political Prisoners as well as provide a retreat for January 6th Patriots and their loved ones.
‘However long I’m here in life, I want to be consumed with God and…. consumed with touching people’s lives.’
An Arizona woman whose heart stopped beating for 27 minutes claims she has seen God face-to-face in heaven, and it was He who orchestrated her “medically documented miracle,” bringing her back to life at His mercy. Her first words, scrawled on a piece of paper by her bedside, read, “It’s real.”
“I was before the face of God. One in a million have this happen to them, and for whatever reason, God chose for me to do this,” Tina Hines, who has made it her mission to share her testimony, told The Epoch Times.
“In those 27 minutes, I mean being dead, they had no signs of life—no breathing, no heartbeat that was showing on the monitor. I didn’t need to have this [near-death experience] happen in order to believe that God is real and that heaven is real. I’ve always believed that, deeply and passionately. But God gave it to me as a gift so that I could share more about it.”
Tina has been married to her husband, Brian, for 34 years; they share four children and are expecting their first grandchild around August. Before her near-death experience in 2018, hardworking Tina had been feeling that her “heartbeat wasn’t right,” but tests unearthed no issues. “They sent me off from the hospital and said there’s nothing wrong,” she recalled.
Three months later, she suffered sudden cardiac arrest.
Tina with her family after her sudden cardiac arrest in 2018. (Courtesy of Tina Hines)
The Sudden Emergency
On the morning of Feb. 12, 2018, Tina said prayers with her prayer partner of 23 years, Dawna, and completed some student recruitment tasks for the school she worked for. After lunch with a friend, she felt “heavy-chested.”
Nonetheless, she met her close family friend Jeff Logas and husband, Brian, around 4 p.m. for a hike on Deem Hill, but fell to the ground unconscious in front of their home with her eyes rolled back and no pulse. Brian called 911 and Jeff began CPR, before Brian took over chest compressions. She continued to turn blue. Paramedics arrived minutes later and shocked Tina’s heart three times, then twice more on their way to HonorHealth Deer Valley Hospital.
“Talk about miracles … the timing of God, allowing me to be around people that could do CPR,” Tina reflected. “They put a machine around me called a LUCAS device and it did the compressions for them consistently. Once I got to the hospital, they did one more shock.
“The doctor said, ‘Well, let’s just try, she’s a healthy 51-year-old.’ That last shock was when I came out of it and could see.”
Tina scribbled “It’s real” on a piece of paper after coming out of a coma, trying to express that she was in heaven. (Courtesy of Tina Hines)
Tina had a gash on her forehead from the fall, a cracked sternum, and several cracked ribs from the CPR, and had limited to no oxygen to her brain for over 27 minutes. Doctors feared she may have sustained brain damage. Put on a ventilator and with a tube down her throat, Tina finally came out of all that emergency chaos; but, she said, she had experienced those life-changing minutes differently.
“I could see lights on the ceiling and I knew in those 27 minutes of being dead, not being able to feel anything. God totally removed all the pain,” she recalled. “I didn’t feel any of the compressions. They broke my sternum and my rib cage to get to my heart to be able to start it up again. And I felt none of that—I felt nothing.”
Tina had more to say and was desperate to share her experience immediately, but doctors placed her in an induced coma to allow her body to recover and get to the root cause of her heart attack. Frantic family flocked to the ICU waiting room, including Tina and Brian’s four grown kids, and Tina’s sister and husband-in-law.
The following day, Feb. 13, Tina woke up. And she shared what she saw in the heavenly realms.
Tina has written about her divine encounter and near-death experience in her book, “Heaven—It’s Real… How Dying Changes Living.” (Courtesy of Tina Hines)(Courtesy of Tina Hines)
‘Heaven—It’s Real’
Doctors wanted to confirm if Tina could breathe on her own, so Brian leaned down to his beloved wife’s face and asked if she could take some breaths. Within seconds, they could see Tina’s chest rise and fall. Doctors were assured that she was strong enough to breathe on her own and removed the ventilator.
Coming out of sedation, Tina started gesturing with her hands as if asking for something to write with. Her children reached for a journal and Brian placed a pen in her hand. She scribbled “It’s real,” nodding to heaven, and tears of relief fell freely. “That was the moment that my family knew everything’s going to be just fine,” Tina recalled.
“Words don’t do it justice,” she said. “I was before the face of God. I literally just saw a bright, huge sun in the background, bright yellow sun colors, and some soft clouds. I saw the [heaven’s] gates in the back. It was a euphoric, absolutely incredible sense of peace.
“A lot of people want to know, ‘Did you see family members? Did you see your pets that have passed away?’ I saw nothing except for Jesus. There were no words, it was just that presence of Jesus being with me—seeing my beautiful Savior’s face. His beautiful, amazing face standing there before me. Just He and I there together, with His arms stretched out to me and completely open drawing me into Him. We just looked at one another. There were no words, it was just that presence. I truly was blinded by the yellow, the bright yellow that was there, and the lights that were coming from behind Him.”
Tina has accepted the skepticism of non-believers, claiming that while doctors may say it was “just loss of oxygen and hallucinations,” her story contains no exaggeration. “It was seeing Jesus face-to-face, with his arms stretched out, just giving me that comfort of no pain, no trauma, no drama. It was just completely before the Lord,” she said. “Then, He sent me back.
“How else could I come back from being dead for 27 minutes and no signs of life, and come back and live a very normal life? I don’t even take heart medications any longer. God did it. God started my heartbeat again. He touched, He reached down, and He touched my heart. And He was with me in heaven. And He let me tell the story.”
Three days after her heart attack, Tina had a 2-by-2-inch defibrillator implanted near her left collarbone to monitor her heart rate. She was discharged from the hospital the very next day.
Tina’s first words after coming back to life touched her family deeply. Her niece even had the words “It’s real,” in Tina’s handwriting, tattooed on her body, and the story went viral. If her story convinces just one person to choose life because there’s a chance that God and heaven are real, said Tina, then it must be shared.
Cherishing Earthly Existence
Tina claims to have been a believer since she was 5 years old. Her mother played a big role in her faith, sending her to a religious private school where her understanding intensified. Both Tina and her husband are devout Christians and are proud parents to four children: twin sons Jordan and Logan, both 30; son Jake, 24; and daughter Tatum Marie, 18. Jordan and his wife, Kaylee, are expecting their first child.
Since seeing heaven and coming back to tell the tale, Tina—who’s worked in education for 30 years—has made sharing her testimony a major part of her life and she’s met “so many amazing people” along the way.
Tina has even written a book to that end. “Heaven—It’s Real… How Dying Changes Living” is the story of Tina’s experience and the impact it has had upon her earthly existence.
Tina and Brian. (Courtesy of Tina Hines)Tina and Brian with their family. (Courtesy of Tina Hines)
Over six months, she employed the SOAP writing method—scripture, observation, application, and prayer—to put her testimony together. She confronted questions such as, “What if this happens again, how is my family going to deal with this?” concluding that God is faithful and true, and we are all here for a purpose.
“I still have an imperfect heart. I still have the weird heartbeat,” she said. ‘But I always say I have this imperfect heartbeat, but I have a perfect God. And so if God just brought me back here on this life for a few years to share the story, and for some reason, it happened again, or for some reason, my life was not physical here on Earth. I know that I’ve done exactly what God wanted me to do. So I trust him in that.
“I still owe thousands of dollars of hospital bills. I still have to deal with the everyday struggles that we all do. But ultimately, the sovereignty of God means that he’s in control no matter what. And so I trust that. And I know that and I believe that and so it changes everything on how I live here on Earth now.”
Tina believes that no matter what our challenges and painful moments in life are, every one of us needs “the hope of eternity and the hope of heaven.” She hopes that her life story would help people discover the much-needed peace within themselves and know that “God is real and heaven is real.”
Tina, who has been weaned off her heart medications and returned to training for marathon running, has found renewed purpose in her life-changing brush with death. “You don’t have a testimony unless you have a test,” she insisted. “If you don’t see the rain and the storm, you don’t end up seeing the sunshine and the rainbow at the end.
“However long I’m here in life, I want to be consumed with God and consumed with what He has for me and consumed with touching people’s lives.”
Missouri Gov. Mike Parson signed a new election law on Wednesday that will require a voter to show a photo ID to vote in the coming general election.
The new law, House Bill 1878, requires voters to show one of the following photo IDs at polling sites: nonexpired Missouri driver’s license, nonexpired state nondriver’s license, other documents issued by the state or federal government with a photo and recent confirmable signature, or photo identification issued by the Missouri National Guard, U.S. Armed Forces, or U.S. Department of Veteran Affairs.
A voter who comes to the polling sites without the required photo ID can cast a provisional ballot with a signature on the ballot envelope and a sworn affidavit.
However, the election judges will mark the ballot envelope to indicate that the voter’s identity was not verified.
The voter can either come back to the polling site with a photo ID on the same day or allow the election authority to determine if the ballot is effective by comparing the voter’s signature with one on file with the election agency.
Missouri Gov. Mike Parson listens to a media question during a press conference in Jefferson City, Mo., on May 29, 2019. (Jacob Moscovitch/Getty Images)
The bill was sponsored by state Rep. John Simmons, a Republican, and passed in the Missouri House and Senate early this year.
It also bans the use of drop boxes to collect absentee ballots, mandates cybersecurity reviews, and prohibits private donations for elections unless it’s personal protective equipment, water, or food for election workers.
“No absentee ballot shall be delivered through a drop box and no election authority shall establish or use a drop box for the purpose of collecting absentee ballots,” read the text of the legislation (pdf).
The law will take effect on Aug. 28, 2022.
It comes amid a renewed national emphasis on election laws. Democrats in many states have sought to expand voter access following widespread mail-in voting during the pandemic-affected 2020 elections, while many Republicans have pursued new election integrity measures that they contend would cut down on the potential for fraud.
Missouri’s measure was backed by Republican Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft, who called it “one of the strongest election laws in the country.”
“It makes sure that it’s easy to vote, it’s harder to cheat, and the people can have trust in the results,” Ashcroft said.
Ashcroft rejected assertions that the photo ID mandate harms minority voters.
“It seems pretty racist to me to say that the color of skin determines whether or not someone knows how to get an ID,” Ashcroft said Wednesday.
Seventeen states besides Missouri had voter photo identification laws in effect as of this spring, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures, and 19 states had identification laws that accepted proof other than photos.
Missouri Republicans have sought for years to impose photo ID requirements but have been rebuffed by courts. The state first adopted a photo ID requirement in 2006 that was ruled unconstitutional by the state Supreme Court.
In 2016, Republican lawmakers put on the ballot a constitutional amendment authorizing photo ID that was approved by 63 percent of voters. But lower courts placed a hold on the accompanying law enacting the actual photo ID requirement. In January 2020, the state Supreme Court struck down a “misleading” and “contradictory” provision requiring a sworn statement for voters without a photo ID to cast a regular ballot.
Blue states believe their abortion policies can bring companies back
Amidst predictions of a political “red wave” in the upcoming mid-term elections, an economic wave has been building for years with no end in sight as companies flood out of blue states and into red states.
And as a result of its political divisions, America appears to now be dividing itself into prosperous, high-growth states and states that are suffering a chronic decline. But Democrat-run states believe their abortion policies could be a key factor in attracting companies back.
Caterpillar and Citadel, which in June announced their exit out of Illinois, are only the latest firms to leave high-tax, high-regulation states. Tesla, Hewlett Packard, Oracle, and Remington are also among the hundreds of companies flocking out of California, Illinois, New York, and New Jersey to business-friendly places like Texas, Florida, Arizona, and Tennessee. Relocating companies have spanned industries including tech, finance, media, heavy manufacturing, autos, and firearms.
“There is a great migration going on, and I expect it to accelerate,” Glen Hamer, president of the Texas Association of Business, told The Epoch Times. “When the Caterpillars and the Elon Musks relocate, it’s an advertisement to the entire country and the entire world that something positive is going on in that state. And there is a multiplier effect.”
According to a 2022 survey of 700 CEOs, the top states for business were Texas, Florida, Tennessee, Arizona, and North Carolina. The worst were California, New York, Illinois, New Jersey, and Washington.
Even companies like Apple, which did not move its headquarters to Texas, chose to establish its second-largest campus for employees there. Amazon selected Houston as one of its prime hubs. Ford, Volkswagen, and Nissan chose Tennessee as the location for major new manufacturing facilities. And in some cases, entire industries like firearms, which are being targeted by legislation and lawsuits in blue states, are moving south.
The skyline of Miami, Fla., on Sept. 29, 2021. (Joe Raedle/Getty Images)
“It’s a broader trend that we’ve been tracking for the last 15 years,” Lee Schalk, Vice President of Policy at the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), told The Epoch Times. ALEC tracks state economic trends in their annual report, “Rich States Poor States.”
“You won’t see companies moving to states like New York, California, and New Jersey,” Schalk said. “They’ll be moving out of those states into neighboring states, where the policies are a little bit better, or they’ll be making the big move to places like Texas, Florida, North Carolina.”
“Texas was one of the first states to recover all the jobs it lost during the pandemic,” Hamer said. “Now we have a workforce that is at an all-time high, and the economy has diversity and strength. Whether it’s energy, manufacturing, health care, technology, finance, you name it, the Texas economy is firing on all cylinders.” Texas has attracted 250 new corporate headquarters since 2015, Hamer said.
When jobs leave, people leave with them. According to the U.S. Census, Democrat-run states California, New York, New Jersey, Michigan, and Illinois together lost 4 million people between 2010 and 2019, the so-called “leftugees.” During the same period, the states with the greatest influx of people were Florida, Texas, Tennessee, Ohio, and Arizona.
States have been able to attract companies by cutting taxes, reducing red tape, and establishing right-to-work policies. In 2013, North Carolina passed a landmark tax reform package to cut corporate and personal income taxes. The business income tax there is now 2.5 percent and will be phased out entirely over the next several years.
Contrary to expectations that states would bankrupt themselves by cutting taxes, an influx of companies and new residents often boosts state revenues from property taxes, sales taxes, and personal income taxes, even when the percentages are reduced. Florida attracted 624,000 new residents in 2020, along with more than $40 billion in income, equating to an estimated $23.7 billion in new tax income. Florida has enjoyed two decades of net in-migration, amounting to a total income gain of $197 billion.
North Carolina’s latest budget included a deal to phase out corporate income taxes while also giving teachers a raise and even padding its “rainy day fund,” Schalk said. “North Carolina has been able to do that because not only have they been bold on lowering taxes, but they’ve also gotten the spending side under control.” And when companies move in, they bring intangible benefits with them as well.
“Any sort of civic organization loves it when they hear that a blue chip company like Caterpillar is relocating to our state,” Hamer said. “It means these executives are going to be serving on all sorts of different boards of directors, the local art museum, opera, or the chamber of commerce. When companies relocate their individuals, they become deeply ingrained in the community. They contribute time and treasure to activities that make the community more vibrant.”
The reverse is also true for states that are losing businesses and population, creating a vicious circle where continuously hiking taxes fails to bring in more revenue because the tax base gets depleted and quality of life suffers. According to a report based on IRS data by Wirepoints, an Illinois-based economic research organization, the cost of losing companies and people is stark for states like Illinois, which has lost population for 21 straight years.
Since 2020, that state has lost a total of $535 billion in income that moved away, which equates to about $25 billion in lost tax revenue during that period, and $4 billion in 2020 alone. Illinois’ problems include a loss of 114,000 residents in 2021, a string of 21 consecutive years of state budget deficits, a $313 billion deficit in public pensions, and the second-highest property tax rates in the country.
“Illinois is stuck in a vicious downward spiral it can’t hope to escape from without fundamentally changing how it governs,” the Wirepoints report states. “Structural property tax reform, reductions in pension debt, slashing units of local government—the state needs to do all these things if it wants to convince Illinoisans to stay and persuade other Americans to move in.”
Reducing violent crime would also help. Escalating crime was reportedly a factor, one among many, in Citadel’s decision to leave Chicago for Miami. Ken Griffin, the hedge fund’s CEO, had been one of Illinois’ richest residents and had given more than $600 million in charitable donations to educational, cultural, medical, and civic causes in the state.
Ken Griffin, Founder and CEO, Citadel, speaks during the Milken Institute Global Conference in Beverly Hills, Calif., on May 2, 2022. (Patrick T. Fallon/AFP via Getty Images)
“It’s the beauty of the 50 laboratories of our democracy,” Schalk said. “We’re able to quickly see what’s working and what’s not working across all issue areas. Unfortunately, I don’t see the high tax and high spend states changing their ways.”
“We can see an acceleration of hostile business policies in states like California, Illinois, and New York,” Hamer said. “It’s a race to increase taxes, increase regulation, and make it more difficult for people to live their lives. When you contrast that with states like Texas and Arizona, the gap is just widening and we’re seeing the great migration as a result.”
Republican Representatives in Washington are attempting to grant even more economic power to states in energy production. The GOP introduced the Federal Land Freedom Act last year, which would take authority to approve oil leases and permits away from the federal government and “give each state the right to develop all of the energy resources on the federal lands located within that state’s borders.”
Recently, however, blue states appear to be waking up and looking for ways to boost their competitiveness. California Gov. Gavin Newsom recently stated, “some businesses may have left the state, come on back! It’s a point of pride that we welcome you back.”
New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy sent personal letters to more than 50 companies in red states, appealing for them to come to New Jersey. Connecticut Gov. Ned Lamont made a similar attempt. These governors are highlighting one regulatory advantage that they believe will give them an edge over conservative states: their permissive policies toward abortion.
Murphy’s letter to companies in Georgia stated that “The overturning of a woman’s right to bodily autonomy—and the chilling effect this decision will have on your ability to attract and retain top female talent by being located in a state which has refused to recognize women’s reproductive freedom—cannot be ignored.”
Alyana Alfaro Post, Murphy’s press secretary, said, “Governor Murphy encourages businesses looking to stand with their employees to look at New Jersey, a state where they can be confident that the rights of women, the LGBTQIA+ community, and voters will always be protected.”
“We’re a family-friendly state that respects women,” Lamont stated in a video pitch. “I know some of you are in states like Texas, which are outlawing a woman’s right to choose. We have codified, we are protecting a woman’s right to choose … any of you business owners thinking about making a move, give me a call. I’d love to hear from you.”
Iowa’s Mike Franken says cabal will use schools to win elections for Republicans
Iowa Democratic Senate candidate Mike Franken says there’s a Republican-led, capitalist-evangelical plot to “dumb down” youth through “a war on education,” designed to gain an electoral advantage in the years to come.
During a campaign event in Red Oak last week, Franken told voters Republicans are uniting “the über-capitalists … and the ultra-right evangelicals” on educational issues to “make people dumb and lemmings.”
“Is this what Newt Gingrich wanted everybody to do in the ’90s?” Franken said, according to a video of the event obtained by the Washington Free Beacon. “Dumb down America as much as we can because the demographics are working against the Republican Party? It’s true. It appears so.”
Former speaker of the House Newt Gingrich told the Free Beacon he found Franken’s remarks “laughable” and that the Senate candidate “is falling for the teachers’ union line.”
“As a Ph.D. in European history and author of more than 40 books, I find it laughable that Franken thinks I could be anti-learning. I participated in the launch of President Reagan’s dramatic report A Nation at Risk in 1983,” Gingrich said. “The teachers’ unions and their Democratic Party loyalists have fought against reform every step of the way. Children should not be trapped in terrible schools that cripple their future. Parents have the right to know what is being taught to their children.”
Franken did not respond to a request for comment.
The retired Navy vice admiral, who served under former president Barack Obama and as a military adviser to former senator Ted Kennedy (D., Mass.), has no stance on public education listed on his campaign website. He has, however, taken strong stances on increasing abortion access, expanding Medicare, and combating climate change. The Iowa Unity Coalition, which has endorsed Franken, supports tuition-free college education for all state residents. A Harvard University study in 2014 found that a Massachusetts tuition-free program lessened students’ college completion rate.
Republicans have made education a significant election issue, as parents have expressed concerns over a public education system they believe has abandoned the teaching of core academic subjects and doubled down on racially divisive rhetoric and courses. The Republican National Committee in 2021 adopted a resolution that condemned critical race theory and “antiracist” school curricula. Congressional Republicans in January put forth as part of their midterm platform a Parents’ Bill of Rights, which would publicly disclose state education budgets and curricula.
Franken did not elaborate on his opposition to Republicans’ education platform, which could potentially alienate some Iowa voters concerned with radical teachings about America’s history in schools. The state House in 2021 entertained a bill that would have banned the New York Times‘s 1619 Project from public education.
Franken’s Democratic nomination this year was unexpected. In 2020, he lost a primary race to Theresa Greenfield, who would go on to lose her election to Sen. Joni Ernst (R.). Franken in June bested Democratic candidate Abby Finkenauer to win the party’s nomination for 2022.
Having raised nearly $3 million thus far for his campaign, Franken will face Sen. Chuck Grassley (R.) in November.
A Grassley campaign spokeswoman said Franken’s comments were “lockstep with the Biden White House,” which in 2021 “orchestrated a memo from the National School Board Association in an effort to intimidate parents by unleashing federal antiterrorism surveillance tools on them at school board meetings.”
“Mike Franken didn’t read the memo from last November’s gubernatorial election in Virginia, the near upset gubernatorial race in New Jersey or the school board recall election in his dream state of California,” Michaela Sundermann told the Free Beacon. “Waging a war on parents is not a winning strategy. Chuck Grassley fights for the fundamental right of parents to have a say in their child’s education.”
How much student loan debt would Americans hold in three years if rresident Joe Biden instituted his forgiveness plan today? The exact same amount they hold today.
The reason is simple: Forgiveness does nothing to address the structural causes of the $1.6 trillion in student debt held by the public, according to economists and education experts who spoke with the Washington Free Beacon. Canceling debt won’t stop future students from borrowing tomorrow, nor can Biden wave a wand and make college cheaper.
The White House is considering forgiving up to $10,000 of student loan debt per person, according to multiple reports. Should Biden follow through with the plan, a reduction in outstanding student loan debt wouldn’t last long. Economists say the total amount owed to the U.S. government would return to $1.6 trillion by 2026 under a $10,000 forgiveness program.
Biden’s consideration of loan forgiveness comes as his administration has seen approval ratings plummet, with younger voters increasingly losing trust in his presidency just months before the midterm elections. No matter what Biden’s rationale for the move may be, economists say any forgiveness scheme could actually exacerbate the problem for current and future students by incentivizing schools to raise tuition.
“Here’s the basic situation, the most charitable explanation is that student loan debt forgiveness is a Band-Aid,” said economist Marc Goldwein. “This is a one-time gift.”
Even if Biden were to capitulate to the demands of Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D., Mass.) and Bernie Sanders (I., Vt.) and cancel all outstanding student loan debt, Goldwein finds, outstanding student debt would return to $1.6 trillion in under 15 years. If Biden were to cancel $50,000, student debt would return to that level in under a decade.
There are several explanations for why student debt would continue rapidly increasing after cancellation. For one, partial student loan forgiveness would make the total debt held much younger. Older college graduates have less debt to pay, whereas younger Americans on average have much larger outstanding balances that continue to accrue interest.
The cost of higher education has skyrocketed over the past decades. In fact, few goods or services have risen faster. Some studies find college tuition has increased in price at a faster rate than health care, child care, and housing.
Between 1980 and 2020, the price of an undergraduate education has increased nearly 170 percent, according to a report from Georgetown University. But that fact hasn’t deterred Americans from attending college. In 1980, 16.2 percent of Americans held a college degree or more, compared with just under 38 percent in 2021.
Why the cost of college has risen so sharply is a matter of ongoing debate among economists. Whatever the reason, few would say student debt relief does anything to address the underlying problem.
“Executive authority on student debt relief only works with a certain king on the throne. That doesn’t sound like good economic policy,” said education economist Carlo Salerno. “Student debt relief is just mopping the floor while the faucet still runs. We’re adding student debt faster than we’re paying it off.”
Worse, some economists say, student debt relief could actually encourage colleges and universities to raise tuition prices further. Consider the hypothetical of a college administrator deciding tuition costs for the 2023-2024 school year. Biden just declared a $10,000 student loan bailout and promised future relief. A college administrator could rationally consider it a safe bet to significantly hike tuition costs if the government might cover the increase in a few years.
“You could argue that student debt relief is worse than a Band-Aid. It’ll infect the wound,” Goldwein said. “This is going to worsen the problem.”
Economists and education experts who spoke with the Free Beacon said student debt relief could also provide perverse incentives for future undergraduates. A student deciding between a more costly private education versus a local state school may opt for the former if he believes another round of student debt cancellation is down the road. Moreover, a student may opt to pay back his outstanding debt at a slower pace if he expects further cancellation under a different Democratic administration or a second Biden term.
One individual who works in private lending told the Free Beacon that his advice to students today is to take out as much debt as you can. Interest rates remain relatively low, he said, and there is a good chance it may all be forgiven by the time the student graduates.
Young people considering a gap year before enrolling in college may want to reconsider their plans as well. Biden announcing student debt relief in the fall will not do much good for the 18-year-old who decided to postpone college to volunteer for a year.
Although a vast majority of Americans—roughly 87 percent—do not hold any student loan debt, there may never be a better time to go back to school. Biden’s plan could be the deal of a lifetime.
Strength is the foundation of the Jacksonian affinity for Israel. Jacksonians admire strength. They can be romantic retrospectively about past heroes and they admire courage against the odds and last stands. But they prefer winners to the “beautiful losers” favored by more sentimental observers of international politics. Israel’s triumph in the Six-Day War while the United States was struggling in the quagmires of Vietnam first drew the attention of Jacksonian America to the Jewish state. The refusal of the Arabs to make peace afterward, and the adoption of terrorist tactics by some Palestinians, heightened what Jacksonians saw as a contrast between a strong and upstanding nation and, again from their particular and partial point of view, what they saw as its cowardly, incompetent, and treacherous opponents.
It is not just Israeli strength that appeals to Jacksonian America. It is Israel’s approach to power. This can be hard for people not raised in a Jacksonian milieu to understand: some of the very things that make Israel most unpopular around the world actually make Jacksonians respect Israel more.
Jacksonian beliefs about war, for example, mesh well with some of Israel’s more controversial policies. When Hamas or Islamic Jihad fighters send a few rockets from Gaza into Israel, and Israel occasionally retaliates with its air force and tanks, much of the world is appalled by what it sees as a “disproportionate” Israeli response. Overreacting to a provocation is, many feel, as bad as launching the original attack. This is not how many Israelis feel, and American Jacksonians agree.
For Jacksonian America, the most logical and appropriate response to a terrorist attack is a massive response that breaks the will and the ability of the enemy to resume hostilities. While one should try to avoid civilian casualties if possible, the original aggressor bears all the guilt for all the deaths caused in the ensuing conflict. When American Jacksonians see Israelis launching massive attacks on Gaza and talking about trying to break Hamas in response to rocket attacks, the Jacksonians support the effort and wish Israel well. Far from agreeing with European and other critics of Israel’s response, Jacksonians wish that more of the NATO allies shared what they see as the refreshingly honest and realistic approach to war that the Israelis have. They believe that if more countries had the courage and determination of the Israelis, there would be many fewer terrorists and the world would have more peace.
Jacksonians see no problems with the controversial American prison for captured enemy combatants established at Guantánamo during the Bush administration. Similarly, they are comfortable with Israeli actions on the West Bank that many find unacceptable. Jacksonians tend to support strong and even harsh measures against terrorists, and they think the job of American presidents is to protect the American people regardless of what squeamish human rights lawyers think about the methods employed. While Israel’s actual policies are often more restrained than Jacksonians would like, and its military is far more concerned about legality than the average American Jacksonian would be in a similar situation, nevertheless Israel’s clear determination to defend its people and its military resonates deeply with Jacksonian ideas about how a country should defend itself.
A strong U.S.-Israel alliance appeals to most Jacksonians in part because they like Israel and admire its approach to world politics, but Jacksonians instinctively think in “America First” terms and their support for an alliance ultimately depends on their views of whether they think an alliance with Israel is good for the United States. Where Wilsonians look for common values in choosing allies, Jacksonians look for allies with similar interests, and by interests Jacksonians mean primarily enemies. Believing as they do that fear is the most important factor in international relations, Jacksonians look for allies who can help the United States overcome the enemies it fears. Believing as they do that nations do not act altruistically, Jacksonians look for countries who fear the same enemies that the United States fears and, ideally, fear them more than we do. That fear, and their eagerness to win American help against their enemies, will keep allies helpful and loyal. Jacksonians also look for evidence that an ally or potential ally is committed to its own security. They do not think it is America’s place to provide free guarantees to foreign countries that refuse to invest in their own defense. America’s help should go to those who are prepared to earn it.
From this standpoint, Israel appears to be an exemplary ally. The United States and Israel share so many enemies that anti-U.S. signs can often be found at anti-Israel rallies and that those most prominently associated with the cry of “Death to America!” will often also be found shouting “Death to Israel!”
Ever since the oil embargos and the seizure of American diplomatic hostages during the Iranian Revolution, Jacksonian America has mostly seen the Muslim Middle East as dominated by the hatred of America and everything it stands for. The wars in the Gulf, the long-standing hostility of the Iranian regime, and the attacks of 9/11 further strengthened this impression.
The rise of the threat of Middle East terrorism has made Israel’s position seem even more sympathetic to Jacksonians. To Jacksonians deeply concerned about what they believe to be serious and long-term threats from the Middle East, Israel looks like a good ally to have, if only because Israel’s geographical position and relations with militant Islam put it even more firmly in the crosshairs than the United States. Israel needs American help in what is ultimately a war of survival, and so Americans can count on Israel being there through thick and thin. Rather than wanting to distance themselves from Israel in the hope that this will deflect the terrorists’ wrath from the United States, Jacksonians see Israel’s regional unpopularity as an asset because it ensures that Israel is fully committed to the common cause. Beyond that, Jacksonians do not believe that it is either prudent or wise to let fear of your enemies make you abandon your friends. This, in their view, is cowardly and dishonorable behavior that signals weakness and invites attack.
Israel’s enemies have always, despite their best efforts, been Israel’s most helpful friends. It may not be rational in the sense that non-Jacksonians understand the meaning of the word, but every time a violent mob burns American and Israeli flags side by side in the Islamic world, every time a United Nations office issues what to Jacksonian ears sounds like a grotesquely one-sided condemnation of Israel for behaving exactly as Jacksonians under enemy fire would behave, every time a suicide bomber kills innocent people out of a twisted and fanatical belief, every time a village of Christians flees their ancestral homes in terror, American Jacksonians become less interested in the case against the Jewish state and more eager to deepen our alliance with it.
Finally, Israel holds up its end of the bargain when it comes to defending itself. While rich countries like Germany reject any and all American requests to pay an appropriate share of NATO’s costs, Israel invests in excellent military forces and is not afraid to use them. In 2020, Israel spent 5.6 percent of its GDP on defense, compared to 2.2 percent in Britain, 2.1 percent in France, 1.4 percent in Germany, and 3.7 percent in the United States. For many Jacksonians, Israel is a better, more trustworthy, and more useful ally than most of the NATO countries. While both Germany and Japan have had major American bases on their soil since World War II, the American military presence in Israel is minimal. Israel does more, many Jacksonians feel, and asks less, than many of the American allies that coast on American security guarantees while criticizing both Israel and the United States nonstop.
The alliance with Israel, far from looking like a strategic liability to Jacksonians, looks like a source of strength and prestige. One advantage, in the Jacksonian mind, is the signal Israel’s success sends about the wisdom of alliances with America. Israel is a small country that (until recent oil and gas discoveries changed the picture somewhat) had few natural resources and a much smaller population than many of its enemies. Criticized by Europe, ostracized by the Muslim world, Israel has only one true friend in the world—and look at how well Israel is doing. It is prosperous, extremely well armed and well integrated into global financial markets. The message to other countries: there is only one country in the world whose friendship you need. If the United States is your ally, even if everyone else turns against you, life will go well. Jacksonians believe that this perception around the world will help keep America safe.
Similarly, ever since the United States became Israel’s principal arms supplier during the Cold War, Israel’s wars and confrontations with its neighbors have served to showcase the superiority of American technology and weapons. When Israel’s American-supplied arsenal overmasters its rivals in conventional warfare, governments all over the world get two messages. First, you want to have the kind of relationship with the Americans in which you can buy their top-shelf hardware, and second, you do not want the Americans so annoyed with you that they sell the really powerful gear to your opponents.
Finally, Jacksonians have come to see Israel as a kind of symbolic surrogate of the United States. Their view of Israeli Jews—as a Chosen People with a unique message, embattled in a hostile world by the enemies of God, united against hostile outsiders in an unbreakable unity of kith and kin—applies the ideas that Bible-reading Protestant Christians in the British Isles and the American colonies once held about the ancient Hebrews to the Jews of today. It is easy for scholars and skeptics to take issue with this vision, but its roots are deeply implanted in American culture.
As Israel has gone from strength to strength it has become a kind of talisman for many American Jacksonians. Recent generations have seen Jacksonian America undergo a series of shocks and challenges. The civil rights movement undermined long-held ideas about the nature of American society and forced Jacksonians to confront some of its historical demons. A culture and belief system shaped in a rural, ethnically homogeneous America had to adapt to life in multiethnic suburbs. Feminism and the gay rights movement forced Jacksonians to take another look at the relationship of their traditional social values and assumptions to the individualism that Jacksonian culture cherishes. As Jacksonian America struggles to make its peace with a host of new forces and new ideas, signs of continuity with the past are welcome. The modern Israeli success story appears to vindicate both Jacksonian principles and biblical religion; there is a balm in Gilead that soothes the wounded soul.
Walter Russell Mead is James Clark Chace Professor of Foreign Affairs and Humanities at Bard College, Ravenel B. Curry III Distinguished Fellow in Strategy and Statesmanship at Hudson Institute, and the Global View columnist at the Wall Street Journal. This essay is adapted from his new book, The Arc of a Covenant: The United States, Israel, and the Fate of the Jewish People, which will be published by Knopf on July 5.
Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) on Friday introduced a bill in the House to bar the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) from acquiring ammunition.
The bill (pdf), known as the “Disarm the IRS Act,” stipulates that the IRS is “prohibited from acquiring ammunition” and “notwithstanding any other provision of law.” Reps. Marjorie Taylor Green (R-Ga.), Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.), and Jeff Duncan (R-S.C.) are co-sponsors of the measure, according to his office.
It came after Gaetz, in interviews with Fox News and other outlets, expressed concern after he discovered that the IRS purchased more than $700,000 in ammunition in recent days. The congressman suggested that it’s part of a broader White House plan to disarm Americans.
“Here’s the Biden plan: Disarm Americans, open the border, empty the prisons–but rest assured, they’ll still collect your taxes, and they need $725,000 worth of ammunition, apparently, to get the job done,” he told Fox News last week.
The bill, he said, would put a “total moratorium on the IRS buying ammo. When we used to talk about the IRS being weaponized, we were talking about political discrimination, not actual weapons for the IRS.”
“Undeniably, part of the strategy is that with one hand, the Biden regime is doing everything they can to suppress access to ammunition for regular Americans, while with the other hand, they are scooping up all the ammo that they can possibly find,” Gaetz alleged.
5 Million Rounds
According to a report released by the Government Accountability Office in 2018, the IRS has been stockpiling ammunition and weapons for years. As of 2018, the agency had 4,487 firearms and 5,062,006 rounds of ammunition in its inventory, the report said.
Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) walks in a courtroom in Atlanta, Ga., on April 22, 2022. (John Bazemore/Pool/Getty Images)
A 2018 report from Forbes noted that the IRS buys guns and ammunition for its Criminal Investigation Division. Agents in that division are the only employees in the IRS that carry firearms, according to its website.
But in an interview last month with Breitbart, Gaetz said he’s heard concerns that it’s part of a larger trend to “have any entity in the federal government buy up ammo to reduce the amount of ammunition that is in supply, while at the same time, making it harder to produce ammo.”
“You cannot fully exercise the complement of your Second Amendment rights if you are unable to acquire ammunition in your own country because your government has reduced the production of that ammunition, and then on the other hand, tried to soak up the supply,” the congressman added.
Republicans in June expressed concerns over a report suggesting the Biden administration would block private ammunition companies from using the federally owned ammo factory in Missouri, potentially creating a “backdoor” ban on AR-15-style rifles. Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), a member of the GOP leadership, later confirmed that the White House will keep the Lake City factory running.
The IRS and Treasury Department have not responded to requests for comment.
The ‘independent state legislature doctrine’ is a longtime favorite of conservative legal thinkers and Republicans
The Supreme Court decided on June 30 to hear an important new case that Republicans hope will re-empower state legislatures to make rules for redistricting and governing congressional and presidential elections.
Republicans say the U.S. Constitution has always directly authorized state legislatures to make rules for the conduct of elections, including presidential elections. Democrats say this idea, encompassed by the Independent State Legislature Doctrine, is a fringe conservative legal theory that could endanger voting rights. The Supreme Court has reportedly never ruled on the doctrine.
The doctrine, if endorsed by the high court, could allow state legislatures to select presidential electors in disputed elections, something critics decry as a threat to democracy.
Election law expert J. Christian Adams, a former U.S. Department of Justice civil rights attorney who now heads the Public Interest Legal Foundation, an election integrity group, praised the Supreme Court for granting the case, which he said was “very important.”
“It means that the Court may take up all the nonsense that has been occurring over the last 10 years,” Adams told The Epoch Times by email.
In a series of Twitter posts, Democratic Party attorney and election law activist Marc Elias denounced the court’s decision to hear the case.
“The Supreme Court will hear a case next term that may validate the dangerous independent state legislature theory,” Elias wrote.
“Congress must enact comprehensive voting rights and anti-subversion legislation before it’s too late,” he wrote, adding “the future of our democracy is on the docket.”
The doctrine has been in the news because conservative Republican activist Ginni Thomas, wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, sent emails to 29 Republican state lawmakers in Arizona urging them to choose the state’s presidential electors despite the disputed popular vote tallies showing Democrat Joe Biden had won the state, The Washington Post reported June 10.
The emails were sent Nov. 9, 2020, after media outlets had called the Arizona race for Biden. The efforts by Republicans to change the result in Arizona were unsuccessful and ultimately the state’s 11 votes in the Electoral College were awarded to Biden.
In her emails, Ginni Thomas, a supporter of then-President Donald Trump, asked Arizona legislators to “stand strong in the face of political and media pressure” and asserted that the responsibility to select electors was “yours and yours alone.” Lawmakers, she wrote, had the “power to fight back against fraud” and “ensure that a clean slate of Electors is chosen.”
The emails attracted the attention of the U.S. House select committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, security breach at the U.S. Capitol that delayed official congressional certification of the 2020 presidential election by several hours. Democrats also say there is a conflict of interest because Justice Thomas will participate in the court case about the independent state legislature doctrine. Through her lawyers, Ginni Thomas is resisting committee demands that she testify in the ongoing probe that many Republicans, including Trump, say is a sham.
Tim Moore, a Republican who is the speaker of the North Carolina House of Representatives, explained why he supports the doctrine.
“The U.S. Constitution is crystal clear: state legislatures are responsible for drawing congressional maps, not state court judges, and certainly not with the aid of partisan political operatives,” Moore said in March when he launched an appeal of the Supreme Court of North Carolina’s order redrawing the state’s electoral map against the wishes of the state’s GOP-majority legislature.
“We are hopeful that the Supreme Court will reaffirm this basic principle and will throw out the illegal map imposed on the people of North Carolina by its highest court. It is time to settle the elections clause question once and for all.”
The elections clause in Article 1 states: “The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof.”
The presidential electors clause in Article 2 states gives each state the power to appoint presidential electors “in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct.”
Three Supreme Court justices have said the doctrine applied in the Bush v. Gore case that resolved the disputed 2000 presidential election.
In an unsigned order issued on June 30, in Moore v. Harper, court file 21-1271, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case. The justices did not explain why they decided to hear the case, which is their usual practice when deciding which appeals to take on. For such a petition to be granted, at least four of the nine justices must agree. The case is expected to proceed to oral argument in the court’s upcoming term that begins in October.
Moore filed his petition (pdf) with the court on March 17.
It was preceded by an emergency application seeking to stay a Feb. 14 ruling by the Supreme Court of North Carolina that required the state to modify its existing congressional election districts for the 2022 primary and general elections. Respondent Rebecca Harper is one member of a group of 25 individual North Carolina voters.
On March 7, the Supreme Court turned away (pdf) the stay application. In an opinion concurring in the denial of the stay, Justice Brett Kavanaugh invoked the so-called Purcell principle, writing that the high court “has repeatedly ruled that federal courts ordinarily should not alter state election laws in the period close to an election.”
AS NEW CALLS TO BAN CHINA-OWNED TIKTOK FROM AMERICAN APP STORES EMERGE FROM THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, THE OLD REASONS TO BAN THE APP STILL HOLD TRUE.
As new calls to ban the China-owned TikTok from American app stores emerge from the Federal Communications Commission, older reasons to ban the app also continue to hold true. The National Pulse has compiled our historical reporting on the subject, below.
Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Commissioner Brendan Carr recently called on Apple and Google to remove TikTok from their respective app stores, citing national security and data privacy concerns. Carr described TikTok’s parent company ByteDance as “beholden” to the Chinese government in his letter, noting that, as a result, the app is “required by law to comply with [Chinese government] surveillance demands.”
Carr’s request renews a Trump-era initiative to ban the app from American phones due to similar concerns given the app’s well-documented links to the Chinese Communist Party. Since the initial effort was launched, even more evidence and financial ties have been unearthed, demonstrating TikTok’s intimate relationship with the Chinese Communist Party.
Beyond national security fears concerning TikTok, the app has repeatedly been used to sow discord in the U.S. and parrot Chinese Communist Party propaganda. TikTok has also expanded its influence over American “fact-checkers,” which are often used by social media platforms to silence conservative voices and stories critical of the Chinese Communist Party, by funding one of Facebook’s leading “fact-checking” partners, Lead Stories.
The stories below, published by The National Pulse, outline the well-documented case for banning TikTok once and for all.
One of the key reasons TikTok has been able to escape a ban – which has been executed in countries including India – is due to the fact that the app has hired an extensive team of American lobbyists with deep ties to the Democratic Party.
The Democratic National Committee (DNC) recently joined the platform and has even seen far-left activists use the platform to target voters.
The Supreme Court followed up its June 23 landmark ruling that for the first time recognized a constitutional right to carry firearms in public for self-defense, by issuing a series of rulings June 30 reversing federal appeals court decisions that upheld gun restrictions in California, New Jersey, Maryland, and Hawaii.
Courts will find it difficult to uphold the firearms laws in question after the high court’s June 30 and June 23 rulings.
In unsigned orders, all four cases were remanded June 30 to lower courts “for further consideration in light of” the Supreme Court’s June 23 decision in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen. In that 6–3 ruling, the high court invalidated New York state’s tough concealed-carry gun permitting system.
Lisa Caso sells guns at Caso’s Gun-A-Rama store in Jersey City, N.J., on March 25, 2021. (Spencer Platt/Getty Images)
The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
The Supreme Court has been strengthening Second Amendment protections in recent years. In District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), the Supreme Court held the amendment protects “the individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation,” and in McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010), that this right “is fully applicable to the States.”
It makes no sense to recognize Americans’ right to defend themselves in their homes while denying them the ability to defend themselves outside their homes, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote June 23 in the court’s majority opinion.
“After all, the Second Amendment guarantees an ‘individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation,’ and confrontation can surely take place outside the home. … Many Americans hazard greater danger outside the home than in it,” Thomas wrote.
In the new orders, the Supreme Court summarily disposed of the four pending cases, simultaneously granting appellants’ petitions seeking review while skipping over the oral argument phase. Some lawyers call this process GVR, standing for grant, vacate, and remand.
In the Maryland case, Bianchi v. Frosh, court file 21-902, a coalition of 25 states led by Arizona challenged Maryland’s Firearms Safety Act of 2013. The statute, which was upheld by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit in September 2021, required pistol purchasers to seek a license, complete safety training, and be fingerprinted. Maryland bans popular weapons such as the AR-15 and similar rifles and limits magazine capacity to 10 rounds.
Rifles are offered for sale at Freddie Bear Sports on April 8, 2021 in Tinley Park, Illinois.(Scott Olson/Getty Images)
Maryland Attorney General Brian Frosh, a Democrat, was defiant after the remand order. Military-style firearms “pose grave risks to public safety, as recent mass shootings in other states have made clear,” Frosh stated. Despite the Bruen ruling, the state’s law remains in effect, he said. “Marylanders have a right to be protected from these dangerous weapons.”’
The California case, Duncan v. Bonta, court file 21-1194, challenged the state’s ban on magazines containing more than 10 rounds. The ban went further, requiring the confiscation of such magazines, which had previously been lawful to own. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit upheld the ban in November 2021.
California Attorney General Rob Bonta, a Democrat, is currently scrambling to deal with the fallout after his office leaked sensitive personal information, including the names and addresses of every concealed-carry permit holder in the state. Some holders say they now fear for their lives.
The New Jersey case, Association of New Jersey Rifle and Pistol Clubs Inc. v. Bruck, court file 20-1507, is similar to the California case. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit affirmed the New Jersey law in December 2021.
Petitioners challenged the state law that bans 10-round magazines and requires that owners surrender such magazines to law enforcement. The law also forbids the transfer or sale of these magazines but allows owners to keep them if they modify them to reduce how many rounds may be held. Failing to comply with the law is a crime that can be punished with a sentence of up to 10 years of imprisonment and $150,000 in fines.
In Young v. Hawaii, court file 20-1639, a petitioner challenged Hawaii’s gun licensing system that allows the transportation of an unloaded firearm only in an enclosed container and only to and from a gun repair shop, target range, licensed gun dealer, hunting ground, or police station. Licensed firearms may only be used for hunting or target shooting. Licenses are issued by the chief of police of the county in which the gun owner lives.
Hawaii law requires gun owners to keep their weapons at their “place of business, residence, or sojourn.” Concealed-carry permit applicants must show they have “reason to fear injury to the applicant’s person or property” in order to obtain a permit. Permits allowing open carry are granted only “where the urgency or the need has been sufficiently indicated” and the applicant “is engaged in the protection of life and property.”
“Records show the state granted only 4 permits from 2000 to 2020,” KITV reports.
The Hawaii law was affirmed in March 2021 by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit.
The flurry of rulings from the Supreme Court has everyone’s head spinning. The most significant among them, even if it doesn’t capture all the headlines, is West Virginia vs EPA. The majority opinion is impressive but the part I found truly wonderful is the concurring opinion by Neil Gorsuch. This is where we see things headed, toward a major and much-welcome curbing of the power of the administrative state.
Just to review what this thing is, it is the unelected bureaucracy that rules the country without oversight from voters or legislatures. For well over 100 years, most courts have given it a pass, just assuming that the “experts” in the bureaucracies are handling things just fine, faithfully interpreting legislation, and merely creating rules for easy compliance.
Generations have gone by as this 4th branch of government has grown in size, scope, and strength. For the most part, its baneful impositions have been felt by one business or one industry at a time. You have heard the stories. The car dealer complains of how the Department of Labor is making him crazy. The machine-parts manufacturer is going bonkers about letters from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. The energy company can never satisfy the Environmental Protection Agency.
They are stories and we find them unfortunate but we’ve generally avoided thinking of these as systematic, all pervasive, and truly dangerous to the idea of freedom itself. However, there are some 432 of these agencies. The authors of the Declaration of Independence noted their existence back in the day when they accused the English king of having “erected a Multitude of new Offices, and sent hither Swarms of Officers to harass our People, and eat out their Substance.” They fought a revolution to end the tyranny but now we have a home-grown form, starting in 1883 with the Pendleton Act and continuing throughout the 20th century as each new administration creates its own bureaucracy.
The thing has taken on a power of its own. Strangely, the topic hardly comes up at all during elections, and this is for a reason. Politicians running for office like to advertise their power to make change. They might even believe it. In reality, elected officials have very little influence over the conduct of public life relative to the administrative state. As Trump found it, not even the president is a match for the deep state.
Here is what has happened since March 2020: the beast showed its face. Seemingly out of nowhere, these strange agencies and people for whom we never voted were ruling our lives. They restricted travel, forced us to cover our faces, closed our churches and schools, and forbid our businesses from operating unless they were big enough to afford a powerful lobbying arm in Washington. The whole scene was appalling. It caused many people—including some earnest judges—to take notice.
Once you see the problem, you cannot unsee it.
Consider the problem with inflation alone: it is largely the responsibility of the Federal Reserve, which is among the most terrifying of the deep-state agencies. This thing was founded in 1913 with the promise that it would end “wildcat banking” and contain the expansion of money and credit so that we would have a more stable economic environment to encourage growth.
Even now, people believe that the Fed is going to somehow fix recessions and inflations, even though a deeper analysis reveals that the Fed itself is the cause of both. The Fed cannot be both the problem and the solution, surely. This is becoming as obvious as the fact that the CDC cannot make a textbook pathogen go away with power and potions.
Let’s take a quick look at the supposed 2 percent inflation target of the Federal Reserve. It might seem to you that they have long ago blown past this such that it is entirely cosmetic. But the Fed has a little trick up its sleeve. It says it doesn’t follow conventional inflation indexes like the Consumer or Producer Price Index. It is fancier than that. It follows instead the index of Personal Consumption Expenditures. And sure enough when we look at the PCE, we find that the Fed is pretty good at its job!
All that changed recently when the PCE itself blew up. Now the Fed has been revealed to be utterly incompetent, in a way that is not different from the CDC, NIH, DOL, DOE, DOT, HHS, DHS, FTC, SEC, and all the rest of these glorified 3-letter agencies employing nearly 3 million people who cannot be fired or controlled. The unique feature of our times is that the expert class in government has been unmasked as fakes at best and unrelenting menaces as worst.
Here is where the Fed’s preferred measure of inflation stands today:
(FRED/Jeffrey A. Tucker)
So much for competence at the Fed! And yet, how exactly is this institution supposed to be controlled? We don’t vote for them. The Fed board is appointed by the president with Senate approval but this control is mostly mythical. The fancy economists run circles around the political actors with big words and fancy finance, so what can they do but approve?
The political class too often acts like absentee owners of a far-off land: they have little choice but to trust the hired landlords to do a good job. That’s the administrative machinery that has become the real power, not only implementing the policies but making and enforcing the rules too.
With COVID, this whole scam was revealed to absolutely everyone—not just to small businesses but to every single individual and family in the United States. The whole bureaucracy announced to us what they have always believed but rarely said: your life is not your own. Your job is to comply. And so this raises the fascinating question of what precisely are we going for here and what kind of society and government do we want? Surely this should be up to the people!
The Supreme Court in its most recent decision was dealing with a technical aspect of how regulations applied to a coal plant, but the implications of the decision are much larger. The EPA was determining policy, even making it, riffing wildly on legislation with the presumption that courts will always and everywhere defer to the agency over industry and even over the words of the legislation. The court said no: it was the EPA that had been operating illegally all along.
This decision is so startling because it shows a Supreme Court doing what it is supposed to do, serving as a legal check on the power ambitions of government itself. That’s what the framers intended. We’ve just begun, however. The Court needs to attack the whole machinery of the deep state at its very root, going after “Chevron deference” (1984), the Public Health Services Act (1944), the Federal Reserve Act (1913), and stretching all the way back to the Pendleton Act (1883). A nation ruled by a faceless deep state is not a representative democracy and it is not consistent with the U.S. Constitution.
When you consider the implications of this one decision, they are awesome. It doesn’t just apply to the EPA and its elaborate plans for changing the global climate through command and control. It also applies to every other agency, including the CDC and even the Federal Reserve itself. They all should be accountable to the people through their elected representatives. If we cannot get back to that system, we will lose everything.
Dutch farmers are continuing their demonstrations against a government climate policy that officials expect to end many farmers’ livelihoods, with organizers on Telegram planning July 4 protests they say will “flatten” the whole of the Netherlands.
The message calls on concerned farmers and citizens to organize their own regional actions with the goal of closing all “distribution centers for food supplies and all major polluters” until “the government changes its plans.”
One viral call for a July 4 protest came from a large truckers’ Telegram group, suggesting that some truckers in the Netherlands may find themselves in solidarity with the nation’s agriculturalists.
The farmers, who plan to protest at many of the nation’s airports, specifically mentioned Schiphol and Eindhoven. NLTimes.nl has reported that spokespersons for both airports say they are monitoring the situation but have little information at present.
The Epoch Times reached out to both airports for comment but did not receive a response by press time.
A KLM airplane landed from Johannesburg, South Africa, is parked at the gate E19 at the Schiphol Airport, the Netherlands, on Nov. 27, 2021. (Sem Van Der Wal/ANP/AFP via Getty Images)
In 2021, the Netherlands’ coalition government proposed slashing livestock numbers in the country by 30 percent to meet nitrogen emissions targets.
The country has already implemented stringent restrictions on new construction with the aim of curbing nitrogen emissions.
Rabobank has argued that those new hurdles have slowed down homebuilding in the Netherlands, intensifying a housing shortage in the densely populated coastal nation.
On June 10, the government issued a national and area-specific plan for curbing nitrogen emissions. Those emissions are heavily driven by ammonia from livestock manure.
Some parts of the country would have to slash those emissions by 70 or even 95 percent.
A Dutch police officer stands guard as dutch police close access to Apeldoorn on the A1 highway to stop potential farmers demonstrating against the Dutch government’s plans to cut nitrogen emissions, on June 29, 2022. (Jeroen Jumelet/ANP/AFP via Getty Images)
It openly acknowledged that “there is not a future for all [Dutch] farmers within [this] approach,” as reported by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Foreign Agriculture Service.
“The Minister of Nature and Nitrogen Policy expects about a third of the 50,000 Dutch farms to ‘disappear’ by 2030,” the New Zealand Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade reported in a June 23 Market Insight Report.
The Netherlands is the world’s fifth-largest exporter of food, exceeded only by the United States, Germany, the United Kingdom, and China, according to World Bank statistics.
The Dutch government offers a multibillion-dollar buyout arrangement for farmers.
Christianne van der Wal, minister of nature and nitrogen policy, has left open the possibility that the government will expropriate land from farmers who do not comply, as reported by NOS Nieuws.
The proposals and resultant protests come amid worldwide fertilizer and food shortages.
Farmers leave the city of Bathmen, the Netherlands, on their way to the rural farmers’ protest in Stroe. Tens of thousands of participants are expected at the protest against the nitrogen policy, on June 22, 2022. (Bart Maat/ANP/AFP via Getty Images)
United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres warned on June 24 that “there is a real risk that multiple famines will be declared in 2022,” adding that “2023 could be even worse.”
On a recent episode of “Facts Matter” on EpochTV, American farmer John Boyd, Jr. warned of potential food shortages as a result of steeply rising input costs.
He said the expenses of running his own operation have tripled, driven in large part by significantly increased fertilizer costs.
In Sri Lanka, a ban on chemical fertilizers contributed to an economic crisis that has destabilized the government.
The country has recently announced a temporary ban on fuel sales to private vehicles, effective June 27 through July 10.
The latest round of demonstrations by Dutch farmers comes after a wave of similar protests in 2019 after lawmaker Tjeerd de Groot called for livestock numbers in the Netherlands to be cut by 50 percent.
Demonstrators have burned hay bales alongside highways, blocked roads with tractors, and spread manure to make their anger known.
In recent days, protesters have targeted the homes of Dutch government officials, including Prime Minister Mark Rutte and Nitrogen Minister van der Wal.
Footage circulating on social media purports to show protesters spraying manure on Dutch law enforcement.
Rutte criticized protesters, saying, “You can demonstrate, but in a civilized way,” as reported by the Associated Press.
AP also reports that Dutch police say they arrested 10 people on June 28 in connection with the protests.
A business owner in Chicago, Illinois tells Fox News Digital that skyrocketing crime in the city forced him to quit doing business in town adding to the list of individuals and businesses that have fled Illinois over the past couple of years amid surging crime…
“We would do thousands of jobs a year in the city, but as we got robbed more, my people operating rollers and pavers we got robbed, our equipment would get stolen in broad daylight and there would usually be a gun involved, and it got expensive and it got dangerous,” Rabine told Fox News Digital.
How unbelievable. Crime is getting so bad in Chicago that road workers were being robbed at gunpoint… in broad daylight.
Criminals stole expensive equipment, disrupting work as they robbed these employees.
Gary Rabine, who owned 13 businesses in the state, said enough is enough.
He, along with many other business owners, is leaving Chicago and the state.
This isn’t some odd coincidence. Both the left-leaning Governor of Illinois and the Mayor of Chicago have turned a blind eye to rising crime.
It’s getting so bad that a seemingly endless parade of residents is fleeing even nice parts of the state.
The costs related to all this crime were making jobs twice as expensive. That is unimaginable.
How can any leaders, regardless of party, allow this kind of thing from happening? How can Mayor Lightfoot just sit back and watch criminals get away with robbing law-abiding citizens?
But that is just what Democrats are doing, all over the country. Their “woke” politics are putting hardened criminals ahead of hard-working citizens.
And these leftists refuse to admit such policies are driving people away. There is only so much a person can take before they are forced to leave.
Nobody can blame them. The scary reality is, that wherever Democrats have power in state and local governments, this happens.
Unless serious law-and-order leaders take over, the trend will only continue.
Key Takeaways:
Numerous small businesses are fleeing Chicago due to rising crime.
In some cases, criminals are robbing workers in broad daylight.
The state’s left-wing governor and the city’s mayor are to blame.
States will not prevent life-saving treatment for pregnant women post-Roe v. Wade, contrary to claims from liberal media outlets and politicians.
Democratic politicians including Resident Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris, along with left-leaning media outlets like the New York Times, have said the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe may endanger or kill pregnant mothers. “I don’t mean to sound alarmist, I mean this: Women will die,” Harris said in a recent interview. Daily Beast columnist Wajahat Ali said women will have to ask themselves, “Do I abort this ectopic pregnancy to literally save my life or do I go to jail?”
While the overturn of Roe has either outlawed or severely restricted abortion in at least 11 states, each include exceptions to save the life of the mother in medical emergencies. Nevertheless, Democrats are hyping these concerns over pregnant mothers’ safety, and abortion advocates are spending millions of dollars to rally supporters before the 2022 midterms. Biden reminded his party last week before the Dobbs decision that “Roe is on the ballot“
The Texas “heart beat” bill, which prohibits abortion after six weeks of pregnancy, states that removal of an ectopic pregnancy does not constitute an abortion. Louisiana’s law prohibiting abortion after 15 weeks includes exceptions for ectopic pregnancies and other medical emergencies, along with the Ohio, Kentucky, Missouri, Arkansas, and Wisconsin abortion bills.
Treatment for ectopic pregnancies, where the unborn baby develops outside the uterus, is not abortion, said Dr. Christina Francis, a board-certified OB-GYN and associate scholar at the Charlotte Lozier Institute. She said women will receive the same treatment for life-threatening conditions as when Roe was in effect.
“The intent of an abortion is to end the life of the developing fetal human being, while our intent when we treat an ectopic pregnancy is to save the life of the mother,” Francis told the Washington Free Beacon. “We do a very different procedure than what’s done for an induced abortion.”
In Oklahoma, the state with the strictest abortion laws in the country, abortion is allowed when the doctor’s “reasonable medical judgment” determines it is necessary to save the mother’s life. Alabama allows abortions if the mother has a medical condition that requires “the termination of her pregnancy to avert her death or to avert serious risk of substantial physical impairment of a major bodily function.” West Virginia, which criminalizes abortion, also allows exceptions with the “intention of saving the life of such woman or child.” South Dakota’s 2022 abortion bill says a “procedure for the management of a miscarriage” is not an abortion.
Claims that the overturn of Roe will harm mothers who have miscarriages are also unfounded, according to Francis. If the unborn baby has died, “abortion laws, statutes, and even discussions don’t apply,” she said.
“There is intentional fear mongering being done,” Francis said. “I think people who know better are trying to scare women and physicians in the general public into supporting abortion laws.”
Think tank report finds systemic anti-Israel bias in corporate ratings
A prominent financial services firm promotes divestment from companies that help the Israeli government combat Palestinian suicide bombers, according to an independent investigation conducted by a Washington, D.C. think tank.
Morningstar Inc., a financial research firm that advises investors, is accused in a new report from the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD) of downgrading companies that help Israel combat terrorism, including those that work on the country’s security barrier built to stop Palestinian suicide bombers from attacking cities. Ratings produced by Morningstar and similar research firms act as a primary guide for investors and can greatly impact how a company is valued.
The author of the FDD report told the Washington Free Beacon that Morningstar’s practices comprise a key pillar of the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement—which wages economic warfare on Israel—and could force states with anti-BDS laws to cut ties with Morningstar. FDD concluded that Morningstar’s ratings are “driven by a quantifiable bias against Israel” and that the company “risks running afoul of numerous state statutes” meant to curb support for the BDS movement.
The focus on Morningstar stems from its 2020 acquisition of Sustainalytics, a research firm that rates companies based on their social values. Following Morningstar’s acquisition of Sustainalytics, watchdog groups including NGO Monitor and JLens accused Morningstar of allowing its research arm to promote the BDS movement through ratings that negatively impact companies working with Israel. These claims prompted the Illinois Investment Policy Board to initiate an investigation into the company’s practices. They are also fueling calls for at least 34 other states with similar anti-BDS laws to cut ties with Morningstar.
Faced with concerns from its own shareholders, Morningstar insisted in March 2021 that it was not unfairly targeting companies that work with Israel. But the Illinois investigation into its actions prompted the company to hire an outside law firm, White & Case, to conduct an investigation into Sustainalytics’s business practices. That report was published earlier this month and touted by Morningstar as proof it does not discriminate against the Jewish state.
“This investigation concludes that Morningstar’s Sustainalytics products do not recommend or encourage divestment,” the report reads.”
While White & Case unearthed an enormous amount of information about how Sustainalytics builds ratings that could negatively impact Israel, it ultimately concluded there was no evidence of systemic bias against the Jewish state within the company.
Outside analysts disagree. Sustainalytics routinely employs biased methods to investigate and downgrade firms doing business with Israel and its security sector, according to a follow-up analysis published by the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. Evidence included in the White & Case report indicates these “ratings and reports [are] driven by a quantifiable bias against Israel” and effectively promote BDS, according to FDD’s research.
The White & Case investigation “demonstrates conclusively that Sustainalytics’s processes and products … are infected by systemic bias against Israel,” FDD senior adviser Richard Goldberg, a former Trump administration official, wrote in the June 17 policy brief.
“Sustainalytics may engage directly with companies to try to dissuade them from doing business in and with Israel,” according to FDD’s analysis. “To the extent that Sustainalytics encourages companies to cease doing business in Israel to improve their [social values] ratings—which is precisely what would happen, according to the methodology set forth in the Report—these interactions may amount to boycotts of Israel under numerous state anti-boycott laws.”
Sustainalytics also sells investors a product called the Global Standards Screening, which essentially rates companies based on their association “with violations of international norms and standards”—an esoteric metric that critics say is intentionally skewed against Israel.
“Sustainalytics employees acknowledged” that their clients use these ratings as a de facto “‘do not invest list,” according to the White & Case report. Experts tout this as evidence that Sustainalytics knowingly downgrades certain companies in order to drive divestment from Israel.
Among activities that would put a company on the blacklist: surveillance or security supporting the security barrier Israel built during the Second Intifada to stop suicide bombers from infiltrating Israeli cities and killing civilians.
FDD’s Goldberg maintains that the metrics used by Morningstar are intentionally written to impact any company that works with Israel’s security sector.
“Morningstar is staking out a corporate policy to drive divestment from companies that help Israel stop suicide bombers from blowing up children in restaurants,” Goldberg, who helped draft the Illinois anti-BDS law, told the Free Beacon. “Morningstar is complicit in classic BDS campaign tactics. There’s little doubt state anti-BDS laws apply to Morningstar.”
A Morningstar spokeswoman in comments to the Free Beacon acknowledged that the White & Case report “identifies limited areas of bias that are outliers over the span of our work.”
The company said these limited findings of bias “do not live up to Morningstar’s standards” and that the company will alter its methodologies to reduce instances of anti-Israel bias.
The spokeswoman also noted that the Illinois Investment Policy Board did not sanction the company after a June 21 meeting about whether Morningstar’s policies violate the state’s anti-BDS laws. During that meeting, a motion put forward to clear Morningstar of wrongdoing failed. But after discussing the need to continue monitoring to see if further changes are made, the Illinois board voted not to blacklist Morningstar.
Arsen Ostrovsky, international law expert and CEO of The International Legal Forum, an organization that combats BDS, said Morningstar “has essentially been engaging in BDS practices and economic warfare” via its ratings system. “By actively seeking to discourage investments in companies that work on Israel’s security barrier, they are effectively giving tacit support to Palestinian terrorism, by falsely claiming it is contrary to international law and undermining Israel’s inalienable right to self-defense.”
Jay Tcath, executive vice president at the Jewish United Fund of Metropolitan Chicago, which works to combat BDS and was involved in pressing Morningstar to implement reforms, said his organization will continue to raise concerns about any investment rating criteria that unfairly target Israel.
A rating guide “that would ‘flag’ and harm the rating of a company like Illinois-based Motorola because it provides camera surveillance technology to what is mistakenly and provocatively referred to Israel’s ‘wall’ is an example of the type of on-going concerns—over terminology, sources, etc.—that we will continue to raise,” Tcath told the Free Beacon.
Morningstar also has offered to meet with Goldberg to discuss his findings and said it is committed to keeping the Illinois investment board apprised of any reforms it makes.
Many swing-district House Democrats are distancing themselves from Joe Biden as they face difficult reelection bids. The task won’t be easy—those same Democrats have voted with the president 100 percent of the time.
During a Tuesday Fox News appearance, Rep. Abigail Spanberger (D., Va.) said she does not want Biden to join her on the campaign trail and would rather “do the campaigning myself.” Just months ago, however, Spanberger—who votes with Biden 100 percent of the time—said she “welcome[d] the opportunity” to bring Biden to her district when the president visited Virginia in February.
Rep. Kim Schrier (D., Wash.), meanwhile, in a new ad touted “taking on the Biden administration to suspend the gas tax.” The Democrat’s claim is a bizarre one, considering that Biden supports the policy—he called on Congress to suspend the gas tax two days before Schrier released the spot. Schrier has also voted with Biden 100 percent of the time, and she was photographed in April holding hands with the president when he visited Seattle.
Spanberger and Schrier’s newfound attempts to break away from Biden show how vulnerable House Democrats are fighting for their political lives in a midterm environment that is extremely unfavorable to their party. While Biden won both Virginia and Washington by double digits, his approval rating is 26 and 10 points underwater in the two states, respectively, according to Civiqs. Biden’s freefall comes as the country experiences record-high inflation, an issue some House Democrats have used to criticize Biden despite voting for his multitrillion-dollar stimulus packages.
Rep. Chris Pappas (D., N.H.), for example, in early June criticized Biden on the economy, saying the Democrat’s administration “took their eye off the ball when it came to inflation.” But Pappas regularly touts his vote for Biden’s $2 trillion stimulus package, the American Rescue Plan, which liberal economists say drove the nation’s inflation surge. Pappas also votes with Biden 100 percent of the time, including on the president’s Build Back Better Act, which called for more than $2 trillion in additional spending at a time of record-high inflation. Rep. Susan Wild (D., Pa.) also voted for the bill just weeks after questioning how Biden would pay for the pricey package.
Spanberger, Schrier, Pappas, and Wild did not return requests for comment. In addition to their 100 percent Biden scores, all four endorsed Biden in 2020, and Spanberger, Schrier, and Wild said in the past they were “proud” and “honored” to earn his endorsement.
“Having the endorsement of a man who knows the struggles and priorities of Pennsylvania speaks volumes,” Wild said in September 2020. “I look forward to working with a White House that not only understands the needs of the seventh district, but is also committed to producing real solutions for the people back home.”
Even with Democrats’ best efforts, Republicans won’t make it easy for frontline members to disassociate themselves from the president given their voting records. The National Republican Congressional Committee has already labeled Spanberger one of Biden’s “loyal cronies,” and the group hammered Schrier in April for being “all smiles with Joe Biden while Washington State families struggle under Democrats’ failed agenda.”
Not every vulnerable House Democrat is bucking Biden. Rep. Marcy Kaptur (D., Ohio)—whose new district in 2020 narrowly voted for former president Donald Trump—continues to heap praise on the Delaware Democrat, calling his first year in office “outstanding” during a February event. Still, even Kaptur is trying to distance herself from the national Democratic Party. Her first general election ad rails against “people in Washington” who “care only about the coasts”—Kaptur has been in Congress since 1983 and votes with Biden and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) 100 percent and 99 percent of the time, respectively.
Former White House Coronavirus Response Coordinator Dr. Deborah Birx revealed that the federal government was relying on “hope” that COVID-19 vaccines would prevent infection when officials publicly stated that Americans who received the jab would become immune to the virus.
The admission came during a line of questioning by Rep. Jim Jordan, who inquired to the former Trump administration official: “When the government told us that the vaccinated couldn’t transmit it, was that a lie or is it a guess?”
“I think it was hope that the vaccine would work in that way,” she replied.
Dr. Birx’s comments follow a host of studies determining that the COVID-19 vaccine doesn’t confer protection as comprehensively as natural immunity. Data during the Omicron surge also showed that vaccinated people in Germany comprised the overwhelming majority of individuals contracting the variant.
“You were part of this effort when you were in the previous administration. And you’re saying in this administration that you can’t rule out the fact that our government was lying to us when they told us the vaccinated could not get the virus,” Rep. Jordan continued.
“I don’t know about their discussions that they had in the task force. So I can’t tell you that,” she began, adding “I can tell you as a family member who had individuals that were susceptible, of course, we got everybody vaccinated. But we still used layered protection during surges.”
Despite being vaccinated, Dr. Birx took additional precautions “because I knew potentially vaccine immunity would wane like natural immunity waned.”
“There was evidence that every four months, reinfection was occurring in South Africa.”
Revelations about the questionable efficacy of the vaccine come amidst the White House, Democratic governors, and left-wing companies attempting to mandate the jab for employees and customers. Users sharing data highlighting the weakness of the vaccine on social media platforms such as Facebook have also been hastily censored by left-wing “fact-checking” organizations.
The book exposes Soros’s connection to US media infrastructure and politics
From his responses, it’s clear that George Soros is a sociopath. [US Patriot]
Matt Palumbo, author of “The Man Behind the Curtain: Inside the Secret Network of George Soros,” details billionaire George Soros’s connection to American politics, and illustrates how Soros controls not only what is written about him, but also influences how the American public perceives news events.
Soros created a financial concept called reflexivity, which Palumbo said is “brilliant,” because it can cause what Soros wants in the finance sector to happen.
“But expectations set reality and Soros realized, ‘Well, that’s true of media as well.’ If you tell people what to expect, they’re going to reinterpret reality,” and that can be used to affect how people interpret news events, Palumbo said during a recent interview for EpochTV’s “Facts Matter” program.
“For whatever reason, if people think something’s going to happen, it actually will happen,” and Soros applied this to media companies’ coverage to make people believe something that did not actually happen, happened, said Palumbo.
Soros-backed media agencies use this concept to create false narratives and make people believe in something that did not actually occur. The reason Soros is able to have this level of influence is that he gives tens of millions of dollars to the U.S. media infrastructure.
There are many Soros-linked mainstream media organizations including, “ABC, CBS, CNN, Washington Post, New York Times, I mean, it is a very long list. Type Soros’s name and just look at how they cover him, and if it’s ever anything negative, it’s ‘anti-Semites say: negative claim,’” said Palumbo, adding that their coverage always seems to favor Democrats and Soros.
A watchdog group called the Media Research Center (MRC) has documented Soros’s ties to media infrastructure. “Soros has spent more than $52 million funding media properties, including the infrastructure of news—journalism schools, investigative journalism, and even industry organizations,” according to an MRC report.
Many left-wing groups, including media companies, get funding via Soros’s Open Society Foundation. That group is known to fund progressive initiatives like Black Lives Matter and Defund the Police, as well as political candidates and district attorney campaigns, said Palumbo.
Antifa and Black Lives Matter demonstrators protest on election night near the White House in Washington on Nov. 3, 2020. (Nicholas Kamm/AFP via Getty Images)
Soros’s foundation claims to promote democracy and individualism, but in reality, it supports a more radical agenda, said Palumbo.
“There is what they say things are and what they really are,” Palumbo said about the Open Society Foundation
Alexander Soros, George Soros’s son, heads the Open Society Foundation, which in 2017 was given $18 billion by George Soros to fund progressive causes. They have chapters all over the world, including an office in New York.
Palumbo cites Soros’s disguising himself as a Christian during his early years in Hungary before the rise of Hitler, when Jews were being purged, to explain the possible reason for Soros’s support of leftist ideology.
Before the rise of Hitler, Soros was taken in by a Christian man, who swore to authorities that Soros was his godson. Soros worked with the man to confiscate Jews’ property.
In a 1998 interview with “60 Minutes,” host Steve Croft asked Soros if he felt any guilt about confiscating property from Hungarian Jews, to which he replied that he did not.
“I was 14 years old, and I would say that that’s when my character was made. … That one should think ahead, one should understand and anticipate events, and when one is threatened, it was a tremendous threat of evil, I mean, it was a very personal experience of evil,” Soros said.
When questioned further about whether it was difficult knowing fellow Hungarians were being sent to death camps after he helped take away their property, Soros said it was not difficult in any way.
“Not at all, not at all. Maybe as a child, you don’t see the connection. But it created no, no problem at all,” said Soros. “I was only a spectator. The property was being taken away. So, I had no role in taking away that property. So I had no sense of guilt.”
In his research, Palumbo also found that many people who once worked for Soros’s Open Society Foundation later went on to work for media outlets.
In addition, Soros has funded campaigns for many Democratic politicians and progressive district attorneys, backing those who will get the results Soros wants.
“If you elect a DA, they have total autonomy on all those things, so it’s just hey, I want the law changed, I back a guy who wants to change it exactly the way I do, he goes in and changes it overnight,” said Palumbo
“But when you’re in a DA’s race, and there’s a couple of hundred grand spent with each person normally and then you drop 1 or 2 million, you actually can buy an election that way. And it’s happened time and time again. There in fact are cases where the challenger just drops out, because they know there’s no point,” said Palumbo.
The reason a broader swath of the public does not know who Soros really is is that he controls these organizations with money.
“It’s sort of an implied contract, where, ‘I’ve gotten money from this guy before, am I really going to badmouth them in my report?’ And a lot of people just choose not to,” Palumbo said.
KINNEY COUNTY, Texas—Kinney County sheriff’s deputies responded to a suspected smuggling vehicle on a county road early in the morning on June 29. During the ensuing pursuit, the fleeing driver lost control of the vehicle and flipped it.
The driver, a Mexican national wearing a cartel-related medallion, was taken into custody and is facing at least seven felony charges, according to Kinney County Sheriff Brad Coe.
Of the five passengers, all illegal immigrants, one female was taken to the hospital in Del Rio for non-life threatening injuries, while the remaining four declined medical treatment.
Coe said Border Patrol told him they could take the four uninjured illegal aliens into custody for processing only if they had been checked medically first.
“Well they had declined any type of medical help,” Coe told The Epoch Times. “So I can’t let them walk the streets. I can’t say, ‘Hey, go, be free.’ Because I still have to protect the Constitution and protect the people in the county.”
Coe said he loaded the three males and one female into his truck and drove to Eagle Pass, about an hour away, and dropped them off at the port of entry between the United States and Mexico.
In response to a question by The Epoch Times about the sheriff’s move, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott said the sheriffs in Texas play a “vital role” up and down the border.
“I applaud all of our sheriffs for having to respond in unprecedented conditions. And that’s causing all of us to use unprecedented action,” Abbott said during a press conference in Eagle Pass on June 29.
“And so whether it’s doing what that sheriff in Kinney County is doing, or what we’re doing, such as turning back more than 20,000 people, we all have our own tools and strategies that we use to either turn back or to return people across the border.”
Coe said he agrees with Abbott that local law enforcement shouldn’t have to be tying up so many resources on the border issue.
“But to let them go, undocumented, unaccounted for, just go because of a policy—I couldn’t do it. It’s going to be the exception rather than the rule. But at the same time, if Border Patrol won’t take a group for whatever reason, I don’t have a choice.”
He said he’s not sure if there will be any legal ramifications—”We’ll see what happens.”
Kinney County deputies have arrested 66 smugglers so far in June as the county remains a thoroughfare from the U.S.–Mexico border to San Antonio.
The rate of hospitalization for COVID among children is so low, it’s basically zero. Then why is it so important to jab babies and toddlers two or three times, even though side effects of the injection could harm them for life – or kill them?
Statistics show the rate of COVID-19 associated hospitalization among children aged 5 to 11 is 0.0008%.1 In real-world terms, that’s so close to zero you basically cannot lower it any further. Yet, despite such reassuring data, children in this age group are urged to get two to three doses of the COVID jab, even though side effects of the injection could harm them for life, or kill them.
As noted by the Vaccine Safety Research Foundation in the video below, myocarditis — one of the recognized effects of the COVID jab — “has a mortality rate of 25% to 56% within three to 10 years, owing to progressive heart failure and sudden cardiac death.”
Sudden cardiac death is what the media and public health agencies are now glibly referring to as “sudden adult death syndrome” or SADS. The older and more appropriate description for SADS is “sudden arrhythmic death syndrome,” but they don’t even want to use the word “arrhythmic” anymore, as that tells you what the death is really caused by, and many are now aware that the jab can cause heart inflammation.
By avoiding the word “arrhythmic,” it’s easier for them to pretend as though people are dying for no apparent reason, and certainly not because of the COVID shots. Still, real-world facts tell us that SADS didn’t take off until after the shots were rolled out, and the vast majority of young healthy people who suddenly die for no apparent reason have been jabbed.2
Also, understand that if your child or you are injured by the shot, you cannot sue the drug company for damages and, so far, the U.S. government has rejected all but one of the claims filed with the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program (CICP).3 At the current pace of about 18 claims a month, it would take 38 years just to get through the current backlog, Reuters has noted.4 Basically, many may die before their case even gets through review.
COVID Jab Authorization Granted for Babies
As if the situation were not bad enough already, June 15, 2022, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s vaccine advisory panel — the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC) — unanimously approved (21-0) to grant Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) to both Pfizer’s and Moderna’s COVID shots for infants and young children.5
Pfizer’s EUA is for a three-dose regimen (3-microgram shots) for children 6 months to 5 years old, while Moderna’s EUA is for a two-dose regimen (25-microgram shots) for children 6 months to 6 years.
In the video at the top of the page, Steve Kirsch, president of the Vaccine Safety Research Foundation, interviews reporter Toby Rogers, who endured the entire nine-hour day of the recent VRBPAC meeting.
The day before that meeting, June 14, Rogers published6 a written summary of Pfizer’s trial on young children, which he referred to as “an embarrassment.” “Any VRBPAC member who votes Aye on this junk science application should be removed from his/her job,” he wrote. Apparently, they all need to go.
In the interview, Rogers laments the fact that the VRBPAC members remain “locked in their information bubble” and won’t allow any conflicting data to influence their preconceived biases.
As noted by Rogers, they have a sacred duty to protect public health, and they’re being flippant about it. They’re ignoring data, they’re ignoring the pleas of the vaccine injured, they’re ignoring serious questions, they’re ignoring everything except the flimsiest bits and pieces upon which their narrative is built. Rogers called the experience “heartbreaking.”
VRBPAC Refuses to Answer Lawmakers’ Questions
The VRBPAC members aren’t even swayed by concerns from lawmakers. They simply ignore their questions too. As reported by The Defender:7
“The Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC) ignored pleas from experts, the vaccine injured and a congressman representing 17 other lawmakers to halt authorization until questions about the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines for the nation’s youngest children could be properly addressed …
Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) said there are many unanswered questions … ‘I’m deeply concerned that the push to vaccinate these children is nothing more than a dystopian experiment with unknown consequences,’ Gohmert told the committee. ‘Some of us have outlined these questions in a letter8 to VRBPAC but have not received any answers, and I pose some of them here.’ Gohmert said:
‘Number 1, why has the FDA refused to release the hundreds of thousands of pages of data from preapproval manufacturer studies, post-approval adverse events data and other post-approval manufacturer data?
Number 2, what is the cardiac risk factor in administrating these COVID vaccines to children?
Number 3, world-renowned immunologists have raised concerns about potential antibody-dependent enhancement, or ADE, resulting from COVID vaccines, and since ADE was a problem in prior unrelated respiratory vaccine trials, we need to know what studies, if any, the FDA has that it’s used regarding ADE from COVID vaccines in children 5 and under or any age group. Can the FDA affirm there’s no risk of ADE for vaccinated children?
Number 4, if widely approved among children 5 and under, how many lives, if any, does FDA estimate will be saved next year? Given the injuries reported in the FDA’s VAERS [Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System] system, how will FDA evaluate serious vaccine injuries versus serious COVID outcomes?
Number 5, is it possible the proposed COVID vaccines in young children could create increased risk in future novel COVID variants?
Number 6, why has the FDA recently lowered the efficacy bar for COVID vaccines for youngest children? This change significantly lowers the expected benefits from any COVID vaccination for young children and it’s of particular concern given that over 70% of that age cohort already is seropositive.’
Gohmert said these questions and 13 other questions posed by lawmakers are critical and deserve answers from the FDA and VRBPAC prior to any EUA with the ‘accompanied protection for liability for all harm done.’”
Trial Showed COVID Jab Increases Infection Risk in Babies
In the video above, you can see Centers for Disease Control and Prevention director Dr. Rochelle Walensky, with a forced grin on her face, claiming “rigorous scientific review” has proven the shots to be safe and effective in infants and young children.
The video also features excerpts from a video in which Dr. Clare Craig, a diagnostic pathologist and “lover of data,”9 reviews what this “rigorous scientific review” actually found and what the FDA and CDC aren’t telling you. To hear Craig’s full summary of how Pfizer twisted its clinical data for young children, check out the video below.
Craig points out that of the 4,526 children, aged 6 months to 4 years, who participated in Pfizer’s trial, 3,000 didn’t make it to the end of the trial. Why did two-thirds of the children drop out? Oftentimes, this happens when side effects are too severe for the participant to continue. Here, we don’t know why two-thirds of the participants were eliminated, and “on that basis alone, this trial should be deemed null and void,” Craig says. Moreover:
•Six of the children, aged 2 to 4 years, in the vaccinated group were diagnosed with “severe COVID,” compared to just one in the placebo group. So, what this actually shows is that the likelihood the shot is causing severe COVID is higher than the likelihood that it’s preventing it.
•The only child who required hospitalization for COVID was also in the “vaccinated” group.
•In the three weeks following the first dose, 34 of the children in the vaccinated group and 13 of the unvaccinated children were diagnosed with COVID. That means the children’s risk of developing symptoms of COVID within the first three weeks of the first dose actually increased by 30%. These data were ignored.
Between doses two and three, there was an eight-week gap, and the vaccinated arm again experienced higher rates of COVID. This too was ignored. After the third dose, incidence of COVID was again raised in the vaccine group, and this was ignored as well.
In the end, they only counted three cases of COVID in the vaccine arm and seven cases in the placebo group. They literally ignored 97% of all the COVID cases that occurred during the trial to conclude that the shots were “effective” in preventing COVID.
•While they claim the triple-dose regimen reduced COVID, 12 of the children actually caught COVID twice in the two-month follow-up, and 11 of them were vaccinated.
•The confidence interval for Pfizer’s jab is -370% at the lower end of the 95%, which suggests children who get the jab are nearly four times more likely of getting sick with COVID than their unvaccinated peers.10
Unscientific and Unethical Behavior
As reported by The Defender:11
“Combining all ages together, Pfizer said its three-dose regimen for children 6 months to 5 years old was 80% effective at preventing illness from the Omicron variant based on preliminary data from its clinical trial.
The 80% number was calculated 30 days after the third dose. As noted by committee members, the efficacy number is likely to go down after 30 days and post-approval monitoring was suggested.
Moderna said its two-shot vaccine was about 51% effective against infection from Omicron in children under 2, and about 37% among kids 2 to 5 years old, citing different efficacy numbers than what was reported by the company in March.
In a March 23 press release, Moderna said its vaccine in the 6-month to 2-year age group was only 43.7% effective. In the older age group, the company said its vaccine was 37.5% effective. A top official at Moderna has already said a booster will be necessary.”
As noted by the Vaccine Safety Research Foundation, vaccinating infants and children who have no need for the shots and don’t benefit from them, just to “protect” adults, violates medical ethics. And since those who are jabbed still readily transmit the virus, the children are actually put at risk for no reason at all.
It’s All About Securing Indemnification
🧐So I’m guessing everyone is wondering why the FDA voted unanimously to give not one — but THREE shots of the C@ViD 💉to the youngest of children when there’s N🚫 emergency.
It is IMPERATIVE they have this approval. R. obert K. ennedy Jr. tells us why: pic.twitter.com/denjlTchMF
So, how can we explain the irrational behavior of the FDA and CDC? Why don’t any of the data matter? Why doesn’t the science matter? Why don’t any of the red flags matter? And why are they handing out EUAs when the criteria for EUA are satisfied? Products must satisfy four criteria in order to get EUA:
There must be an emergency
A vaccine must be at least 30% to 50% effective
The known and potential benefits of the product must outweigh the known and potential risks of the product
There can be no adequate, approved and available alternative treatments (drugs or vaccines)
Unless all four criteria are met, EUA cannot be granted or maintained, yet here we are. COVID, by any reasonable measurement, is no longer an emergency, there are plenty of adequate alternative treatments, and the potential benefits in no way, shape or form outweigh the potential risks — especially not in infants and children under 5. That’s three out of four criteria that, clearly, are not met.
The short answer to the question, “Why are the CDC and FDA acting so irrationally?” is that both agencies are corrupt to the core and are no longer in the business of protecting public health. They are securing profits for the drug industry, and getting EUA for infants and young children is a crucial step toward securing permanent legal indemnity for the drugmakers.
They need this last remaining age group to be included under the EUA, because once the emergency is finally declared ‘over,’ the next phase of liability shielding requires that the shots receive approval by the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). Sam DOnce the vaccine is on the childhood vaccination schedule, the vaccine makers are permanently shielded from liability for injuries and deaths that occur in ANY age group, including adults.
As explained by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., in the short video clip above, they need this last remaining age group to be included under the EUA, because once the emergency is finally declared “over,” the next phase of liability shielding requires that the shots receive approval by the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP).
This is the group that decides which vaccines are to be added to the childhood vaccination schedule. Once the vaccine is on the childhood vaccination schedule, the vaccine makers are permanently shielded from liability for injuries and deaths that occur in ANY age group, including adults.
The only way to break that indemnity is by proving the vaccine maker knew about the safety issues and withheld that information. You can learn more about this indemnification process in “The Real Reason They Want to Give COVID Jabs to Kids.”
So, the end goal is permanent immunity against liability for injury and death from the COVID shots in all age groups, and to get there, they first need the EUA to cover all children. After that, the ACIP approval becomes more or less a matter of rubber stamping. This is why they’re playing Russian roulette with the health of infants and young children.
Murder Has No Statute of Limitation
That said, if fraud can be proven, all indemnity falls by the wayside, and there’s no statute of limitation when it comes to murder, which some insist is what’s happening here.
The video above features “To The Lifeboats” podcaster Sam Dodson’s comments to the FDA VRBPAC during its open public hearing session to approve the COVID jabs for children between the ages of 6 months and 5 years. In a rapid-fire manner, he reviews several data points that ought to have put a halt to these injections, but didn’t; several instances where the FDA knew harm was occurring from these shots, or would occur, and they did nothing.
Another public comment was submitted by an as-yet unidentified individual. The submitted comment was provided to and reposted on Coquin de Chien’s Substack. Here are some select pieces:12
“This comment is NOTICE of possible criminal liability to Lauren K. Roth and members of the Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee who owe duties of care, diligence, good faith, and loyalty in recommending ‘for’ or ‘against’ the EUA amendment for COVID-19 mRNA vaccine in children 6 months through 4 years of age.
Only two deaths are listed herein to establish knowledge. If the amendment is approved, it will have been done by committee members ‘knowing’ of felony crimes in context. Your investigation of these deaths should include death certificates, autopsy records, witness interviews, and immunization records.
Massachusetts Death Certificate 2022 SFN 5980 is a 7yo girl died January 18, 2022 listed as died from U071 ‘COVID-19,’ B49 ‘unspecified mycosis,’ J450 ‘predominantly allergic asthma,’ and R091 ‘pleurisy.’
VAERS_ID 2038120 is a 7yo girl in Massachusetts, who received her 2nd dose 1/13/2022 and was reported to VAERS 1/15/2022. PRIOR_VAX states, ‘Severe nausea and vomiting from 5 min post vaccination and for the next 8-10 hours.’
SYMPTOM_TEXT states, ‘Spiked a 103 fever, severe stomachache, has not had a bowel movement since the day before vaccination, which makes today 3 days without one. First vaccine caused severe nausea and vomiting from 5 minutes post injection and for the next 8-10 hours.’ This little girl suffered immeasurably 4 to 5 days as her intestines shut down due likely to impeded blood vessels servicing intestines.
Massachusetts Death Certificate 2021 SFN 56611 is a 48yo man died 11/16/2021 listed as died from U071 ‘COVID-19’ and E669 ‘OBESITY.’ SFN 56611 is known to have died less than 24 hours after inoculation.
In both cases, the Medical Examiners listed the cause of death as ‘COVID-19,’ when it was clearly not COVID-19. And in both cases, the Medical Examiners omitted listing causes Y590 ‘Viral vaccines’ and T881 ‘Other complications following immunization, not elsewhere classified,’ when these clearly were proximate and actual causes.
Death certificates from the state of Massachusetts are sent to the CDC, a federal entity. Thus, fraud on a state death certificate is a federal crime as it affects federal death records. Several federal felony crimes apply in this instance and are listed below.
If you dismiss this NOTICE and recommend the EUA amendment without first investigating these two deaths, you become liable for inchoate crimes and the felony crime of ‘misprision of felony.’ If a single person subsequently dies as a result of the amendment, all the elements will have been satisfied for you to face felony murder charges or involuntary manslaughter. Qualified immunity is not a valid defense …
There were found sixty likely C19 vaccine deaths in a 25-minute perusal of the 2021 and 2022 death certificates, which extrapolates to hundreds, probably thousands of C19 vaccine deaths in Massachusetts.
Refusal to investigate these fraudulent records is a crime that, because of the felony murder aspect, has no statute of limitations. Five, ten, or twenty years from now, if a federal prosecutor were to learn of this NOTICE, he or she would have significant evidence to bring charges for felony murder.
In summary, this NOTICE places you in a position requiring you to investigate these deaths prior to recommending the amendment. If you dismiss this NOTICE, you may be criminally liable for involuntary manslaughter, felony murder, and a list of federal crimes and inchoate crimes … Comment Tracking Number l4d-m52d-ge4m.”
Florida Bucks the Trend
My home state of Florida now stands out as the only U.S. state that is recommending AGAINST the COVID jab for 6-month-olds to 5-year-olds. Parents can still get their infants jabbed if they want, but the official state recommendation is not to do it, as there’s simply no scientific or logical rationale for doing so.
Florida also did not preorder any extra doses for this age group.13 In a June 18, 2022, Substack article, Dr. Robert Malone addressed the latest EUA authorization for infants and young children, and applauded Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’ decision to buck the trend. It’s hard to believe he is the only governor in the U.S. who resisted this murderous threat to the children:14
“Have you looked at the VAERS data lately? The CDC apparently has not. In the USA alone, there have been 831,801 adverse events, of which 12,776 are life threatening. There have been 63,978 hospitalizations. There have been 13,293 deaths and 14,232 permanent disabilities from these vaccines.
True, these are ‘unverified’ — but previous research has shown that the VAERS system under-reported adverse events associated with vaccines, not over-reported … Then there are the international post-vaccine adverse event summaries.15
The CDC, under Freedom of Information Act Request (FOIA) has now admitted16 that even though they had promised to analyze the VAERS data before advising about these vaccines for children, they did not.
The VAERS data were NOT taken into consideration before the authorization of these genetic agents for babies and young children. Frankly, this is shocking. So shocking, it is hard for me to even write about it.
Now, approximately 430 children with other severe illnesses have died with COVID in the last 2.5 years (that would be 172 per year). Plus there have been 2,600 hospitalizations of children, most with underlying conditions — over that 2.5 year period. These numbers show that even before Omicron, in the case of children, COVID is less severe than flu …
Omicron in children is much less severe. We know this. The scientific evidence is clear. Yet the FDA goes back to data from the DELTA variant when discussing the effects of this virus … Governor DeSantis again has it right. It is time to stop. Parents must stop. The time is now to just say no.”
Last but not least, if you’re still unsure whether the COVID shot is the “right” choice for your child, please read through Dr. Byram Bridle’s “COVID-19 Vaccines and Children: A Scientist’s Guide for Parents,”17 published by the Canadian Covid Care Alliance. It goes through how the shots work, what the known side effects are, results from the clinical trial, the effects of the spike protein and much more.
Why not start using the border for munitions testing; waste disposal (especially nuclear); etc.? [US Patriot]
The Supreme Court gave the Biden administration the green light on June 30 to end the Trump-era “Remain in Mexico” policy that requires non-Mexican asylum-seekers arriving at the southern border to wait in Mexico for processing.
Resident Joe Biden’s decision to nix the program didn’t violate a 1996 migrant detention law, the court held, noting that the administration’s memorandum rescinding the program should have been examined by the lower courts.
The 5–4 opinion (pdf) in Biden v. Texas, court file 21-954, was written by Chief Justice John Roberts and comes as record numbers of illegal aliens are streaming across the U.S. border with Mexico, overwhelming the capacity of U.S. Customs and Border Protection to deal with them.
Roberts’s opinion was joined by Justices Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Brett Kavanaugh. Breyer, 83, retired from the court at noon on June 30 and was replaced by Biden appointee Ketanji Brown Jackson. Kavanaugh also filed a separate concurring opinion. Justices Samuel Alito and Amy Coney Barrett both filed separate dissenting opinions.
Texas and Missouri had argued that Biden broke the law by ending the program.
Upon taking office, Biden cut off enrollments in the program, part of the Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP) created by Congress under then-President Bill Clinton. In 2018, the Trump administration said it would enforce the program to crack down on the practice known as catch-and-release, in which individuals would make fraudulent asylum claims knowing they would be released into the United States and be able to stay for years before their court appearance.
Under Biden, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) issued a memorandum on Jan. 20, 2021, saying it would “suspend new enrollments in the [MPP] pending further review of the program.”
“Aliens who aren’t already enrolled in MPP should be processed under other existing legal authorities,” it reads.
Days later, Biden signed three new executive orders aimed at undoing Trump-era immigration policies. One of them, Biden said, “orders a full review of the previous administration’s harmful and counterproductive immigration policies, basically across the board.”
But in August 2021, at the urging of the two states, Texas-based U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, a Trump appointee, ordered the government to enforce the MPP policy until “lawfully rescinded.” The Biden administration had failed to properly justify ending the policy and to uphold a 1996 law requiring the detention of certain migrants, the judge held. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit affirmed Kacsmaryk’s ruling.
On May 2, the Supreme Court took the unusual step of asking the attorneys involved in the case to provide post-hearing submissions to the court. Both the Biden administration and the two states opposing it in the high-stakes litigation filed briefs arguing that the court does have the power to decide the central legal questions in the case, The Epoch Times reported.
In his new opinion, Roberts wrote that “the Government’s rescission of MPP did not violate” section 1225 of the Immigration and Nationality Act” and reversed the decision of the lower court, remanding the case “for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.”
By incorrectly interpreting the section as a command, the appeals court needlessly injected itself into administration affairs and “imposed a significant burden upon the Executive’s ability to conduct diplomatic relations with Mexico,” Roberts wrote.
The district court would force the administration “to the bargaining table with Mexico, over a policy that both countries wish to terminate, and to supervise its continuing negotiations with Mexico to ensure that they are conducted ‘in good faith.’” The law doesn’t allow the lower court “to tie the hands of the Executive in this manner,” the chief justice wrote.
In his dissent, Alito wrote that even though Congress gave the administration the option of returning “inadmissible aliens to Mexico while they await proceedings in this country,” the Biden DHS instead violated the law by releasing in the United States an “untold numbers of aliens who are very likely to be removed if they show up for their removal hearings.”
“This practice violates the clear terms of the law, but the Court looks the other way,” he wrote.
Christopher Hajec, director of litigation at the Immigration Reform Law Institute (IRLI), a nonprofit public interest law firm that filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the case, shared his views on the new ruling.
“We are certainly disappointed with the Court’s decision today,” Hajec told The Epoch Times by email.
“We think it was wrong on the merits and wrong on jurisdiction. Nevertheless, there are two silver linings. On the merits, the Court made clear that the lower courts in this case have yet to decide, and should decide, whether Biden’s extreme parole policies are lawful. We think they clearly are not. Also, on jurisdiction, the Court still left open a path for states and other parties to get relief from Biden’s disastrous immigration policies, though that path is narrower than before.”
Judy Rabinovitz, special counsel with the American Civil Liberties Union’s Immigrants’ Rights Project, praised the ruling.
“The Supreme Court was right to reject the spurious argument that this cruel policy is statutorily required,” Rabinovitz said in a statement. “While, as noted in the decision, the case will return to the district court, the Biden administration can and should move forward swiftly to finally terminate ‘remain in Mexico’ for good—a result that has been long, and unjustly, delayed.”
The U.S. Department of Justice didn’t respond by press time to a request by The Epoch Times for comment.
The sale of over 2,000 acres of North Dakotafarmland to an entity linked to Bill Gates, the fourth-richest man in the world and America’s largest private owner of farmland, has attracted scrutiny from the state’s top prosecutor.
Red River Trust, a Texas-based entity with ties to Gates, in November purchased 13 parcels of land near the borders of Minnesota and Canada, a move that North Dakota officials said may violate the state’s corporate farming laws. Over 2,100 acres of land in North Dakota’s Pembina and Walsh counties were sold in the transaction, regional agricultural publication AgWeek reported. The company paid a total of $13.5 million, records The Epoch Times obtained from the two counties show.
The trust is located in Lenexa, a suburb of Kansas City, and shares the same address with Cottonwood Ag Management, a subsidiary of Cascade Investment, an asset management firm controlled by Gates, as well as Oak River Farms/Midwest, which has been previously traced to the billionaire Microsoft founder.
The trustee of Red River Trust is Peter Headley, whose LinkedIn profile identified him as head of agriculture investment for Cottonwood Ag since April 2017.
A research report last January found Gates to be America’s biggest private farmland owner, having acquired over 242,000 acres of land across 18 U.S. states. The amount is still less than 1 percent of the nation’s total farmland.
The seller of both land deals was Campbell Farms, a family-owned potato farming group headquartered in Grafton, North Dakota. The three brothers William P. Campbell, Gregory T. Campbell, and Thomas S. Campbell signed the agreements handing over land ownership to Red River Trust, according to Pembina and Walsh county records.
On June 21, North Dakota’s Attorney General Drew Wrigley penned a letter asking Red River Trust to explain how it plans to use the land to comply with state law. The regulation (pdf), with some exceptions, largely bars trust corporations and limited liability companies from owning or leasing farmland or ranchland, he wrote in the letter, warning that companies who fail to meet the regulations face up to a $100,000 fine.
Vogel Law Firm, which represents Red River Trust, told the North Dakota attorney general’s office that the trust has met the state law requirements by leasing the purchased land to Campbell Farms for farming.
“The Campbell family has a history of operating these Pembina and Walsh County farmlands, which has continued under the ownership of Red River Trust,” Matthew Thompson, an attorney with the law firm, wrote in a June 24 letter obtained by The Epoch Times.
The attorney general’s office has closed the inquiry.
Residents ‘Livid’
The state’s agriculture commissioner, Doug Goehring, said that the reaction from the public to the deal was far from positive.
“I’ve gotten a big earful on this from clear across the state, it’s not even from that neighborhood,” he told North Dakota TV station KFYR-TV. “Those people are upset, but there are others that are just livid about this.”
In a recent media interview, though, Wrigley appeared to downplay the issue.
“I don’t know that it’s quite as volatile a situation as some have depicted,” he told The Associated Press. “It’s taken off, it’s all over the planet, but it’s not me sticking a finger in the eye of Bill Gates. That’s not what this is.”
He said his office makes such corporate farming inquiries “as a matter of course.”
“It’s meant to get everybody up to speed on what the ownership arrangement is and what their intentions are for the land,” Wrigley said. “If it complies with state law, the matter goes forward. If not, they’re informed they’re going to have to divest of the land.”
Gates made his first public comment about his farmland investments in March 2021, during an “Ask Me Anything” session on the social media platform Reddit.
“Why are you buying so much farmland?” asked one Reddit user.
“My investment group chose to do this. It is not connected to climate,” Gates wrote in response. “The agriculture sector is important. With more productive seeds we can avoid deforestation and help Africa deal with the climate difficulty they already face. It is unclear how cheap biofuels can be but if they are cheap it can solve the aviation and truck emissions.”
Gary Hubbell, a real estate broker and accredited land consultant at United Country Ranch Properties in Colorado, said he sees “a lot of resentment and resistance to [Gates’] acquisitions.”
“Not to say that we don’t appreciate people who amass large holdings, because it’s an integral part of our business,” Hubbell told NTD, the sister media of The Epoch Times. “But they are no longer really a part of the community, and it seems that Bill Gates, his goals are contrary to many of the established practices and traditions of those communities.”
The Epoch Times has reached out to Headley, Cascade Investment, Cottonwood Management, Campbell Farms, and Oak River Farms for comments.
The Supreme Court ruled 6–3 on June 30 that the Clean Air Act doesn’t give the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) widespread power to regulate carbon dioxide emissions that a popular theory says contribute to global warming.
Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the court’s majority opinion (pdf) in West Virginia v. EPA, court file 20-1530. Roberts was joined by the court’s other five conservatives. The court’s three liberal justices dissented.
While “capping carbon dioxide emissions at a level that will force a nationwide transition away from the use of coal to generate electricity may be a sensible ‘solution to the crisis of the day,’” Roberts wrote, quoting a 1992 precedent, “it is not plausible that Congress gave EPA the authority to adopt on its own such a regulatory scheme in Section 111(d)” of the Clean Air Act.
“A decision of such magnitude and consequence rests with Congress itself, or an agency acting pursuant to a clear delegation from that representative body,” he wrote.
West Virginia and 18 other states challenged the authority the Clean Air Act provides the EPA.
In 2016, the Supreme Court overturned the Obama-era Clean Power Plan (CPP), which expanded controls over the industry. Next, the deregulation-minded Trump administration reversed course, easing control on the industry with its Affordable Clean Energy Rule (ACE Rule).
On Jan. 19, 2021, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit struck down the ACE Rule, restoring some of the EPA’s authority in American Lung Association v. EPA (pdf). The court held that the EPA, under Trump, had misconstrued section 7411(d) of the Clean Air Act.
In the new opinion, the Supreme Court reversed the D.C. Circuit decision and remanded the case “for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.”
In Justice Elena Kagan’s dissent, she criticized the court majority for a decision she said “strips” the EPA of the power Congress gave it to respond to “the most pressing environmental challenge of our time,” citing Massachusetts v. EPA (2007).
“Climate change’s causes and dangers are no longer subject to serious doubt. Modern science is ‘unequivocal that human influence’—in particular, the emission of greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide—’has warmed the atmosphere, ocean and land.’”
“Whatever else this Court may know about, it does not have a clue about how to address climate change. And let’s say the obvious: The stakes here are high. Yet the Court today prevents congressionally authorized agency action to curb power plants’ carbon dioxide emissions. The Court appoints itself—instead of Congress or the expert agency—the decision maker on climate policy. I cannot think of many things more frightening.”
West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey, who previously told The Epoch Times that the EPA is trying to transform itself from “an environmental regulator into a central energy planning authority,” praised the Supreme Court.
“For many years, we’ve argued that EPA only had a narrow bit of authority to regulate carbon emissions,” Morrisey, a Republican who brought the appeal, said at a press conference.
“I think that the court today amplified that point. And once again, they also made clear that when you have something this big, something with vast economic and political significance, then that represents an extraordinary question. And that means Congress needs to step in, as opposed to the unelected bureaucrats.
“We know that over the last year and a half, the Biden administration has tried to run roughshod over the American economy with respect to its energy agenda.
“We want to make sure that the Biden agenda is limited by basis of what Congress authorized these agencies [to do],” he said.
“Our founders envisioned” that “Congress and not the unelected bureaucrats” should make decisions “about the major issues of the day.”
“They didn’t want to just have these unelected bureaucrats reach out and try to seize power where it didn’t exist,” Morrisey said.
U.S. Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.) criticized the ruling and the six conservative justices.
“As the devastating impacts of climate change are becoming ever-more present, it is mind boggling and deeply alarming that the Supreme Court today has decided to hamstring the EPA’s authority to regulate greenhouse gases. This ruling not only restricts the agency’s ability to limit air pollution from the second-largest source of emissions in America, it also undermines the landmark Clean Air Act that gave it such authority,” the senator said.
“Make no mistake, with this devastating ruling in West Virginia v. EPA, the conservative majority of the Court continues to take our country backward and more worrisome, it opens the door to far-reaching implications for how other federal agencies generally create regulations to implement existing legislation moving forward.”
‘This is what you have when vindictive leftists get in charge of major parts of the government’: Rep. Gohmert
Just when the wife of one incarcerated Jan. 6 prisoner believed things couldn’t get worse, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) informed her they are going to suspend all of her husband’s benefits. According to United States Representative Louie Gohmert (R-Texas), “this is what you have when vindictive leftists get in charge of major parts of the government.”
In an unsigned letter from the VA—dated June 13 and appearing to originate from the “Director Regional Office,”—Angel and Kenneth Harrelson were notified that the administration “received information from the United States Department of Justice” that Kenneth had been “indicted and charged with Seditious Conspiracy (18 U.S.C 2384).”
Page 1 of the unsigned letter received by Angel and Kenneth Harrelson from the “Director Regional Office” “informing them that their Veterans Benefits are being suspended due to 38 U.S. Code § 6105 – Forfeiture for subversive activities, which requires that an individual be “convicted” of a listed crime, not “indicted.” (Courtesy of Angel Harrelson)
The letter further noted that: “Pursuant to 38 U.S. Code § 6105(a)”—Forfeiture for subversive activities—”after receiving notice of an indictment for the above offense” the “VA must suspend payment of gratuitous benefits pending disposition of the criminal proceedings. If convicted, gratuitous benefits are forfeited, automatically, from and after the date of the offense.”
The “date of the offense” is Jan. 6, 2021.
“Based on the information above,” the VA further informed the Harrelsons that they “propose to suspend” their “compensation benefit payments effective September 1, 2022, which is the first day of the month following a 60-day due process period.”
“If you are subsequently acquitted of this charge, payments can be resumed from the date of suspension, if otherwise in order. If you are convicted, benefits will be retroactively terminated effective January 5, 2021, the date proceeding the offense, or from the date your award commenced, whichever is later.”
Kenneth Harrelson taking photographs inside the Rotunda inside the Capitol Building on Jan. 6, 2021. (FBI Criminal Complaint)
“Any individual who is CONVICTED after September 1, 1959, of any offense listed in subsection (b) of this section shall, from and after the date of commission of such offense, have no right to gratuitous benefits (including the right to burial in a national cemetery) under laws administered by the Secretary based on periods of military, naval, air, or space service commencing before the date of the commission of such offense and no other person shall be entitled to such benefits on account of such individual.”
According to the 18-page criminal complaint (pdf), Kenneth Harrelson was charged with Conspiracy (1) Obstruction of an Official Proceeding and Aiding and Abetting (2) Destruction of Government Property and Aiding and Abetting (3) Entering and Remaining in a Restricted Building or Grounds (4) Tampering with Documents or Proceedings (5). According to the Arrest Warrant (pdf), Kenneth was arrested at his home in Titusville, Florida, on March 10, 2021. According to the Criminal Docket, the seditious conspiracy charge was added with several others on Jan. 12, 2022.
Kenneth is currently being held in the Correctional Treatment Facility in southeast Washington and has been incarcerated, without a trial and without being convicted of any crime, for over 475 days.
Page two of the letter explains that: “if convicted,” the change in his benefits “may mean” the VA had paid “too much,” in which case they will send another letter letting them “know if the changes go through.” If so, the “VA’s Debt Management Center will send a letter explaining how much” they’ve “been overpaid, as well as how to repay this debt.”
Page 2 of the unsigned June 13, 2022 letter received by Angel and Kenneth Harrelson from the “Director Regional Office” “informing them that their Veterans Benefits are being suspended due to 38 U.S. Code § 6105 – Forfeiture for subversive activities and that they may have “been overpaid, as well as how to repay this debt.” (Courtesy of Angel Harrelson)
Page three of the letter advises the Harrelsons how to obtain representation.
Page 3 of the unsigned June 13, 2022 letter received by Angel and Kenneth Harrelson from the “Director Regional Office” “informing them that their Veterans Benefits are being suspended due to 38 U.S. Code § 6105 and advises the Harrelsons how to obtain representation. (Courtesy of Angel Harrelson)
Page four provides clarification of what VA.gov is and provides information on how “enrolling in VA.gov is easy.”
Page 4, the signature page, of the unsigned June 13, 2022 letter received by Angel and Kenneth Harrelson from the “Director Regional Office” providing clarification of “what” VA.gov “is” and provides information on how “enrolling in VA.gov is easy.” (Courtesy of Angel Harrelson)
“This is what you have when vindictive leftists get in charge of major parts of the government,” Gohmert told The Epoch Times. “What we’re seeing is when immoral, mean-spirited, leftist people take over the government, they use every aspect of the government in order to try to inflict their hatred on people with whom they disagree. Even after most of the Democrats in the House of Representatives obstructed an official session of Congress back in June 2016, at that time, none of us were saying these people have got to be put in jail. We just wanted to be able to go back into session as the majority. But when they have power, obstructing an official session of Congress—which is the worst charge many of the January Sixers were charged with—we see the left wanting to bury them, take away any benefit, destroy their lives and not only their lives they want to destroy their homes, destroy their children’s lives. This is an evil, toxic atmosphere when these types of people are in control of so much of the federal government.”
Following the June 12 shooting at Pulse Night Club in Orlando, Florida, members of the House Democratic Caucus staged a pre-planned and well-organized protest sit-in on the House floor just after the House convened on June 22, 2016. They demanded that then-House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) allow a vote on gun control. Through the day and into the next morning, they obstructed proceedings, chanted “no bill, no break,” and sang “We shall overcome.”
According to The Guardian, Gohmert “stood toe to toe” with then United States Representative Corrine Brown (D-Fla.) “in a confrontation that looked set to spiral out of control” until Rep. John Lewis (D-Pa.) and others intervened. Gohmert said he was angered by the disrespect shown by Democrats for the sanctity of the House chamber, which he called a “last bastion of civility.” He was also angered by the disrespect shown to the 49 victims of the shooting. “I’m amazed here on the House floor that to them [Democrats] it’s all about guns,” he said. On May 19, the Internal Revenue Service announced Brown “pleaded guilty to engaging in a corrupt endeavor to obstruct and impede the due administration of the internal revenue laws” and was “ordered to pay $62,650.99 in restitution.”
Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) (2nd L) speaks as Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) (R), Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) (3rd L), and Rep. Bob Good (R-Va.) (L) listen during a news conference outside the U.S. Capitol in Washington, on July 29, 2021. (Alex Wong/Getty Images)
“I do not, will not, and have not advocated for violence,” Gohmert said. “But we do need to stand up for our rights and we do need to call this what it is. It’s evil. It’s abuse of the federal government and its an effort to hurt people and their children simply because of political disagreements. Hopefully we can, by example, show how this is not the way to go. But we’ve been using that example for 60 years. If these leftists have not figured that out and still think that abusing their positions in the federal government, so they appear like the Ministry of Love in Orwell’s 1984 which used torture and horrific conditions like we’ve seen in the D.C. jail, then we have got to have people peacefully rise up and make clear that we need to change the law so we can find people who are abusing their positions in the government.”
As Gohmert explained, laws were changed that allowed for the firing of people within the VA who were abusing their positions. The Department of Veterans Affairs Accountability and Whistleblower Protection Act of 2017 makes it easier to demote, suspend and even fire senior executives and other employees for misconduct or poor performance.
Likewise, Gohmert said, “we’re seeing a need to do that in other federal places as well so we can get rid of the mean, evil vindictive people who are abusing their federal employment.”
The envelope shows the letter originated from the “Evidence Intake Center” (EIC) at the Department of Veterans Affairs.
Envelope containing a four-page letter informing Kenneth and Angel Harreslson that, because of information sent to them from the Department of Justice, the Veterans Administration has decided to suspend all of Kenneth’s veterans benefits and of September 1, 2022. (Photo Courtesy of Angel Harrelson, graphically enhanced by Patricia Tolson/The Epoch Times)
According to the VA website, “The Department of Veterans Affairs has implemented centralized mail processing (CM) for compensation claims to reduce incoming paper handling and shipping requirements.”
According to Hill & Ponton Disability Attorneys, “The EIC only handles compensation related claims.” However, this is not regarding a claim. It’s a notice that Harrelsons’ benefits are being suspended entirely and that, if convicted, the Harrelsons will be expected to reimburse the VA for the amount they deem as “overpaid.”
In stark contradiction to the notice of benefits suspension and the threat of having to repay everything Kenneth has received, a May 2021 email from Jeremy Van Cleave, Veterans’ Services Counselor at the Brevard County Government Center in Viera, Florida to Angel Harrelson, Van Cleave said he “wanted to clarify something.”
Screenshot of May 19, 2021 email from Jeremy Van Cleave, Veterans’ Service Counselor at the Brevard County Government Center in Viera, Florida, to inform Angel and Kenneth Harrelson of “information on appointment and information on incarcerated veterans.” (Courtesy of Angel Harrelson)
“As long as your husband is not convicted, your benefits will continue to be paid. If your husband is convicted, and he has to serve greater than 60 days, then his benefit will be reduced to 10%. I am sorry if I did not communicate that correctly. So, right now you will continue to receive funds pending the outcome of the trial.”
Van Cleave included a link in his correspondence for further reassurance that her husband’s benefits were not lost. The link took her to a page on the VA website that explained what happens when a veteran is incarcerated.
“VA disability compensation payments are reduced if a Veteran is convicted of a felony and imprisoned for more than 60 days. Veterans rated 20 percent or more are limited to the 10 percent disability rate. For a Veteran whose disability rating is 10 percent, the payment is reduced by one-half. Once a Veteran is released from prison, compensation payments may be reinstated based upon the severity of the service connected disability(ies) at that time.”
The Epoch Times reached out to Van Cleave for clarification of the glaring contradictions in his email and the unsigned June 13 letter.
“Right now it’s a lot of emailing,” Angel told The Epoch Times. “Me trying to get someone at the VA to give me that letter that DOJ sent them.”
So far, she has received no response. The next step is a Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) request. If that fails, she plans to sue for the information.
“I have asked so many of the other veterans who are in prison from January 6 and no one else has received this, not even the others on the Oath Keepers case,” Angel revealed. “Ken is the only one. That’s why I want this to go public because we are being targeted. Probably because I won’t shut up.”
According to court documents (pdf), there are 10 individuals cited in the Oath Keepers case, including Kenneth Harrelson.
As The Epoch Times reported on March 11, Angel is convinced that the Democrats in power are intentionally targeting Jan. 6 participants just because they are Trump supporters. She also believes it’s all about “revenge.”
“That’s how I feel,” she reiterated Tuesday. “We are being targeted because I am going out there in public and I won’t shut up about any of this, and what’s the one way to get someone to shut up? Take everything from them.”
Asked what she was going to do now, Angel didn’t hesitate.
“Be louder,” she said.
In the meantime, she has less than 60 days to make a plan.
Kenneth and Angel Harrelson at Cape Canaveral in 2017, just before Angel’s mother passed away. (Courtesy of Angel Harrelson)
“I’m going to call the real estate agent. I have no choice I have to put this house up for sale,” she lamented. “We don’t want it to go into foreclosure because that will ruin our credit. We’ll be able to do something later. I’m going to have to pay for another storage unit because the one I have isn’t going to be big enough. I will probably lose his truck. There’s nothing I can do about that, because if I don’t sell it, we’ll end up being homeless.”
Angel said moving in with family isn’t an option. She has three children as well. The homes family members live in are already filled to capacity as all of them have children as well. Due to “Biden’s inflation,” Angel said families are already consolidating, moving in together to get by. With parents on both sides deceased, there is just no place else to go.
Angel and Kenneth Harrelson’s children, Aimes, Nate, and Trey on Christmas day 2021. (Courtesy of Angel Harrelson)
“I have friends,” Angel said. “But going to my friends, I would feel like a big burden.”
Joseph McBride, an attorney for several other Jan. 6 prisoners and defendants, says this latest effort to punish the “political prisoners” and their families is “disgusting.”
“I heard about this. That’s a big story,” McBride told The Epoch Times. “This is disgusting. It’s completely [expletive] up. Kenny Harrelson is entitled to his benefits. He’s merely been accused of a crime and the idea he is going to be stripped of his military medical benefits is without question a violation of his due process rights. That’s crazy. It’s a disgrace. It’s an absolute disgrace. He’s accused and presumed innocent until proven guilty and his family is certainly innocent. All of this is absolutely horrific.”
Cynthia Hughes of the Patriot Freedom Project agrees.
“This is a woman who has three children. Her husband is medically disabled and she relies on that,” Hughes told The Epoch Times. “Her husband is in jail. The government refuses to let him have a bond. He can’t be home preparing for his trial with his wife. He can’t meet with his own attorney and this is all she has to keep her family in that house. What is she supposed to do now? Some people will say she needs to run out and get a job but it’s just not that simple. I think the government is doing everything it can to a Trump supporter that is going to create the most hardship … and here it is. Here’s the harm. They don’t care about the collateral damage and the collateral damage in this are women and children. It’s truly disgusting. This government should be ashamed of themselves. I can tell you this, we will make sure the Patriot Freedom Project helps the Harrelson family as much as it can.”
In closing the interview, Gohmert made note of how the letter from the VA was unsigned.
“Somebody knew what they were doing when they sent that letter without a signature, without a name,” Gohmert posited. “That’s the kind of hiding behind a federal position you get when you have evil, abusive, vindictive people in federal employment. They knew what they were doing when they sent that without a signature and without their name on it. That should make them feel a little more Kafkaesque, just anonymously charging people. Hopefully, we can clean up the government and get rid of people who are abusing their positions and doing so vindictively, like whoever sent this letter. They weren’t even following the law. They’re abusing the law, abusing their position, and hiding behind anonymity. These are the kinds of people who need to be gone from the federal employment.”
The Epoch Times reached out to the DOJ, the VA, and specifically to Jeremy Van Cleave but received no response.
Following years of accusations from several women, R&B artist R. Kelly has been sentenced to 30 years in prison after being convicted of racketeering and sex trafficking.
U.S. District Judge Ann Donnelly imposed the sentence on Kelly and ordered him to pay a $100,000 fine at the conclusion of a nearly three-hour hearing. As reported by Fox News, Kelly did not address the court, however, several women did come forward to testify against him. The victims held hands while the sentence was read. Kelly had no apparent reaction.
Seven of Kelly’s victims gave impact statements during the sentencing hearing. The women who spoke at Kelly’s sentencing were identified only by first names or pseudonyms.
“You made me do things that broke my spirit. I literally wished I would die because of how low you made me feel,” one woman told the Grammy-winning, multiplatinum-selling singer. “Do you remember that?”
Another woman, sobbing and sniffling as she spoke, said Kelly’s conviction restored her faith in the legal system.
“I once lost hope,” she said, addressing the court and prosecutors, “but you restored my faith.”
The woman said Kelly victimized her after she went to a concert when she was 17. “I was afraid, naive and didn’t know to handle the situation,” she said, so she didn’t speak up at the time.
“Silence,” she said, “is a very lonely place.”
The artist was convicted on one count of racketeering. The racketeering includes 14 underlying acts of sexual exploitation of a child, kidnapping, bribery and sex trafficking charges. He was also convicted on eight violations of the Mann Act. The legislation makes it illegal to transport people across state lines for “immoral purposes.”
Kelly has been jailed without bail since 2019. He’s still facing child pornography and obstruction of justice charges in Chicago, where a trial is scheduled to begin on Aug. 15.
Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS) is a debilitating disease that disconnects the afflicted from reality. Although most are either born with or have developed a natural immunity to this sickness, there are still those who attempt to spread the infection.
It now appears that Cassidy Hutchinson, an aide to former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows in the Trump administration, has come down with an acute case of TDS. The only cure might just be some time in jail.
Rep. Liz Cheney displayed a handwritten note at Tuesday’s Jan. 6 committee hearing that Hutchinson testified she wrote after Mark Meadows handed her a note card and pen to take his dictation, according to ABC News. Eric Herschmann, a former Trump White House lawyer, claims the note was written by him.
Hutchinson, testifying about the note, said, “That’s a note that I wrote at the direction of the chief of staff on Jan. 6, likely around 3 o’clock.”
“And it’s written on the chief of staff note card, but that’s your handwriting, Ms. Hutchinson?” Rep. Liz Cheney then asked.
“That’s my handwriting,” Hutchinson answered.
A spokesperson for Herschmann told ABC News on Tuesday evening, “The handwritten note that Cassidy Hutchinson testified was written by her was in fact written by Eric Herschmann on Jan. 6, 2021. All sources with direct knowledge and law enforcement have and will confirm that it was written by Mr. Herschmann,” the representative said.
Hmmm. Who to believe?
Hutchinson also testified that Tony Ornato, former Trump Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations, told her that former President Donald Trump repeatedly demanded that the Secret Service take him to the Capitol on Jan. 6, according to FOX News.
Hutchinson also said that Ornato told her that Trump lunged at a Secret Service agent and tried to grab the wheel of the presidential SUV.
Ornato, on the other hand, says he did not brief Hutchinson. A source close to Ornato told Fox News that Ornato watched the hearing and was distraught when Hutchinson made the allegation about the steering wheel. To top it off, Ornato wasn’t even in the presidential SUV when the alleged incident was supposed to have happened.
Both Bobby Engel, the top agent on Trump’s Secret Service detail — who was in the SUV — and Ornato testified to the Jan. 6 Committee in private over the past year, according to Fox.
Neither Engel nor Ornato brought up anything about a steering wheel. Both are willing to testify that Trump did not grab or try to grab the wheel. The unnamed driver of the SUV will also cooperate with the committee if asked.
Judging by the Jan. 6 Committee’s refusal to have witnesses cross-examined by reputable Republicans like Jim Jordan and Jim Banks — who were not allowed on the committee — it’s doubtful that Ornato and others who dispute Hutchinson’s claims will be called by the committee. It wouldn’t suit their tendentious tactics.
It’s also doubtful that Hutchinson will be charged with lying to Congress under oath. Her testimony is, at best, hearsay. She claims that she was relating what she had heard from someone else. In other words, she didn’t actually witness anything at all.
Nevertheless, U.S. Code sections 1621 of Title 18 stipulate that anyone who “willfully and contrary to such oath states or subscribes any material matter which he does not believe to be true” is guilty of perjury and shall be fined or imprisoned up to five years, or both.
Section 1001 stipulated that “whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the government of the United States, knowingly and willfully” falsifies or conceals information before a congressional committee may be fined or imprisoned up to five years.
Why would Hutchinson lie and in doing so risk jail time? Who knows? TDS comes with strange symptoms.
Take Liz Cheney for example. She recently reached out to Democratic voters in Wyoming asking them to register as Republicans to vote for her in the upcoming primary election. Surely some Dems in Wyoming have TDS, but not enough to stop Republican Harriet Hageman from handily winning the election.
Why would Cheney bother with such a futile move? It’s embarrassing.
Why would the Jan. 6 Committee commit to humiliating itself time and again on national television? Due process has been blatantly thrown out the door. Propping up young witnesses like Cassidy Hutchinson to be chopped down by the facts and witnesses waiting just outside the committee doors disintegrates any inkling of legitimacy the committee crazily believes they possess.
TDS can’t run its course soon enough. Some, like Liz Cheney and Adam Schiff, will probably never recover from it. But they, too, must pass. It’s actually sad to watch.
It’s almost as if the Jan. 6 Committee is chock-full of masochists.
A bombshell witness for the Jan. 6 committee is being mocked as a dud.
On Tuesday, Cassidy Hutchinson, an aide to former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows delivered testimony that has since been contradicted in at least two cases.
Eric Herschmann, a former Trump White House lawyer, has contradicted her claim of having taken dictation from Meadows and said a note she insisted under oath she wrote was in fact written by him.
The handwritten note J6 Star Witness testified she wrote was actually written by Eric Herschmann. She flat out lied. The committee knew it because Eric testified under oath that he wrote that note. Cheney questioned him about it. She knew Cassidy was lying https://t.co/56vRvA64Uk
Former Trump Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations Tony Ornato has poured a generous dose of cold water on her claim that former President Donald Trump wanted to take control of his presidential SUV, according to reports that say he wants to testify that no such thing took place, according to The Guardian.
Carol Leonnig of The Washington Post, who wrote about the Secret Service, said, “Sources tell me agents dispute that Donald Trump assaulted any agent or tried to grab the steering wheel on Jan. 6. They agree Trump was furious about not being able to go to Capitol with his supporters. They offer to testify under oath,” according to The Guardian.
“The Jan. 6 committee’s ‘smoking gun’ is literally female Jussie Smollett,” commentator Caleb Hull noted.
The Jan. 6 committee’s “smoking gun” is literally female Jussie Smollett
Attorney Jody Hunt, who is representing Hutchinson, said that the testimony was essentially hearsay.
“Ms. Hutchinson testified, under oath, and recounted what she was told. Those with knowledge of the episode also should testify under oath,” Hunt tweeted.
In her response to Hutchinson’s testimony, former White House adviser Kellyanne Conway noted that it is a major step for Secret Service agents to say they will go public.
Conway said on Fox News that Trump’s enemies “really make folk heroes out of anyone who’s willing to become go from working for Donald Trump, wanting to continue to work for Donald Trump to becoming part of the resistance.”
“Look, she was under oath today, but I think it’s pretty remarkable that you have Secret Service agents and in this case, the deputy chief of staff for the White House also willing to go under oath just to dispute the firsthand account they were in the vehicle. They can tell us what happened and what didn’t happen.
“It’s pretty remarkable that they would do that. I mean, often law enforcement doesn’t really want to get involved, doesn’t like to testify and get involved in anything seen political. But they were watching what you were watching,” she concluded.
Dozens of progressive prosecutors, many of them funded by left-wing billionaire George Soros, have signed onto an open letter signaling their intention to defy state laws that would impose limits on abortion.
Since Friday, 87 prosecutors have signed a letter published by Fair and Just Prosecution, a Soros-funded progressive legal nonprofit, stating that they will “decline to use our offices’ resources to criminalize reproductive health decisions and commit to exercise our wellsettled discretion and refrain from prosecuting those who seek, provide, or support abortions.” Twenty-eight of the document’s 87 signatories, roughly a third, have ties to Soros, per the Washington Free Beacon‘s analysis, having either received direct contributions from the billionaire or been championed by his network of political organizations.
Soros has spent tens of millions of dollars over the past decade to get candidates aligned with him elected as top prosecutors. The Free Beaconreported that Soros has helped elect prosecutors in half of the United States’ largest legal jurisdictions. Many of the areas where Soros-backed candidates have won now face issues with rising crime.
The prosecutors who signed the letter hail from 30 states and the District of Columbia, with millions of Americans under their jurisdiction.
“Enforcing abortion bans runs counter to the obligations and interests we are sworn to uphold,” the letter reads. “It will erode trust in the legal system, hinder our ability to hold perpetrators accountable, take resources away from the enforcement of serious crime, and inevitably lead to the retraumatization and criminalization of victims of sexual violence.”
Prosecuting violations of abortion laws represents a “mockery of justice” that “prosecutors should not be part of,” the letter concludes.
Many of the prosecutors who signed the letter have taken fire for being soft on crime and letting free offenders who went on to commit grievous crimes. Los Angeles County district attorney George Gascón lessened penalties for repeat offenders within his jurisdiction and was later sued by the union representing the county’s deputy district attorneys over the policy changes. San Francisco district attorney Chesa Boudin is also a signatory of the letter. Boudin was defeated in a recall election earlier this month after critics accused him of being too soft on crime.
Soros darling prosecutors in Northern Virginia also featured among the letter’s signatories. Constituents have launched recall campaigns against county prosecutors Steve Descano, Buta Biberaj, and Parisa Dehghani-Tafti for mishandling cases and letting serial offenders back on the streets.
Senate hopeful peddles dangerous stereotype, shows no remorse
Vanity Fair, the magazine that launched Beto O’Rourke’s failed 2020 presidential campaign, has published a profile of Rep. Val Demings (D., Fla.), the frontrunner to win her party’s nomination and lose to Sen. Marco Rubio (R., Fla.) in the state’s election for the Senate.
The article opens with an outrageous anecdote that no legitimate opponent of racism could read without literally shaking. Demings was caught red-handed peddling a racist stereotype, which as we all know is indistinguishable from physical violence. The candidate’s praise for the story suggests she has absolutely no remorse for her destructive actions.
The racist incident took place at a diner in Lake County, where Demings “milled about with twinkling eyes” before being approached by “a white man with sparse grays and a stubbly beard [who] grabbed her right hand.” Here is reporter Rita Omokha’s chilling account of the racist act:
“Miss Demings?” he said, locking eyes.
“Yes?”
Her staffers stood more erect.
“I want to ask you—” the man began.
More stares.
“Can I pray for you?” the man asked, his voice soft, his gaze on Demings as he cradled her hands.
Her staffers’ shoulders dropped in relief. In a town where Confederate flags fly freely, in a state that increasingly restricts LGBTQ+, reproductive, and voting rights, and bans history books while its Republican officials call a mob attack on the Capitol legitimate political discourse, their fear of the worst-case scenario was no exaggeration.
The sweet old man bowed his head and closed his eyes. He proceeded to pray, unfazed by the bigoted assault on his white body. “God, I ask that you watch over Miss Demings as she rides her motorcycle. That you keep your hand of protection on her, guide her, and encourage her. We bless your name. In Jesus’s name. Amen.”
Demings “dwelled on that encounter” hours later during a debrief with campaign staffers and “reflected on how stereotypes can creep in unexpectedly, even when we know better.” She appeared to accept at least some responsibility for her actions, but resisted a deep reckoning with the harm she had inflicted on an innocent man. “What I felt, it wasn’t him, it was me,” she said. “I looked at him and thought about the people that broke into the Capitol.”
The reporter didn’t bother to examine the pain that sweet old man must have felt after being racially victimized by an elected official. All he wanted to do was pray, but Demings couldn’t see past his white skin. In the courtroom of her racist mind, he was just another QAnon Shaman fomenting insurrection, presumed guilty of a treasonous crime along with every other white man.
That’s unacceptable. The citizens of Florida deserve better.
Tim Cook spoke to ‘genocide-denying propaganda rag,’ says congressman
Apple chief executive Tim Cook met this month with Chinese Communist Party members and propagandists who enable Beijing’s mass surveillance, internet censorship, and other human rights abuses.
Speaking on the sidelines of the Apple Worldwide Developers Conference, Cook praised China’s “innovative and inspiring” app developers in an interview with China Daily, a Chinese Communist Party mouthpiece that has spreaddisinformation about China’s genocide against Uyghurs. Cook also held talks with an app developer who last year was appointed a secretary of the CCP and another whose photography app prohibits content that “subverts state power” or “undermines the national solidarity” of China.
The interactions highlight the kind of compromises Cook has made in order to do business in China. The tech titan has touted Apple’s commitment to civil rights and privacy in the United States while complying with Beijing’s draconian national security laws and ignoring its human rights record.
“This further underscores the hypocrisy of corporate America, which preaches social justice at home and turns a blind eye when it comes to its profits,” Rep. Mike Waltz (R., Fla.) told the Washington Free Beacon. “It’s absolutely shameful an American CEO would sit down with a communist, genocide-denying propaganda rag like China Daily.”
China Dailypays millions of dollars a year to publish its propaganda in American news outlets.
Cook’s interview with China Daily and meeting with Chinese app developers were part of his push to maintain access to China’s deep reservoir of tech workers. He said Apple’s app store has 5 million China-based apps, up from 4.4 million last year. He lauded Chinese developers as “at the cutting edge” and said he was “inspired” by their innovation. Cook’s remarks were a propaganda coup for China Daily, which reported that Cook’s remarks showed how “China will be of greater appeal to global tech giants in the future.”
To remain in Beijing’s good graces, Apple blocks apps from its store that might offend Chinese leaders and shares its Chinese customers’ user data with government authorities. One China watcher said Cook has had “to kiss the ring” of Chinese government leaders because he “is desperate to hold onto any remaining scraps of the China market.”
Cook met at the developers conference with app makers Liu Wei and Lin Jiashu as part of a roundtable discussion with Chinese developers, according to reports in Chinese media.
Liu, the founder of video game maker miHoYo, in September was appointed his company’s secretary for the Chinese Communist Party, according to Chinese news reports. Liu said after his appointment that his company would use its games “as a promoter of Chinese culture” and would contribute to China’s “new future.” MiHoYo has censored characters and chat functions in its popular Genshin Impact video game to appease Chinese authorities. Cook congratulated miHoYo in 2020 after the game was named the Apple App Store’s video game of the year.
Lin developed NOMO CAM, a popular photography app that requires users to “comply with the applicable laws and regulations of the People’s Republic of China” or face criminal prosecution. The list of offenses in NOMO’s terms of service include “damag[ing] the honor and interests of the nation.” NOMO’s privacy policy for its Apple app allows the company to share user data with the Chinese government on issues “directly related to national security and national defense security.” The Chinese government has been accused of using its national security laws to crack down on pro-democracy demonstrators and shut down news organizations critical of the Communist Party.
Cook has heaped praise before on the Chinese tech industry, which is required to comply with Beijing’s national security laws. Cook said at a 2017 conference Beijing uses to promote its internet regulation and censorship initiatives Apple and China were working toward “openness and shared benefits.” Cook has avoided criticism of the Chinese government’s human rights record, even as Apple pushes social justice causes in the United States. Apple last year canceled production in Georgia of a movie about slavery in protest of a GOP-backed voting law. Apple’s critics noted the company has been accused of relying on Chinese slave labor to build its popular iPhones.
A George Soros-backed prosecutor in Virginia released on probation a violent repeat offender who went on to kill an elderly homeless woman—the third case of its kind in the jurisdiction this year.
Fairfax County commonwealth’s attorney Steve Descano (D.) in October charged Chante Antonio Jones with assault and battery before releasing him on recognizance, slapping him with just a $212 fine and one-year period of supervised probation. Police on Monday arrested Jones for beating 63-year-old Michelle Huntley to death at a bus stop where she had taken shelter.
The brutal killing last week is just the latest instance in which bail reform and lightened sentencing by so-called criminal justice reform prosecutors have brought deadly consequences. The Washington Free Beacon reported that Descano’s office dropped felony charges against a man who was later charged with killing two homeless men in Washington, D.C., and New York City in March. Two months before, another gunman, whom Descano had pleaded out on misdemeanors in 2020, killed an 18-year-old at a bus stop.
“An innocent Virginian lost their life because of the criminal-first, victim-last mentality pushed by far-left prosecutors,” Virginia attorney general Jason Miyares (R.) told the Free Beacon. “Continually giving repeat offenders light sentences and allowing them to quickly get back onto the street only encourages more crime and creates more victims.”
Jones, who is also known as Siddiq Khashi Salam, is a repeat offender with more than a dozen charges in Fairfax County in the past three years, including larceny, public intoxication, and indecent exposure. Huntley, who was affectionately called “Mama” by residents, according to ABC 7, was found around midnight on June 17 with evidence of trauma to her upper body. First responders rushed her to the hospital, where she succumbed to her injuries days later. Police records show Jones’s assault-and-battery charges stemmed from punching someone in the face months before on a block close to the Huntley killing.
Descano’s office did not respond to a request for comment. Jones has been charged with aggravated malicious wounding for Huntley’s death (a class-two felony carrying a minimum 20-year sentence), pending a medical examiner’s report.
Through his Justice and Public Safety PAC, Soros dropped more than half-a-million dollars in 2019 to help elect Descano, along with other left-wing Virginia commonwealth’s attorneys like Loudoun County’s Buta Biberaj and Arlington County’s Parisa Dehghani-Tafti. Each pushed out veteran prosecutors who had served decades in their counties, promising in their campaigns to reduce incarceration and oppose many felony convictions.
Homicides in Fairfax County are set to outpace their 2021 levels, with 12 so far compared with 10 by this point the year before. The rate last year jumped 40 percent from 2020. A full annual police report, however, has not been released by the county in 2022.
Descano’s approach to criminal justice, which has enabled repeat offenders, is now fueling recall efforts in Northern Virginia.
“This abhorrent crime was totally preventable,” Sean Kennedy, who is running one of the recall efforts, told the Free Beacon. “Virginians for Safe Communities is dedicated to seeing justice done and removing Steve Descano from office for violating his oath to uphold justice and protect the public. … Like Chesa Boudin in San Francisco, Steve Descano poses a clear and present danger to public safety in Fairfax County.”
The recall effort has amassed more than half of the roughly required 30,000 signatures to trigger a special election to remove Descano from office, according to Kennedy.
A recovered voicemail reveals resident Joe Biden called his son, Hunter Biden, in late 2018 to discuss a New York Times report on the latter’s dealings with a Chinese oil tycoon who had been charged with financial crimes.
The leaked voicemail contradicts Biden’s claims that he never spoke with Hunter about his overseas business transactions.
“I think you’re clear,” Biden said to Hunter in the audio, first released by Daily Mail on June 27. “And anyway if you get a chance, give me a call, I love you.”
The voicemail, dating back to Dec. 12, 2018, came from Hunter’s old iPhone backup on his abandoned laptop. It came after the NY Times published an article detailing Hunter’s ties with Chinese oil giant CEFC’s former chairman, Ye Jianming, who was arrested in China on bribery charges in 2018.
“Hey pal, it’s Dad,” Biden began with his message. “It’s 8:15 on Wednesday night. If you get a chance, just give me a call. Nothing urgent. I just wanted to talk to you.”
“I thought the article released online, it’s going to be printed tomorrow in the Times, was good,” he said.
NEW: In 2018, Joe Biden left a voicemail for Hunter saying he wanted to talk to him about a New York Times report on Hunter’s business deals in China.
The NY Times reported on a private meeting between Ye and Hunter in Miami in May 2017.
Moreover, when a top aide of Ye, Patrick Ho, was arrested by the FBI for corruption and bribery in 2017, Ho reportedly called Biden’s brother, James Biden. The latter later told the NY Times that he believed the call was intended for his nephew Hunter.
According to a disclosed letter, CEFC China Energy also paid Hunter $1 million to find a U.S.-based attorney for Ho, whom Hunter once called “the spy chief of China.”
Throughout his presidential campaign, Biden repeatedly denied any knowledge of his son’s overseas business dealings.
“I have never spoken to my son about his overseas business dealings,” Biden said at a Democrat fundraiser in Iowa in 2019, accusing then-President Donald Trump of trying “to smear” him.
During the second presidential debate in 2020, Biden went further, claiming that stories about his son’s laptop were “a Russian plant.”
Since taking office, Biden has denied such allegations on several occasions, both in person or via his press spokespersons.
The White House didn’t immediately reply to a request for comment.
“SMOKING GUN!” Rep. Jody Hice (R-Ga.) wrote on Twitter upon the release of the voicemail message. “Even Big Tech can’t ignore [resident Biden’s] Hunter problem anymore,” he said in another post.
“It’s time for a hearing,” the GOP lawmaker concluded.
