‘Emerging Collusion’: Experts Warn of Expanding Warrantless Surveillance of Americans

/in , , , , , , , , , /by

A panel of experts, including famed author and psychologist Jordan Peterson, warned Congress on Thursday that potential collusion between federal law enforcement agencies and financial and other corporations could lead to unprecedented violations of the constitutional right of American citizens not to have private information handed over without proper warrants.

On Thursday, a hearing of the House Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government was held to examine how citizens’ private financial data is being surveilled by the federal government. In the wake of incidents like what happened in January when a government agency colluded with banks to uncover gun and religious book purchases of citizens without a warrant, experts are concerned that the U.S. could be headed in the direction of surveillance states such as China.

“If the emerging collusion between government and gigantic corporations continues in the manner it is continuing, there won’t be anything that you do that can’t be used against you and will be used against you in very short order,” Peterson warned. “We are in danger of eliminating the private sphere in its entirety. It’s already happening in places around the world, particularly China. … We have technologies at hand, and it appears both giant corporations and giant governments are utilizing it in every way that they can manage.”

Congressmen like Rep. Warren Davidson (R-Ohio) are also worried about how surveillance laws already in place can potentially be abused by the government for political reasons, as he shared on “Washington Watch with Tony Perkins” Thursday.

“[The] Bank Secrecy Act is supposed to keep us safe,” he explained. “You use [it] to … catch terrorism, money laundering, illicit finance, tax evasion, things like that. So they do have sort of this loophole, though, because they implemented this in 1970, and it essentially circumvents the Fourth Amendment. … [I]f you remember back a couple of years ago, the Biden administration wanted to start surveilling your bank account for $600 of activity a year and share that directly with the IRS. I think what people are seeing now is they already surveil your accounts … with the rules they have in place. The question is, can they use it in court?”

Davidson, who serves on the House Financial Services Committee, went on to observe how other laws such as the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) and agencies like the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) were initially enshrined to protect Americans but are now being increasingly used to eavesdrop and spy on Americans without cause.

“[T]he Fourth Amendment’s there on purpose,” he emphasized. “And there’s a reason it’s the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act — foreigners aren’t protected by our Constitution the way American citizens are. … [Y]ou’re supposed to have to get a warrant or a subpoena to go after an American.”

Davidson continued, “They can’t just do this blanket [search] like, ‘Well, I don’t know who was in Washington, D.C. on this day. Well, who was here? Who was here?’ And they build the case from that end. They’ll literally say, ‘We’re querying the database,’ which is a synonym for searching. But they’ll say, ‘No, no, no, that’s very different, because once we go to search, we get a search warrant.’ So they’ll query the database, and they build the database. How does the data even get into the database? They do it [in] multiple ways. … [T]he Financial Crimes [Enforcement] Network will direct the banks to, basically, ‘Here’s how you spy on your customers better for us. And if you don’t do a good job, the regulators will come in and shut your bank down.’”

The congressman further shed light on how the FBI surveilled private data without a warrant surrounding the January 6, 2021 riot at the Capitol.

“[T]he whistleblower came forward because he worked in the Boston FBI office, and he said, ‘Hey, what I saw is we were targeting people that happened to be in Washington, D.C. on January 5th, 6th, and 7th,’ and then they started building from there, like who had a financial transaction on this date,” Davidson described. “And if they had financial transactions on this date, what other things did they buy? Did they use transactions in certain stores? And they started highlighting red flags like, ‘Oh, you might have gone to Cabela’s or Bass Pro, you might have purchased anything related to a firearm. You might have purchased religious material, including the Bible.”

Davidson concluded by outlining what congressional actions need to happen in order to help restore Americans’ Fourth Amendment rights against unwarranted searches and seizures.

“[W]e have to change the law fundamentally,” he stressed. “The Bank Secrecy Act is very flawed. … There’s court decisions related to that … [which could] effectively completely nullif[y] the Fourth Amendment right to privacy. … The Judiciary Committee, in a rare set of events, you had Jim Jordan [R-Ohio] and Jerry Nadler [D-N.Y.] agreeing that the government needs to get a warrant. … The intel community, on the other hand, is asking to expand the surveillance on Americans. They want to add Wi-Fi hotspots … to get at more expansive data, to add more things to the database. And those ideas deserve a debate, and they deserve a recorded vote. So we hope Speaker [Mike] Johnson will give us that vote very quickly.”

AUTHOR

Dan Hart

Dan Hart is senior editor at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICE: Viktor Orbán Warns: ‘The Hegemony of the West has Ended, A New World Order is Emerging’

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.

More Misleading White House Statistics on Unemployment

/in , , , , , , , /by

Critical Thinkers will not be fooled!

One of the most monitored U.S. statistic — and one frequently used for political gain — is the Unemployment Rate. It sounds simple enough (and actually should be) but when bureaucrats and politicians got their hands on it, it’s merely a shadow of itself.

Here is a Mainstream Media article on the most recent Employment Report (just released), plus the Whitehouse spin on it…

Believe it or not (as this superb article explains), there are now SIX different U.S. unemployment rates! Here are the latest (2023) government data for all six. The popularly referred to rates are 3.6% (U-3: unemployed) and 6.9% (U-6: out of work).

However, there is another large fly in the ointment: the unemployment rates (by-and-large) do not count illegal immigrants. When that number was low, it was ignored, as it was considered to be just statistical noise. Since 2020, that is no longer the case, as the current data says some six (6) million new illegal immigrants are in the US, just from the Southern border!

A reasonable estimate is that 4± million of these are people who would be normally considered as part of the labor pool. The approximate size of the US citizen labor pool is 165 million. So the 3.6% (U-3) means that 6± million US citizens are unemployed.

Let’s estimate that 1± million (out of the 4± million employable) of the new illegal aliens are gainfully employed. That leaves 3± million who would be considered unemployed. None of those are considered in the government statistics… Put another way, the U-3 statistic goes from 6 to 9 million (i.e., a 50% increase: 3.6%—> 5.4%). The U-6 statistic would likewise go from 6.9% to 8.7% (i.e., an increase of 1.8%)

The point here is that these immigration corrections are rather sizable, so if the government is claiming to be doing its best to keep citizens accurately informed, (e.g., about our economy) they should include this information in their calculations. Maybe I missed it, but I was unable to find that…

In this vein, I can’t resist plagiarizing this prior Abbott and Costello spoof:

COSTELLO: I want to talk about the unemployment rate in America.
ABBOTT: Good Subject. It’s 3.6%.

COSTELLO: That many people are out of work? 
ABBOTT: No, that’s 6.9%.

COSTELLO: You just said 3.6%.
ABBOTT: 3.6% are unemployed. 

COSTELLO: Right, 3.6% out of work.
ABBOTT: No, that’s 6.9%. 

COSTELLO: Okay, so it’s 6.9% unemployed.
ABBOTT: No, that’s 3.6%. 

COSTELLO: WAIT A MINUTE. Is it 3.6% or 6.9%?
ABBOTT: 3.6% are unemployed. 6.9% are out of work. 

COSTELLO: But if you are out of work, you are unemployed. 
ABBOTT: No, Biden said you can’t count those “Out of Work” as the unemployed. You have to be looking for work to be unemployed.

COSTELLO: BUT THEY ARE OUT OF WORK!!!
ABBOTT: No, you miss his point.

COSTELLO: What point?
ABBOTT: Someone who isn’t actively looking for work can’t be counted with those who look for work. It wouldn’t be fair.

COSTELLO: It wouldn’t be fair to whom? 
ABBOTT: The unemployed. 

COSTELLO: But they are ALL out of work. 
ABBOTT: No, the Unemployed are actively looking for work. Those who are Out of Work gave up looking. If you give up, you are no longer in the ranks of the Unemployed.

COSTELLO: So if you’re off the Unemployment roles that would count as less Unemployment? 
ABBOTT: Yes, unemployment would go down.

COSTELLO: The unemployment rate goes down because you don’t look for work?
ABBOTT: Obviously. That’s how the current administration gets it to 3.6%. Otherwise it would be 6.9%. Our government doesn’t want you to read about 6.9% unemployment.

COSTELLO: Why don’t they include illegal immigrants in the employment data?
ABBOTT: Because that would make unemployment rates much worse!

COSTELLO: That would be tough on those running for reelection. 
ABBOTT: Duh!

COSTELLO: So that means there are three ways to bring down the unemployment number? 
ABBOTT: Yes.

COSTELLO: Unemployment can go down if someone gets a job?
ABBOTT: Correct. 

COSTELLO: And unemployment goes down if citizens stop looking for a job? 
ABBOTT: Bingo.

COSTELLO: And unemployment also goes down if the government doesn’t fully include employment data about illegal immigrants? 
ABBOTT: You’re a genius. 

COSTELLO: So citizens who support the current administration can help bring unemployment down, by stopping to look for work. 
ABBOTT: Now you’re thinking like the Economy Czar.

COSTELLO: I don’t even know what the hell I just said!  ABBOTT: Now you’re thinking like some of our current leaders!!!

PS — This relevant article just came out today: Doing statistics can be difficult but understanding them can be fairly simple…

©2024. John Droz, Jr. All rights reserved.

POST ON X:

Here are other materials by this scientist that you might find interesting:

My Substack Commentaries for 2023 (arranged by topic)

Check out the chronological Archives of my entire Critical Thinking substack.

WiseEnergy.org: discusses the Science (or lack thereof) behind our energy options.

C19Science.info: covers the lack of genuine Science behind our COVID-19 policies.

Election-Integrity.info: multiple major reports on the election integrity issue.

Media Balance Newsletter: a free, twice-a-month newsletter that covers what the mainstream media does not do, on issues from COVID to climate, elections to education, renewables to religion, etc. Here are the Newsletter’s 2023 Archives. Please send me an email to get your free copy. When emailing me, please make sure to include your full name and the state where you live. (Of course, you can cancel the Media Balance Newsletter at any time – but why would you?

U.S. Economy LOST 1.87 Million Full Time Jobs In Past 3 Months

/in , , , , , , , /by

Every month, the Biden regime’s job report is revised DOWN by 20-50%. It bears noting that it’s the government sector that continues to dominate the new jobs reports.

Rich Baris posts: “Another MASSIVE downward revision to the prior monthly jobs report. These people are lying to us, and covering their tracks a month later. We’ve now had downward revisions for 10/12 to 11/12 on the 12-month for nearly two years.”

Government statistics, once a tool to measure the health of our economy, are cooked and created – weaponized as a campaign tool.

 

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

POSTS ON X: 

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

Americans Chip Away at Corporate Wokeness with Doritos Win [Video]

/in , , , , , /by

It took Frito-Lay 63 years to build a $13 billion dollar empire. This week, 50 seconds almost destroyed it. That’s how close the brand came to corporate annihilation after its Doritos team posted a short video with a trans influencer that makes Dylan Mulvaney look like a youth pastor. Turns out, 24-year-old Samantha Hudson isn’t just a man pretending to be a woman, he’s a sick pervert with dreams of sexually abusing children. Congratulations, Bud Light. You’re officially out of the brand basement.

To everyone’s shock, Hudson, who appeared on “Crunch Talk” on behalf of Doritos Spain, has a disgusting history of social media tweets that fantasize about everything from nymphomania to child sexual abuse. “I want to do thuggish things to get into a 12-year-old girl’s [expletive],” he wrote. In another post, he talks about being in the middle of a street in his underwear “in front of a super beautiful 8-year-old girl.” With surprising cruelty, he vilifies victims of abuse, writing, “I hate women who are victims of sexual assault and go to self help centers to overcome their trauma. Annoying sl—s.”

As if that weren’t enough, Hudson describes himself as a Marxist “anti-capitalist,” who fights for “the abolition of … the traditional monogamous nuclear family” — which apparently makes him perfect spokesperson material.

Of course, once people started digging up his vile statements, Hudson apologized, claiming they were “pure provocation and in very bad taste.” “… [H]onestly I don’t know what to say,” he said. “I don’t remember having written such barbarities. … I thought that ‘dark humor’ was funny.” But it was too late. Americans across every platform were horrified, outraged, and to Frito-Lay’s terror, motivated. From journalists to former Trump officials, people called for “the Bud Light treatment.” Who hires an admitted pedophile to be the face of their product, everyone wondered? And what lazy marketing team doesn’t do a background check?

“This person is a million times worse than Dylan Mulvaney,” Ian Miles Cheong argued. The country seemed to agree — making #BoycottDoritos trend on X within hours of the story breaking.

Then something incredible happened. Before the wave of consumer anger hit land, Frito-Lay didn’t just take the video down — they fired Hudson. “We have ended the relationship,” a spokesperson told Rolling Stone. “We strongly condemn words or actions that promote violence or sexism of any kind.”

It was an astonishing turn for the company, even more astonishing given the timetable. Less than 48 hours after the video went viral, Frito-Lay — whose parent company PepsiCo has a perfect 100% score from the Human Rights Campaign on trans advocacy — dropped Hudson like a hot potato. Even Rip Curl, who faced the world’s wrath last month for featuring a trans “hero” in its surfer series, took five days to apologize — a record for regret.

That’s how dangerous it’s become for brands to cross consumers with a woke agenda. In the 11 months since Mulvaney-gate at Bud Light — a gamble that’s now cost them an eye-popping $1.4 billion in revenue — the entire landscape of corporate activism has changed. CEOs who were tripping over themselves to embrace the LGBT fringe are desperate to avoid the pushback that broke Anheuser-Busch, Target, Disney, and others.

As Family Research Council’s Joseph Backholm pointed out to The Washington Stand, this situation is different than other endorsement deals “involving so-called trans influencers,” since Hudson has quite a different, depraved past. “But it’s good to see that gender identity is no longer providing immunity to do and say terrible things,” he observed. “Wokeness has long insisted those labeled ‘oppressed’ can get away with doing things other people should not do. We need a world where people are judged consistently by their choices more than the group they identify with. Yes, Frito-Lay is probably doing a financial calculation here as well, but this is still a refreshing act of moral sanity.”

For corporate America, it’s quite a sea change. After years of punching above their weight class, Big Business faces a terrifying reality: consumers are punching back. And victories like this one will only inspire them to flex those muscles more.

AUTHOR

Suzanne Bowdey

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

RELATED ARTICLE: Student Files Lawsuit against Fairfax County’s ‘Dystopian’ Trans Bathroom, Pronoun Policies

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.

At Last! A new bill in Congress to hold Big Pharma companies responsible for Covid vaccine injuries!

/in , , , , , , , , , , /by

Hats off to Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, for authoring this bill!

While so many of us have been sounding the alarm over the experimental mRNA Covid “vaccines” and fighting localized battles as we were able, Rep. Chip Roy’s bill may be the colossal breakthrough we’ve all been praying for!

Not only would it be a godsend to the many thousands who’ve been badly injured by these novel injections, but it also loudly proclaims to the entire nation that these vaccines were not, and are not, safe!

Chip Roy is one brave man. His quote below says it all:

“I am introducing the LIABLE Act to empower Americans to remove crony federal liability protections for COVID-19 vaccine manufacturers and empower injured Americans. The American people deserve justice for the infringement on their personal medical freedom and those medically harmed deserve restitution.” (Emphasis mine)

Gotta now watch his back!

Here’s more from an Epoch Times article: Proposed legislation introduced on March 5 would strip COVID-19 vaccine manufacturers of liability protections, enabling U.S. residents injured by the vaccines to sue the companies.

The bill, proposed by Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas), would retroactively remove protections from the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP Act) for COVID-19 vaccine manufacturers. (Emphasis mine)

The bill itself reads as follows: “No federal law … may make the manufacturer of a COVID-19 vaccine immune from suit or liability, or limit the liability of such a manufacturer, with respect to claims for loss caused by, arising out of, relating to, or resulting from the administration to or the use by an individual of a COVID-19 vaccine.”

And now we need to flood our Representatives with calls, letters, faxes and emails, exhorting them to support this bill!

©2024. Cherie Zaslawsky. All rights reserved.

RELATED VIDEO: Tucker Carlson with Dr. Pierre Kory on the now known deaths from the mRNA shots

More Deception from Once Reliable Medical Sources: Paxlovid — Part 2

/in , , , , , , , /by

Please read Part 1 here. As bad as the multiple failings in the Johns Hopkins article I outlined in Part 1 were, there is an even greater abdication of medical responsibility by Johns Hopkins.

Their Mission Statement says: “The mission of Johns Hopkins Medicine is to improve the health of the community and the world by setting the standard of excellence in medical education, research, and clinical care.”

Maybe I don’t understand what “standard of excellence” means. It seems that it says that Johns Hopkins will objectively provide the public with the latest scientific health research as to what is in citizens’ best interest to do (or not do).

In other words, when Johns Hopkins discusses a pharmaceutical option for COVID — e.g., Paxlovid — (or anything else) they would objectively and thoroughly:

  1. honestly describe the possible benefits,
  2. accurately explain all the potential downsides, and
  3. objectively identify reasonable alternatives.

As my original commentary outlined, they did a woeful job of both #1 and #2. Here I’d like to address #3, which was completely missing.

Well over two years ago (January 2022), after doing some research, I published a spreadsheet of the various pharmaceutical options for COVID-19 early treatment — as I was not able to find this posted elsewhere in a layman easy-to-understand format. I compared the official and non-official options on several key criteria. Since then I have updated this spreadsheet every month or so. (This info is one of many things to be found on my COVID website: C19Science.info). Here is the latest data.

Since this article is just about Paxlovid, I put together a very condensed version: Condensed Comparison of Paxlovid to Some Other Options.

To see the links and more explanations refer to the uncondensed version. (Please pay attention to the note there clarifying that I am not a medical professional, etc.)

Note that Paxlovid has two columns in the upper (Effectiveness) part:

  • a) the first column was the evidence used by the FDA (a single study done by Pfizer) to grant Pfizer an EUA (Emergency Use Authorization), and
  • b) the second column is the current number of scientific studies of Paxlovid done by numerous independent scientists. Compare the concluded ET effectiveness…

What this data indicates about these COVID early treatment options is:

1 – An alternative to Paxlovid is Vitamin D. Based on 11 scientific studies of 44,000± patients, it has about three times the effectiveness (60% vs 21%). (The results of Peer-reviewed early treatment studies = 57%. The results of early treatment Randomized Control Trials [RCTs], after exclusions = 65%.)* The data.

Safety & Cost — Vitamin D has: no serious medical side effects, no evidence of a rebound effect, and no usage restrictions. Further, it has long-term safety data, it does not require a prescription (OTC), and the cost is minuscule.

2 – Another alternative to Paxlovid is Ivermectin. Based on 38 scientific studies of 59,000± patients, it also has roughly three times the effectiveness (62% vs 21%). (The results of Peer-reviewed early treatment studies = 61%. The results of early treatment Randomized Control Trials [RCTs], after exclusions = 66%.)* The data.

Safety & Cost — Ivermectin has: only minor potential medical side effects, no evidence of a rebound effect, and no usage restrictions. Further, Ivermectin has long-term safety data and the cost is very low.

The question is: why didn’t the Johns Hopkins article say anything about alternatives to Paxlovid — since scientific data indicates that they may be superior options?

To be fair, the same question applies to the FDA, CDC, AMA, WHO, Dr. Fauci, Dr. Birx, the Mayo Clinic, the mainstream media, etc., etc. They have all shed their scientific suits, and have proudly dressed themselves in political correctness panoply.

Please watch this talk given by Dr. Scott Atlas, last week. It is chilling to hear what he observed going on at the highest levels of our country, regarding COVID policy.

As always, the most effective defense is Critical Thinking.

PS: Still no response to the polite email I sent to the Johns Hopkins article author.

* This data is not on the above table, but can be found by following the links of the full version.

©2024. John Droz, Jr. All rights reserved.

Here are other materials by this scientist that you might find interesting:

My Substack Commentaries for 2023 (arranged by topic)

Check out the chronological Archives of my entire Critical Thinking substack.

WiseEnergy.org: discusses the Science (or lack thereof) behind our energy options.

C19Science.info: covers the lack of genuine Science behind our COVID-19 policies.

Election-Integrity.info: multiple major reports on the election integrity issue.

Media Balance Newsletter: a free, twice-a-month newsletter that covers what the mainstream media does not do, on issues from COVID to climate, elections to education, renewables to religion, etc. Here are the Newsletter’s 2023 Archives. Please send me an email to get your free copy. When emailing me, please make sure to include your full name and the state where you live. (Of course, you can cancel the Media Balance Newsletter at any time – but why would you?

More Deception from Once Reliable Medical Sources: Paxlovid, Part 1

/in , , , /by

If we can’t trust Johns Hopkins, what established sources are left?

I was periodically updating my webpage on the effectiveness of all the popular COVID early treatment options, and came across this current article:

Feel free to read it, but be forewarned that it is woefully deceptive. I can understand that when Paxlovid first came out (late 2021), medical professionals would be enthused to endorse it, as the only study done said it was 88% effective. Nice!

But is that our scientific knowledge in 2024? NO! I sent the JH author a polite email:

Aliza:

I’m an independent scientist (physicist) who has done considerable research on COVID.

As such I read with interest your recent article on Paxlovid, stating that it is “a tremendous tool that’s completely underutilized”.

FYI, I also read your CV.

[Note to substack readers: she has no science credentials.]

The key message in your article is premised on your statement:

“Paxlovid is extremely effective when taken within five days of symptom onset. In clinical trials, it reduced the risk of hospitalization and death by almost 90% in unvaccinated people.”

I’m writing because that is (regretfully) a major misrepresentation of our current knowledge of Paxlovid.

Please consider the following three facts:

Fact one: In late 2021 the FDA gave Pfizer an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for Paxlovid as a COVID-19 early treatment.

Should your readers be alerted to the fact that the FDA has not approved Paxlovid, but rather given it a very different EUA? Then your readers could use their own judgment whether or not we remain in a COVID-19 emergency.

Fact two: when the FDA gave Pfizer an EUA for Paxlovid for COVID-19 early treatment, it was based on just one (1) study (on 2,100± people), done by Pfizer, that showed that Paxlovid supposedly had an 88% effectiveness rate.

Should your readers be alerted to the fact that there was only one initial study prior to the EUA, and that it was done by the drug manufacturer — clearly not an unbiased source?

Fact three: Since the FDA gave Pfizer the EUA for Paxlovid, many independent scientists have conducted studies about the effectiveness of Paxlovid. To date, some 57 studies on Paxlovid have been completed, with 42 being peer-reviewed.

Should your readers be alerted that these independent studies (on 120,000± people) have concluded that the actual COVID-19 early treatment effectiveness of Paxlovid is only 21±% — a far cry from the Pfizer study claiming 88%?

I’m taking the time to write as I’ve always respected Johns Hopkins as an unbiased, accurate source, of current medical information.

Sincerely,

It’s been over a week now, and I’ve received no response of any kind.

Some may think I’m being a bit harsh on Johns Hopkins, but the letter sent was a stripped-down version of what I could have said. (I thought that the chance of a response would be inversely related to the length of my email.)

For example, Fact 4: Harvard published a late 2023 study that concluded that 20±% of those taking Paxlovid, were likely to have a rebound result where they get COVID again. (Compare that percentage to the average chance of 2±%.)

That appears to say that taking Paxlovid results in a net zero result! (It has a 21±% chance of a positive result, but a 20±% chance of a negative one…)

Note: I shouldn’t be surprised, but I was, when the same JH person felt compelled to write a later piece pooh-poohing the COVID rebound matter.

As a proud optimist, I thought that the AMA, well-known medical establishments (like Johns Hopkins), etc., would continuously analyze new scientific COVID studies, and realize that they made some earlier bad calls regarding COVID.

Maybe (for legal reasons) they wouldn’t outright apologize (although they should), but I did NOT expect them to continue with the same politically correct posturing WHEN THEY SHOULD NOW KNOW THAT WHAT THEY ARE SAYING IS WRONG!

However, this JH article about Paxlovid seems to indicate that now that they find themselves in a hole, their reflex solution is to keep digging.

  • FYI #1, although this commentary is about Johns Hopkins, their politically correct campaign is the norm, as there are dozens of other one-sided Internet articles advocating more use of Paxlovid (e.g., here and here). I chose Johns Hopkins as they should be above political science, and instead be focused on real science.
  • FYI #2, I could write quite a bit more about this matter, but this is not intended to be a scientific paper, but rather an overview for the public. That said, I will do Part 2 in a few days about another very important omission in this JH article…

I’ll end this part with some GOOD NEWS.

  1. This late 2023 article reports that Paxlovid usage has precipitously declined. “Sales of Paxlovid are down 97%, year over year… and Pfizer lost $4.7 Billion in write-offs.” Citizens are getting informed and voting with their feet — excellent!
  2. As even more evidence of the weakness of Paxlovid, the FDA has recently officially announced that the EUA for Paxlovid will expire on March 8th, 2024! Note 1: Maybe I shouldn’t be surprised, but when I searched the Johns Hopkins site, I could find no mention of this important FDA announcement, made back on 1-29-24. Note 2: I could find nothing about this EUA change elsewhere!}

Once again this all reinforces the extraordinary importance for citizens to become Critical Thinkers — and it all MUST start in K-12 Science classes…

PS — I’m legally required to make clear that I am not a medical professional. Always consult with a qualified physician before taking (or stopping to take) any medication.

©2024. John Droz, Jr.. All rights reserved.

Here are other materials by this scientist that you might find interesting:

My Substack Commentaries for 2023 (arranged by topic)

Check out the chronological Archives of my entire Critical Thinking substack.

WiseEnergy.org: discusses the Science (or lack thereof) behind our energy options.

C19Science.info: covers the lack of genuine Science behind our COVID-19 policies.

Election-Integrity.info: multiple major reports on the election integrity issue.

Media Balance Newsletter: a free, twice-a-month newsletter that covers what the mainstream media does not do, on issues from COVID to climate, elections to education, renewables to religion, etc. Here are the Newsletter’s 2023 Archives. Please send me an email to get your free copy. When emailing me, please make sure to include your full name and the state where you live. (Of course, you can cancel the Media Balance Newsletter at any time – but why would you?

Historic Business Remington Flees New York For Georgia After 208 Years

/in , , , , , , , , /by

Remington is leaving Ilion, N.Y., ‘after two centuries, abandoning upstate for a gleaming new factory in Georgia. With it goes the village’s identity.’  so wrote the New York Times.

NY village ‘losing its soul’ as nation’s oldest gun manufacturer flees blue state for Georgia

Remington is the nation’s oldest gun manufacturer

“Two hundred and eight years of history. Gone, gone,” Ilion, New York, Mayor John P. Stephens told The New York Times. “Ilion is Remington. Remington is Ilion.”

“Two hundred and eight years of history. Gone, gone,” Ilion, New York, Mayor John P. Stephens told The New York Times. “Ilion is Remington. Remington is Ilion.”

Remington, the nation’s oldest gun manufacturer, told union officials late last year that company chiefs at RemArms, the current version of Remington Arms, made the decision to end its New York manufacturing come March. The remaining operations located in Ilion will move to Georgia, where company leaders say the firearms industry is supported and welcomed.

Residents of the New York village, which is located roughly 230 miles northwest of New York City, are bracing for the manufacturer to officially move, which some say will take part of the town’s identity with it.

A view of the Remington Arms Co., Inc. compound in the middle of Ilion, New York, on Feb. 1. The nation’s oldest gun-maker is consolidating operations in Georgia and recently announced plans to shutter the Ilion factory in early March. (AP Photo/Seth Wenig)

“When Remington leaves, it’s not going to be like a facility leaving, it’s going to be like part of your family has moved off,” Jim Conover, a retired Remington employee who began his career there in 1964, told The Associated Press.

A furnace operator and technician at the factory, Frank “Rusty” Brown, told the outlet that he and generations of his family worked at the facility and noted he and his wife will be out of jobs.

“My mom worked there. My dad worked there. My wife works there with me now. My daughter works there with me now. My second daughter works there with me now. And my son-in-law works there,” Brown said. “So it’s a double-hit for me and my wife: two of us out of a job.”

The closure of the New York location will result in about 300 people losing their jobs in a town of roughly 7,600. The mayor of Ilion told the Daily Mail that the village is expected to lose $1 million in revenue due to the move, in addition to other local businesses taking a financial hit.

”It’s like the town is losing its soul. It’s almost like losing a family member. That’s the thing that people are struggling with, the nostalgia, the history. It feels like we are losing the identity of the town,” Stephens told the outlet.

Continue reading.

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLES:

New York City congestion pricing, first in the nation, is approved at $15 and up for vehicles

Insane Trump’s Penalty Will NY Businesses To Flee to FLA, as New York State Becomes ‘Legal Banana Republic’: Experts

CEO of Cardone Capital To Team: “Immediately Discontinue All Underwriting on New York City Real Estate” In Wake of Insane Ruling in Trump Case

California, New York Lose Most in Tax Revenue as Residents FLEE for Conservative States

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

Javier Milei Delivers Argentina’s First Surplus in Over a Decade—and U.S. Media is Silent

/in , , , , , /by

Argentines witnessed something amazing last week: the government’s first budget surplus in nearly a dozen years.

The Economy Ministry announced the figures Friday, and the government was $589 million in the black.

Argentina’s surplus comes on the heels of ambitious cuts in federal spending pushed by newly-elected President Javier Milei that included slashing bureaucracy, eliminating government publicity campaigns, reducing transportation subsidies, pausing all monetary transfers to local governments, and devaluing the peso.

Milei’s policies, which he has himself described as a kind of “shock therapy,” come as Argentina faces a historic economic crisis fueled by decades of government spending, money printing, and Peronism (a blend of national socialism and fascism).

These policies have pushed the inflation rate in Argentina, once one of the most prosperous countries in Latin America, above 200 percent. Today nearly 58 percent of the Argentine population lives in poverty, according to a recent study.

And Milei rightfully blames Argentina’s backward economic policies for its plight—policies that, he points out, are spreading across the world.

“The main leaders of the Western world have abandoned the model of freedom for different versions of what we call collectivism,” Milei said in a recent speech in Davos. “We’re here to tell you that collectivist experiments are never the solution to the problems that afflict the citizens of the world—rather they are the root cause.”

The revelation that Argentina has done something the US government hasn’t done in more than two decades—run a budget surplus—seems like a newsworthy event.

Yet to my surprise, I couldn’t find a word about it in major US media—not in the New York Times, the Associated Press, the Washington Post, or Reuters. (The New York Sun seems to be the only exception.)

I had to find the story in Australian media! (To be fair, the Agence France Presse also reported the story.)

One could argue that these outlets just aren’t very interested in Argentina’s politics and economics, but that’s not exactly true.

The Associated Press has covered Argentinian politics and Milei extensively, including a recent piece that reported how the new president’s policies were inducing “anxiety and resignation” in the populace. The same goes for Reuters and the other newspapers.

A cynic might suspect these media outlets simply don’t wish to report good news out of Argentina, now that Milei is president.

Indeed, in the wake of the news that Milei’s reforms had already resulted in a budget surplus, both Reuters and the AP ran articles highlighting a new study under the headline “Poverty in Argentina Hits 20-year High.”

Why US media would choose to ignore Milei’s budgetary accomplishments and highlight Argentina’s soaring poverty, which is decades in the making, is a difficult question to answer.

The decision could stem from the fact that these outlets have described Milei as a “far-right libertarian,” and a “Trump-like” figure (even though Trump, unlike Milei, is not a libertarian or classical liberal).

Another possibility is that these media institutions are suffering from something known as “media capture.”

Media capture can come in various forms and has numerous definitions, but the Center for International Media Assistance (CIMA) defines it as “a form of governance failure that occurs when the news media advance the commercial or political concerns of state and/or non-state special interest groups controlling the media industry instead of holding those groups accountable and reporting in the public interest.”

The most obvious examples of media capture would be outlets refusing to cover stories due to explicit threats of retaliation from powerful actors.

Maybe a sponsor says they’ll pull advertising if you run a story about the side effects of their product, or maybe a powerful Hollywood director threatens reprisals if you report his sexual abuses. Perhaps a certain Royal Family threatens to cut off interview access to your network if you run an interview with a sex trafficking victim who says she was victimized by a member of that Royal Family.

These are all very real scenarios of captured media, and such situations can have a profound impact on independent journalism.

“Captured media can go from vigilant watchdog to toothless public relations machine, ignoring the news of the day,” CIMA notes.

This is why the government takes such an interest in media. The economist Murray Rothbard famously wrote that because “its rule is exploitative and parasitic,” the state has a great incentive to shape opinion and ideology, which are the source of power.

Few tools are more effective at shaping thought than media, which is no doubt why the greatest tyrants of the 20th century went to great lengths to control it.

Constitutional systems of course require more subtlety. Which is why, as Rothbard wrote, the state purchases “the alliance of a group of ‘Court Intellectuals,’ whose task is to bamboozle the public into accepting and celebrating the rule of its particular State…”

The state has various methods to “purchase” the allegiance of media and others who can shape opinion, and some of these are downright shocking.

Writing for Rolling Stone in 1977, legendary reporter Carl Bernstein exposed records showing that hundreds of US journalists had been paid by the CIA over years to do work on the Agency’s behalf.

“Some of these journalists’ relationships with the Agency were tacit; some were explicit. There was cooperation, accommodation, and overlap. Journalists provided a full range of clandestine services,” wrote Bernstein, who along with Bob Woodward broke the Watergate scandal.

He continued:

Some of the journalists were Pulitzer Prize winners, distinguished reporters who considered themselves ambassadors without-portfolio for their country. Most were less exalted: foreign correspondents who found that their association with the Agency helped their work; stringers and freelancers who were as interested in the derring-do of the spy business as in filing articles; and, the smallest category, full-time CIA employees masquerading as journalists abroad. In many instances, CIA documents show, journalists were engaged to perform tasks for the CIA with the consent of the managements of America’s leading news organizations.

To be clear, I’m not suggesting the CIA is paying the above-mentioned media organizations not to write flattering stories about Milei.

Media capture, as mentioned, comes in various forms. And my hunch is that it typically involves applying pressure and offering incentives in more subtle ways than overt quid pro quos.

What I am saying is that no institution is more effective at media capture than the government, which has even more resources and power than Hollywood directors and royal families. And chief among the state’s many agendas is its own self-preservation. This puts the state at odds with free-market libertarians like Javier Milei who wish to create a more prosperous society by reducing (or eliminating) government’s influence over our lives. And this is the reason a resounding free-market success story in Argentina is likely unwelcome news to both the state and the Court Intellectuals who serve it.

The problem is, free-market economics is the only force that can save Argentina from proceeding further into an economic death spiral.

From countries like Hong Kong and Ireland to former Soviet Bloc countries such as Estonia and beyond, free markets have transformed struggling and impoverished economies with what Adam Smith long ago recognized as the surprisingly simple recipe for prosperity: “peace, easy taxes, and a tolerable administration of justice.”

It will do the same in Argentina, given the opportunity—whether media choose to cover it or not.

What do you think of Javier Milei? Is he a mad libertarian? Is he the saviour of Argentina? Does he need a better barber? Tell us in the comments below. 

This article was originally published on FEE.org. Read the original article. 

AUTHOR

Jonathan Miltimore is the Editor at Large of FEE.org at FEE.

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

Poll Shows Biden Unpopular among Voters as Immigration, Inflation Worsen

/in , , , , , , , , /by

A sprawling new survey is revealing that voters are getting sick of the Biden administration, and Trump’s popularity is holding strong. According to the latest Harvard CAPS/Harris poll, President Joe Biden’s approval rating is floundering, underwater at 45% (23% strongly approve, 22% somewhat approve), with his disapproval rate (39% strongly disapprove, 15% somewhat disapprove) remaining fairly steady since January of 2022. Nearly half of voters (48%) said that Biden is getting worse as a leader, while 27% (mostly Democrats) said he’s improving and 25% said he’s pretty much the same.

Furthermore, voters are disappointed with Biden’s performance on key issues. The 81-year-old president’s approval rating is low regarding his management of immigration (35%), inflation (39%), the economy (43%), rising crime rates (41%), and others. The only area where voters said Biden has done a good job was in responding to COVID-19. When asked what Biden’s biggest achievement has been as president, more voters (30%) said he hasn’t had a big achievement than voters (28%) who agreed that lowering the cost of prescription drugs is the biggest feather in Biden’s cap.

The Biden administration’s biggest failure is, according to voters, its border policy. Forty-four percent of voters (including about a third of Democrats and nearly half of Independents) believe Biden’s biggest failure was overseeing “an open borders policy and a historic flood of immigrants.” Runners-up for the title of “biggest failure” include weak leadership, “rampant inflation,” “a shameful withdrawal from Afghanistan,” and a failure to tackle surging crime rates.

Immigration, inflation, and the economy are the top issues that voters are concerned about heading into the next presidential election. Thirty-six percent of voters expressed concern over immigration, 33% over inflation and price increases, and 24% over the economy and jobs. Inflation was rated the most important issue to voters personally with 42% of voters responding that they have been personally impacted by rising prices, up four percentage points just since January. Immigration and crime were next, at 18% and 11% respectively. Additionally, 54% of voters said their personal financial situations were suffering under Biden and upwards of 70% said they fear that inflation is “here to stay.”

On immigration, 63% of voters said that the border crisis is worsening (including 42% of Democrats and 65% of Independents) and a staggering 71% said that the U.S. needs tougher laws against illegal immigration (including 56% of Democrats and 76% of Independents). A majority of voters also believe the federal government already has the power and authority it needs to fix the illegal immigration crisis and that Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas is simply not enforcing existing border control laws. Sixty-two percent of voters (including nearly half of Democrats) support impeaching Mayorkas “under the charge that he is willfully not enforcing immigration laws and securing the border…”

Also according to the survey, Biden would lose against former President Donald Trump if the election were held today. Forty-eight percent of voters said that they would pick Trump over Biden, with 9% saying they weren’t sure. When that 9% were asked which way they lean, Trump would beat Biden 53% to 47%. Significantly, Trump would earn 52% of the Independent vote and even 13% of the Democratic vote.

When third-party players are introduced, Trump still comes out on top, with former Democrat Robert F. Kennedy Jr. taking a substantial portion of the vote (nearly 10%) that would otherwise go to Biden. Trump also garnered nearly 80% support among GOP voters for the Republican presidential nomination, with former South Carolina governor Nikki Haley earning a paltry 14%. Biden would also beat Haley (41% to 39%, 19% undecided) if the two were to go head-to-head.

Even if Trump were to be convicted of the numerous indictments leveled against him by leftist prosecutors and Biden’s Justice Department, voters would still likely go for him over Biden. A whopping 54% of voters said they’d vote for Trump even if he were convicted of inciting the riot at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021. Only 46% said they’d back Biden, which is actually down from 52% just a month ago. Fifty-two percent of voters said they would still vote for Trump if he were convicted of election interference charges in Georgia, but voters were split on whether to vote for him if convicted of allegedly mishandling classified presidential documents, with 50% backing Trump and 50% backing Biden.

A clear majority of voters (58%) also believe that the prosecutions against Trump are politically motivated. Even a surprising 42% of Democrats said they think that the Biden administration is “using the legal system in biased ways to take out a political opponent.” Voters were split when asked if Trump poses a “threat to democracy,” with 50% saying he doesn’t and 50% saying he does, which is down from 52% a month ago.

When asked if Trump will impact the nation “for the better,” 56% of respondents said yes, while 44% said he’s “a danger to democracy and will hopelessly divide the country if elected.” Nearly 60% of respondents also agreed with the statement, “I miss Donald Trump’s policies on the economy, immigration and crime,” and 62% agreed that Democrats “are trying to unfairly scare the voters over Donald Trump by labeling him as a dictator.”

When asked, nearly 60% of respondents said that they think Trump did a good job as president — that includes a majority in every age range polled, a majority among urban, suburban, and rural voters, 53% of independents, and even 29% of Democrats. Trump was also rated among the political figures with the highest net favorability, while Biden, his son Hunter, and other Democrats like Vice President Kamala Harris, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), California Governor Gavin Newsom (D), and others received some of the lowest scores.

This comes as numerous other polls show Trump leading Biden in November and concern over illegal immigration skyrocketing.

AUTHOR

S.A. McCarthy

S.A. McCarthy serves as a news writer at The Washington Stand.

To learn more please visit: BIDENOMICS IS BAD ECONOMICS

POST 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.

Are You Sick and Tired of Sending Your Tax Dollars to a Federal Government that Doesn’t Give Damn about You?

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

As we the tax paying citizens of America approach the 2024 tax season, we are witnessing a growing anger against the federal government.

Washington, D.C. doesn’t give a damn about you, they just want your money to spend on everything and anything that keeps them in power.

All three branches of government are wasting our money in different ways.

Big Government Writ Large

Let us look at a list of our top criticisms and recommendations of the Big Federal Government spending troika.

Truths and recommendations (a short list):

  1. They tax us more and more and then spend furiously on things that do nothing for the American citizen. BTW, when was the last time you saw a tax cut?
  2. The growing national debt, now reaching $34+ trillion. Printing money isn’t the answer, cutting government spending, except for mandatory items like Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, is.
  3. Spending more and more money to support illegal aliens, a.k.a. illegal migrants/drug cartel members/foreign terrorists/child traffickers/drug traffickers, who are coming across our borders by the thousand each and every week.
  4. Spending billions on foreign wars, with the exception of fully supporting the state of Israel. It’s time to defund foreign wars and use that money to build up our own prosperity.
  5. Buying foreign oil and natural gas when we have abundant amounts right under the ground and off the shores of America.
  6. Investing in private green companies that waste our tax dollars and then go broke.
  7. Bailing out students who took out federal government loans to go to college or university. What are we teaching our children about taking responsibility for their own debts? We need to return student loans back to the private sector.
  8. Using our tax dollars to fund foreign entities, e.g. the PLO, and even terrorists organizations, like Hamas, via our monetary support of the United Nations and U.N.R.W.A.
  9. Funding federal department that are unconstitutional, e.g. the Department of Education.
  10. Stop over paying our federal elected officials, their staff, appointed members of the various departments and their staffs and the growing numbers of federal employees, e.g. the IRS armed agents. Cut the pay at every level.
  11. Wasting our tax payer dollars to attack we the people, via a two-tiered and militarized justice system, that seeks to destroy our Constutional Republican form of government.
  12. Finally, making us taxpayer fund a bloated Executive Branch, Congressional and Supreme Court staff. Cut each branch in half and you will see half the damage done to we the people.

The Bottom Line

Many today are addicted to a bloated, corrupt, and wasteful big government.

It’s past time to cut government and with it government spending.

Time to implement the Fair Tax and get rid of the federal income tax.

We live in the free state of Florida. Florida gets its income from a state 6% sales tax. Florida has a multi-billion dollar surplus.

Get the idea?

Time to defund, defang and damn the federal government to hell.

©2024. Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

RELATED VIDEO: CBS POLL: More Than Half Of Americans Say Prices Will Keep Going Up If Biden Is Re-Elected

POST ON X: Here is how big government is working to stay in power.

The introduction of Corporate Fascism in The Netherlands

/in , , , , , , , /by

13 years ago, Mr. Mark Rutte started to govern in my country Holland as Prime Minister. Though he is a member of the Dutch Conservative Party, he’s in his heart not for individual freedom at all.

Right now, he is at the end of his last term. Elections for a new Dutch Government have already been held, and so he is on his way out.

The Netherlands changed a lot during his reign. And not for the better.

For example, the total amount of taxation per citizen, was 13 years ago about 35% of the average income. Now it’s up to 40%! That means that if you have an income of 20,000 Euro then you pay a total of taxes of that amount to the value of 8,000 Euro. This makes you a part-time slave of the Dutch Government.

There is a name for the system with which Mark Rutte governs. It’s not a pretty term: Corporate Fascism.

Corporate Fascism means that the CEO’s of the largest companies and a small group of powerful politicians rule over the citizens in total cooperation. They suppress the common man and empty his pockets with the power of the full state behind them.

Corporate Fascism can be found in many countries in Europe. It has replaced Social Democracy, otherwise known as the Welfare State.

In The Netherlands we see after 13 years of corporate fascism, that a huge amount of nice small shops with quality products and good personal service, have closed their doors. There are very few places where you can still buy artisan made traditional high quality products.

It’s gotten hard these days to make enough money simply to buy your groceries, clothes and pay your monthly rent, mortgage, electricity bill, phone bill et cetera. That’s strange, because you pay most money to big firms that produce their products in factories at almost no costs at all. The CEO’s of these companies are therefor FAKE capitalists. Competition is an illusion.

In a country with corporate fascism, there is an elite class that doesn’t do any productive work at all. These profiteers just sit behind computer screens and produce nothing. They enrich themselves in an extreme way.

Mr. Mark Rutte, who introduced Corporate Fascism in The Netherlands, now is considered the number 1 candidate for leading NATO.

I think that you should be warned.

When he can operate at a global level, he will do a serious effort to introduce Corporate Fascism on a global scale.

©2024. Matthys van Raalten. All rights reserved.

Biden Campaign Co-Chair Suggests Deporting Illegal Immigrants Would Hurt The Economy

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

Democratic Texas Rep. Veronica Escobar on Friday suggested that deporting illegal immigrants would have adverse economic consequences.

President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump both visited the border and delivered remarks on Thursday. Escobar, co-chair of Biden’s 2024 reelection campaign, criticized Trump’s rhetoric and underscored the economic importance of immigrants in the workforce, advocating against deporting them on “CNN Newsroom With Jim Acosta.”

“Democrats have been willing over the decades to not just address border security as a whole, but also to address our workforce needs and to make sure that we remain a country of immigrants. Immigration is good for us economically,” Escobar asserted. “Republicans have created the current situation and we need solutions. But what Trump is signaling is horrific. He really does want to take us back to an era where people feared being in their own country simply because they belong to a minority group.”

WATCH:

Illegal immigration has massively increased under Biden as millions of migrants from around the world cross the southern border. One of Biden’s first actions in office was to issue executive actions revoking Trump-era border policies, including the Muslim travel ban and the border wall project.

“He‘s willing to violate the Constitution, violate our civil rights, violate constitutional rights,” Escobar told Acosta. “And let me tell you, it is impossible to deport every undocumented person in this country. There simply are not the resources nor is it advantageous to us. I mean, I’m sure you’ve seen the reports, Jim, that it has been immigrant labor, the immigrant workforce that has actually propped up our economy. The challenge we face is that Congress has not created legal pathways for them.”

AUTHOR

JASON COHEN

Contributor.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Majority Of Americans Support Building Border Wall For First Time In Poll’s History

Illegal Immigrants Continue to Commit Violent Crimes as Sanctuary Cities Reassess Policies

Federal Judge Blocks New Texas Law to Arrest Illegal Immigrants

POSTS 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.

Illegal Immigrants Continue to Commit Violent Crimes as Sanctuary Cities Reassess Policies

/in , , , , , , , , , , , /by

Violent crimes committed by illegal immigrants continue to rise throughout the country, resulting in American citizens being attacked, raped, and murdered. Experts are noting that these are the same migrants who receive taxpayer-funded health care, housing, education, food, and more.

The most high-profile story making news is last week’s murder of 22-year-old Laken Riley. She was a young nursing student at Augusta University who never returned from her jog Thursday morning because she was brutally murdered by who police believe to be a man named Jose Antonio Ibarra, who is also an illegal immigrant.

Not only does Ibarra have a criminal record in the U.S. since arriving illegally, but his brother does as well. Ibarra has been charged with theft, child endangerment, and murder, among other crimes. And his brother, Diego Ibarra, along with stealing, was recently caught giving police a fake green card with two different birth dates on it. This happened after he was stopped by police for driving while drinking beer — which the migrant told the officer was his seventh since he’d been behind the wheel.

On Monday, police in Maryland charged Nilson Trejo-Granados, one of five suspects, for the first and second-degree murder of two-year-old Jeremy Poou Caceres. Before being arrested for murder, Trejo-Granados was charged with theft in March 2023.

On February 20, Angel Matias Castellanos-Orellana allegedly raped a 14-year-old girl at knifepoint, and on February 25, he repeatedly stabbed a man in the face and back, demanding the man give him his property. According to The Post Millennial, “He was arrested and booked on armed robbery, aggravated battery, first-degree rape, and aggravated assault and a federal ‘ICE’ detainer was also issued for him.”

In addition, last month a group of alleged illegal immigrants viciously attacked New York City police officers in Times Square. As crimes committed by illegal immigrants skyrocket, some sanctuary cities are starting to reassess their policies. In fact, it was this beating in NYC that caused Mayor Eric Adams (D) to say during a townhall meeting, “Those who are committing crimes, we need to modify the sanctuary city law. If you commit a felony, a violent act, we should be able to turn you over to [Immigration and Customs Enforcement] ICE and have you deported.”

And the Big Apple isn’t the only city backtracking. According to The Daily Wire, “The city council of Aurora, which sits just east of Denver, approved a resolution in a 7-3 vote on Monday demanding that large groups of migrants not be transported there since it is unable to fund new services for migrants or homeless people.”

In addition to a call to “secure our nation’s border,” the resolution said: “The City Council affirms remaining a Non-Sanctuary City and asserts the City does not currently have the financial capacity to fund new services related to this crisis and demands that other municipalities and entities do not systematically transport migrants or people experiencing homelessness to the City.”

Family Research Council President Tony Perkins said on “Washington Watch” Wednesday that these harsh and dangerous circumstances only highlight “the damage inflicted by the Left’s public policy decisions [and] their open borders.” Congressman Rich McCormick (R-Ga.), who serves on the House Foreign Affairs Committee and the House Armed Services Committee, agreed, noting that these policies have allowed “some nefarious people … across the border.”

McCormick pointed out that Venezuela currently has a record low crime rate. “Why do you think it is?” he asked. It’s because Venezuela is “getting rid of their criminals” by sending them to the U.S. through the open border, he said. “Bad people are crossing the border. … We have record numbers of deaths from fentanyl. We have record amount of child trafficking, rape, [and] murder. … I’ve been talking about it for years. This is a significant problem.”

He added, “If you’re coming to this country and committing crimes, and then you continue to commit crimes and have been released, what are we doing?” A major issue facing America, McCormick shared, is that these illegal immigrants and violent criminals are being released as if they’re “regular citizens.” But “they’re not,” he said. “They’re here illegally. … This should be an ICE issue,” because when an illegal immigrant gets arrested, “they get sent back to their country. That’s the way it’s supposed to be. That’s the law. Imagine following the law.”

Perkins noted that the Left is notorious for also making claims that we shouldn’t “politicize the murder of a 22-year-old student” like Laken Riley by connecting it to illegal immigration. But, he wondered, “How else do we look at this? This is their policies. This is the outcome that we’re seeing from their open border policies. How else can you look at it?”

“There’s so many ramifications for lawlessness that we’ve allowed to take place at our southern border,” Perkins stated. And that will only end, McCormick concluded, if we continue to “fight the good fight.”

AUTHOR

Sarah Holliday

Sarah Holliday is a reporter at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLES:

‘We Can’t Let Florida Become San Francisco’: Florida House Passes Bill Banning Homeless People from Sleeping on Public Property

‘A Biden Invasion’: Trump and Biden’s Border Speeches Make ‘An Extraordinary Contrast’

EAGLE PASS, TEXAS: President Donald J. Trump ‘We’re going to take care’ of the dangerous border!

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.

Is American Pork Ending Up In The Bellies Of Chinese Soldiers?

/in , , , , /by

Communist China’s military could be reaping the benefits of the takeover of a U.S agricultural giant.

America’s largest pork producer was exporting massive quantities of pork to its Chinese “sister company” as it stockpiled food for the Chinese military, according to a Daily Caller News Foundation review of corporate records and Chinese state-run media reports.

Smithfield Foods, owner of roughly 150,000 acres of U.S. land and operator of dozens of feed mills and production plants, has shipped hundreds of thousands of tons of pork to its China-based parent company WH Group and sister company Shuanghui Investment and Development Co. (Shuanghui) since being acquired in 2013, according to corporate and Chinese government records as well as state-run media reports.

Shuanghui has extensive ties to the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), which it touts on its website, and is responsible for developing food for China’s military to use on the battlefield, according to the PLA-sponsored China Military News.

Shuanghui also operates a food “mobilization center” for the PLA in Henan province, and has done so since 2009, according to a 2022 Shuanghui news release. Shuanghui’s mobilization center stockpiles food, including pork, to meet the PLA’s emergency response needs, and Chinese state-run reports indicate that Shuanghui has distributed food from this stockpile to Chinese soldiers on several occasions in recent years.

A December 2023 report from the Luohe municipal government in Henan province indicates the military stockpile is still active and under Shuanghui’s management.

While Shuanghui doesn’t disclose where the pork it supplies the PLA originates from, it’s very likely that at least some U.S. pork product is being supplied to the PLA, according to Brian O’Shea, a former military and intelligence analyst.

“My opinion would be that the Chinese government is giving this superior U.S. pork to their soldiers,” O’Shea told the DCNF based on his understanding of Smithfield’s central role in Shuanghui’s pork supply chain and Shuanghui’s extensive relationship with the PLA.

“At these mobilization centers, there’s going to be a Smithfield pile and a Chinese domestic pork pile, and the Chinese domestic pork is most likely going to the civilians, whereas the superior pork is going to the Chinese military,” O’Shea said.

Neither Smithfield nor Shuanghui responded to multiple requests for comment.

‘A Unified State’

WH Group acquired Smithfield in 2013 for $7.1 billion. At the time, WH Group Chairman Wan Long said the acquisition would allow his companies to “meet the growing demand in China for pork by importing high-quality meat products from the United States,” adding the merger “provided Smithfield the opportunity to expand its offering of products to China through Shuanghui’s distribution network.”

The DCNF recently reported that WH Group’s chairman and four other executives are Chinese Communist Party (CCP) members. WH Group’s chairman and several top executives also hold, or previously held, positions with the Chinese government, the DCNF found.

WH Group’s leadership includes both Shuanghui and Smithfield executives, according to Reuters.

In 2013, the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission’s annual report characterized Smithfield’s acquisition by WH Group as “part of a broader trend of Chinese global investment in farm assets or food technologies.”

“China’s acquisitions in agriculture and other sectors are being driven by the desire to secure higher volumes of safe products and, in the long term, access to advanced production and processing technologies,” the commission wrote in its report.

“We’ve got to remember that China is a unified state,” Gordon Chang, distinguished senior fellow at the Gatestone Institute, told the DCNF. “It operates under the direction of the Communist Party, which demands absolute obedience from all individuals and all entities.”

Since 2013, Smithfield’s exports to China have exponentially increased. Shuanghui constructed a $110 million Smithfield-branded factory in China in 2015 that exclusively processes U.S.-raised Smithfield pork, and the company developed an e-commerce portal in 2017 that sells Smithfield products.

In the wake of these developments, Smithfield’s pork exports to China exploded from roughly 83,000 tons in 2018 to approximately 335,000 tons in 2020, according to S&P Global Market Intelligence data obtained by the DCNF.

Click here to view S&P Global Market Intelligence infographic U.S. Exports of Pork Linked to Smithfield (tons)

“There was an unusual increase in sales of entire swine carcasses to China during 2019,” according to a U.S. Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service report. “This increase reflects the retooling of at least one U.S. Smithfield Foods plant to produce carcasses for shipment to a plant in China that had excess processing capacity due to the shortage of hogs in the country.”

Shuanghui “used excess capacity in its Chinese plant to make processed products from the carcasses,” the report added.

Between 2015 and 2020, 80% of Shuanghui’s imported meat came from Smithfield, Chinese state-run media outlet The Paper reported. Shuanghui characterized Smithfield as its “primary” pork supplier that same year.

Since then, Smithfield has continued to export hundreds of thousands of tons of pork to China. S&P Global Market Intelligence’s data shows Smithfield sent 242,672 tons of pork to China in 2021 and 124,886 tons in 2022. Smithfield exports to China hit 101,791 tons in 2023, the data shows.

A November 2023 financial briefing published by Chinese state-run firm Guosen Securities, which used data from compliance reports, forecast that Shuanghui will continue to rely on Smithfield pork imports for the foreseeable future.

“Shuanghui Development’s meat product offerings are expected to rely on the importation of Smithfield Foods’ Western products, and the synergy of the two large platforms will increasingly arise,” Guosen Securities reported.

‘My Love Spills Into Every Army Base’

While Smithfield has been sending pork to Shuanghui, the Henan-based company was supplying the PLA, according to corporate records seen by the DCNF. In fact, Shuanghui’s relationship with the PLA predates WH Group’s acquisition of Smithfield.

In 2008, the Chinese government proposed that large enterprises assist in creating provincial military stockpiles for various goods like food at so-called “mobilization centers,” and, shortly thereafter, Shuanghui officials applied for the firm to establish a “Non-Staple Foods Mobilization Center,” according to a PLA Daily article that was reposted by Chinese news outlet Sina.

The PLA first called upon Shuanghui’s mobilization center in June 2009 while it was still under construction, asking for assistance in delivering 10 types of foods to Chinese soldiers approximately 125 miles away, PLA Daily reported.

Shuanghui’s mobilization center “integrates the military with the civilian” and “blends peacetime and wartime” in order to “guarantee an emergency response,” according to an archived December 2009 company news release.

That same month, Shuanghui head Wan Long, who also heads WH Group, presided over the opening ceremony of the firm’s mobilization center, which several high-ranking Chinese military personnel attended, according to the archived post.

By 2015, the mobilization center reportedly employed more than 2,200 veterans. These veterans routinely simulate emergency situations, such as delivering food goods to front-line positions in wartime, according to state-run China News.

Shuanghui President Ma Xiangjie, who sits on WH Group’s board and is a CCP member, serves as the mobilization center’s director, according to a company announcement from December 2022. In that same announcement, the company touted that the PLA had named Ma Xiangjie as one of Henan’s “Top 10 Military Supporters.”

Company and Chinese military records reviewed by the DCNF indicate that PLA officers have inspected Shuanghui’s mobilization center multiple times in recent years. During a December 2021 inspection, PLA officers presented Ma Xiangjie with a ceremonial banner that read: “My heart is bound to the Great Wall of steel, my love spills into every army base.”

A December 2022 Shuanghui announcement states the company’s mobilization center had at some point prior “successfully developed an ABC set meal series of military rations.” The U.S. Army describes A-rations as “perishable foods,” B-rations as “nonperishable foods” and C-rations as a “balanced meal in a can.”

Wan Long and Ma Xiangjie did not respond to multiple requests for comment.

‘Food Security’

Chinese social media posts show Shuanghui has on multiple occasions distributed pork from its mobilization center to Chinese military personnel.

In February 2020, for instance, Shuanghui announced it had donated meat to the PLA as well as Wuhan military medical staff working on the front lines of the COVID-19 pandemic. Shuanghui’s announcement featured photographs of the firm’s truck delivering boxes of pork sausages to PLA soldiers.

Smithfield exported at least 335,411 tons of pork to China in 2020, S&P data shows.

Chinese government documents show that Smithfield was sending pork directly to Shuanghui during the pandemic. China’s General Administration of Customs reporting it had rejected approximately 27 tons of Smithfield “frozen bone-in pork” sent to a Shuanghui subsidiary sometime before August 2020, citing an issue with the shipment’s certificate of goods.

Shuanghui has also bragged about donating medical supplies to the PLA during the pandemic.

In fact, People’s Daily, which is the CCP’s official media arm, reported in February 2020 that Shuanghui had launched a global campaign to procure medical supplies for the Chinese military. China’s State Council supported Shuanghui by helping medical supplies obtained abroad pass smoothly through customs, People’s Daily reported.

“In the early stages of the COVID-19 outbreak, WH Group’s subsidiary Shuanghui Development purchased anti-epidemic materials, including protective clothing, isolation gowns, masks and goggles overseas to support front-line medical staff in Hubei Province,” reads an English-language version of an April 2020 WH Group release. “Shuanghui also donated living materials and epidemic prevention materials to military medical workers at Wuhan Huoshenshan Hospital through the Luohe military sub-district.”

Moreover, the People’s Daily article also features a photo of a Smithfield truck outside a warehouse with a caption reading “overseas procurement” and credits Shuanghui for the picture.

Other images show what appears to be a Caucasian man moving rectangular boxes purportedly full of medical supplies with a forklift and a UPS plane on a tarmac beside pallets of boxes. Another photo appears to show workers and delivery trucks at Shuanghui’s headquarters preparing to deliver supplies to the Chinese military, as reported in a Shuanghui corporate release less than a week later.

“The Chinese Communist Party is increasingly focused on acquiring, illicitly or otherwise, agricultural technologies and supply chains,” Wisconsin Republican Rep. Mike Gallagher, chair of the House Select Committee on the CCP, told the DCNF. “We must strengthen our food security before it is too late.”

‘Chinese Communist Control’

Shuanghui also apparently agreed to supply a Chinese state-owned defense firm with Smithfield products, according to a 2022 Shuanghui Chinese social media post to which the company’s website also links.

During a November 2022 conference in Guangdong province, Shuanghui signed a strategic partnership agreement with the Aviation Industry Corporation of China (AVIC) to manufacture customized products in order to “support the rapid development of China’s aviation industry,” according to a company social media post.

Photos from the November 2022 event appear to show Smithfield bacon alongside other Shuanghui products involved in the defense contractor deal. The U.S. government sanctioned AVIC in 2021 “for operating or having operated in the defense and related materiel sector of the economy of the PRC.”

“People are just now starting to understand the consequences of the naïve policymaking that dominated Washington for the past couple decades,” Florida Republican Sen. Marco Rubio told the DCNF. “Chinese communist control of American businesses is a challenge we have to confront before a crisis.”

AUTHOR

PHILIP LENCZYCKI

Daily Caller News Foundation investigative reporter, political journalist, and China watcher. Twitter: @LenczyckiPhilip

RELATED ARTICLES:

EXCLUSIVE: Leadership Of Major US Landowner Chock-Full ‘Of Chinese Communist Party Members

James Biden: My Brother Gave Me $40K, $200K Loans For Chinese Company

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.