http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Geller Reporthttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Geller Report2022-08-30 09:24:452022-08-30 09:41:22The Vaxxed Are ‘Dropping Like Flies’ from Sudden Death Syndrome
A senior FBI official in the bureau’s Washington field office has abruptly resigned after coming under congressional scrutiny for suspected political bias in handling the investigation of Hunter Biden’s laptop computer.
FBI Agent Timothy Thibault, who publicly posted anti-Trump Lincoln Project tweets, and buried the investigation into Hunter Biden’s laptop, was also one of the FBI agents tasked with “combatting election fraud.”
He was the mastermind behind the affidavit to raid Mar-a-Lago.
He has longtime connections to the Clintons and the Obamas.
Thibault was the FBI official who was Assistant Agent in Charge (ASAC) in investigating voter fraud in the 2020 election. (source).
WATCH — FBI Agent Timothy Thibault, who publicly posted anti-Trump Lincoln Project tweets, and buried the investigation into Hunter Biden's laptop, was also one of the FBI agents tasked with "combatting election fraud".
Former FBI Washington Field Office Assistant Special Agent in Charge Tim Thibault was reportedly escorted out of the bureau on Friday, amid whistleblower allegations that he showed political bias in his handling of politically sensitive investigations.
The Washington Times reported eyewitness accounts that “Mr. Thibault was seen exiting the bureau’s elevator last Friday escorted by two or three ‘headquarters-looking types.’” The article appears to have been updated and now states that Thibault “abruptly resigned” but that he was “forced to leave his post” and cites two unnamed former FBI officials.
Just the News was unable to independently confirm the Times’ report.
Whistleblowers alleged that Thibault concealed the partisan nature of evidence from FBI Director Christopher Wray and Attorney General Merrick Garland to secure their approval to open an investigation into former President Donald Trump in 2020 unrelated to the raid, according to information made public by Sen. Charles Grassley.
Those whistleblower allegations have raised questions about the bureau as it also deals with the fallout of the raid on Trump’s home earlier this month.
In that matter, the public release of the affidavit that accompanied the search warrant revealed the warrant application relied heavily on information from news articles, including a CBS Miami piece titled “Moving Trucks Spotted At Mar-a-Lago” and a Breitbart News article in which former Trump adviser Kash Patel discussed the classified status of documents the bureau previously removed from the estate on behalf of the National Archives.
Grassley confirmed to Just the News prior to the raid that Thibault had been removed from his post and reassigned to an unspecified position.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Geller Reporthttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Geller Report2022-08-30 09:13:172022-08-30 13:39:00FBI Special Agent Who Opened Trump Investigation Escorted Out of Bureau
Former President Donald Trump is taking his case against FBI “election interference” to the American people — and to a new level — by demanding to be declared the “rightful winner” or “have a new election.”
“So now it comes out, conclusively, that the FBI BURIED THE HUNTER BIDEN LAPTOP STORY BEFORE THE ELECTION knowing that, if they didn’t, ‘Trump would have easily won the 2020 Presidential Election,’” Trump wrote Monday in Truth Social.
“This is massive FRAUD & ELECTION INTERFERENCE at a level never seen before in our country.”
Trump added the “remedy” for the 2020 presidential election meddling should be to “declare the rightful winner” or, a minimum, hold a “new election.”
“REMEDY: Declare the rightful winner or, and this would be the minimal solution, declare the 2020 election irreparably compromised and have a new election, immediately!” Trump’s statement concluded.
Trump’s remarks came after a weekend of rebuke of multiple angles of the 2020 presidential election, including Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg acknowledging the suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop story came after a visit and warning from the FBI.
Some countries run their entire economies around remittances, promoting mass migration to America, and then profiting from the money sent back to their families. Once we enabled money to enter Taliban territory, this was inevitable.
But this little detail emerges from what is supposed to be a sympathetic profile of Afghan migrants by the Los Angeles Times, but is actually an exercise in entitlement.
In many ways, Musafer said, America has provided him and his family with the safety and opportunity they had hoped for. He quickly found a full-time job at an Apple warehouse. His children — Sefatullah, 18; Rabia, 16; Muqaddas, 12; and Subhanullah, 10 — are enrolled in school. He and Yalda take English-language courses. Many in Yalda’s family immigrated to California several years ago, during an earlier phase of the U.S. occupation, and on weekends the Musafers spend time with her sister’s family, cooking together or exploring Northern California.
But America sucks.
About 10 miles from Musafer’s home, Ali Zafar Mehran questioned why the resettlement process for Afghans hasn’t gone more smoothly. Since arriving in the U.S. in April, Mehran, 36, has struggled to find housing. His caseworker told him that it could take months for the resettlement agency to help him find a place to live.
It can take Americans months to find a place to live. And we do it without subsidies or a government-funded agency.
“This resettlement system and refugee services are not fair,” said Mehran, who worked as a budget advisor for the Justice Sector Support Program — an international partnership with the U.S. and Afghan governments to help reform the Afghan criminal justice system and curb the flow of narcotics. “Some of my friends received good services. But most are in bad situations like me.”
His resettlement agency didn’t help him find a home, he said.
Why should it? The vast majority of people coming to this country don’t have government agencies finding them homes. They have to do that on their own.
He found his current apartment through another friend, who said he knew the leasing office manager in a complex in the Arden Arcade area where many Afghans have resettled.
That’s how it works.
Mehran used his “welcome money,” about $3,500 disbursed by the resettlement agency, to pay for the apartment that he has furnished with hand-me-downs and items he’s salvaged from the street. His wife, Karima, 31 — a former nurse who gave birth to their second daughter after moving to California — sleeps on a mattress he pulled from the trash. The decorative pillow cases that he brought from Afghanistan are also filled with things he found in the garbage.
Mehran works in a warehouse, he got $3,500 in aid and is getting government aid now. Why can’t he afford a mattress for his pregnant wife?
He borrowed roughly $12,000 from friends to purchase a car, a rug and other household items.
Buying the rug is a priority, but your wife can sleep on a mattress from the trash. That’s a cultural value.
“I really didn’t expect it, that life will start like this in the United States,” Mehran said. “I have lots of other problems. I must earn money to send to my parents in Afghanistan.”
Each month, he receives roughly $1,400 from Sacramento County in the form of cash aid and food stamps.
Between a full-time job and $1,400 in state welfare, Mehran might have more money, but he’s sending it to his family who live in Talibanstan. One way or another, the terrorists will get a cut of money brought into Afghanistan.
How much money is he sending to them? We’re not told.
The bottom line though is that Mehran is surly and complaining about the country that took him in and is lavishing cash on him because it’s not doing enough, meanwhile he’s sending money back to his home country.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Jihad Watchhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJihad Watch2022-08-30 08:03:182022-08-30 08:06:26Afghan Refugees in U.S. Are Sending Our Tax Dollars Back to Afghanistan
During this year’s edition of FreedomFest in Las Vegas, Nevada, Project Veritas founder James O’Keefe sat down with C-SPAN’s Peter Slen to discuss the current state of American media.
James talked about the core themes of his latest book, “American Muckraker,” and why it is a true guide for those who aspire to become investigative journalists in the modern age.
You can watch the highlights of his interview on C-SPAN2
TRANSCRIPT
Peter Slen, C-SPAN:Is it okay to deceive a subject you’re investigating?
James O’Keefe, Project Veritas:Your question is an interesting one, because it’s a question of relative deception. Because either you deceive your subject that you’re investigating to tell the truth to your audience, or you don’t deceive your subject and you tell untruths to your audience. In other words, if you just take what your subject is saying at face value, you’ll be disseminating perhaps falsehoods to millions of people. So, there’s an ethicist named Lewis Hodges who argues in a thesis paper: you have a moral imperative to deceive your subject if your mission is to tell the truth to your audience. This is also written about in a book called, ‘The Journalist and The Murderer,’ which is a famous book in the 1990s. Janet Malcolm, who is a legendary journalist, wrote that a journalist always deceives their subject. It’s a confidence game that you must play if your intention is to do investigative reporting. If your intention is to read off teleprompters, to play a stenographer, and to tell the public what the two-star general wants you to know, well, I would argue that’s a worse deception. You must choose between these two types of “deceptions,” but it’s paramount that you tell the truth to your audience. That’s what a journalist is supposed to do. There has always been a tension in journalism between what I call in this book [American Muckraker], access and autonomy. There’s always a tension there, because some people need to get really close to their sources and sometimes need to aggressively, and adversarially investigate their sources. So, you have to strike that balance just perfectly. But these days in journalism — its become too out of balance in the early 21st century. I think in the mid 20th century, investigative reporting was — you had the Chicago Sun Times doing these investigations where they’re posing as bartenders, you had, you know, most famously Upton Sinclair. Upton Sinclair was [celebrated] by journalists in New York for what he did. You don’t really see that anymore, right? You don’t on cable news. People just sort of sit up there and opine and talk about what they think. You know, none of these journalists on cable have really broken big aggressive stories. Most of the stories are broken through people like me. For example, The Washington Post won a Pulitzer surprise for investigating me — not corruption in the government. So, you need to have the spirit of investigative reporting, and citizens need to do it. You kind of have a [need for a] Renaissance and go back to what was done decades ago.
Slen:Has there ever been a moment in your career where you said, “I just can’t do this again.” I mean, this is really hard. This is really uncomfortable.
O’Keefe:Yes. In the first chapter of this book, American Muckraker, which is a journalism textbook, it’s about suffering. You might say, why would you write a chapter in a journalism book about such a theme like that? Because I think there’s a lot of trauma that has occurred in my life and in the lives of the people that work for me. Whether you’re being a whistleblower and you’re violating your nondisclosure agreement, you’re, you know, you’re fired from your job. I was arrested in 2010 by the FBI, eventually exonerated from what they accused me of. I was — we [Project Veritas] were raided by the FBI in November. These are federal agents taking journalists’ work product, rifling through anonymous sources in order to find out if you’ve committed crimes. These are traumatizing things that shake the foundation of what it means to be a journalist, what it means to be an American.
Slen:Do you think it’s because of some of the topics that you’re addressing that were ignored, edited, or ridiculed by the mainstream media?
O’Keefe:I don’t know if it’s so much politics as it is power. There is, you know, as Noam Chomsky wrote about, which I refer to in American Muckraker — he wrote a book called Manufacturing Consent. There is a symbiotic relationship between people in power and the media due to kind of a reciprocity of interest. For example, CNN, one of their main advertisers is Pfizer pharmaceutical in the commercial break. You actually hear it. You know, it’s become a cliche, “Brought to you by Pfizer.” So, we kind of take that for granted on the commercials, but if you are literally paid by a billion-dollar corporation, can you investigate that corporation? Of course not. We take this for granted growing up in America. We grow up seeing the media operate the way it does, but these are not right-wing arguments. I mean, Noam Chomsky is not a right-winger. Glenn Greenwald is not a right-winger. You begin to realize there’s more of us than there are of them in the sense that there’s more people that believe in truth and transparency than believe in darkness and corruption. There’s a place in the world for people like that. Without people like that, investigative journalists can’t do their jobs. It’s the bread and butter of what it means to be an American and the right to report [news]. What someone tells you is being fundamentally — fundamentally is in jeopardy right now. In our case with the FBI, they’re trying to take that right away from us right here. I had ACLU lawyers in my office last month telling me, by the way, they’re defending us. The ACLU is writing to the judge, trying to unseal the warrants against me. They said this has never happened before in American history. “James O’Keefe what’s happened to you has never happened before to any journalist.” Now they’re starting to point guns at us and take our reporters’ notebooks. That’s never happened before. So, I do admire people like Ed Snowden. I admire Julian Assange. I admire Dan Ellsberg. I admire Mike Wallace. I don’t know what’s happened. I don’t know why the billion-dollar [media] corporations aren’t doing the job — it’s left to scrappy, broke, entrepreneurial, enterprising people. But so be it.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00O'Keefe Media Grouphttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngO'Keefe Media Group2022-08-30 07:55:582022-08-30 07:55:58VIDEO: Founder of Project Veritas James O’Keefe Discusses the State of American Journalism
Casey Chalk reviews a new book about how, beginning in earnest in the mid-twentieth-century, Catholics traded their parochial, traditionalist, and often ethnic clannishness for the domesticity of bourgeois, suburban America.
American Catholics made a trade. You may not be aware of it or have personally participated in it. But it’s likely, if you’re a Catholic living in the United States in 2022 reading this, you feel its effects (and benefits). And though it may sound bleak, the trade more-or-less destroyed the American Catholic identity familiar to those living just a couple of generations ago.
That’s perhaps the most salient lesson I derived from Christendom history professor Christopher Shannon’s new book, American Pilgrimage: A Historical Journey Through Catholic Life in a New World. Though Shannon’s history covers much ground beyond just the United States, with long early chapters on Spain and France, the sections on England and the United States teach the most important lesson.
First, consider a few numbers. In 1969, when the U.S. population was about 202 million, there were about 60,000 diocesan priests. Today, with a national population of about 330 million, there are fewer than 40,000. And it’s not as if the number of Catholics here declined over that period. Far from it: we increased from about 30 million in 1950 to more than 70 million today (plus another 13 percent of American adults who describe themselves as “ex-Catholics”). The drop is even more stark for women religious: in 1970 there were about 161,000 women religious in the United States; today there are about 42,000.
What happened? According to Shannon’s incisive narrative, those numbers are emblematic of an epochal shift, in which Catholics, beginning in earnest in the mid-twentieth-century, traded their parochial, traditionalist, and often ethnic Catholic clannishness for the domesticity of bourgeois, suburban America. Catholics became just another “denomination” in big-tent American Judeo-Christianity – devout, patriotic, and trustworthy members of America’s civil religion.
How and why that happened is a complicated story beginning in the early years of the Republic, when Catholics like Baltimore archbishop John Carroll (1735-1815) aimed to synthesize “old World faith and New World culture,” as Shannon puts it. It continued through the nineteenth century with prominent Protestant converts to Catholicism, such as Orestes Brownson, who were critical of the insular and often unassimilated ethnic Catholics from Ireland, Germany, and elsewhere.
But it reached its most dramatic moment in presidential candidate John F. Kennedy’s address to the (Protestant) Houston Ministerial Association in 1960. It was there that our first Catholic president declared: “I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute. . . .I believe in a president whose religious views are his own private affair.” Indeed, as Shannon notes: “Aside from attendance at the church of his choice on Sunday, Kennedy could have been any other upper-middle-class white American.”
Of course, Kennedy’s words represented a trend that was already decades old. It was visible in the departure of Catholics from their tight-knit urban parishes for the more anonymous, religiously diverse suburbs. Shannon explains: “The suburbs cut Catholics off from that world and placed them into a social setting where they mixed much more freely with non-Catholics.” And as long as our Catholicism was a private affair, non-Catholics didn’t care.
Suburbia also meant embracing a family life that often looked more Protestant than Catholic. As early as 1952, about half of Catholics had no moral qualms with artificial birth control. That translated to fewer kids for Catholics, who focused their energies on the same kinds of values as their Protestant neighbors: consumerism, physical and emotional fulfillment, and affluent professionalism. “Most Catholics had made their peace with artificial contraception and an increasing number seemed willing to accept legal abortion,” writes Shannon.
There were of course other relevant developments. The “Land O’Lakes Statement” of 1967 sought to modernize and assimilate Catholic academic institutions into the broader secular (or nominally Protestant) American academy. Catholic thinkers like John Courtney Murray, S.J., meanwhile sought to repudiate scholars such as Will Herberg and Paul Blanshard, who claimed that Catholicism and democracy were antithetical. Rather, Murray famously declared, the Founders “built better than they knew.”
Whether we are talking about social, economic, educational, or professional matters, the goal was always the same: develop the habits “required to attain a decent, moderate middle-class lifestyle.” And boy, did we succeed: most Catholics in post-World War II America secured middle-class status. We now comprise a significant percentage of both houses of Congress and a majority of the Supreme Court, and (at least nominally) occupy the White House.
Did we lose anything in the process? Shannon thinks so: “What has decidedly been lost is unity, or better, a sense of people-hood. Despite the rhetorical shift toward understanding the Church as the ‘people of God,’ there are few if any ways in which Catholics stand apart from other Americans to identify themselves as people.” There’s also the depressing fact that ex-Catholics make up the nation’s second-largest religious demographic. The more we tried to be like middle-class Protestants, the less we cared to be serious Catholics.
More radically, the recent secularized intellectual and cultural offshoots of Protestantism – progressivism, the sexual revolution (culminating in the LGBT+ orthodoxy), and racial activism – have imposed themselves on the American public, including Catholics.
In one of his most astute observations, Shannon notes: “Soon after Kennedy declared that his faith was a totally private matter, various strains of the counterculture rallied around the slogan ‘the personal is political.’” Catholics got bourgeois respectability, but we let the post-Protestant Left impose their anti-Christian ideologies on the American people, including millions of Catholic kids in the nation’s public schools. “Religious pluralism seemed to require a privatization of faith, or at least those aspects of the faith that set Catholics apart from the universally American.”
Perhaps this trade was in certain respects inevitable. Catholics weren’t going to live in ethnic ghettos forever. And however much we can be cynical about the materialist nature of the exchange, what parents don’t want their children to do better professionally and economically? The more urgent challenge, however, is ensuring they do spiritually better as well.
Casey Chalk is a contributor for Crisis Magazine, The American Conservative, and New Oxford Review. He has degrees in history and teaching from the University of Virginia and a master’s in theology from Christendom College.
A year ago, Dr. Leana Wen was arguing unvaccinated people shouldn’t be allowed to leave their homes. But now she says she’s abandoned her “extremely cautious” Covid views.
During the 1960s, the phrase “the personal is political” became a rallying cry for second-wave feminists challenging the social framework that existed at the time.
There was an unhealthy collectivist undercurrent to this idea—“There are no personal solutions at this time,” wrote Women’s Liberation Movement member Carol Hanisch in an essay on the topic, “There is only collective action for a collective solution”—but the phrase also contains an element of truth.
Personal experience does play an undeniable role in how many humans perceive politics and social structures, which brings me to CNN medical analyst Dr. Leana Wen.
‘I Accept the Risk’
Throughout the pandemic, Wen was in what I’ll call the “pro-mandate” camp.
In March 2021, she excoriated governors who rescinded or failed to pass mask mandates in their states.
“We are not out of the woods. We haven’t reached the end of the pandemic,” Wen said in a pro-mask CNN piece. “It’s counterproductive and truly infuriating these governors are treating this as if the pandemic is over. It’s not true.”
Later that year, she went so far as to argue that unvaccinated people shouldn’t be allowed to leave their homes.
“We need to start looking at the choice to remain unvaccinated the same as we look at driving while intoxicated,” Wen told CNN’s Chris Cuomo. “You have the option to not get vaccinated if you want, but then you can’t go out in public.”
.@DrLeanaWen: “There are privileges associated with being an American. That if you wish to have these privileges, you need to get vaccinated. Travel, and having the right to travel in our state, it’s not a constitutional right as far as I know to board a plane." pic.twitter.com/eyhEVooV20
A year later, Wen’s views have changed. In a recent Washington Post article, she explained why she’ll no longer be masking her children and how she shifted away from “being extremely cautious” with Covid protocols.
“I accept the risk that my kids will probably contract covid-19 this school year, just as they could contract the flu, respiratory syncytial virus and other contagious diseases,” she writes. “As for most Americans, covid in our family will almost certainly be mild; and, like most Americans, we’ve made the decision that following precautions strict enough to prevent the highly contagious BA.5 will be very challenging.”
Wen’s observations are not wrong. The new variants are less deadly, and this is particularly true for children, which has always been the case.
A year ago, when Wen was still advocating strict mandates, we pointed out that the CDC’s own data showed small children were at far greater risk of dying from the flu, drowning, vehicle collisions, cancer, and other things than Covid.
This data, for whatever reason, apparently did little to persuade Wen in 2021, however. What does appear to have changed her mind is that her child appears to have suffered from the mandates.
“Masking has harmed our son’s language development,” she bluntly asserts in the article.
‘There Is a Tradeoff’
Throughout the pandemic, few policies have been debated with more fury than mask mandates. The vast majority of these debates focus on a single point: does masking prevent or even reduce Covid transmission? Some studies say yes, others cast doubt on their efficacy.
For many, however, the efficacy of masking became a sort of dogma that could not even be questioned. (If you doubt this, consider that until a few days ago one faced risk of suspension on YouTube for suggesting that masks don’t play a role in preventing Covid transmission.)
Far less discussion focused on the costs of forcing people to wear masks, and Wen now sees this as a mistake.
“There is a tradeoff,” Wen says.
Many on Twitter have asked–how did I go from being extremely cautious with #covid19 precautions for nearly two years to now resuming pre-pandemic activities, including not masking my young kids at school?
Many, however, refused to acknowledge this and argued that masking is simply a moral imperative. I recently had a discussion at a family gathering with a person who supports mask mandates. He became indignant when my sister-in-law said she didn’t think it was right to force her children to wear masks at school all day long.
“It’s about protecting others,” he said. “It’s the smallest thing.”
The fact that he was not wearing a mask himself as he said this didn’t seem the least bit ironic to him, but it proved Wen’s point: there are tradeoffs. (If there was not, we’d wear them all the time.)
The idea of tradeoffs is perhaps the most basic principle in all of economics. It’s rooted in a simple idea: in order to have or do one thing, one must sacrifice having or doing something else. All things come with opportunity costs, big and small. (A minor tradeoff with masking is simply being able to breathe more freely.)
For most of the pandemic, many Americans and most public health officials refused to acknowledge the reality of tradeoffs. In 2021, The New York Times described a phenomenon known as “Covid Absolutism.” It consists of two primary factors: 1. Taking every conceivable step that could reduce the spread of Covid regardless of its actual effectiveness; 2. Downplaying or ignoring the unintended consequences and tradeoffs of these policies.
There is an important difference between taking steps that *appear* to reduce the spread of Covid and taking steps that actually reduce the spread of Covid.
Basic economics, however, teaches us the folly of this thinking.
“There are no solutions, there are only trade-offs,” Thomas Sowell famously observed.
This was the economic lesson Wen learned during the pandemic. She didn’t learn it in a classroom or in a textbook. She learned it in her personal experience when her own child began to struggle with language development (not a minor tradeoff), just like countless other children.
Writing in The Atlantic, Stephanie Murray also wrote about the reality of tradeoffs, stating that many parents with youngsters who are struggling see the potential benefits of masking as a poor trade for what they lose developmentally.
“Children with speech or language disorders offer perhaps the clearest example of these murky trade-offs,” she writes.
This is precisely why decision-making must be left to individuals, not bureaucrats. Nobody is more capable of weighing the pros and cons of a trade or action better than the people who themselves stand to lose or benefit from that trade or action (or in this care, their parents).
Dr. Wen no doubt knows a great deal about public health, just like Anthony Fauci and Rochelle P. Walensky. But even Fauci and Walensky, I suspect, would concede that it’s Wen who knows what’s better for her child.
It must be stressed that it’s not just that Wen wants what’s best for her child. It’s that she actually knows what’s best for her child because she has infinitely more knowledge about her child than any distant bureaucrat or meddling politician could ever possess.
Nobel Prize-winning economist F.A. Hayek detailed this “local knowledge” concept in his work exploring “the knowledge problem,” and he showed why central planners seeking to engineer society through force are capable of producing little beyond “planned chaos.” This is why it’s so important that freedom of decision-making is left to those who have the most local knowledge and can most accurately assess the risks and rewards of any given action.
The good news is that Wen, to her credit, appears to have learned something throughout the tragedy of the Covid pandemic, as have so many others.
The tragedy is that for so long she overlooked tradeoffs and used her platform to advocate coercive policies that deprived individuals of the ability to choose, a tragedy that is compounded by the fact that Wen now finds herself a target of cancellation for advocating a more sensible approach.
I'm on 3 immunosuppressants. COVID's been scary.
I never talk about this. Until I saw 600 experts publicly compare @DrLeanaWen to a supporter of eugenics bc she's come to oppose mandates.
They're doing this in the name of folks like me. I'd like to tell you why they're wrong.
It’s an ironic twist considering that only a year ago Wen herself was a proponent of confining unvaccinated people to their homes, and not one we should celebrate.
But hopefully it can be a learning experience for Wen and others, who now recognize the danger in turning what should be individual decisions over to bureaucrats and political tribes.
Jonathan Miltimore is the Managing Editor of FEE.org. His writing/reporting has been the subject of articles in TIME magazine, The Wall Street Journal, CNN, Forbes, Fox News, and the Star Tribune. Bylines: Newsweek, The Washington Times, MSN.com, The Washington Examiner, The Daily Caller, The Federalist, the Epoch Times.
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)2022-08-30 07:15:042022-08-30 07:17:34CNN Medical Analyst Says Masking Stunted Her Toddler’s Language Development—and Taught Her an Important Lesson about Tradeoffs
The gross negligence surrounding the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shootings in March 2018 was astounding including failures by the School District, the local FBI, the Broward Cowards in the Broward County Sheriff’s Office, including Sheriff Israel, and even the Administrator’s of the High School itself.
Remember that the School District had taken a large Grant from Obama/Holder called the “Promises Program” to suppress the criminal activity of minority students including the killer Cruz. Also both the Broward County Sheriff’s Office and FBI had numerous reports on social media warning about Cruz that they failed to follow up on. Sheriff Israel had a terrible policy in regard to response to active shootings; his Deputy stationed at the school was a coward hiding behind those policies and the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School Administration failed in many ways.
These terrible mass murders were preventable.
This was outlined in the Special Commission’s Report on the shootings.
Sadly, the result was a knee jerk reaction by Republicans under pressure in the Legislature to quickly drum up a Red Flag Law modeled after existing Blue State Laws which reduced the rights of law abiding gun owners.
Gov. Ron DeSantis is removing more local elected officials from office, this time on the recommendation of a grand jury.
DeSantis announced Friday he is removing Broward County School Board members Patricia Good, Donna Korn, Ann Murray and Laurie Rich Levinson. They serve the nation’s sixth-largest school district and second-largest in Florida.
A grand jury investigating school safety issues in the wake of the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Broward County recommended that the school board members be removed. The grand jury accused the elected officials of “incompetence and neglect of duty.”
“We recommend that the Governor remove them from their elected offices,” the grand jury report states.
DeSantis immediately appointed four people to replace the suspended school board members:
Torey Alston, a former Broward County commissioner and president of Indelible Solutions;
Manual “Nandy” A. Serrano, a member of the Florida Sports Foundation Board of Directors, and CEO and Founder of Clubhouse Private Wealth;
Ryan Reiter, a U.S. Marine veteran and Director of Government Relations for Kaufman Lynn Construction;
Kevin Tynan, an attorney who previously served on the Broward County School Board and South Broward Hospital District.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Royal A. Brown IIIhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngRoyal A. Brown III2022-08-30 06:48:242022-09-02 06:59:32Governor Ron DeSantis on the Recommendation of a Grand Jury Removes 4 Broward County School Board Members
WASHINGTON, D.C. /PRNewswire/ — America First declares the Dade County Florida Republican Party dead. Less than 19% of registered Republican voters participated in the August primary elections, allowing the RINO’s Republicans Carlos Gimenez, Maria Salazar and Mario Diaz-Balart to slither through once again on questionable Mail in Ballots and virtually no voter turnout.
Disgusted Republican voters have simply given up on the corrupt Republican Party, which is infested with Socialist Democrats. The Republican party is failing on all fronts and the voter base has lost confidence and quit.
Case in point, over 82% of Republican Voters in Florida 28th Congressional District did not even bother to vote in the Primary. The corrupt Republican Party continues to prop-up failing RINO Carlos Gimenez otherwise known as a Socialist Democrat. Gimenez has a long record of supporting radical socialist policy, dating back to his time as Miami-Dade Mayor.
As Miami-Dade Mayor, RINO Gimenez locked down and destroyed small businesses during Covid. Gimenez was also tainted with corruption and ethics accusations including unauthorized business dealings with Communist China.
In Washington, D.C., RINO Gimenez has voted with Nancy Pelosi and the radical leftists. Gimenez defended disgraced Liz Cheney after she voted in favor of the ‘Sham Impeachment’ against Donald Trump.
RINO Gimenez has openly voted the radical Democrats in Congress on ‘Unconstitutional Issues’ too many times and continues to support a socialist agenda:
RINO Gimenez openly supported and Voted forHillary Clinton and the Clinton Agenda in 2016;
RINO Gimenez also voted for the ‘January 6‘ Democrat ‘Witch Hunt’ against American Citizens and Republican voters;
RINO Gimenez voted withNancy Pelosiand the radical Democrats on H.R. 550, to allow the federal government to create a database, track unvaccinated Americans, who could be targeted, segregated, discriminated against, and forced to comply with vaccination mandates;
RINO Gimenez voted withNancy Pelosi and the radical Democrats on Anti-Second Amendment legislation HR-8, making it more difficult for law-abiding citizens to purchase, own, carry, and use a firearm;
RINO Gimenez voted withNancy Pelosi and the radical Democrats on H.R. 6 for ‘Open Borders and Amnesty’ to over 20 million criminal illegal aliens, which would permanently avoid deportation, obtain a pathway to citizenship, and full voting rights;
RINO Gimenez also voted withNancy Pelosi and the radical Democrats to strip Republican Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene of all Congressional Committee positions.
RINO Gimenez voted with Nancy Pelosiand the radical Democrats on the wasteful $1.5 Trillion wasteful socialist spending bill packed with billions in earmarks (Pork);
RINO Gimenez voted with Nancy Pelosi and the radical Democrats to codify homosexual marriage into federal law, overturning voter-approved measures in more than 30 states.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Dr. Rich Swierhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDr. Rich Swier2022-08-30 06:25:252022-08-30 06:25:25America First Declares the Dade County Florida Republican Party Dead, Less Than 19% Voter Turnout in August Primary Election
Watch this short video of an interview of Colonel Douglas Macgregor who is a very smart man – his analysis of Ukraine situation is 100% spot on especially with following points.
KEY POINTES:
Biden can keep sending Billions in ammo and equipment to Ukraine (depleting our military capabilities) but they can’t out shoot the Russians especially with artillery because the Russians have huge stockpiles of ammo dating back many years.
The US is taking a huge risk continuing to provide Ukraine with intelligence from our spy satellites because Putin knows this and Russia has the capability of destroying our satellites.
US and NATO are providing Sr military officers which have become Ukraine’s defacto general staff as well as providing contractor cells to collect intelligence for Ukraine – Putin know this too and may not continue retraining from taking them out.
The technologically advanced HIMARS rocket system lockheedmartin.com/en-us/products/high-mobility. being provided Ukraine by U.S. is being setup and operated by US backed contractors and Russia knows this too
The Wall Street Journal and other lamestream media is falsely reporting Ukraine is preparing to go on the offensive which is patently false – they have lost 70-100,000 of their best troops and don’t have the capacity to go on the offense.
A mass deluge of mistakes has been made by those in U.S. government, NATO and EU supporting Ukraine. All of this amounts to a huge disinformation campaign by Obama 3/Biden and NATO and even liberal Europeans are beginning to catch on to the lies especially those most at risk e.g. Poland, Romania, Hungary, Slovakia, Czechoslovakia and even Germany, the Obama 3 Admin and NATO have dug themselves a huge hole and the only way out is to tell the TRUTH but they won’t do so especially with November 2022 midterm elections around the corner.
Biden’s advisors running things on Ukraine are the same pack of Marxist deep Staters who failed so miserably on past foreign relations including Afghanistan including former national security advisor Susan Rice, Senior adviser Jake Sullivan, Secretary of State Anthony Blinken, DOD Secretary Lloyd Austin, Obama himself and Valery Jarrett, etc.
Ukraine is a no-win situation for the U.S. and we should stop supporting them – if we don’t this war will continue to escalate and may lead to WW III.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Royal A. Brown IIIhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngRoyal A. Brown III2022-08-29 16:25:162022-08-29 16:39:07Watch Colonel Douglas Macgregor’s Exposé ‘Reinforcing Failure in Ukraine’
In 1980, my father-in-law, Alfonso, gave me the little red book of “Quotations by Mao Tse Tung” as published by the Peking Press in 1972.
Alfonso was Hispanic, the owner (with his wife) of the Mexico Inn. A self educated chef. One of my heroes. His picture hangs on my wall of heroes in my home office. His advice was to know your enemy. And he considered Chinese, Russians, Communists to be the enemy that he saw infiltrating the Hispanic community in the USA in 1980 through the Democrat party.
Mao was the founder of the Chinese Communist Party, CCP. He killed millions upon millions of Chinese who disagreed with Chinese Communists. Millions. Some estimates are that CCP killed as many as 60 million fellow Chinese citizens who disagreed with CCP. Dissent, freedom of speech, freedom of thought, was not allowed. CCP rewrote the Chinese history that was taught to children to demonize the regimes that proceeded CCP. CCP was/is the ultimate cancel culture.
Mao was a proponent of democratic socialism. He believed that when the majority of people could vote to give things to themselves, that they would take from those who have wealth to give it to themselves (which is the exact reason why our US Constitution established a republic with a limited government instead of a majority run democracy).
Many of Mao’s ideas help explain the actions of Democrats in the USA today, especially their relentless attempt to stop Trump and to stop the Make America Great Again (America First) movement.
These are some quotations from that little red book of which many sound like Democrats in the USA today:
We must facilitate the change from private to public ownership…. through democratic socialism.
This is the dictatorship of the proletariat.
Our state is a people’s democratic dictatorship (say it again, then think about it…Democratic dictatorship… tyranny of the majority).
Our job is to suppress those who try to wreck our socialist construction, to arrest, try, and sentence certain individuals, to deprive capitalists of their right to vote and their freedom of speech… centralized control… through democracy…
The purpose of war is specifically to preserve oneself and to destroy the enemy… attack is the chief means of destroying the enemy… strive to wipe them out thoroughly and do not let any escape.
We must be ruthless to our enemies… annihilate them… wipe out all enemies.
Politics is war without bloodshed…. Wipe them out thoroughly… starting with their leaders…
(now go back and read “the purpose of war” again and think about the relentless attacks on Trump and on the Make America Great Again movement with the thought that “politics is war”).
Do propaganda among the masses … carry on constant propaganda…
The state must practice democratic centralism (a strong central government that is the opposite of state’s rights in a decentralized government as described in the US Constitution).
History is written by the winners. Those that succeed are correct and those that fail are incorrect (winning is everything as per Alinsky: the end justifies the means).
Man’s social being (values) determines his thinking. We must not allow thinking (values) from outside of Chinese thinking to infect our society (no religions, no competing political parties).
All genuine knowledge originates from direct experience.
Idealism is the easiest thing in the world because people can talk as much nonsense as they like without basing it on objective reality (climate change, CRT, WOKE, LBGTQ).
The individual is subordinate to the organization (the political party, the government).
OK Americans. Now ask yourself:
Who controls the mainstream media propaganda in the USA?
Why are liberals attempting to cancel our Declaration of Independence with its unalienable (individual) rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness and rewrite history?
And attempting to redefine the Bill of Rights (the first 10 amendments) in our Constitution from what the words actually state?
Why weren’t Hillary Clinton and Hunter Biden pursued by the FBI/DoJ with the same fervor as Trump is being pursued?
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Michael Charles Masterhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngMichael Charles Master2022-08-29 16:08:232022-08-29 16:08:23Mao’s Influence on Democrats
“Illegal immigration is wrong, plain and simple. Until the American people are convinced that we will stop future flows of illegal immigration, we will make no progress.” — Chuck Schumer.
“If making it easy to be an illegal alien isn’t enough, how about offering a reward for being an illegal immigrant? No sane country would do that.” — Harry Reid.
“I think we can enforce our borders. I think we should enforce our borders.” — Dianne Feinstein.
“I’m deeply opposed to illegal immigration, and I call on the federal government, the President, and the immigration services to stop the inflood of illegal immigrants into this country.” — Tim Kaine.
“It is wrong and ultimately self-defeating, for a nation of immigrants, to permit the kind of abuse of our immigration laws we have seen in recent years and we must do more to stop it.” — Bill Clinton.
“I voted numerous times when I was a senator to spend money to build a barrier to try to prevent illegal immigrants from coming in, and I do think you have to control your borders.” — Hillary Clinton.
“We simply cannot allow people to pour into the United States undetected undocumented, unchecked, and circumventing the line of people who are waiting patiently, diligently, and lawfully to become immigrants.” — Barack Obama.
Don’t believe me? I put the video on the website. There’s no denying it.
Last question: What do all these people have in common? They’re all top Democrats who said these things in the past and they belong to a party that has now become the Open Borders Party because it thinks that’s the way it will take, and hold on to power, in America, permanently.
The head of the Open Borders Party is joe Biden who, when he was a senator, joined Barack Obama in voting for the Secure Fence Act of 2006 which authorized the construction of 700 miles of fencing and vehicle barriers on the border. But one of the first things Biden did in the Oval office was to issue a proclamation stopping the construction of Trump’s border wall.
But now it’s time for their quiz. I hope they’re ready. Here’s what I want to ask:
Bill Clinton, almost 5 million illegal aliens have poured into the country since Joe Biden took office. How do you suggest Joe Biden stop it?
Hillary, given that Joe Biden stopped construction of the wall, do you blame Texas for busing illegal aliens to New York and D.C. and increasing the number?
Chuck Schumer, is it progress in your view that Joe Biden’s open borders policies, that you have done nothing to oppose, led to the seizure of 1.2 million fentanyl pills by border agents last week and there’s now enough fentanyl to kill everybody in the country? How do you define ‘progress’?
Finally, for Barack Obama: Did you vote for the Secure Fence Act in 2006 because you believe in the wall or because you just wanted to get into power?
I close with something from another top Democrat, Dick Lamm, former Governor of Colorado. He said on video in 2004, if you want to destroy a nation, start with no longer enforcing its immigration laws and turning it into a multicultural country full of people who won’t assimilate. He was being facetious. Too bad his party took him literally.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Daily Skirmish - Liberato.UShttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Daily Skirmish - Liberato.US2022-08-29 10:27:562022-08-29 10:28:06You Won’t Believe What Top Democrats Said About Illegal Immigration
Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida blasted Democratic Gov. Kathy Hochul of New York and Democratic Rep. Charlie Crist of Florida for attacking Republicans during a Saturday night Fox News appearance.
“We’ve got so much support in Florida, and it’s not because people have hate in their hearts,” DeSantis told “Unfiltered” host Dan Bongino. “They are thankful we saved their jobs. Mothers are thankful we kept their kids in school and senior citizens are thankful we provided medication for them, and so I think that he really put his foot in his mouth. But I think people like Hochul and Crist are representative of this leftist mindset and they do believe that the conservative half of the country are effectively second-class citizens.”
WATCH:
Crist and Hochul made their attacks last week while campaigning against Republican opponents in their gubernatorial races. Crist is challenging DeSantis, while Hochul is facing Republican Rep. Lee Zeldin of New York, who was nearly stabbed in July.
“If you have that hate in your heart, keep it there,” Crist said Wednesday, shortly after defeating Nikki Fried for the Democratic nomination for governor. “I want the vote of the people of Florida who care about our state, good Democrats, good Independents, good Republicans. Unify with this ticket. Unify with Val Demmings and Charlie Crist.”
Hochul criticized her Republican rivals at a campaign event Monday, arguing they aren’t “real New Yorkers” due to their political beliefs.
“Trump and Zeldin and Molinaro – just jump on a bus and head down to Florida where you belong,” Hochul said Monday, according to the New York Post. “OK? Get out of town. Because you don’t represent our values.”
President Joe Biden also attacked Republicans, claiming that they had embraced “semi-fascism” during a Thursday fundraising event for the Democratic National Committee.
A federal appeals court on Friday struck down a Biden administration statute that forced doctors to perform medical procedures, including gender-transition procedures, against their religious beliefs.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit unanimously upheld a lower court’s ruling in Franciscan Alliance v. Becerra which protected around 19,000 health care professionals in Franciscan Alliance, a Catholic health care network, from performing medical procedures against their conscience.
The lower court’s ruling had permanently prohibited the U.S. Department of Health and Human Service (HHS) “from requiring Franciscan Alliance to perform gender-transition surgeries or abortions in violation of its sincerely held religious beliefs.”
Becket, the legal counsel representing Franciscan Alliance, said the court explained that permanent protection from the statute was appropriate for health care workers.
“This ruling is a major victory for conscience rights and compassionate medical care in America,” said Joseph Davis, counsel at Becket, in a statement. “Doctors cannot do their jobs and comply with the Hippocratic Oath if the government requires them to perform harmful, irreversible procedures against their conscience and medical expertise.”
The court noted that the Biden administration argued for more chances to show why it needed religious health care providers to participate in gender-transition surgeries, but that the ACLU, a co-appellant, cited a previous case that worked against their argument, according to court documents (pdf).
“For years, our clients have provided excellent medical care to all patients who need it,” Davis said. “Today’s ruling ensures that these doctors and hospitals may continue to do this critical work in accordance with their conscience and professional medical judgment.”
Mandate
The mandate was first issued six years ago as part of the Affordable Care Act, commonly known as Obamacare. Becket noted that this applied to “virtually every doctor nationwide.”
Section 1557 of Obamacare prohibits health care programs that receive federal funds from discriminating against patients on the basis of sex.
In May 2016, HHS issued a rule interpreting Section 1557’s prohibition of “discrimination on the basis of sex.” It defined sex discrimination to include discrimination on the basis of “termination of pregnancy” and the disputed concept of “gender identity.”
Franciscan Alliance claimed the 2016 rule violated the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) by defining “sex discrimination” inconsistently with Title IX, which protects people from discrimination based on sex in education programs or activities that receive federal financial assistance.
This rule was swiftly challenged by nine states and a group of religious organizations and received protection from federal courts in North Dakota and in Texas.
Franciscan Alliance also claimed that the 2016 rule violated the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) by forcing it to perform abortions and gender-reassignment surgeries inconsistent with its sincerely held religious beliefs.
Becket says on its website that the Biden administration and the ACLU were “dissatisfied with not being able to force religious health care providers to violate their faith” and appealed the decision back to the Fifth Circuit.
The Biden administration has been accused of weaponizing Title IX to push “woke insanity” on Americans.
It isn’t as if we weren’t warned. Many people have observed for years now that the total exclusion of morality from the public square, and the refusal to declare that any behavior was wrong in itself, would lead to the normalization of all manner of abhorrent behavior. Such warnings seem almost quaint now, with drag queens in primary schools and toddlers being encouraged to undergo radical body mutilation. In this insane environment, it is no surprise whatsoever that the Left is now pushing to make pedophilia as normal as a walk in the park. The assault on traditional values is total and unyielding. No quarter will be given.
The Post Millennial reported recently that “a professional counselor who works with incarcerated sex offenders defended pedophiles as a ‘marginalized’ minority in a recent YouTube upload, sparking criticism as clips from the video went viral on social media.” Miranda Galbreath, who is a licensed sex therapist, posted a video which is, at least for now, unavailable. It was entitled “Let’s talk about minor-attracted persons.” In it, Galbreath advocates for the use of the term “minor attracted people” and claims that the term “pedophile” is a “judgmental, hurtful insult.” She says that pedophiles are “the most vilified population of folks.”
Amid all this rancid and dangerous propaganda, even “folks” is a charged word. While the Post Millennial transcribes the word as “folks,” it is likely that Galbreath said “folx,” which Merriam-Webster, a newly woke company like all the rest of them, explains is “used especially to explicitly signal the inclusion of groups commonly marginalized.” Galbreath is semaphoring to her Leftist audience that pedophiles are or should be considered to be among the Left’s protected victim groups, groups that are prized and privileged because they are supposedly “marginalized.” To redress the wrongs done by white, Christian, cisgendered, heteronormative bigots, these people deserve special consideration and accommodation.
Galbreath claims that the term minor-attracted person “simply means that the person has an enduring sexual or romantic attraction to minors. They have not chosen this attraction… you don’t get to choose to be heterosexual or gay, and you don’t get to choose to be a minor-attracted person.” It’s something the poor dears can’t help, you see. Galbreath doesn’t seem to have any interest, meanwhile, in the plight of people who don’t choose to become the victims of pedophiles. They don’t choose, either, but apparently they don’t deserve any consideration.
The Post Millennial notes that Galbreath is not just a talking head, but acts upon her ideas: “On her website, called Sexual Safe Space, Galbreath claims that she has been an active mental health counselor for over 20 years. According to the site, she provides ‘evaluation and treatment services in the community and within state prisons to folks who have committed sexual offenses.’ On her Linkedin profile, she displays experience working with the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections.” And one insane and immoral perspective leads to another: Galbreath “is also a registered member of the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH), which sets international guidelines and protocols for medically transitioning, including recommendations for minors as young as 14.”
Galbreath is not alone in trying to normalize pedophilia. She is just one part of a much larger push. As far back as October 2014, the New York Times published an op-ed entitled “Pedophilia: A Disorder, Not A Crime.” Those who would dismiss that on the basis of its having been an op-ed and not a news article, and thus not necessarily reflecting the position of the Times itself, should investigate when the Times last published an op-ed arguing that Islam was not a religion of peace, and that jihad terrorists were inspired by texts and teachings of the Qur’an itself. The Times has, of course, never published such an op-ed, and never would. But normalizing pedophilia? That fits in just fine with the Times’ agenda.
And with that of the Washington Post, which chimed in on July 8, 2015 with a piece entitled “We’re shocked by every nice guy caught with child porn. But we shouldn’t be. Our image of pedophiles is completely wrong.” Even farther back, in 2012, CNN asked: “Do pedophiles deserve sympathy?” The answer was, of course, yes.
Clearly the media elites want us to accept pedophilia as normal as baseball and apple pie. But why? If we had any actual journalists today, they would be investigating and exposing the forces behind this unseemly push to normalize what is and always will be the horrific abuse of children. But we don’t.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Jihad Watchhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJihad Watch2022-08-29 06:31:232022-08-29 07:23:19And Now, the Left Moves to Normalize Pedophilia
