VIDEO: Tucker Carlson on the Transgender Line of Attack on Civilization and Reality

This is on someone named, Yen Vy’s YouTube channel so there is no way to know when this was actually broadcast. Rather, there is a way to know but I don’t know when it was broadcast.

Below is our favorite video explaining the nature of the Trans lie.

An explanation of how the trans-issue is a Marxist dialectic attack

Yeah, it’s the usual suspects. If a bunch of us were to sit around a table at a restaurant with a few drinks and a meal and take our time, several hours, and the only topic of discussion was, ‘what would be the most outrageous lie we could foist on the public’, it would have to be that a man who claimed he was a woman, was in fact a real woman.

POST ON X:

EDITORS NOTE: This Vlad Tepes Blog column with videos posted by Eeyore is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

GOP Experts Warn Candidates to Stop Treating Abortion ‘Like a Hot Stove’ They Won’t Touch

Nobody likes a wimp — and on the issue of abortion, the Republican Party has plenty of them. After the Dobbs ruling put the issue back in legislators’ hands, a shocking number of GOP candidates spent the 2022 and 2023 elections cowering in the collective corner, hoping voters would take their silence as confirmation that they had a reasonable position on life (despite the Democrats’ 24/7 ads to the contrary). Now, staring down a high-stakes November where this issue has the potential to upend all of the GOP’s momentum, more voices are urging the party to get off the sidelines and fight.

National Republican Congressional Committee Chair Richard Hudson (R-N.C.) was the latest to demand more guts from candidates. “You need to tell voters your position [on abortion],” argued the head of the House’s Republican fundraising arm. The idea that conservatives can continue letting the Democrats mischaracterize their positions is a losing recipe for 2024, he insisted. It’s time to stop being scared and start getting aggressive, Hudson urged.

“[Our candidates] need to articulate their position to the voters,” he pointed out, “because [right now] the voters think the Republican position is like, ‘We’ll throw you in jail if you get an abortion.’” And unfortunately, that lie has become the perceived reality in the face of very little GOP pushback. “We could have done a better job handling [abortion] last cycle,” Hudson lamented, “where the Democrats spent hundreds of millions of dollars on that topic, and we pretty much just treated it like a hot stove and didn’t touch it.”

And this year, Joe Biden’s party is betting even more money on the topic — an unsurprising move for leaders with nothing to run on but three years of catastrophe. Already, one of the Left’s super-PACs has pledged an eye-popping $200 million on television, social media, radio, and mail advertisements focused on the GOP’s supposedly “radical” position on life.

“Another Donald Trump presidency would mean disaster for Americans who value their rights,” the founder of America Bridge 21st Century said. “We know exactly how to beat Donald Trump. We’ve done it before, and our paid media strategy is a big part of how we’re going to do it again.”

What Democrats are careful not to say — and what Republicans should begin to — is their actual position on abortion. That, strategists say, is where conservatives have a powerful edge. “Republicans don’t have a policy problem,” Hudson insisted. “We have a branding problem,” Hudson said. “We need to point out that the Democrat position is abortion for any reason, up until the moment of birth, paid for by taxpayers. That’s extreme.”

Family Research Council Vice President Brent Keilen agreed that the GOP’s silence created “a huge messaging disadvantage.” “Attempting to avoid this conversation — a conversation that was and is on many voters’ minds — allowed the opposition to completely set the terms of the debate,” he told The Washington Stand. “Candidates should make sure to do two things: first, let the voters know where you stand; second, draw a contrast with what the radical abortion lobby is actively pushing for.”

Republican National Committee Chair Ronna McDaniel has been beating that drum since Dobbs. “We shouldn’t be silent,” she insisted late last year. “Listen, we’re proud to be a party that stands for the unborn. And I think coming out of Roe, after 50 years of … people not having to navigate this issue, it’s really important that we define ourselves before the Democrats do. Let’s talk about pregnancy [care] centers. Let’s talk about getting rid of cumbersome regulation to adoption. But let’s also put the Democrats on the defense because they stand for late-term abortion. They stand for gender-selection abortion.”

“I will work alongside every single candidate,” McDaniel vowed, “but Democrats have nothing to run on except for abortion, and they spent $350 million on it in 2022. They are going to use the same playbook in 2024, and our candidates need to get up to speed and be able to go on TV and articulate where we stand — because when we do, we win.”

If they need motivation, check out the polling data. “The first step in addressing the public perceptions of Republicans’ stance on abortion restrictions is to get a handle on the basics,” urged Amanda Iovino, polling director for Virginia Governor Glenn Youngkin’s 2021 campaign. “Americans generally favor some limits on abortion. As an October 2022 WPA Intelligence poll found, by a two-to-one margin, voters see no restrictions on abortion as ‘more extreme’ than limiting it with exceptions for rape, incest, and the mother’s life.”

In a country as divided as ours, that’s as close to a statistical slam-dunk as you can get. Another August 2022 survey from the same group discovered that “62 percent of likely voters support limiting abortion to 15 weeks or earlier, similar to the European standard.” This is the line of public consensus that Republicans like Senator Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) have been urging the GOP to draw — with surprising pushback from fellow pro-lifers.

“If we can’t muster the courage, post-Dobbs, to tell the country that we’re against late-term abortion, then we’ve lost our way,” he’s argued. That doesn’t mean, Graham has said, that states can’t be more restrictive. If Arkansas or Louisiana want to outlaw abortion entirely, they can. But there also needs to be a clear, nationwide boundary, Graham argued, so that children in extreme places like California, Illinois, or Maryland have a fighting chance. So “at 15 weeks, we draw the line as a nation. [That’s a] minimum federal standard.”

It’s also a strong public preference, Iovino pointed out. But for Republicans to seize on this support, they have to also realize the mountain of misconceptions they’ll have to climb — the tragic result of months of Republican silence on the issue. “The same poll found that 44 percent of Americans mistakenly thought the Supreme Court has outlawed abortion nationwide, and half of those voters think Republicans also want to ban contraceptives. This misinformation makes it easier for Democrats to foster distrust towards Republicans.”

Americans witnessed that first-hand in Virginia and Ohio, where radical abortion won on the ballots by popular vote — stunning states that had made positive pro-life strides. “Heading into the 2024 cycle, the Republican Party must craft clear, effective messaging to counter misinformation and rebuild trust,” Iovino warned. “… The lessons for the GOP from Virginia and Ohio are clear: prioritize policies that support women and directly confront trust issues and misinformation.”

One of the first things a candidate learns, FRC Action Director Matt Carpenter pointed out to TWS, “is to not allow your opponent to define you on an issue.” “Issues don’t just go away because a campaign refuses to engage,” he warned. “In fact, if Republicans don’t engage, a vacuum emerges, one that pro-abortion forces are happy to fill. They want the issue to be about removing someone’s rights when in reality what we’re really talking about is protecting unborn lives. Chairman Hudson’s advice is solid — candidates need to tell the voters where they stand.”

The stakes are too high not to.

AUTHOR

Suzanne Bowdey

Suzanne Bowdey serves as editorial director and senior writer at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLE: Poll Reveals Most Young Voters Want Limits on Abortion

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2024 Family Research Council.


The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Here’s Why the Florida Surgeon General Wants to Halt COVID Shots

STORY AT-A-GLANCE
  • With shockingly little data, questionable benefits and a high likelihood of adverse events, the continuing campaign for COVID-19 shots raises many red flags
  • The documentary “The Unseen Crisis,” detailed by investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson, scratches the surface of the many lives ruined by COVID-19 shots
  • For every 1 million shots, an estimated 1,010 to 1,510 serious adverse reactions, such as death, life-threatening conditions, hospitalization or significant disability may occur — but only about 75 hospitalizations would be prevented among those aged 18 to 49
  • Florida Surgeon General Dr. Joseph Ladapo has called for an end to the use of COVID-19 mRNA shots, citing concerns about DNA fragments in the products
  • The FDA provided no evidence that appropriate DNA integration assessments have been conducted on mRNA COVID-19 shots; in a statement, Ladapo says, “DNA integration poses a unique and elevated risk to human health and to the integrity of the human genome”

As the number of people injured by COVID-19 shots rises, U.S. health officials continue to advise Americans to get more doses. Neither the U.K. nor Australia recommend repeated COVID-19 jabs for those who are under 65 and low risk.1 But in the U.S., official guidance suggests virtually everyone should get multiple COVID-19 shots, beginning at just 6 months of age.2

With shockingly little data, questionable benefits and a high likelihood of adverse events, the continuing campaign for COVID-19 shots raises many red flags. “The only clear winners are Moderna and Pfizer … they have convinced the CDC and the FDA that perpetual COVID vaccination is necessary without robust data,” writes Dr. William Ward in Sensible Medicine.3

The documentary “The Unseen Crisis,” detailed by investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson in the video above, scratches the surface of the many lives ruined by COVID-19 shots — and the ongoing efforts to keep their stories quiet. Meanwhile, Americans are expected to keep rolling up their sleeves, no questions asked.

Benefits and Risks of COVID-19 Shots Don’t Measure Up

After pushing multiple doses of COVID-19 shots on the American public for years, in September 2023 the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention announced the rollout of the updated 2023-24 COVID-19 shot. “CDC recommends everyone 6 months and older get an updated COVID-19 vaccine … Vaccination remains the best protection against COVID-19-related hospitalization and death.”4

While the updated shot boosts antibody levels against new COVID variants, there’s no proof that this translates to a reduction in severe illness and death. Further, the CDC’s estimated benefits from the updated shots were paltry at best. According to Ward, for every 1 million COVID-19 shots given in the following age groups, the following benefits were estimated:5

  • 6 months to 4 years — Avoid 103 hospitalizations
  • 5 to 11 years — Avoid 16 hospitalizations
  • 12 to 17 years — Avoid 19 to 95 hospitalizations, five to 19 ICU admissions and “perhaps one death”
  • 18 to 49 years — Avoid 75 hospitalizations

Meanwhile, randomized controlled trials estimate the risks of COVID-19 shots are much higher.6 For every 1 million shots, an estimated 1,010 to 1,510 serious adverse reactions, such as death, life-threatening conditions, hospitalization or significant disability, may occur.7 When compared to the flu shot, data from the European Medicines Agency Eurovigilance Database shows that COVID-19 shots cause more:8,9

Allergic reactions Arrhythmia
General cardiovascular events Coagulation
Hemorrhages Gastrointestinal, ocular and sexual organs reactions
Thrombosis

A real-world case-control study from Israel10 also revealed that the Pfizer COVID-19 jab is associated with a threefold increased risk of myocarditis,11 leading to the condition at a rate of 1 to 5 events per 100,000 persons.12

As Ward points out, the CDC often states the risk of myocarditis is greater after COVID-19 infection than COVID-19 shots, but a JAMA Cardiology study refutes this. It found a higher rate of myocarditis in young men after a COVID-19 shot compared to COVID-19 infection.13,14 But by ignoring the real risks while continuing to push ongoing shots, health officials are quickly losing the public’s trust. Ward notes:15

“A large randomized trial to simultaneously evaluate the ongoing harms and benefits of boosters should be enacted. This was not required by the FDA for the newest vaccine. Instead, the FDA only required Pfizer to study the new vaccine on 10 mice. Moderna only studied theirs on 50 humans. One person (2%) had a serious adverse reaction.

… As the only country pushing boosters to healthy 6-month-old infants, we better produce the best data in the world. Instead, we get antibody titers from 10 mice. The CDC and FDA are whittling away at public trust by forgoing their duty to protect and inform. Meanwhile, their recent actions are aligned with the financial interests of Pfizer and Moderna. Consent to perpetual COVID boosters is not informed, it is manufactured.”

Past COVID Boosters Quickly Stopped Boosting

The updated COVID-19 shot targets the XBB.1.5 Omicron subvariant, which was the dominant strain in the U.S. for much of 2023. However, this strain “has since been overtaken as the virus continues to evolve,”16 raising questions about whether the “updated” shots are already out of date, which could render them ineffective, as we’ve seen many times in the past with flu shots and COVID-19 shots.

Even the CDC states, “When flu vaccines are not well matched to some viruses spreading in the community, vaccination may provide little or no protection against illness caused by those viruses.”17 SARS-CoV-2 is known to mutate rapidly, even faster than other human viruses like influenza.

Remember the last round of “updated” COVID-19 shots — the bivalent booster? They’re no longer available. “The 2022–2023 bivalent vaccines were designed to protect against the original virus that caused COVID-19 and the Omicron variants BA.4 and BA.5. These vaccines were replaced with the 2023-2024 updated vaccines that more closely target the XBB lineage of the Omicron variant,” according to the Illinois Department of Public Health.

At the time, there were questions about the bivalent boosters’ effectiveness. While Pfizer cited strong antibody responses from its retooled boosters, the booster shot studies did not reveal whether the shots prevented COVID-19 cases or how long they were effective.18 Even vaccination proponent Dr. Paul Offit, director of the vaccine education center at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, was underwhelmed.

As a member of the FDA’s Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC), Offit sat in on the June 28, 2022, presentation, when Pfizer and Moderna presented data on their bivalent shots:19

“The results were underwhelming. Bivalent boosters resulted in levels of neutralizing antibodies against BA.1 that were only 1.5 to 1.75 times as high as those achieved with monovalent boosters. Previous experience with the companies’ vaccines suggested that this difference was unlikely to be clinically significant.”

Soon, data rolled in showing the bivalent boosters did not offer better protection than the former COVID-19 booster shots,20 which were already failing.21 Steve Kirsch, executive director of the Vaccine Safety Research Foundation, pointed out that the data is crystal clear that boosters aren’t working and are dangerous.

“Paul Offit is no dummy; he’s not getting any more boosters,” he says. “Neither should you.”22 Yet, here we are a year later, being sold another promise that another round of “updated” COVID-19 shots is necessary.

Florida Surgeon General Calls for Halt on COVID Shots

Florida Surgeon General Dr. Joseph Ladapo has called for an end to the use of COVID-19 mRNA shots, citing concerns about DNA fragments in the products.23 In a December 6, 2023, letter sent to the U.S. FDA and CDC, Ladapo outlined findings showing the presence of lipid nanoparticle complexes and simian virus 40 (SV40) promoter/enhancer DNA.

“Lipid nanoparticles are an efficient vehicle for delivery of the mRNA in the COVID-19 vaccines into human cells and may therefore be an equally efficient vehicle for delivering contaminant DNA into human cells. The presence of SV40 promoter/enhancer DNA may also pose a unique and heightened risk of DNA integration into human cells,” according to a news release from the Florida Department of Health (DOH).24

In a 2023 preprint study, microbiologist Kevin McKernan — a former researcher and team leader for the MIT Human Genome project25 — and colleagues assessed the nucleic acid composition of four expired vials of the Moderna and Pfizer mRNA shots. “DNA contamination that exceeds the European Medicines Agency (EMA) 330ng/mg requirement and the FDAs 10ng/dose requirements” was found.26

So, in addition to the spike protein and mRNA in COVID-19 shots, McKernan’s team discovered SV40 promoters that, for decades, have been suspected of causing cancer in humans, including mesotheliomas, lymphomas and cancers of the brain and bone.27 Fact checkers have called out the preprint study for using expired vials, but as McKernan tweeted:28

“Factchokers keyboards will melt as they regurgitate the same fake taking [talking] points. 1) vials were old Wrong- newer studies used good vials. RNA integrity was measured and fine. Expired vials were used on people. Expiration doesn’t spontaneously generate DNA.”

Further, the FDA published guidance on DNA in vaccines in 2007, which outlines important points that must be considered. According to the Florida DOH, the FDA’s 2007 guidance states:29

  • “DNA integration could theoretically impact a human’s oncogenes — the genes which can transform a healthy cell into a cancerous cell.
  • DNA integration may result in chromosomal instability.
  • The Guidance for Industry discusses biodistribution of DNA vaccines and how such integration could affect unintended parts of the body including blood, heart, brain, liver, kidney, bone marrow, ovaries/testes, lung, draining lymph nodes, spleen, the site of administration and subcutis at injection site.”

FDA Didn’t Perform DNA Integration Assessments

The FDA responded to Ladapo’s letter on December 14, 2023, but provided no evidence that appropriate DNA integration assessments had been conducted on mRNA COVID-19 shots. In a statement, Ladapo calls for a halt in their use as a result:30

“The FDA’s response does not provide data or evidence that the DNA integration assessments they recommended themselves have been performed. Instead, they pointed to genotoxicity studies — which are inadequate assessments for DNA integration risk. In addition, they obfuscated the difference between the SV40 promoter/enhancer and SV40 proteins, two elements that are distinct.

DNA integration poses a unique and elevated risk to human health and to the integrity of the human genome, including the risk that DNA integrated into sperm or egg gametes could be passed onto offspring of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine recipients. If the risks of DNA integration have not been assessed for mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, these vaccines are not appropriate for use in human beings.”

Ladapo, a graduate of Harvard Medical School, previously issued an alert about a “substantial increase” in reports of adverse events from COVID-19 mRNA shots in Florida. He also recommended against COVID-19 shots for healthy children in 2022 and, in 2023, suggested that those under age 65 should not get COVID-19 booster shots.31 Board-certified internist and cardiologist Dr. Peter McCullough states:32

“The Florida State Surgeon General’s announcement today is a milestone as more government officials join a chorus calling for recall of COVID-19 vaccines including myself (US Senate, multiple State Senates, EU Parliament, UK Parliament), 17,000 physicians representing the Global COVID-19 Summit, Australian scientists, the World Council for Health, and the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons.”

In the meantime, considering their questionable effectiveness and significant health risks, it would be wise for most to “just say no” to further boosters. Should you develop symptoms of COVID-19 infection, remember there are safe and effective early treatment protocols, including I-MASK+33 and I-MATH+,34 which are available for download on the COVID Critical Care website in multiple languages.

 Sources and References

What More Proof Do You Want That Abortion Is Satanic?

I’m not in the habit of reading Cosmopolitan and I can’t honestly say that I regret my negligence. However, many women do; it is one of the biggest magazines in the United States, with an estimated readership of more than 32 million, both in print and on the web. It knows what interests young career women – sex, health, gossip and fashion, mostly.

But the November-December issue promoted another interest – Satanism. It featured a “Cosmo special report” titled “The Satanic Abortion Clinic That’s Pissed Off Pretty Much Everyone…and Might Beat the Bans Anyway.”

The focus of the article is one of America’s weirdest enterprises: “Samuel Alito’s Mom’s Satanic Abortion Clinic”. Based in New Mexico, which has very liberal abortion laws, the telehealth clinic offers 24/7 advice about abortion and supplies abortion pills until the eleventh week of pregnancy.

It’s not just your average abortion clinic – it’s run by The Satanic Temple, an organisation for Satan worshippers, and it has ambitious plans for providing “free religious reproductive healthcare” across the US. The Satanic Temple claims that it is a religion and that providing abortion is an important element in its rituals. In fact, American tax authorities have recognised The Satanic Temple as a religious group with nonprofit tax-exempt status.

And now The Satanic Temple is trying to persuade courts in Idaho and Indiana to follow New Mexico’s lead. An expert on religious freedom legislation told Cosmo:

It’s a layered plan, crafted with backup arguments to the backup arguments … “The logic flows, step-by-step. It all holds together.” If TST were to win an exception to state bans, it could become the biggest, and only, abortion medication provider in either Idaho or Indiana.

True, it’s a strange sort of religion, as The Satanic Temple denies that it believes in God, Satan or the supernatural. “To embrace the name Satan is to embrace rational inquiry removed from supernaturalism and archaic tradition-based superstitions,” it says. However, it argues that it is a religion in the sense that it has a coherent narrative with its own rituals and community.

Cosmo’s journalist, Arielle Domb, painted an enthusiastic picture of the project, although she noted that few people had attended the clinic and it is burning through its cash. The magazine illustrated the article with fiery-red images evoking the Devil.

Up to a certain point, it all sounded like a tasteless adolescent joke. But then I read The Satanic Temple’s abortion ritual. It was hellish, truly hellish. Here is the way that Domb describes it:

First, you find a quiet space. Bring a mirror if you can. Just before taking the medication, gaze at your reflection and focus on your personhood. Home in on your intent, your responsibility to you. Take a few deep, relaxing breaths.

When you’re ready, read the following tenet aloud: One’s body is inviolable, subject to one’s own will alone.

Take the medication and immediately afterward, recite, Beliefs should conform to one’s best scientific understanding of the world. One should take care never to distort scientific facts to fit one’s beliefs.

Later, once your body expels the aborted tissue, return to your reflection. Focus again on your personhood, your power in making this decision.

Complete the ritual by reciting a personal affirmation: By my body, my blood; by my will, it is done.

This is not a joke; it is selling some poor woman’s soul to the Devil. Hell is a place where souls care nothing for one other; each is obsessed with the self. As C.S. Lewis said, “There are only two kinds of people in the end: those who say to God, ‘Thy will be done’, and those to whom God says, in the end, ‘Thy will be done’.”

I don’t think that Cosmo and I will ever see eye-to-eye about religion. You could sum up its hedonistic theology in the terrifying maxim of the English poet William Blake: “Sooner murder an infant in its cradle than nurse unacted desires.” But on one thing we do agree: abortion is literally Satanic.

AUTHOR

Michael Cook is the editor in chief of Mercator. He lives in Sydney, Australia.

RELATED ARTICLE: Biden Reelection Campaign Makes Abortion ‘Front and Center’

EDITORS NOTE: This Mercator column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Congressman: Border Chaos ‘Is Ripping Apart America Right Now’

One of the many obstacles to solving the southern border crisis is the lack of cooperation from the Democrats, according to Senator Roger Marshall (R-Kan.). In December, Marshall, who serves on four Senate committees, discussed on “Washington Watch with Tony Perkins” how the president’s party had been focused on Ukraine funding rather than the border, putting progress at a complete standstill. However, as the threat to the southern border continues to swell, more Democrats are changing their stance on the issue.

Sam Joshi, the Democrat mayor of Edison, New Jersey, said migrants are “not welcome” in his town. Although he received backlash, the mayor stood his ground. “They’re illegal, and they belong on the other side of the border. We don’t want them in Edison, period,” he said. And recent polls indicate this opinion is growing — among unlikely groups.

A January 5 poll conducted by YouGov and CBS News revealed 60% of white people, 50% of black people, and 47% of Hispanics oppose settling illegal immigrants locally. And although the Democrats surveyed largely support local housing for the undocumented migrants, 62% of independents oppose it.

Separate data collected by Rasmussen Reports showed 65% of “likely U.S. voters” consider the immigration crisis as an “invasion” with an additional 43% who strongly view that statement as “very accurate.” Only 31% disagree, and another 15% felt that statement was completely inaccurate.

On Monday’s episode of “Washington Watch,” Representative Mark Alford (R-Mo.) shared about his experience when he joined Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and several others on a trip to the southern border last week. “We saw firsthand the chaos,” he said. “Chaos that this administration [and] Secretary [Alejandro] Mayorkas … will not classify as a crisis.”

Instead, Alford noted, they call it “a challenge.” “This has been languishing for years,” he said, insisting that it’s not accurate to say it is simply a challenge. “Look,” he added, “this isn’t selling used cars. … [It’s] a crisis that [Mayorkas] and President Biden created.” And “with a wink and a nod … almost nine million illegal aliens” have been admitted into the nation.

Notably, most Americans welcome immigrants who enter the country legally. “Legal immigrants are part of the fabric of America,” Alford said. “But this process, this crisis, this chaos, is ripping apart America right now.” And in addition to the madness caused from having nowhere to place them or ways to treat their needs, America’s national security is under severe jeopardy, Alford observed. But he stressed that most Democrats won’t “admit” that “because they want these illegals to eventually become voters” for the Democratic Party who let them in.

Another shocking consequence of the border crisis is the correlation it has to the rise of human trafficking in America, Alford pointed out. During his visit to the border, Alford learned that “$32 million a week is going back to the cartels who are ferrying these people over.” Broken down, these trips can cost “anywhere from $5,000 to $8,000 per trip” per individual, he emphasized. Last week on “Washington Watch with Tony Perkins,” Speaker Johnson noted the money going back to the cartels from the border crisis would total about “$1.6 billion annually.”

Alford continued, “[The migrants] don’t have that money. So, they go to work in the human sex trade” in the U.S. to “pay off their debt to these cartels. One hundred thousand children are unaccounted for in America in this process. That’s despicable.”

On top of the border crisis, “[T]here’s a lot of work yet to be done in getting … [the] spending bill addressed, all the appropriations bills across the finish line, and avoiding a potential shutdown,” guest host and former Congressman Jody Hice chimed in. But Alford mentioned the most recent text for a spending bill had no mention of border security. And as far as he and his conservative colleagues are concerned, no matter how dressed up the spending bill appears, border security is non-negotiable. Or, as he stated, “[Y]ou can put lipstick on a pig, but I’m not kissing this pig.”

Alford concluded that his only priority right now is border security. “That is my number one concern, number two concern, and number three concern right now,” he said. “Whatever it takes to secure the border.”

AUTHOR

Sarah Holliday

Sarah Holliday is a reporter at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Texas Authorities Seize City’s Property Along The Border

Study Shows Some Good and Bad News Out of an Increasingly Divided United States

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2024 Family Research Council.


The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

Prominent Psychologist Talks Nonstop About Gender-Transitioning 3-Year-Olds During Medical Training Course

Psychologist Dr. Wallace Wong argued that three-year-olds know their gender better than their parents while defending transitioning young children, according to a video obtained exclusively by the Daily Caller News Foundation.

In November 2022, Wong was featured in a training video for the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH), an international organization that trains medical and mental health professionals on how to treat transgender patients, including minors. Wong told the trainees that kids “are at your mercy” when it comes to convincing their parents to transition them, and claimed that three-year-olds “know their authentic self” better than their parents, according to a video the DCNF obtained through a public records request.

Parents are so nervous and don’t know what to do when [their] three-year-old kid presents this kind of problem,” Wong said in the video. “They may think that ‘my child is gonna have a vasectomy or phalloplasty,’ but that’s not true. We need to let them know that our goal is helping the kid move step by step, one step at a time, getting to what is their authentic self. Where that will be I don’t know, the parents don’t know. The kids will know when it is time.”

WPATH’s Global Education Institute (GEI) Online Foundations courses teach medical professionals how to treat transgender patients in line with its Standards of Care. In the standards section on adolescent treatment, WPATH argues that while current research supports “early medical intervention” for transgender youth, there is a lack of studies to show the effects long-term.

Wong is also listed as the co-lead for WPATH’s GEI Diversity, Inclusion and Community Engagement committee, which is designed to “find creative ways to include marginalized or under-utilized contributors to the curriculum development and/or course delivery in every topic area,” according to its website.

WATCH:

Wong said that he had “quite a few” three-year-old patients, and that the “first thing” many children say is not “‘Mommy, I love you,’ but ‘Mommy I am not a boy’ or ‘Mommy, I’m not a girl.’”

“[Parents] really have that wishful thinking that ‘this is not true and I cannot let that happen.’ So they have a lot of different irrational thinking to deny it, undermining it, so having equal time with the parents is important,” Wong later said in the presentation.

During the training, Wong explains that when medical professionals work with families, it is very important that they “always” reassure parents that it is good to talk about sex and transgender issues with their young children. He said that often parents express fear that by introducing their children to these concepts that young they will “really become transgender” but Wong argued that is not the case.

“I wish it was that easy but it’s not,” Wong said to a laughing audience.

Wong also discussed the role schools must play in helping kids transition during the end of his lecture, saying that they need to accept using preferred pronouns and have resources for transgender students. He dismissed the idea that using pronouns like “they” would be confusing for other children.

“They need to learn,” Wong concluded. “They just need to learn. I’m sure [people] are confused when they call me by my Chinese name, I’m sorry … you cannot pronounce it, learn it, just like you have to learn [to] use they.”

Wong previously said in 2019 that he had treated a patient younger than three years old with gender dysphoria, according to a transcript of an event hosted by Vancouver Public Library.

In 2021, a Canadian father was arrested after refusing to consent for his teenage daughter to transition, according to City Journal. Wong was the doctor who encouraged the child to begin socially transitioning with the school’s help, despite the father not being informed and later encouraged her to go on cross-sex hormones.

Wong and WPATH did not respond to the Daily Caller News Foundation’s requests for comment.

AUTHORS

MEGAN BROCK AND KATE ANDERSON

Contributors.

RELATED ARTICLES:

EXCLUSIVE: University With Gender Clinic Funds Study To See If Puberty Blockers Cause ‘Lasting’ Brain Changes For Kids

Ohio Lawmakers Set Date to Override DeWine’s Veto of Child Protections

California Extends Free Gender Transition Procedures to Illegal Immigrants

POST ON X: WARNING GRAPHIC

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.


All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Abortion, Trump And Censorship Headline Supreme Court’s Docket In The New Year

  • The Supreme Court will grapple with issues involving former President Donald Trump, the Biden administration’s communication with social media companies to censor speech online and the abortion pill in the lead up to the 2024 election. 
  • Abortion is back at the Supreme Court just two years after it issued a major ruling overturning Roe v. Wade, with two cases on the issue.
  • The justices will hear oral arguments on Trump’s eligibility for office under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment in February.

Issues involving the chemical abortion pill, former President Donald Trump and the Biden administration’s encouragement of censorship online top the Supreme Court’s docket in the New Year.

Though only one decision has been released so far this term, the justices have already heard arguments on gun restrictions for subjects of domestic violence restraining orders, government officials blocking constituents on social media and Purdue Pharma’s bankruptcy settlement. Other pending cases will require the Supreme Court to grapple with multiple hot-button issues in the lead up to the 2024 election.

Abortion

Just two years after overturning Roe v. Wade in June 2022, the justices agreed to hear another major abortion case challenging the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) approval of the chemical abortion pill mifepristone.

U.S. District Court Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk ruled in April that the FDA must reverse its approval of the pill. The Fifth Circuit later declined to fully remove the pill from the market, but upheld the portion of the decision rolling back FDA rules issued in 2016 and 2021 that had expanded access, allowing the pill to be sent via mail and used later in pregnancy.

However, due to an emergency order issued by the Supreme Court in April, both decisions are paused until the Supreme Court rules on the case.

The Supreme Court also agreed Friday to hear a second big case considering whether the federal law requires emergency room doctors to perform abortions in violation of Idaho’s law, which prohibits abortions unless the mother’s life is in danger. The Biden administration argues the that the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act, which instructs doctors not to turn away patients in need of “emergency stabilizing care,” preempt’s Idaho’s ban and requires doctors to perform emergency abortions.

On Friday, the Court agreed to allow Idaho’s ban to remain in effect until it could hear the case in April.

Censorship

The Supreme Court will weigh in on the Biden administration’s coordination with social media companies to suppress speech online in Murthy v. Missouri. District Court Judge Terry A. Doughty called the government’s censorship efforts “Orwellian” in his July 4 ruling finding the Biden administration likely violated the First Amendment, noting the Republican attorneys general of Louisiana and Missouri “produced evidence of a massive effort by Defendants, from the White House to federal agencies, to suppress speech based on its content.”

The Supreme Court paused the ruling in October pending its consideration of the appeal. Justice Samuel Alito dissented, along with Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, writing the decision could be construed in the meantime as “giving the Government a green light to use heavy handed tactics to skew the presentation of views on the medium that increasingly dominates the dissemination of news.”

Election officials in eight states filed a brief urging the Supreme Court to reject the appeals court’s ruling, expressing dismay that communications made with platforms during the 2020 and 2022 election season have “essentially ended” ahead of “a critical and hotly contested 2024 election season.”

The Supreme Court will also hear a case considering former superintendent of New York’s Department of Financial Services Maria Vullo pressuring banks and insurance companies not to do business with the National Rifle Association. Aaron Terr, Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) director of Public Advocacy, told the Daily Caller News Foundation in November there are “clear parallels” between the cases.

“Each case involves government officials exceeding constitutional boundaries by coercing private companies to censor or dissociate from speakers expressing views those officials dislike,” he said.

Trump

As the 2024 election draws near, issues surrounding former President Donald Trump are creeping into the court’s docket.

The Supreme Court will hear oral arguments Feb. 8 to consider Trump’s appeal of the Colorado Supreme Court’s decision finding him ineligible to appear on the state’s primary ballot under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. The justices decision will clarify whether other states can take similar actions to remove Trump from the ballot, as Democratic Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows did in a Dec. 28 ruling finding Trump ineligible to appear.

The justices also agreed to hear a case on the scope of an obstruction statute used to charge hundreds of Jan. 6 defendants, as well as Trump.

The statute, Section 1512(c)(2), threatens fines or up to 20 years in prison for anyone who “obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding.” It is connected to two of the four charges in Jack Smith’s indictment of Trump for alleged election interference.

If the Supreme Court limits the scope, it could shake up Jan. 6 cases along with impacting the former president’s case.

Special counsel Jack Smith already asked the justices in December to consider Trump’s presidential immunity appeal before the lower court had a chance to weigh in, a request they ultimately denied. Still, the issue will likely be back before the justices soon, as the D.C. Circuit is slated to hear oral arguments on the issue Jan. 9 and issue a decision sometime after.

Other coming cases to watch

The Supreme Court will hear arguments Jan. 17 for a pair of cases that challenge “Chevron deference,” a legal doctrine that instructs courts to defer to executive agency interpretations of statutes when the language is ambiguous. Critics argue the doctrine enables federal agencies to adopt expansive interpretations of statutes that broaden their power while evading the checks and balances of the judicial branch.

In February, the Supreme Court will hear a case challenging a Trump-era federal ban on bump stocks, along with a pair of cases considering red state laws aimed at preventing viewpoint censorship on social media.

AUTHOR

 

RELATED ARTICLES:

Dems Seek To ‘Affect The Outcome’ Of Key 2024 Cases Through Public Pressure On SCOTUS, Legal Experts Say

Here’s The Legal Question That Could Determine The 2024 Election

Judge Denies Trump’s Team From Referencing E. Jean Carroll’s Rape Claim For Future Defamation Trial

RELATED VIDEO: Epstein Files Clear President Trump of Involvement (Duh) | TIPPING POINT

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.


All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

California to Provide Free Sex Changes for Illegals

G-d help us.

California to provide free sex changes for illegal immigrants

A state memo regarding Medi-Cal stipulated that “gender-affirming care” is a covered benefit only “when medically necessary.”

By: Jarryd Jaeger, The Post Millennial,  Jan 4, 2024:

It has been revealed that sex changes and hormone therapy will be included in the healthcare coverage offered to illegal immigrants in California. As of January 1, everyone, regardless of whether they entered the country via legal means, will qualify for Medi-Cal, the state‘s public health insurance program. This program had typically been reserved for low-income individuals, families with children, seniors, persons with disabilities, people in foster care, pregnant women, and low-income people with diseases such as tuberculosis, cancer, or HIV/AIDS.

Prior to the new rules, illegal immigrants were only able to access emergency and pregnancy-related care, however surgical and non-surgical procedures that “bring primary and secondary gender characteristics into conformity with the individual’s identified gender, including ancillary services, such as hair removal” are now covered as well.

According to the Daily Caller, a state memo regarding Medi-Cal stipulated that “gender-affirming care” is a covered benefit only “when medically necessary.”

“Requests for gender-affirming care,” it added, “should be from specialists experienced in providing culturally competent care to transgender and gender diverse individuals and should use nationally recognized guidelines.”

The decision to include illegal immigrants in Medi-Cal was made in May of last year. State Sen. Maria Elena Durazo called it a “historic investment” that “speaks to California’s commitment to health care as a human right.”

“In California, we believe everyone deserves access to quality, affordable health care coverage – regardless of income or immigration status,” Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office said in a statement to ABC News at the time. “Through this expansion, we’re making sure families and communities across California are healthier, stronger, and able to get the care they need when they need it.”

The children of illegal immigrants first became eligible to receive free healthcare in the state in 2015 thanks to former governor Jerry Brown. That was expanded to those 19 to 25 years old in 2019. Now, all undocumented residents under 50 will have access to the program.

Keep reading.

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

TRANS TERROR: Perry School Mass Shooter Was Prominent Trans Activist, Planted an IED in School

CDC Champions Addressing Racism, ‘Injustices’ Over Jailing Criminals To Prevent Violence

France Raises Alarm over ‘Very Disturbing’ Spike in Sudden Deaths of Babies Since Introduction of New RSV Vaccine

55% Spike in Young Disabled Women Since Vaccine Rollout

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

CDC Champions Addressing Racism, ‘Injustices’ Over Jailing Criminals To Prevent Violence

The Centers For Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) maintains that putting more criminals in jail does not prevent violent crime but that addressing the “root causes” of violence, like racism, will make communities safer, according to internal documents obtained by the Daily Caller News Foundation.

The CDC is set to release new guidance, titled the Community Violence Prevention Resource for Action, on how to address community violence in the coming weeks, according to documents obtained by the DCNF. In a section of a document detailing the CDC’s planned responses to potential questions from the public on its upcoming recommendations, the agency claims that “increasing punitive measures, including incarceration, does not reduce community violence” and that “we can work to prevent violence by addressing the underlying conditions that contribute to violence,” like racism.

The community violence recommendations are based on the “best available evidence,” according to the CDC, and will identify firearm violence as a “public health problem,” in line with the CDC’s past guidance on viewing gun violence and community violence broadly as public health concerns.

The new guidance will “[weave] health equity concepts throughout” and is intended to help “address structural inequities.” Youth impacted by violence are at a higher risk for “mental health challenges, such as substance use, obesity, high-risk sexual behavior, depression, traumatic stress, low educational attainment or suicide,” according to the CDC’s document.

However, the CDC’s internal communications strategy, obtained by the DCNF, sheds further light on how the CDC views criminal justice. The strategy indicates the CDC views crime as the product of underlying social factors like racism and economic inequality, and that it views incarceration as an ineffective means of reducing crime.

“Isn’t community violence caused by criminals who make poor decisions?” and “Shouldn’t we just lock these people up to keep communities safe?” are among the possible questions the CDC is “hoping against hope” it is not asked about their forthcoming guidance, according to the document.

“Racism, economic injustices, and other systemic inequities contribute to the current and persistent increased risk of violence experienced by some communities,” the CDC’s pre-written answer to those questions reads.

“Dominant public narratives” surrounding crime and race “often consider violence primarily a problem of personal responsibility,” the CDC continues. Focusing on personal responsibility as a way to reduce gun crime “invokes images of youth and young adults, and especially Black or African American youth and young adults, as aggressors, troublemakers, or worse,” the CDC says.

“Harmful narratives around race and violence” are “biased and inaccurate” and can “rob youth and young adults of their humanity by failing to value them as complete people and valued members of communities,” the CDC document states.

Instead of buying into these narratives, stakeholders should work toward addressing root causes of violence, according to the CDC. The CDC identifies things like “structural racism” and “historical injustices” as among these root causes.

“The resource and its supporting materials are still undergoing CDC review,” a CDC spokesperson told the DCNF.

“The resource will be a compilation of examples of the best available evidence to prevent community violence based on research showing effects on violence or the behaviors or conditions that affect risk for violence,” they continued. Among the evidence cited in the upcoming guidance will be “meta-analyses or systematic reviews and other rigorous evaluations.”

Though the CDC asserted that putting more criminals in jail would not reduce community violence, it did not provide evidence to support its claim when asked to do so by the DCNF.

AUTHOR

ROBERT SCHMAD

Contributor.

RELATED ARTICLE: New CDC Director Teases Annual COVID Shots

POST ON X:

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.


All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

House GOP Raises the Stakes: ‘Shut the Border Down or Shut the Government Down’

While the rest of Congress is soaking up the last few days of holiday recess, Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) decided to cut his vacation short, opting instead to take 60 House Republicans on a detour to the southern border before Congress resumes next week. If the goal was to remind them what they’re fighting for in the standoff on immigration with Joe Biden, it succeeded.

With December’s record-breaking migrant crossings as a backdrop, this “show of force,” as many are calling it, aims to put more pressure on the White House to negotiate on reforms in real faith. “Life along the border is turned upside down,” host Congressman Tony Gonzales (R-Texas) told reporters, “and that’s exactly what the speaker and my colleagues are going to see.”

The trip comes as a growing chorus of Democratic leaders plead with Biden to act. From big cities like Denver to small communities like 15,000-population Whitewater, Wisconsin, even liberal politicians say they’re at “a breaking point.” “…[T]here’s just not enough work or housing in the city to support this ongoing [flood],” Mile High City mayor Mike Johnston admitted from his sanctuary city. “… [W]e know we can’t keep growing at this pace,” he warned. “When I took the oath of office six months ago, we had about 400 migrants in shelter[s]. We have more than ten times that number right now. We’ve brought 35,000 through this year.”

Republicans, who know they have the upper hand tying border reforms to less-popular Ukraine aid, are dangling even more drastic measures before the president after seeing Eagle Pass — including a government shutdown. “No more money for this bureaucracy of his government until you’ve brought this border under control,” border state Representative Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.) insisted. “Shut the border down or shut the government down.”

That extreme approach might get a warmer reception than Democrats think, given the latest polling. Incredibly, the new Associated Press-NORC numbers show that the emergency at the border has supplanted the economy and inflation in voters’ top concerns. Thirty-five percent now list immigration and the border wall as their biggest worry — up eight points from last month. Making matters worse for this president, only a handful of Americans — 32% — trust Biden to make “wise decisions about immigration policy.”

Speaker Johnson is hoping to change that, telling reporters on the ground in Texas that if the president wants a supplemental bill with aid for Ukraine and national security, “it better begin with defending America’s national security. We want to get the border closed and secured first.”

That commitment was on display Wednesday, Gonzales insisted, in the mere size of the GOP delegation. Convincing 60 members of Congress to go on a border trip “two days after New Year’s … is a small miracle,” he said. And as Johnson pointed out, it was a diverse bunch. “We have everybody from California to Maryland, from Michigan to Florida,” he explained at the group’s afternoon press conference. “We represent over half the U.S. states because every state in America is now a border state. We’ve seen that on vivid display today.”

Frankly, Rep. Robert Aderholt (R-Ala.) pointed out, this is rapidly becoming a bipartisan issue. From the airport, where he was boarding a plane to Eagle Pass Tuesday, the Alabama congressman told “Washington Watch” that the urgency “is across the party lines.” “This is not just a Republican thing or Democrat issue,” he insisted to Family Research Council President Tony Perkins. “… Democrats are hearing from their constituents, just as Republicans are. And obviously, we want a system where people can come freely into the United States of America, but we want it in a situation where people [come] legally. And that’s what we’re trying to do here. … [H]opefully, this will call some media attention to it, and we can try to put some pressure on the Democrats to come together and find some solution[s].”

This situation is “unsustainable,” Perkins agreed, pointing to the soft target America is becoming by not adequately vetting the people crossing the border. “I understand that people want to come here to the United States of America,” Aderholt said, “but we’re in a situation right now where we have to make sure that the people [who] are coming here are coming for the right reason. When they come here illegally … you don’t know why they’re coming. Some of them may be coming because of good reasons, and they’re just trying to provide for their family. But at the same time, there’s a lot of folks that also may be coming illegally that are trying to do harm to the United States. … And that’s what we’ve got to put a stop to. … It’s the people that would want to come for nefarious reasons that we want to keep out.”

Already, House Republicans are showing their sincerity, scheduling its first impeachment hearing on Biden’s embattled Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas. The fireworks kick off January 10, when the debate over how to couple massive border reforms with overseas aid will be well underway. A fuller investigation may be on the horizon if the president continues to play coy about the hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants disappearing into every corner of our country.

“I very much think that Speaker Johnson will move forward on this [impeachment of Secretary Mayorkas] if the Biden administration doesn’t act responsibly,” Aderholt cautioned. As he should, his colleague Rep. Mark Green (R-Tenn.) argued. “For three years, the Biden admin has fed the American people lies.”

AUTHOR

Suzanne Bowdey

Suzanne Bowdey serves as editorial director and senior writer at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Alejandro Mayorkas Claims Biden Admin Has Removed ‘Record Number’ Of Illegal Immigrants — But There’s A Problem

‘This Stuff Is Gonna Haunt Biden’: Larry Kudlow Predicts ‘Crisis’ Will Wreck Support For Biden Among Key Voting Blocs

POSTS ON X:

EDITORS NOTE: This Washington Stand column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. ©2024 Family Research Council.


The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

BEST INSPIRATIONAL FILM 2023: OUTRAGE: The Life and Times of Al Katz

OUTRAGE: The Life and Times of Al Katz, winner of the World Cinema Awards for BEST INSPIRATIONAL FILM, is the powerful story of the life of the real hero who survived seven years as a Jewish slave in Nazi Europe at the beginning of his life and 70 years later survived human bondage as an elder Ward in Florida’s vast abusive professional guardianship industry along with tens of thousands kept in isolation until their miserable deaths ensue.

As a Jewish slave in his youth, Al Katz was forced into many concentration camps across Europe, starving and working outdoors in frigid conditions of 52 degrees below zero with little clothing; yet, he always kept his faith and knew that he had to survive to warn the world of the depravity of antisemitism.  As a Jewish Ward of the State of Florida, Al Katz once again lost everything – his belongings, house of worship, and all civil rights, trapped in isolation for months, while being forbidden from visits, calls, cards, letters, and all contacts with his family.

Al Katz’s life is an exclusive look into a unique life lived in two worlds of human depravity, unseen and unknown by the masses, and the extraordinary courage to survive with faith in the face of fear and unimaginable terror.  OUTRAGE, winner of the BEST INSPIRATIONAL FILM, will inspire audiences around the world as a once-in-a-lifetime movie of miracles and monsters, hero and unbearable sorrow.

OUTRAGE, by award-winning filmmaker, Stan Moore, has also been nominated for numerous other awards across the globe, including BEST JUSTICE FILM.  Al Katz’s story is featured in the book, Florida Guardianships: Who Shall Live and Who Shall Die? by Dr. Beverly Newman and in the Holocaust education book series, Holocaust Babies, sold in bookstores around the world.

For interviews, book and film orders, and community and school presentations, contact Dr. Beverly Newman, helpelders@hotmail.com.

©2023. All rights reserved.

PODCAST: A predictable “earthquake” – Surrendering our sovereignty to the WHO

A devastating earthquake in Japan yesterday may symbolize a New Year marred by geostrategic tectonic shifts. Some are predictable – and their effects can, therefore, be attenuated if we act in time.

Consider the creation of so-called “global governance” mechanisms that would subordinate us to the dictates of unaccountable international entities like the World Health Organization.

Largely secret negotiations are expected by May to produce agreements that will give the WHO the authority to declare what constitutes a public health emergency here – and what must be done about it. Three Biden administration officials appear to have perjured themselves in testifying last month that would not diminish our sovereignty.

The House of Representatives has voted to cut off funding for the WHO and require Senate approval of any such accords. To prevent irreparable harm to our public health – and America, Congress must concur.

This is Frank Gaffney.

AUTHOR

Frank Gaffney, Jr.

Founder and Executive Chairman

EDITORS NOTE: This Center for Security Policy podcast is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Biden Admin Caught And Released Enough Illegal Immigrants At The Border To Fill More Than 17 Yankee Stadiums

  • There were enough illegal immigrants caught and released into the country in 2023 to fill more than 17 Yankee Stadiums, according to federal data.
  • Not a single year of encounters under the two previous presidential administrations came close to what federal authorities recorded in 2023, according to the data.
  • “In retrospect, 2023 at the border was a progressively worse version of 2022,” former Border Patrol Chief Rodney Scott told the Daily Caller News Foundation.

The number of illegal immigrants caught and released into the country in 2023 would be enough to fill Yankee Stadium more than 17 times, according to federal data.

Border Patrol recorded more than 1.7 million encounters with migrants crossing the southern border illegally in 2023, with more than 824,000 released into the interior of the country with future court appearances, according to the data, which doesn’t account for December. Yankee Stadium has the capacity to hold 46,537 people, according to Ticketmaster.

Federal authorities at the southern border also seized more than 229,000 pounds of drugs, roughly 22,000 pounds of which were fentanyl.

During the Obama and Trump administrations, not a single year reached one million encounters, according to federal data.

“In retrospect, 2023 at the border was a progressively worse version of 2022,” former Border Patrol Chief Rodney Scott told the Daily Caller News Foundation. “Biden continued to double down on his failed border policies, illegal immigration continued skyrocketing to unimaginable levels, the cartels made more money than most people can fathom with less risk than at anytime in history, Customs and Border Protection suspended legal trade and travel to decrease the time in custody for illegal aliens, and the US Border Patrol shut down checkpoints and deployed nearly zero proactive patrols.”

“Biden’s only response was to send Mayorkas and Blinken to Mexico and asks them to control their border,” he said.

The House Homeland Security Committee is preparing to conduct impeachment proceedings against Mayorkas early in the new year, a committee staffer recently told the DCNF.

“The Biden Administration is breaking records everyday and none of them are good. Enough. Time to impeach Mayorkas. No more excuses. This country needs action now,” Homan said.

Despite the record flows of illegal migrants across the southern border, ICE has left thousands of detention beds empty, according to the DCNF’s previous review of agency data. As of Dec. 11, ICE had seven individuals on average in custody each day at its processing center in Adelanto, California, where there is bed space for 640 people, according to agency data.

Court orders limit ICE’s use of bed space in the California facility to mitigate the spread of COVID-19.

The situation is only expected to worsen in the coming year, J.J. Carrell, who served as a deputy patrol agent in charge for Border Patrol, told the DCNF.

“We have never experienced this type of invasion in the history of America,” Carrell said. “And when you look at the totality of the data, meaning Special Interest Aliens, Russian nationals, Chinese nationals, terrorists, criminal aliens, major cities crumbling, social welfare, states of emergencies, I believe that when we look back on 2023 from the viewpoint of 2024, I think 2023 is gonna look tame, and that’s scary. I think that should scare America.”

AUTHOR

JENNIE TAER

Investigative reporter.

RELATED ARTICLE: ‘Breaking Point’: Sanctuary City Mayors Beg Biden Admin For More Help In Addressing Migrant Crisis

RELATED VIDEO: Tucker Carlson Visits Julian Assange

POST ON X:

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.


All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Communist California Rings In the New Year with $2.6 Billion For Illegal Immigrants

The Communist state of California will overlook its massive deficits, fiscal instability and unconstitutional legislation to become the first state in our once free Republic to give free health insurance to all the illegal aliens that criminally entered our republic in violation of congressional federal immigration laws.

So commencing January 1st 2024, if you are a criminal illegal immigrant who has violated US immigration laws by entering California from let’s say Iran, Saudi Arabia, Mexico, Communist China, Yemen, Iraq, Syria etc., no matter which country or how old you are if you are low income, now you qualify for Medi-Cal, a mirror copy of the federal Communist government controlled Medicaid program.

In 2015, illegal immigrant children could join Medi-Cal under a bill signed by then Gov. Communist sympathizer Jerry Brown. Then in 2019, the Communist dictator of California, Gavin Newsom signed a new law upping the age to use the tax dollars from hard working Americans to fund free health care for illegal immigrants age 19-25.

Then it was expanded to adults age 50 and older. Full benefits folks for all illegal immigrants that have criminally invaded our republic. The best way to maintain a Communist Democrat voter base in California is to give illegal immigrants free stuff.

So on Jan. 1 2024. approximately 700,000 plus more illegal immigrants who have violated congressional immigration laws aged between ages 26 and 49 will be added to the free handouts of full coverage.

This according to full blown Marxist and California State Senator Comrade María Elena Durazo the daughter of two illegal immigrants and the former National Co-Chair of the Barack Obama Presidential Destroy America Campaign. Remember Obama forced nuns in Catholic Charity hospitals to perform abortions.

This statement is from Comrade Newsom’s politburo in Sacramento.

“In California, we believe everyone deserves access to quality, affordable health care coverage – regardless of income or immigration status,” Gov. Newsom’s Communist politburo office said in response to a News request for comment.

“Through this expansion, we’re making sure families and communities across California are healthier, stronger, and able to get the care they need when they need it.”

Basically what the communist dictator of California is saying is criminal illegal immigrants that broke congressional immigration laws (that actually must be deported) will be given priority over American citizens and homeless veteran’s.

And – the do nothing weak spineless useless waste of tax payer money California Senate Republican Caucus only criticized the move in their an analysis of the 2022-23 governor’s budget. Cheap words from a none functioning Republican political party.

What did they do about it ? Not a darn thing.

Because California is being turned into a Communist government dependency nanny state over one third of California’s population is now sucking off the Newsom mammary gland.

This is about 14.6 million Californians. So why not add another 764,000 criminal illegal immigrants to the free stuff list.

So instead of enforcing U.S. congressional immigration law by denying any benefit to an illegal immigrant at the detriment of American citizens including homeless veterans the Communists running the California Health and Human Services Agency is going to spend $835.6 million in 2024 and $2.6 billion thereafter to keep these illegal immigrants fit and healthy.

I am not sure where the Golden Shower State of California is going to get this money from to fund all this healthcare for criminal illegal immigrants but it sure is interesting to watch the slow financial demise of this once prosperous and beautiful economically viable state.

Maybe in the future an American ran California legislature could write a bill to charge the illegal immigrants consulate or embassy in Washington DC for their emergency healthcare costs and a bill to totally deny all benefits to the rest of these criminals instead of using American tax payers dollars.

©2023. Geoff Ross. All rights reserved.

‘I’m Finished With This Stiff’: Trump Blasts Mike DeWine For Vetoing Ban On Child Sex Changes

Former President Donald Trump blasted Republican Gov. Mike DeWine of Ohio Saturday over the governor’s veto of a bill banning child sex changes.

DeWine announced the veto of the legislation, House Bill 68, Friday despite its overwhelming passage by the state legislature. The bill not only banned child sex changes, but it also prohibited biological males from competing in women’s sports. “DeWine has fallen to the Radical Left,” Trump posted on Truth Social. “No wonder he gets loudly booed in Ohio every time I introduce him at Rallies, but I won’t be introducing him any more. I’m finished with this ‘stiff.’”

“What was he thinking,” Trump continued. “The bill would have stopped child mutilation, and prevented men from playing in women’s sports. Legislature will hopefully overturn. Do it FAST!!!”

The issue of biological males competing in women’s sports after identifying as transgender became controversial in the United States following University of Pennsylvania swimmer Lia Thomas’s participation in the 2022 NCAA championships. The biological male, who previously ranked at #462 as a male swimmer, won the 500-yard women’s final and placed highly in other events.

Many Republicans criticized DeWine over the veto, including Republican Sen. J.D. Vance of Ohio, presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy and Republican Secretary of State Frank LaRose of Ohio.

Trump endorsed DeWine during his reelection bid in 2022.

Some detransitioners, including Chloe Cole, who transitioned as a teenager before stopping, have filed lawsuits against medical professionals who carried out so-called “gender-affirming” procedures.

AUTHOR

HAROLD HUTCHISON

Reporter.

RELATED ARTICLE: ‘This Boils Down To Money’: Fox News Guest Blasts GOP Gov Who Vetoed Child Sex Change Ban

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.


All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.