Joe Biden is lying about the so-called “Inflation Reduction Act” – an oxymoron if there ever was one. All it does is grow an already bloated federal leviathan. Graham Ledger has a simple, but effective solution to end reckless spending and an out of control fourth branch of government.
The Senate yesterday passed on a party-line basis Democrats’ latest tax and spending bill, which they call the Inflation Reduction Act. President Joe Biden extolled that legislation, saying the bill “makes the largest investment ever in combatting the existential crisis of climate change.” That $369 billion green energy “investment” includes new and expanded subsidies for consumers who purchase electric vehicles, energy-efficient appliances, and solar panels, along with vast new spending for other green priorities. On passing the legislation, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) said “This bill will kickstart the era of affordable clean energy in America.” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) has called the plan “transformational,” adding without flinching that “we have never spent this much money” on green energy.
If that all sounds very familiar, that’s because it is.
Obama teamed these agencies with left-wing stooges. Thereby facilitating the Democrat politicization and weaponization of our intel and government agencies to attack we, the people.
“In a plea deal filed Wednesday, a former FBI agent pleaded guilty to paying a business to “wipe” his computer to make the hard drive unavailable for forensic examination.
According to court documents, former agent Robert Cessario was charged with “corrupt destruction of record in an official proceeding” in connection to the corruption trial of former state Sen. Jon Woods of Springdale.
In the plea deal, Cessario stated: “I erased the contents of the computer hard knowing that the court has ordered that the computer be submitted for a forensic examination. I did so with the intention of making the contents of the computer’s hard unavailable for forensic examination. At the time, I knew that the contents of the hard drive were relevant to an official proceeding, that is, Cause No. 5:17-CR-50010, United States v. Woods et al. I corruptly performed and had performed, the erasures with intent to impair the integrity and availability of the computer hard drive and its contents for use in that official proceeding.”
ON WOODS STILL SITS IN PRISON EVEN THOUGH THE CORRUPT DOJ AND CORRUPT FBI HAVE NOW ADMITTED THEY FRAMED AN INNOCENT MAN BY DESTROYING EVIDENCE.
Woods obtained funds for a Christian school in Arkansas and the government alleged that the donation to the school was a form of fraud because it was collected under false pretenses. The case against Woods was the Department of Justice’s favorite trick: using the word ‘fraud’ to apply to any financial transaction they don’t like.
Here are the details of the FBI trying to destroy relevant evidence in the Woods case:
Woods’ attorneys realized they were missing critical evidence that would prove Woods’ innocence, and asked the prosecutor to turn over a laptop.
On November 30, 2017, the lead FBI Special Agent Robert Cessario, was ordered by the Assistant United States Attorney, Aaron Jennen, to deliver his government issued laptop to an FBI forensics examiner in Little Rock named Timothy Whitlock for a forensics examination.
FBI Criminal Agent Cessario learned of what the examination would entail during a phone conversation with Agent Whitlock on December 1, 2017.
Agent Cessario then brought his government issued laptop to a local computer store in Bentonville, Arkansas on December 4, 2017, at 11:18am and paid in cash the amount of $59.50 to have it professionally ‘wiped’ meaning to eliminate all the digital files.
FBI Criminal Agent Cessario then took the laptop home on December 7, 2017 had it ‘wiped’ at least one more time before turning it over as instructed.
When Criminal Cessario was confronted by FBI Agent Shun Turner, Criminal Cessario asked Turner along with another Agent Whitlock to LIE and NOT report that the laptop had been ‘wiped.’
Agents Whitlock and Turner did the right thing and reported Criminal Cessario
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Geller Reporthttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Geller Report2022-08-20 08:26:332022-08-20 08:28:04FBI Agent Pleads Guilty to Destroying Evidence to Frame Pro-Trump Political Prisoner Jon Woods
Disruptive innovation is reshaping how children learn and expanding access to alternative education models.
Disruptive innovation usually begins on the margins, with a few, intrepid users embracing a new product or service. Abetted by new technologies, a disruptive innovation penetrates the mainstream when its quality is proven to be as good, if not better, than more established models.
According to author and investor, Michael Horn, a classic example of disruptive innovation is Airbnb, which began on the margins as a couch-surfing tool and then, enabled by technology, upended the hospitality industry.
“Initially we thought [disruptive innovation] could be any low-cost innovation,” Horn told me on this week’s episode of the LiberatED podcast. “What we observed over time was that you needed some sort of technology enabler that allowed you to carry the original value proposition around convenience, affordability, and accessibility and allowed you to improve without just replicating all of the cost features of the incumbent.”
Horn should know. He co-founded the Clayton Christensen Institute with Clayton Christensen, who coined the term “disruptive innovation” back in the 1990s. Since then, Horn has studied the role of disruptive innovation in education and has written several books on the topic, including his newly-released book, From Reopen to Reinvent: (Re)Creating School for Every Child.
In our podcast conversation this week, Horn and I focused on the ways in which disruptive innovation is reshaping how many children learn, as well as accelerating the growth of alternative learning models.
For instance, while homeschooling began its modern revival a half-century ago, and microschools, or small, multi-age learning environments, have existed for decades—including some of the ones I highlighted in my Unschooled book—it wasn’t until the advent of new technologies that homeschooling and microschooling became a mainstream option for millions of families.
Virtual schools and platforms such as Sora Schools, My Tech High, ASU Prep Digital, and Socratic Experience, enable students, many of whom may be registered as homeschoolers, to learn from anywhere and have access to a more personalized curriculum. Similarly, Khan Academy, Coursera, Udemy, and Outschool give students around the world access to content and curriculum experts to make it easier to choose an alternative learning path, or supplement a conventional one.
Fast-growing microschool networks such as Prenda and KaiPod are combining educational technology with small, in-person learning pods to enable many more families to have access to a personalized, flexible microschool experience. KaiPod has recently teamed up with virtual providers such as Sora Schools and Socratic Experience to offer pods tailored to families choosing a specific curriculum.
“Leveraging technology allows you to stay connected to the curriculum, learn from anywhere, learn from the best experts anywhere,” said Horn. “And then surround the child with a variety of novel supports that are customized to what that child needs, what the family needs, and unleashes all sorts of things.”
Blending new technologies with the personalization and flexibility of microschooling and homeschooling will continue to disrupt the education sector and turn alternative learning models into mainstream options for many more families.
Kerry McDonald is a Senior Education Fellow at FEE and host of the weekly LiberatED podcast. She is also the author of Unschooled: Raising Curious, Well-Educated Children Outside the Conventional Classroom (Chicago Review Press, 2019), an adjunct scholar at the Cato Institute, and a regular Forbes contributor. Kerry has a B.A. in economics from Bowdoin College and an M.Ed. in education policy from Harvard University. She lives in Cambridge, Massachusetts with her husband and four children. You can sign up for her weekly newsletter on parenting and education here.
Listen to the weekly LiberatED Podcast on Apple, Spotify, Google, and Stitcher, or watch it on YouTube, and sign up for Kerry’s weekly LiberatED email newsletter to stay up-to-date on educational news and trends from a free-market perspective.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Foundation for Economic Education (FEE)http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngFoundation for Economic Education (FEE)2022-08-20 08:16:472022-08-20 08:17:58How Disruptive Innovation Is Accelerating the Growth of Alternative Learning Models
Another 199,976 economic migrants arrived at the southern border in July, ensuring President Joe Biden’s 2022 migration exceeds the total 2021 numbers, even though August and September numbers have yet to be added.
The government tracks the migrant arrival and inflow data by its “Fiscal Year” calendar, which starts October 1 and ends September 30. The total 2022 number will be known once the August and September numbers are counted.
In all 12 months of fiscal 2021, officials counted 1,734,686 migrants at the border and allowed 671,160 into the United States via various border-law loopholes.
But in the first 10 months of fiscal 2022, border officials have counted 1,946,780 migrants at the border and allowed 1,012,378 economic migrants to seek homes and jobs throughout the United States.
This July, Biden’s deputies admitted 125,403 of the 199,976 arriving migrants. The 2022 admission numbers show a 50 percent jump over 2021, with two months to go.
The numbers are flawed. For example, the numbers counted at the border are inflated when rejected migrants repeatedly try to sneak across the border.
But the bigger problem is that the government numbers hide the huge inflow of “got-aways” — people who sneak past the few patrol agents and the incomplete border wall along the border. Insiders within the border agencies say the agencies count roughly 40,000 got-aways each month or roughly 500,000 per year….
If genuine freedom is the goal, rhetoric about liberty won’t be enough.
If you ask the average American what they think about “freedom” or “liberty,” chances are you’ll get a positive response. A love of liberty is built into the cultural fabric of America, and this is especially evident when we compare the US to the rest of the world.
But for a country that prides itself on being the “land of the free,” there are a few things that seem, well, off. America has the world’s highest per capita prison population, for instance. It also has a fair number of economic regulations that interfere with the free market.
This begs the question, if Americans are so passionate about freedom, why does America leave so much to be desired on this front?
The answer, I believe, is that there are two ways of understanding freedom. There is the freedom brand and there is the freedom philosophy. For most Americans, what they really like is the freedom brand. It’s the general idea of freedom that they’re really into. There’s nothing wrong with this, of course, but it’s not the same as being into the freedom philosophy.
To understand this distinction, let’s look at four key differences between these two conceptions of freedom.
1) Principles vs. Preferences
The biggest difference between the freedom brand and the freedom philosophy is that the brand is not rigorously principled the way the philosophy is. For the brand, as long as you agree with a few basic ideas like free speech and free and fair elections, the rest of politics can be a matter of personal preference.
For the philosophy, however, freedom is all about consistently upholding the principles of liberty in every domain regardless of personal preference. On the economic front, this means removing government regulations and trade barriers so people are free to do business as they see fit. On the social front, this means allowing people to make their own decisions about lifestyle choices.
Even unpopular practices and choices should be tolerated according to the freedom philosophy. After all, the reasoning goes, a freedom that is confined to what others deem acceptable is really no freedom at all.
2) What We’re Against vs. What We’re For
Another difference is that the freedom brand tends to define itself by what it’s against, whereas the freedom philosophy tends to focus on what it’s for.
Defenders of the freedom brand spend much of their time denouncing repressive political systems like communism and totalitarianism. In extreme cases, this can lead to movements like Red Scares and McCarthyism. There is a lot of focus on authoritarian countries such as Russia, China, and North Korea, and a strong desire to be “not like them.”
The freedom philosophy does not find this approach wrong so much as incomplete. Yes, authoritarian countries are bad, but for freedom philosophy adherents, it is not enough to merely condemn authoritarian actions. An equal if not greater focus should be placed on the positive vision of a free society, a vision of pluralism, tolerance, free markets, and free expression.
It is not enough to merely identify what we want to move away from. We also need to describe what we want to move toward. Martin Luther King Jr.’s famous “I have a dream” speech is a great example of this. He didn’t just express frustration at the problems he saw. He painted a picture of a brighter future.
3) Slogans vs. Substance
The freedom brand tends to live in popular slogans and refrains. “Land of the free, home of the brave.” “Don’t tread on me.” “I’m proud to be an American, where at least I know I’m free.” “Come and take it.”
These slogans are popular for a reason. They express a deep passion and appreciation for freedom. And again, there’s nothing wrong with that. But slogans do not make a philosophy.
The key to the freedom philosophy is not so much the slogans but the substance behind them. “Land of the free, home of the brave” is a nice sentiment, but if it’s not coupled with a robust understanding of what freedom really means and why it’s important, the words can be somewhat empty.
The freedom philosophy is so much more than a slogan. It’s about ethics and personal responsibility. It’s about self-improvement and creating value for others. It’s about seeing people as unique individuals and recognizing the tremendous benefits of free markets.
This is what makes the freedom philosophy so different from the brand. It’s not just about nice-sounding phrases. It’s about practical, well-reasoned ideas.
4) Recreating the Past vs. Building the Future
Another distinction between the freedom brand and the freedom philosophy is that the brand tends to focus on recovering the past, whereas the philosophy focuses on building something new in the future.
To be sure, there are liberties Americans used to enjoy in the past that no longer exist, and it’s a worthy goal to reclaim these. But if we are merely pining for the good old days, we are adopting the mentality of the freedom brand.
The freedom philosophy has a bolder vision. It’s not just about regaining the freedoms we used to have. It’s about expanding those freedoms farther than they’ve ever been expanded. It’s not just about recovering something we’ve lost. It’s about creating something even better that we’ve never really had.
Practicing What We Preach
America is flooded with rhetoric about liberty. The freedom brand is everywhere. But while the brand is alive and well, actual liberty seems to be shrinking by the day.
If we want to reverse course, giving lip service to liberty won’t be enough. To truly turn this ship around, we need to understand the principles of a free society and start putting them into practice.
Achieving liberty is possible, but it won’t come from a brand. It will only come when we learn the freedom philosophy and resolve to live it out.
Patrick Carroll has a degree in Chemical Engineering from the University of Waterloo and is an Editorial Fellow at the Foundation for Economic Education.
This article was adapted from an issue of the FEE Daily email newsletter. Click here to sign up and get free-market news and analysis like this in your inbox every weekday.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Foundation for Economic Education (FEE)http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngFoundation for Economic Education (FEE)2022-08-20 07:33:582022-08-20 07:38:524 Differences between the Freedom Brand and the Freedom Philosophy
It’s outrageous enough that female college students were secretly filmed in a locker room. But the footage was posted to XHamster and Pornhub.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The National Center on Sexual Exploitation (NCOSE) has joined as co-counsel in a lawsuit (Does 1-9 v. Murphy et al) against XHamster and MindGeek filed on behalf of 9 women who were secretly filmed while changing in a college locker room for a field hockey game, and the footage of which was then uploaded to XHamster and Pornhub.
The plaintiffs, Jane Does 1-9, are young women who were allegedly filmed by Collins Murphy, the intramural/summer conference director of Limestone College, Gaffney, S.C., who placed a hidden “spy camera” in a locker room at Limestone College and secretly filmed the women in all stages of undress, and then uploaded the video footage to XHamster and Pornhub. The women were visiting Limestone College to play a field hockey game on behalf of Bellarmine University, Louisville, Ky. At least one of the videos was shared by a “verified” Modelhub member on Pornhub.
“It is reprehensible that these women’s privacy was violated by the secret recording, but this was made even worse when the footage was uploaded to XHamster and Pornhub, both of which then profited from their abuse. These women deserve every ounce of justice for their abuse and exploitation, and for the egregious violation of privacy,” said Dani Pinter, senior legal counsel for the National Center on Sexual Exploitation.
“XHamster and Pornhub took no action to verify the age or consent of the women in the videos, which were labeled as ‘spy cam’ and ‘hidden cam’ videos. On Pornhub, at least one of the videos was uploaded by a ‘verified’ Modelhub member who did not even appear in the videos. This reveals Pornhub’s verification process for what it is: a sham. ‘Spy cam,’ ‘Hidden cam,’ and ‘Voyeur’ are extremely popular genres and were official categories and tags on XHamster and Pornhub. Both platforms capitalized on these categories of videos which eroticized violating women’s privacy. But pornography tube sites like XHamster and Pornhub have no financial incentive to remove potentially illegal material, so they don’t. For the sake of victims of image-based sexual abuse, it is time for XHamster and Pornhub to be held accountable,” Pinter added.
The National Center on Sexual Exploitation Law Center joins the Bell Legal Group, LLC, and Dolt, Thompson, Shepherd & Conway, PSC, as co-counsel for the plaintiffs.
NCOSE is co-counsel on a class action lawsuit filed on behalf of two survivors of childhood sex trafficking whose videos and images of their abuse were posted on Pornhub and other MindGeek-owned sites. In February 2022, the judge ruled against MindGeek’s motion to dismiss, enabling the lawsuit to move forward. NCOSE also is co-counsel on a lawsuit against XVideos brought by a survivor of child sexual abuse.
The National Center on Sexual Exploitation Law Center offers survivors a way to seek justice. More information can be found at: https://sexualexploitationlawsuits.com/.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00National Center on Sexual Exploitationhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngNational Center on Sexual Exploitation2022-08-20 07:23:032022-08-20 07:23:50Female College Students Secretly Filmed in Locker Room — Footage Posted on XHamster and Pornhub
A majority of Americans say President Biden is allowing a southern border invasion, according to a poll commissioned by taxpayer-supported, left-wing propaganda outlet National Public Radio (NPR).
Fifty-four percent of all respondents believe the term “invasion” is valid; that includes 76 percent of Republicans, 46 percent of independents, and even 40 percent of Democrats.
A mere 19 percent of all respondents — less than one in five — said the term is false.
The open-borders fanatics at NPR lamented the results from Ipsos, the polling firm, saying:
Republican leaders are increasingly framing the situation as an “invasion.” Immigrant advocates say the word has a long history in white nationalist circles, and warn that such extreme rhetoric could provoke more violence against immigrants.
Still, the polling shows that the word “invasion” has been embraced by a wide range of Americans to describe what’s happening at the border
“We are not actually screening enough people to make it safe for the rest of the country,” said poll respondent Michael Cisternino, a Republican from Nevada, in a follow-up interview. “We, the people of the United States, really don’t have control over who’s coming in, and where they’re going or what they’re going to do when they get there — if they’re criminals, if they’re not criminals.”
The Left always tries to smear any opposition to their agenda as “white nationalist,” but in fact there is a literal invasion at our southern border, and the Democrats have invited it. This is not “extreme rhetoric” but a demonstrably valid description of the border crisis.
The Ipsos poll may even have understated the public’s view of Biden’s migration as an “invasion,” because many respondents claimed ignorance or hid their views. For example, 36 percent of independents and 25 percent of Democrats said they “Don’t know” when asked about the term “invasion.”
NPR is a radio landscape crowded with liberal and leftist voices but nearly devoid of conservative hosts and anchors. In one of its most infamous moves, NPR in May 1994 announced its plan to air prison-life commentaries by convicted cop-killer (and former Black Panther) Mumia Abu-Jamal, a cause celebre of the academic left. Public outcry prompted cancellation of Abu-Jamal’s program.
Over the course of NPR’s history, some of its broadcasts have made big headlines with their incendiary anti-conservative rhetoric. In July 1995, for instance, after Republican Senator Jesse Helms had stated that the federal government was spending too much money on AIDS research, NPR’s legal-affairs correspondent Nina Totenberg said: “I think he [Helms] ought to be worried about what’s going on in the Good Lord’s mind, because if there is retributive justice, he’ll get AIDS from a transfusion, or one of his grandchildren will get it.”
In November 2009, the NPR website featured an animated video disparaging the Tea Party movement by teaching readers how “to speak Tea Bag.”
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Discover The Networkshttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDiscover The Networks2022-08-20 07:04:532022-08-20 07:07:14NPR Poll: 54% of Americans Agree Border Crisis an ‘Invasion’
The documentary “Uninformed Consent” takes a deep dive into the COVID-19 narrative — who’s controlling it and how fear was used to push novel, unproven gene transfer technology onto, and into, people of all ages
Weaving in and out of the heart-wrenching story of one man’s loss, interviews with doctors and scientists explore the loss of human rights in the name of biosecurity, and how the “elite class” profit from it all
“Divide and conquer” — creating division among people — is an age-old war strategy. During Hitler’s reign, anti-Semitism was normalized through propaganda in which Jews were likened to “lice” and were accused of carrying infectious disease. The same tactic was used during the COVID pandemic
The personal story that is returned to again and again throughout the film is that of a grieving husband, whose wife committed suicide. She suffered relentless bullying and harassment from coworkers and superiors for refusing the jab, and when she was finally placed on unpaid leave, she took her own life
The film reviews the medical establishment’s wholesale abandonment of the Hippocratic Oath, the lawless culture of the drug industry and its capture of regulatory agencies and media, the history of informed consent and why coercion and mandates violate this basic public health principle, vaccine injuries and vaccine-injury denialism, the behind-the-scenes corruption that led to the suppression of science and early treatment, and more
The documentary above, “Uninformed Consent,”1,2,3 takes a deep dive into the COVID-19 narrative — who’s controlling it and how fear was (and continues to be) used to push novel, unproven gene transfer technology onto, and into, people of all ages, and the simultaneous theft of private wealth and the destruction of small businesses, across the globe.
The film is written and directed by Todd Michael Harris (Matador Films). Odessa Orlewicz, a pro-freedom activist in British Columbia and founder of the Canadian social media platform Librti, and Ted Kuntz, retired psychotherapist and president of Vaccine Choice Canada, co-produced the film.
Weaving in and out of the heart-wrenching story of one man’s loss, interviews with doctors and scientists explores the loss of human rights in the name of biosecurity, and how the “elite class” profit from it all.
Interspersed are compilations of media lies and the bewilderingly contradictory dictates of government officials, as well as footage from protests and examples of people collapsing on live television after getting the jab.
The COVID jabs are a crime against humanity, and it’s a crime in progress. For many who are aware of what’s going on, everyday reality is like watching an intentional, slow-motion train wreck.
Divide and Conquer
As noted by B.C. physician Dr. Stephen Malthouse, who is interviewed in the film, “divide and conquer” is an age-old war strategy. During Hitler’s reign, anti-Semitism was normalized through propaganda in which Jews were likened to “lice,” and were accused of carrying typhus. The same exact strategy was used during the COVID pandemic.
Irrational hatred against anti-maskers, “anti-lockdowners” and “anti-vaxxers” was relentlessly fueled and “normalized” by government officials, health authorities and media, right from the start.
Those who dutifully wore their face masks and got the jab were hailed as good and moral citizens, while the rest were labeled as murderous, disease-carrying, amoral egotists, who’d by their selfishness forfeited their right to life.
Family members were pitted against family members. Friends against friends. Coworkers against coworkers. Employers against employees. Most of us who opted out of this grand genetic experiment have been shunned and berated by people we love.
Adding insult to injury, we all paid for this abuse. Billions of taxpayer dollars were spent on propaganda, anti-vax harassment and pro-vax advertising. The pain of this intentional divide and conquer strategy was too great to bear for many.
Bullied to Death
The personal story that Harris returns to again and again throughout the film is that of a grieving husband whose wife committed suicide. She suffered relentless bullying and harassment from coworkers and superiors for refusing the jab, and when she was finally placed on unpaid leave, she took her own life.
How many suicides are the pandemic puppet masters and their brainwashed minions responsible for? Nobody knows, but it’s likely quite a few. And make no mistake: The hateful rhetoric fed into everyone’s brains and acted out by the weak-minded was intended to cause harm.
It was intended to cause distress, and many now carry the cross of having bullied someone to death, whether they’re aware of it or not. Sadly, many have not yet learned their lesson, and efforts to demonize certain groups continues. Now, the targeted opposition are those who ask questions that Big Pharma and government refuse to answer, or point out blatant contradictions in the narrative.
Most ‘Conspiracy Theories’ Are Conspiracy Facts
Terms like “conspiracy theorist” and “conspiracy theory” are applied to everything and everyone who questions the official and clearly ridiculous narrative. And, the demonization continues even as so-called “conspiracies” are repeatedly shown to be true.
For example, the suspicion that we’d be forced to take these gene therapy shots multiple times a year, for years on end, was labeled a “conspiracy theory,” yet it didn’t take long before boosters were rolled out, and now they’re coming out with shots for newer variants as well, which will result in another round of shots.
Similarly, “conspiracy theorists” warned that people who got the jab would have to continue getting boosters or lose their precious “fully vaccinated” status, and that’s exactly what happened.
In fact, the concept of vaccine passports being used to shut people out of everyday society was initially dismissed as a paranoid conspiracy theory, yet it didn’t take long before governments were doing exactly that.
“Conspiracy theorists” also warned that the COVID jab didn’t prevent infection or spread, and that too is now an indisputable fact. As of early February 2022, Israel reported that 80% of serious COVID cases were among the fully vaccinated.4
“Conspiracy theorists” warned that giving the experimental shot to teens and young children would be unconscionably dangerous, as they have a negligible risk for COVID complications, and now even mainstream media from time to time admit that teens and young adults are suffering above normal rates of heart inflammation.
Between January 2021 and August 2022 (a period of 19 months), at least 1,249 athletes have suffered cardiac arrest or collapse, and 847 have died after COVID injection, worldwide.5 Historically, the annual average of sudden death in athletes was between 296 and 69.7
Pandemic Responses Scrutinized
“Uninformed Consent” scrutinizes many of the elements of the pandemic response, such as the irrational idea that early treatment for COVID-19 is nonexistent and/or futile, and the equally irrational idea that the only solution is to inject everyone on the planet with an experimental product, without regard for individual levels of risk.
In interviews with doctors and scientists — such as Dr. Robert Malone, Dr. Peter McCullough, B.C. family physicians Dr. Stephen Malthouse and Dr. Charles Hoffe, Dr. Tess Laurie and government drug policy researcher Alan Cassels — Harris shines a bright light on the medical establishment’s sudden wholesale abandonment of the Hippocratic Oath.
He also looks at the lawless culture of the drug industry and its capture of regulatory agencies and media — a development that has effectively eliminated any protection the public would have had, and should have, from predatory behavior and dangerous products. Harris also reviews:
The history of informed consent and why coercion and mandates violate this most basic and essential public health principle.
Injuries from the COVID jab and other childhood vaccines, and the history of vaccine-injury denialism.
The corrupted individuals, organizations and networks behind the pandemic measures, including the central roles of Dr. Anthony Fauci and Bill Gates in the suppression of science and life-saving treatments.
The massive conflicts of interest between Big Pharma, the agencies that regulate them and politicians who create our laws.
The collusion between private entities and governments to bring forth global totalitarianism under the banner of biosecurity.
I hope you’ll take the time to watch “Uninformed Consent,” and share it with others. Harris specifically tried, he says, to create a film that would help open the eyes and minds of those who still cannot see what’s happening, or don’t fully believe what they’re seeing.
Resources for Those Injured by the COVID Jabs
To close things out with something that is not covered in this film, if you for whatever reason got one or more jabs and suffered an injury, know there are good doctors and scientists working on solutions.
First and foremost, never ever take another COVID booster, another mRNA gene therapy shot or regular vaccine. You need to end the assault on your system. The same goes for anyone who has taken one or more COVID jabs and had the good fortune of not experiencing debilitating side effects.
Your health may still be impacted long-term, so don’t take any more shots. When it comes to treatment, there still aren’t many doctors who know what to do, although I suspect we’ll see more doctors specializing in COVID jab injuries in the future.
Doctors who have started tackling the treatment of COVID jab injuries in earnest include Dr. Michelle Perro (DrMichellePerro.com), whom I’ve interviewed on this topic. Perro is a pediatrician who over the past couple of years has also started treating adults injured by the jab. Another is Dr. Pierre Kory (DrPierreKory.com).
Both agree that eliminating the spike protein your body is now continuously producing is a primary task. Perro’s preferred remedy for this is hydroxychloroquine, while Kory typically uses ivermectin. Both of these drugs bind and thereby facilitate the removal of spike protein.
Kory also believes there may be ways to boost the immune system to allow it to degrade and eventually remove the spike from your cells naturally, over time. One of the strategies he recommends for this is TRE (time restricted eating), which stimulates autophagy, a natural cleaning process that eliminates damaged, misfolded and toxic proteins. Another strategy that can do the same thing would be sauna therapy.
As a member of the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC), Kory helped develop the FLCCC’s post-vaccine treatment protocol called I-RECOVER. Since the protocol is continuously updated as more data becomes available, your best bet is to download the latest version straight from the FLCCC website at covid19criticalcare.com8 (hyperlink to the correct page provided above).
Other Helpful Treatments and Remedies
In previous articles, I’ve also covered a number of treatments and remedies that can be helpful for COVID jab injuries, such as:
Pharmaceutical grade methylene blue, which improves 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.
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. To learn more, see “The Surprising Health Benefits of Methylene Blue.”
Near-infrared light, as it triggers production of melatonin in your mitochondria9 where you need it most. By mopping up reactive oxygen species, it too helps improve mitochondrial function and repair. Natural sunlight is 54.3% infrared radiation,10 so this treatment is available for free. For more information, see “What You Need to Know About Melatonin.”
Seattle’s leaders have decided this is a perfect time to go even softer on crime. Fatal shootings may be at a record pace, and a lot of officers may have resigned after the city defunded the police but, hey, it’s a perfect time to give dangerous juvenile and adult offenders who steal cars, sell drugs, and take guns to school a chance to stay out of jail. Why? Because the criminal justice system is racist, homophobic, and transphobic, you see. So the city figures it will be better to divert these cases out of the criminal justice system entirely and put them in front of a panel of left-wing activists who will show ‘understanding’ and ‘compassion’ and decide how, if at all, to hold the offenders accountable – kumbaya. I can’t wait for the first time one of those activists gets mugged. We’ll see what they think then.
Seattle’s leaders aren’t the only ones who have lost their minds. Another Democrat, John Fetterman, Senate candidate in Pennsylvania, wants to let one-third of the people in prison out on the streets because, he says, everyone will be safer or better off that way. Sure. Two Democrats running for Congress in Colorado voted while in the state legislature to reduce the penalty for felony murder at the same time the homicide rate was spiking in Denver. They also voted to lower the penalty for the possession of fentanyl and other hard drugs, and now opioid overdose deaths in the state are up 54 percent. Way to go, Democrats!
Being soft on crime has other real consequences. Starbucks closed 16 stores because, in the words of its CEO, “America has become unsafe.” “Many more” store closures are coming, he said. The Chicago Bears want to leave Chicago for the suburbs because of high crime in the city, despite being offered $2.2 billion in incentives to stay. Chicago police are making fewer arrests in response to the increased level of dangerousness and the Woke vilification of their efforts. Woke vilification is also a factor in police officers leaving the force faster than they can be replaced in other Democrat-run cities – Portland, Philadelphia, and L.A. – as well as New York City where suspects let out under the state’s no-bail law are often quickly rearrested. That law has emboldened criminals in the Big Apple, with over $2 million in jewelry being taken in one recent smash-and-grab heist. The no-bail law was adjusted this year to allow judges to consider repeat offenses in setting bail for some crimes. New York City Mayor Eric Adams wants further reforms in cases where public safety is involved, but the state’s Governor is against it.
It’s time for your quiz. How many times did I say the word ‘Democrat’ in today’s commentary? What is it about Democrats and being soft on crime? You might think from the information I’ve given you today that Democrats would come to their senses and strike a more appropriate balance between public safety and the rights of the accused. You might also think Democrat politicians don’t know what they’re doing when it comes to crime. I humbly submit to you they actually do know what they’re doing. They know exactly what they’re doing. They’re pandering to constituencies that, at least for the moment, are in the thrall of being Woke. For Democrat politicians, it’s all about staying in power, no matter how many people get hurt or how many businesses leave. Better King and Queen of a garbage dump than not being royalty at all. It’s despicable, but there it is.
Moral of the Story: If you want crime to go up, vote Democrat. It surely will, as night follows day.
Americans believe in equal justice under the law. They are against justice by political justification, i.e. using government to attack one’s political opponents or cultural and religious institutions that disagree with or are in conflict with public policies.
We are now in the age of Justice created by Justification.
We are living in a unique time when the lawless are idolized and the law abiding are criminalized. Where government mandates trump the law. Where federal agencies are used to attack political opponents.
We are witnessing growing lawlessness on the part of criminals, be they political officials, drug cartels or individual convicted felons like George Floyd, across America.
Rather than arresting those who enter America illegally the current Department of Homeland Security is more likely to reward them with government benefits, free transportation, free education and free healthcare.
Rather than punishing those who riot, burn down buildings and create mayhem the government is more likely to arrest and bring to trial those who protect property from these marauders, like Kyle Rittenhouse.
Today a parent who questions what their children are taught is more likely to be arrested than a murderer.
Today perverts, pedophiles and pederasts are given a get out of jail free pass, while those who speak out against sodomy, underaged sex trafficking and gender change surgeries are persecuted, called homophobic and even arrested and prosecuted.
“EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW”-These words, written above the main entrance to the Supreme Court Building, express the ultimate responsibility of the Supreme Court of the United States. The Court is the highest tribunal in the Nation for all cases and controversies arising under the Constitution or the laws of the United States. As the final arbiter of the law, the Court is charged with ensuring the American people the promise of equal justice under law and, thereby, also functions as guardian and interpreter of the Constitution.
Today, justices of the Supreme Court are ridiculed, chastised and even attacked for following equal justice under the law. Just look at the attacks caused by the overturning of Roe v Wade to understand.
Here’s a perfect example of justice by justification from the mouth of Democrat Senator Elizabeth Warren who wants justice by justification for pot users and blacks. She uses rhetoric to call bankers, whites, Hispanics and Asians evil doers who must be brought to justice, but who’s justice?
Senator Warren doesn’t understand the ideal of equal justice under the law. Watch Steve Hilton’s take on Americans and how they must believe we all have equal justice under law,
Government Expansion in 2022 is 1984 Esque
We are seeing a massive expansion of government in Washington, D.C.
Federal agencies, like the Internal Revenue Service gaining 87,000 agents, while other federal agencies, like the Department of Homeland Security, are cutting back in personnel and being hamstrung in doing their sworn duties.
The Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states that no state shall “deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
This also applies to the Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches of our government. For without equal protection under the laws there is no protection at all.
Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. said, “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.”
Dr. King also said that he wanted his children to be “judged by the content of their character and not by the color of their skins.”
Today if you are white you’ll be judged solely by your skin color.
We firmly believe that justice created by justification is a threat to equal justice under the law everywhere.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Dr. Rich Swierhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDr. Rich Swier2022-08-19 10:42:062022-08-21 14:49:48VIDEOS: Americans Believe in Justice which Justifies not Justice created by Justification
The Climate Intelligence CLINTEL.com website states:
Climate science should be less political, while climate policies should be more scientific. In particular, scientists should emphasize that their modeling output is not the result of magic: computer models are human-made. What comes out is fully dependent on what theoreticians and programmers have put in: hypotheses, assumptions, relationships, parameterizations, stability constraints, etc. Unfortunately, in mainstream climate science most of this input is undeclared.
To believe the outcome of a climate model is to believe what the model makers have put in. This is precisely the problem of today’s climate discussion to which climate models are central. Climate science has degenerated into a discussion based on beliefs, not on sound self-critical science. We should free ourselves from the naïve belief in immature climate models. In future, climate research must give significantly more emphasis to empirical science.
There is no climate emergency
A global network of over 1100 scientists and professionals has prepared this urgent message. Climate science should be less political, while climate policies should be more scientific. Scientists should openly address uncertainties and exaggerations in their predictions of global warming, while politicians should dispassionately count the real costs as well as the imagined benefits of their policy measures.
Natural as well as anthropogenic factors cause warming
The geological archive reveals that Earth’s climate has varied as long as the planet has existed, with natural cold and warm phases. The Little Ice Age ended as recently as 1850. Therefore, it is no surprise that we now are experiencing a period of warming.
Warming is far slower than predicted
The world has warmed significantly less than predicted by IPCC on the basis of modeled anthropogenic forcing. The gap between the real world and the modeled world tells us that we are far from understanding climate change.
Climate policy relies on inadequate models
Climate models have many shortcomings and are not remotely plausible as global policy tools. They blow up the effect of greenhouse gases such as CO2. In addition, they ignore the fact that enriching the atmosphere with CO2 is beneficial.
CO2 is plant food, the basis of all life on Earth
CO2 is not a pollutant. It is essential to all life on Earth. Photosynthesis is a blessing. More CO2 is beneficial for nature, greening the Earth: additional CO2 in the air has promoted growth in global plant biomass. It is also good for agriculture, increasing the yields of crops worldwide.
Global warming has not increased natural disasters
There is no statistical evidence that global warming is intensifying hurricanes, floods, droughts and suchlike natural disasters, or making them more frequent. However, there is ample evidence that CO2-mitigation measures are as damaging as they are costly.
Climate policy must respect scientific and economic realities
There is no climate emergency. Therefore, there is no cause for panic and alarm. We strongly oppose the harmful and unrealistic net-zero CO2 policy proposed for 2050. If better approaches emerge, and they certainly will, we have ample time to reflect and re-adapt. The aim of global policy should be ‘prosperity for all’ by providing reliable and affordable energy at all times. In a prosperous society men and women are well educated, birthrates are low and people care about their environment.
Epilogue
The World Climate Declaration (WCD) has brought a large variety of competent scientists together from all over the world*. The considerable knowledge and experience of this group is indispensable in reaching a balanced, dispassionate and competent view of climate change.
From now onward the group is going to function as “Global Climate Intelligence Group”. The CLINTEL Group will give solicited and unsolicited advice on climate change and energy transition to governments and companies worldwide.
* It is not the number of experts but the quality of arguments that counts.
NOBEL LAUREATE PROFESSOR IVAR GIAEVER NORWAY/USA
PROFESSOR GUUS BERKHOUT / THE NETHERLANDS
DR. CORNELIS LE PAIR / THE NETHERLANDS
PROFESSOR REYNALD DU BERGER / FRENCH SPEAKING CANADA
BARRY BRILL / NEW ZEALAND
VIV FORBES / AUSTRALIA
PROFESSOR JEFFREY FOSS † / ENGLISH SPEAKING CANADA
JENS MORTON HANSEN / DENMARK
PROFESSOR LÁSZIÓ SZARKA / HUNGARY
PROFESSOR SEOK SOON PARK / SOUTH KOREA
PROFESSOR JAN-ERIK SOLHEIM / NORWAY
SOTIRIS KAMENOPOULOS / GREECE
FERDINAND MEEUS / DUTCH SPEAKING BELGIUM
PROFESSOR RICHARD LINDZEN / USA
HENRI A. MASSON / FRENCH SPEAKING BELGIUM
PROFESSOR INGEMAR NORDIN / SWEDEN
JIM O’BRIEN / REPUBLIC OF IRELAND
PROFESSOR IAN PLIMER / AUSTRALIA
DOUGLAS POLLOCK / CHILE
DR. BLANCA PARGA LANDA / SPAIN
PROFESSOR ALBERTO PRESTININZI / ITALY
PROFESSOR BENOÎT RITTAUD / FRANCE
DR. THIAGO MAIA / BRAZIL
PROFESSOR FRITZ VAHRENHOLT / GERMANY
THE VISCOUNT MONCKTON OF BRENCHLEY / UNITED KINGDOM
DUŠAN BIŽIĆ / CROATIA, BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA, SERBIA AND MONTE NEGRO
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Dr. Rich Swierhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDr. Rich Swier2022-08-19 09:45:392022-08-22 06:16:08WORLD CLIMATE DELCARATION: There Is No Climate Emergency!
A recent scenario at the Ford Motor Company is the perfect way to explain what Democrats are doing to this country when they pass bills for our “benefit.” On August 9, Senate Democrats passed a bill they praised, which included a $7,500 federal electric vehicle tax credit.
Shortly after, Ford raised the price of its electric car. By how much? $7,000. What a coincidence. “The base model of the 2023 F-150 Lightning pickup will now cost $47,000, up from it’s original price of $40,000, according to CNN.”
Daily Caller News Foundation reports ”More expensive models, such as the XLT High/Extended Range and the Lariat Extended Range have increased in price by $8,500, while other F-150 Lightning designs vary between $6,000 to $7,000 in price increases, according to the Detroit Free Press.”
The price change was attributed to “significant material cost increases and other factors,” CNN noted. Despite the changes, the increase will not impact those currently waiting for delivery of their vehicles, but impacts those who have reserved but not yet ordered the truck, CNBC reported.
But don’t just blame Ford for being forced to dance with the Democrats. General Motors also just announced it will increase the price of its electric model of the GMC Hummer. The cost will go up by $6,250, CNN reported.
A recent scenario at the Ford Motor Company is the perfect way to explain what Democrats are doing to this country when they pass bills for our “benefit.” On August 9, Senate Democrats passed a bill they praised, which included a $7,500 federal electric vehicle tax credit.
Shortly after, Ford raised the price of its electric car. By how much? $7,000. What a coincidence. “The base model of the 2023 F-150 Lightning pickup will now cost $47,000, up from it’s original price of $40,000, according to CNN.”
Daily Caller News Foundation reports ”More expensive models, such as the XLT High/Extended Range and the Lariat Extended Range have increased in price by $8,500, while other F-150 Lightning designs vary between $6,000 to $7,000 in price increases, according to the Detroit Free Press.”
The price change was attributed to “significant material cost increases and other factors,” CNN noted. Despite the changes, the increase will not impact those currently waiting for delivery of their vehicles, but impacts those who have reserved but not yet ordered the truck, CNBC reported.
But don’t just blame Ford for being forced to dance with the Democrats. General Motors also just announced it will increase the price of its electric model of the GMC Hummer. The cost will go up by $6,250, CNN reported.
The Daily Caller adds:
With eligibility and tax credit rules preparing to change under new legislation, including the passage of the Inflation Reduction Act, certain modules of the vehicle may qualify for the credit this year, according to Consumer Reports. It is unclear if the truck will be eligible in the future, according to CNN.
The electric trucks only have a range of 230 to 320 miles depending on the model, a moderate increase of 10 miles to the company’s standard battery, CNBC continued.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Geller Reporthttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Geller Report2022-08-19 09:25:182022-08-21 05:34:51Democrats Passed $7,500 Electric Vehicle Tax Credit, Then EV Prices Were Immediately Raised $7,500
The U.S. Congress is composed of 100 members of the US Senate and 435 members of the US House of Representatives, called ‘The People’s House’ (seriously, when was the last time “the people” actually had any voice in THAT House?). For the remainder of this article, and for the sake of clarity, all the members of the Senate and the House will be called “the 535”
When people in positions of trust and authority try to cover their own bad behavior and deliberately ignore the bad behavior of their colleagues, and worse, try to cover them up, you must be aware there is a problem. We have witnessed this in the U.S. Congress for many decades and privately wondered why this is allowed to happen, yet it continues to happen from year to year without being addressed in any way. It is a complete impossibility for those who use their eyes and ears, with their brains hopefully engaged, to deny this is a serious problem in the US.
Based on the constitutional description of their duties, have the 535 now made the entire U.S. Congress irrelevant? You decide.
These 535 people who sit in their padded chairs, who have bloated salaries and budgets and huge numbers of staff to “assist” them (doing what?), who are provided “armed security” (from what?), who fly from coast to coast, indeed around the world on OUR dime, have totally lost touch with, not only their constituents (remember them?), but with reality itself and have separated themselves from the American people in so many ways it’s nearly impossible to enumerate them. But let me give it a shot.
Separation from Constituents (remember them?)
They are paid $174,000 per year, compared to approximately $54,000 which is the average salary of a working class American, including their constituents (remember them?) in 2022.
They are provided (I should say they voted themselves) much better ‘benefits’ than the average American, including their constituents (remember them?), both in pensions and insurance, once again from the public treasury.
They are given exemptions from many of the ‘mandates’ that average Americans are required to accept.
They are (seemingly) not required to justify, to anyone, why they voted a certain way on any issue in their day to day work as “representatives” of their constituents (once again, remember them?), compared to the average American who must continually explain his actions to his employer when the expectations of his or her job are not met and the end result is usually termination of employment.
Unlike a majority of their constituents (remember them?), they are not required to go through a yearly “job review” in order to continue with employment, which would almost certainly result in THEIR termination based on poor job performance.
They introduce bills that may result in additional laws being written and signed into law requiring their constituents (remember them?) to obey these laws, while the 535 seem to be exempt from them most of the time. In addition, their constituents (remember them?) are almost never allowed any input into the bill-introduction process.
They are privy to “insider information” that allows them to make stock purchases and sales that brings them huge returns on investment, and indeed will render them millionaires during their time as “representatives of their constituents’ (remember them?), while their constituents must rely on the sometimes fake information given to the public and hope and pray they will not lose their life savings to a crooked and corrupt stock market.
Separation From Reality
The 535 placed their hands on The Holy Bible (remember it?) and swore an oath before Almighty God, to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God (Oh, remember him?).
It now appears that their oaths should be amended to say they swear to “support and defend their party agenda”, regardless of whether said agenda violates the Constitution, and will “bear true faith and allegiance to their party agenda”, and that they will discharge the “duties of their office”, which duties seem to have no connection to the Constitution but rather to the enrichment of themselves and their party, along with further consolidating their power over the people.
The 535 now seem to believe that their constituents (remember them?) exist only to pay the taxes levied by the Congress so that the 535 can continue in their lavish lifestyles, eating super-expensive ‘gourmet’ ice cream and jetting around the world, increasing their personal wealth from covert, and likely illegal, deals made with officials from foreign governments and corporations. While the eating and jetting are commencing, their constituents (remember them?) are trying to come up with additional ways, up to and including taking on extra jobs, to keep themselves and their children fed and clothed.
The Bloated US Debt
Setting the spending of the US government, and making sure that the financial security of the United States government is intact, is the duty of the members of the US House of ‘Representatives’ (do we truly still have those?).
It has been said that debt is bondage, and a majority of Americans experience that bondage daily, and while the AVERAGE American and the constituents (remember them?) of the 535 are living week to week, sometimes day to day, and maxing out credit cards to survive, the 535 seem to spend an inordinate amount of THEIR time, funded by the American taxpayers and their constituents (remember them?), eagerly searching for additional ways to borrow and spend even more money on ridiculous and worthless ideas, adding trillions of dollars to our current debt (and, by the way, millions of dollars to their personal wealth).
While most Americans try to live by a balanced budget (an increasingly impossible task), balancing their incomes with their expenditures, the 535 have not submitted to, or received from, a POTUS, a balanced budget since 2001 (seriously?) and the last time the federal government budget displayed a surplus was in the 1920s (again, seriously?).
If true that the last balanced budget was in 2001, could that have necessitated the instigation of a costly (in excess of $2 trillion) and questionable war, lasting more than twenty years, in order to ignore, or better yet, get rid of that pesky ‘budget-balancing’ idea? After all, wars are critical to the sustenance and proliferation of our “American democracy” (what happened to the republic?) and they sometimes demand that reality be ‘suspended’ so that the war can be fought and won……but wait, we didn’t win THAT war, did we? No, in shame, we left the battlefield to the enemy, along with $85 billion of the latest and greatest US military hardware, paid for by the constituents (remember them) of the 535.
Could this be an indication that, while everyday American citizens wish they had enough income to simply match their necessary expenditures, reality has fled from the 535 who agree to send hundreds of billions of OUR dollars overseas, ostensibly to ‘rebuild’ the very countries they spent hundreds of billions of OUR dollars to ‘destroy’?
Has reality fled from the 535 when they think it is their “duty” to require the lives of thousands of their constituents (remember them?) who have been sent to, and shed their blood in, places that their constituents have no interest in and likely could not locate on a world globe?
Has reality fled from the 535 who daily entertain an army of lobbyists who job it is to present new spending projects to the 535 and get them approved, by any means necessary? Could it be that these lobbyists, who have extremely large amounts of money to use for wining and dining the intended recipients, offering the contents of their bulging pockets, actually enrich the 535 in order to get their pet projects approved?
If so, would that not be an unethical, immoral and likely illegal action of the 535 in receiving such funds?
Even though the 535 (sometimes) make contact with their constituents (remember them?) when their campaigns for reelection are beginning and they feel the need to get their faces in front of them so the voters will be able to place that face with a name on the ballot, those constituents would prefer that the 535 ASK them what they would like to see happen in OUR Congress, while they are being required to pay their bloated salaries, but the 535 mostly seem to be way too busy to spare any time to actually get to know them, and get a feeling for what their concerns are. And that is a real shame because they would get quite an education that, if they were honest enough to admit it, would likely change, at least some of THEIR actions in OUR Congress. (Hint: They are NOT that honest).
Could it be that the 535 don’t really WANT to know the thoughts and needs of their constituents?
BINGO!
The Real Reality, An Eventual Accounting
Has reality fled from the 535 when they believe there will not be an eventual accounting required of them for their unethical, immoral and likely illegal actions?
These 535 might want to take a closer look at those oaths they spoke. They swore, not so much to their constituents (remember them?), but to an eternal and all-powerful God who is also JUST in all His ways. But, they might say, “I really do not believe in God,so I’m not really worried about retribution from any God for violating the oath”. And based on their actions, this would likely be the one time they’re actually speaking the truth),
All well and good, no one is forcing them to believe in God, but their constituents (remember them?) are likely people who DO believe in God and take all oaths sworn before Him much more seriously than the privileged 535. They are also likely to be true patriotic Americans who understand the importance of OUR Constitution and want to see it supported and defended, especially by those 535 for whom they voted.
Conclusion
If any of this makes sense to you, it MUST be considered that the US Congress has indeed become irrelevant. Usually, when important events are occurring, anything deemed to be irrelevant is simply ignored, not considered during discussions or even thought about. But when an entity such as the US Congress, has become irrelevant, yet is responsible for raping the American taxpayers, their constituents (remember them?), an accounting must happen, whether at the hands of their constituents (remember them?) or an angry and powerful God.
The writer of the Book of Hebrews said. “It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.” (Hebrews 10:31 KJV).
The current sentiment of the average American voter, with polling recently showing that the approval rating for Congress is under 20%, when considering whether the US Congress is still relevant, the question could be asked whether it might be a more fearful thing to be required to answer, completely and HONESTLY, to their American CONSTITUENTS, either through the ballot box or the jury box.
As for the ballot box, it has been said that votes and voters do NOT decide elections, MONEY decides elections.
I personally believe that the current political system is SO corrupt and so beyond repair, that the ballot box will not suffice to correct any problems with the US Congress. The powers that be, the ones who truly make the decisions that are ‘mouthed’ by Congress, have enough money to buy any person or party and any number of votes.
The demonic persons just mentioned seem to be very ‘relevant’, but beyond the reach of the average person, leaving the 535 alone to be held responsible, via the jury box, for their actions that affect 330 million Americans.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Bud Hancockhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngBud Hancock2022-08-19 09:15:282022-08-19 09:16:00Is the U.S. Congress Now Irrelevant?
Self-improvement is the answer to interventionism.
The world is beset by meddlers run amok. Government officials around the globe have been on an interventionist decree spree, placing whole populations under house arrest, shutting down entire industries, mandating medical procedures for millions, and so much more.
What can anti-interventionists do about such a metastasis of mass-meddling?
The Office Swap Solution
The solution that gets the most attention is direct political change: remove the mass-meddlers from power and replace them with leaders who respect liberty. Leonard E. Read, the founder of the Foundation for Economic Education (FEE), discussed this proposed fix in his book Elements of Libertarian Leadership.
“The interventionists, it is observed, have ‘leaders’ galore in the political arena. Why, inquire many anti-interventionists, should we tarry any longer?” Read wrote. “Why not find ourselves some political leaders who will represent our points of view?”
This solution, he noted, misunderstands the problem.
“The reason,” Read continued, “that the interventionists have so many ‘leaders’ is only because there is throughout our land a very substantial body of influential, interventionist opinion. The ones out front and who are popularly appraised as leaders are, in fact, not the real leaders. They are but echoes of the underlying opinion, and an echo implies an antecedent sound.”
As Read’s colleague Ludwig von Mises explained, thought-leaders (“influential opinion”) sway popular support, and popular support sets the parameters for political success. The reason anti-interventionist policies have not prevailed is that the ideological groundwork for them has not been laid. Read warned of “the futility of attempting to build on a foundation that does not exist. One might as well look for an abundance of flowers where there has been a scarcity of seeds…”
“The out-front folks in political parties,” Read explained, “are but thermometers—indicators of the political temperature. Change the temperature and there will be a change in what’s out front—naturally and spontaneously. The only purpose in keeping an eye on the thermometer is to know what the temperature is. If the underlying influential opinion—the temperature—is interventionist, we’ll have interventionists in public office regardless of the party labels they may choose for their adornment and public appeal.”
In other words, we will be stuck with interventionist overlords so long as the masses are under the sway of interventionist thought-leaders. Until that changes, deposing one set of tyrants will only make room for another. The only way to rid ourselves of mass-meddlers is to reorient the meddlesome masses. “Politics,” as Andrew Breitbart said, “is downstream from culture.”
Ideas Reign Supreme
And both politics and culture are downstream from ideas.
The political culture of a people is shaped by the moral, social, economic, and political philosophy of its thought-leaders.
“It’s the influential opinion,” as Read clarified (or “ideological might” as Mises called it) “that counts, and nothing else. This is to be distinguished from ‘public opinion,’ there being no such thing. Every significant movement in history—good or bad—has resulted from influential ideas held by comparatively few persons.”
“For the masses of men,” as Murray Rothbard explained,” do not create their own ideas, or indeed think through these ideas independently; they follow passively the ideas adopted and disseminated by the body of intellectuals. The intellectuals are, therefore, the ‘opinion-molders’ in society.”
It is important to note that the ranks of influential intellectuals are not exclusive to university academics and corporate journalists—which is a relief, since those establishment professions have become so compromised by interventionist governments. Especially in the age of the internet, entrepreneurial intellectuals (like podcasters and Substack writers) and amateur intellectuals (like you or anyone else with the interest and intellect it takes to read an essay like this) can rise and come to the fore.
Influence does not come from the government-aligned establishment vesting someone with a PhD or a press pass. True influence, Read taught, comes from within.
“Here, then,” he wrote, “is the key question: What constitutes an influential opinion? In the context of moral, social, economic, and political philosophy, influential opinion stems from or rests upon (1) depth of understanding, (2) strength of conviction, and (3) the power of attractive exposition. These are the ingredients of self-perfection as relating to a set of ideas. Persons who thus improve their understanding, dedication, and exposition are the leaders of men; the rest of us are followers, including the out-front political personalities.”
To realize liberty, we must first cultivate “an influential libertarian opinion.” To rid ourselves of mass-meddlers, we must first persuasively advocate an anti-interventionist, pro-liberty philosophy. And before we can effectively do that, we must understand and uphold that philosophy ourselves, which, as Read cautioned, is harder than many libertarians suppose.
Meddling Defined
With that in mind, what exactly is interventionism, as distinct from liberty? What constitutes meddling, as opposed to minding one’s own proper business? To rid ourselves of something, we must first be able to identify it.
The most fundamental distinction between proper and improper conduct is between the proper and the improper use of force. As John Locke discussed and America’s founders (for the most part) agreed, force is only proper in the defense of individual rights. Any use of force outside of that, whether by government agents or private criminals, is therefore the worst kind of intervention: meddling with someone else’s person or property. When government agents infringe on the rights of individuals, they transgress the most fundamental bounds of propriety.
And by meddling in other people’s business, government officials also stray beyond their domain of competence. As F.A. Hayek explained in his work on “the knowledge problem,” central planners are incapable of “social engineering” the affairs of others without making a massive mess of things. Tyrannical order can only yield “planned chaos,” as Mises called it.
Interventionism is morally wrong and socially destructive, whereas liberty yields justice, harmony, and flourishing. If more intelligent and upstanding men and women had understood these truths well enough to consistently abide by them and persuasively explain them, their influence would have prevented the interventionist blitzkrieg that has made such a mess of the world over the past two years.
Clean Your Room
But advancing a pro-liberty and anti-meddling social, economic, and political philosophy is only half the solution. As Mises explained in “The Psychological Roots of Antiliberalism” (a section of his book Liberalism: In the Classical Tradition), many people have moral failings and psychological issues that make their support for interventionist and socialist doctrines immune from rational counter-argument.
Some people embrace interventionism and socialism as a coping mechanism: they respond to disappointment over their own lives by shifting most of the blame away from themselves and onto outside factors: like “greedy capitalists” or capitalism itself. Through political activism, they meddle in the affairs of others as a way of evading responsibility for their own lives.
As Read put it, “Those who refuse to rule themselves are usually bent on ruling others. Those who can rule themselves usually have no interest in ruling others.”
With people for whom meddling is less an intellectual error and more of an emotional hangup, a different approach may be needed. You may need to help them understand that a life philosophy of resentment is debilitating and self-destructive, while a life philosophy of responsibility is fulfilling, ennobling, and can be downright life-saving.
Frédéric Bastiat said to the mass-meddlers of 19th century France: “You who wish to reform everything! Why don’t you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough.”
Psychologist Jordan B. Peterson echoed this injunction when on Joe Rogan’s podcast he said, “don’t be fixing up the economy, 18-year-olds. You don’t know anything about the economy. It’s a massive complex machine beyond anyone’s understanding and you mess with it at your peril. So can you even clean up your own room?”
Before you get caught up in restructuring society, Peterson advised, sort out your own life first, starting with your room, because then “you’re not exceeding your domain of competence.”
“My sense,” he said, “is that if you want to change the world, you start from yourself and work outward, because you build your competence that way.”
As you improve yourself, you may become an inspiration and good influence for your family, then your circle of friends, then your colleagues at work, then maybe even wider communities.
You change the world for the better by acting as a role model, not a mass-meddler. True leadership is modeling, not meddling.
That is how you can become a force for good instead of a do-gooder. It’s the difference between meaningful virtue and vain virtue-signaling. And attaining the former is vastly more satisfying than indulging in the latter. You can sometimes fool others, but you can’t fool your own conscience. And the human conscience knows the difference between actually doing good and fraudulently looking good.
Peterson’s message of personal responsibility and self-improvement has resonated powerfully with young audiences and inoculated them against the gospel of resentment and intellectual arrogance preached by interventionists and socialists.
Leonard Read would have been delighted to see Peterson’s impact and not the least bit surprised. “Right method,” he wrote, “…consists of self-improvement. If everyone were devoted to the perfection of self, there could be no meddlers amongst us, and without meddlers there could be no socialism.”
A message of self-improvement and personal responsibility can succeed where socio-economic arguments fail, because it’s less of an intellectual exercise and more of a practical dilemma. A person can still cling to their coping mechanism and deny the truth of the message, but only to their own great personal detriment.
The Paradox of Changing the World
We free ourselves from mass-meddling by educating ourselves and others about the dangers of meddling: both on a societal and a personal level.
But in so doing, we must be wary of fighting fire with fire: of meddling with the meddlers.
For example, we must never use government intervention for cheap “wins” against interventionists, for then we become what we hate.
And as Read stressed, we should even avoid “imposing” our explanations on those who have no interest in them. Sharing wisdom where it’s not welcome is its own kind of meddling. Rather than “casting pearls” at those incapable of appreciating them, we should address those who are open to learning.
Above all, Read stressed improving one’s own understanding, dedication to, and ability to explain the freedom philosophy, because the more you do that, the more you will attract students who are not only open to your teaching, but actively seek it.
As Lawrence Reed, President Emeritus of FEE, has stressed in his book Are We Good Enough for Liberty?, improving one’s character in general is also essential, because it greatly increases your influence with those who admire you.
Of course that shouldn’t be the main reason you pursue character development. Self-improvement becomes self-defeating when it becomes primarily about garnering influence, winning praise, and other forms of moral vanity.
The paradox of changing the world is that the best way to improve others is not to try to improve others. Instead seek self-improvement for its own sake, and you will inspire others to improve themselves as a natural and blessed byproduct.
As Leonard Read taught, the most powerful way to minister to the meddlers in our midst is to exorcize the meddlers within ourselves and devote our hearts to self-improvement, thereby leading the way to liberty by our example.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Foundation for Economic Education (FEE)http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngFoundation for Economic Education (FEE)2022-08-19 09:08:172022-08-19 09:08:52When Government Meddlers Run Amok
From branding parents speaking out against critical race theory and sexual ideology in schools as terrorists to the Mar-a-Lago raid, Attorney General Merrick Garland’s radicalized Justice Department transforms pre-election political opposition into national security threats.
The infamous DOJ letter on schools was sent out a month before the gubernatorial election in Virginia, where the National School Board Association, not to mention much of the D.C. establishment, is based. Much as Garland’s DOJ operatives feared, the school protests helped elect Gov. Glenn Younkin and nearly toppled New Jersey’s Democrat governor in the bargain.
The Mar-a-Lago raid was carefully timed around the DOJ’s day policy of avoiding politically sensitive moves 90 days before an election. The real election it has its eye on is in 2024.
And, if it has its way, 2024 will be the new 1984.
The Steele dossier, the Mueller investigation, the Mar-a-Lago raid, and everything before and after are part of the larger Spygate continuum which is marked by the use of national security tools to suppress the political opposition especially before and during elections. The claims of national security, whether they involve the Russians or classified documents, are just a tactic that allow Democrat officials to wield virtually unlimited investigative powers cloaked in secrecy.
Beyond the details of these investigations, which turn as hollow as Steele or Mueller on closer examination, is the larger construct of a crisis that is described as a “threat to democracy”.
The “threat to democracy” is shorthand for a threat to Democrats. The source of that threat are conservatives and Republicans. The vectors of that threat can be described as coming from Russia, school board parents, electoral activism or “disinformation” on the internet. The common denominator is that political activities which are inherently “democratic”, speech, protest and electioneering, are defined as a national security “threat to democracy”.
The net of this crisis extends from individuals posting on social media to political candidates and institutions. Meeting the “threat to democracy” requires the government to monitor social media and for social media companies to censor unapproved speech, for candidates who believe the wrong things to be barred from office, for the IRS to investigate conservative non-profits, for companies to be pressured into pulling donations to conservative candidates and for the military to be prepared to intervene once again in the event of another grave “threat to democracy”.
The threat to democracy or rather the republic here is coming from the Democrats.
The Spygate targeting of Trump is only one strand of a number of threads drawing together to criminalize opposition to leftist agendas. Cancel culture had already contrived to economically punish speech. The next step was criminal investigations of people who non-violently stood up to Black Lives Matter race rioters or drove over BLM’s racial supremacist slogan on streets.
The underlying rationale was that racism was a public health crisis and another threat to democracy. Individuals were components of the crisis. Those who would not take a knee and admit their privilege were perpetuating the crisis and posed a threat to the nation at large.
The same collectivist machinery is being ramped up to enforce global warming dogma by using financial institutions, insurance companies, SEC regulations, real estate codes and countless other financial minutiae to extra-legislatively impose the Green New Deal, punishing companies and individuals until they conform. Dot com monopolies are already censoring those who don’t.
Once again the argument is that all human life on the planet is endangered. Anyone who doesn’t toe the line is a threat to the race. And must either conform or be silenced.
Race and the environment are not the real issues here, no more than Russia or classified documents are with Spygate. Manufactured crises are used to justify totalitarian fascist abuses of power. The details of any individual crisis or allegation matter much less than the tactics used to suppress dissent in the face of this latest imminent emergency. Every crisis is met with a centralized response weaving together federal authority, corporate complicity, national media outlets, cultural elites and all the commanding heights of power in the United States of America.
As FBI raids blend into congressional investigations, National Security Council aides, political campaigns, opposition research labs and media outlets appear to speak with one voice because they operate as arms of the same machine. Likewise, school board leaders, DOJ officials, media outlets and publishing giants start functioning as components of a single political entity.
Because they are just different ways of describing members of the Left.
In true Orwellian fashion, the “threat to democracy”, like most leftist slogans, should be interpreted to mean the opposite of what it appears to. It’s democracy that is a threat to a political system that is undemocratic and built around undemocratic institutions.
The threat to democracy manifests itself when conservative candidates win elections and is most pronounced in the least democratic institutions, government bureaucracies, national media outlets, elite universities and the upper ranks of corporations. This increasingly integrated ruling class springs into action when it’s unable to rig an election and warns of a “threat to democracy”. The worse it loses, the more urgent the crisis and the more ruthless the method of dealing with it. Having lost one election and fearing losses in 2022 and 2024, it’s getting more ruthless.
The solutions to all the crises come down to the components of the machine, the administrative state, corporate leaders, technocratic monopolies, educational bosses, activist front groups and many others urgently grabbing more power to cope with the threat of losing elections.
The Mar-a-Lago raid is a warning that the machine is rapidly preparing to fight off the “threat of democracy” to the 2022 and 2024 elections by once again weaponizing national security, censoring “misinformation”, and stamping out the political opposition. It will do whatever it takes to win, not because it needs to win elections to pursue its agenda, but because winning elections is a convenient cover to explain the amount of power it wields.
Democracy is not just in its name, but its façade. When it loses the façade, people start to notice that elections don’t seem to change very much. And that things still run the same way.
America is in a bad and dangerous place. But it will be in an even worse one by 2024.
This is not just about winning elections, but about making them irrelevant. The goal is to eliminate the opposition, not just in the voting booth, but across society. The Left will use all the powers at its disposal to ban any kind of ideological non-conformity employing government, corporations, and the culture to prosecute, fire and cancel anyone who dissents.
All of this is being done in the name of a rotating series of crises, threats to democracy, social harmony or the environment, not because these threats are real, but because they enable the system to invoke different components to leverage against its political enemies.
Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.
