“Ministry of Truth” Trends on Twitter After Government Unveils New “Disinformation Governance Board”

The revelation that the government had created a new board to fight “disinformation” prompted a slew of Nineteen Eighty-Four comparisons.

On Wednesday news broke that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)—a department that didn’t exist 20 years ago but today spends $52 billion annually—had created a new “Disinformation Governance Board.”

The news comes just days after Twitter accepted Tesla-founder Elon Musk’s offer to buy Twitter for $44 billion, a move that critics of the deal claimed could unleash disinformation. (Musk has been vocal in his support for free speech.)

DHS declined to be interviewed by the Associated Press, but issued a statement after news broke of the development.

“The spread of disinformation can affect border security, Americans’ safety during disasters, and public trust in our democratic institutions,” DHS said.

Perhaps naturally, the revelation that the government had created a new board to fight “disinformation” prompted a slew of Nineteen Eighty-Four comparisons, especially since it came so soon after Musk’s purchase of Twitter.

“Elon Musk buys Twitter to save free speech and days later President Biden announces a Ministry of Truth,” one observer quipped. “It’s like we’re living through an Ayn Rand/George Orwell novel mash-up.”

For those unfamiliar with George Orwell’s masterpiece, the Ministry of Truth is the propaganda and censorship department of Oceania, the fictional setting for Orwell’s dystopia.

Known as Minitrue in Newspeak, the name Ministry of Truth is a misnomer. Like all the departments in 1984, the name reflects the opposite of what the government actually does.

The book’s protagonist, Winston Smith, learns this in the second half of Nineteen Eighty-Four.

Even the names of the four Ministries by which we are governed exhibit a sort of impudence in their deliberate reversal of the facts. The Ministry of Peace concerns itself with war, the Ministry of Truth with lies, the Ministry of Love with torture and the Ministry of Plenty with starvation. These contradictions are not accidental, nor do they result from ordinary hypocrisy; they are deliberate exercises in doublethink. For it is only by reconciling contradictions that power can be retained indefinitely.

Smith, who works at the Ministry of Truth, realizes the Ministry of Truth is not the least bit interested in truth. Its use of propaganda is overt, as is its use of banal slogans designed to confuse and humiliate the people of Oceania.

On the exterior of the Ministry of Truth building are three party slogans: “WAR IS PEACE,” “FREEDOM IS SLAVERY,” and “IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH.” Inside the structure, problematic documents are incinerated, dropped down a Memory Hole where they are conveniently forgotten.

One might be tempted to laugh off comparisons between a “Disinformation Governance Board” and the propaganda department in Orwell’s classic work. After all, we’re talking about a novel.

This would be mistaken, however.

For starters, Nineteen Eighty-Four is indeed a fictional work. But it was inspired by the authoritarian regimes and ideologies Orwell witnessed firsthand. A one-time socialist who observed the fighting in the Spanish Civil War—a conflict between fascists and communists—Orwell became a budding libertarian who became disillusioned with collectivism.

In fact, Orwell makes it clear that Nineteen Eighty-Four was inspired by communism.

“[Nineteen Eighty-Four] was based chiefly on communism, because that is the dominant form of totalitarianism,” he told Sidney Sheldon, who purchased the stage rights to the book; “but I was trying chiefly to imagine what communism would be like if it were firmly rooted in the English speaking countries, and was no longer a mere extension of the Russian Foreign Office.”

Stalin’s regime was not the only totalitarian regime to utilize propaganda and censorship, of course. Joseph Goebbels, the chief propagandist for the Nazi Party, is perhaps the single most infamous wielder of propaganda in human history. And of course the Nazis were infamous for their book burning.

The Chinese Communist Party uses propaganda and censorship to such great effect today that scholars say it’s difficult to even know what’s actually happened in the country over the last century.

“At a time when censorship is a part of everyday experience of the Chinese people, even few historians actually know all the history of the party,” historian Sun Peidong recently told The Guardian. “It’s hard to get hold of party history materials as a history researcher nowadays. It’s even harder to know what the past 100 years has really been about.”

This is why Americans should be concerned that the US government—nearly two and a half centuries after it was founded—is suddenly in the business of rooting out “disinformation.”

Humans will always disagree over what is true. Descartes’ first principle—”cogito, ergo sum” posited that the only thing we can know with total certainty is “I think, therefore I am.”

It doesn’t take a philosopher to see that a lot of stuff one finds online is drek, so it shouldn’t surprise us that “misinformation”—in various forms and to various degrees—is rampant online.

But history shows that no one wields misinformation and propaganda with greater effectiveness—or at greatest cost—than government.

Orwell understood this. Americans would do well to heed his warning.


Jon Miltimore

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.


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

Boston College Psychology Professor: “School Has Become a Toxic Place for Children”

Self-directed education, grounded in play, is most beneficial for youth learning and development.

More families may be flocking to homeschooling and other schooling alternatives over the past two years, but Peter Gray has been urging families to flee coercive schooling since long before the pandemic began. The Boston College psychology professor wrote in his 2013 book Free To Learn: “The more oppressive the school system becomes, the more it is driving people away, and that is good.”

Gray joins me on this week’s episode of the LiberatED Podcast to talk about the harms of forced schooling and why self-directed education, grounded in play, is most beneficial for youth learning and development.

In our conversation, Gray explains that standard schooling today is a key factor in the continuous rise in rates of childhood and adolescent anxiety, depression, and suicide. Its imposed, one-size-fits all curriculum, reliance on reward and punishment as external motivators, and dismissal of natural childhood curiosity and creativity erode learners’ powerful drives for learning and discovery. Stripped of these drives, and increasingly deprived of opportunities to play, explore, and pursue individual interests outside of school without the constant hovering of adults, children and adolescents become more melancholic and morose.

“We adults are constraining children’s lives, in school and out of school,” says Gray in our podcast discussion. “School has become a toxic place for children, and we refuse to say that publicly. The research can show it but it almost never gets picked up in the popular press,” he adds.

Our discussion digs deeper into Gray’s research on the link between standard schooling and skyrocketing rates of diagnoses of ADHD, which Gray asserts is essentially “a failure to adapt to the conditions of standard schooling.” He talks about the disappearance of childhood play and the corresponding rise in childhood mental health disorders, as well as why parents shouldn’t be too concerned about their children’s screen time use.

Gray believes that parents should remove their children from standard schooling and embrace schooling alternatives that are centered on self-directed education. “I’m cheered by the ever-growing stream of people who are leaving coercive schooling for relaxed homeschooling, unschooling, Sudbury schooling, and other forms of education that allow children to control their own learning,” he wrote in Free To Learn.

The current exodus of families away from standard schooling and toward other, often freer, learning models, may have positive, long-term effects on young people’s intellectual development and emotional well-being.

Listen to the weekly LiberatED Podcast on AppleSpotifyGoogle, and Stitcher, and sign up for Kerry’s weekly LiberatED email newsletter to stay up-to-date on educational news and trends from a free-market perspective.


Kerry McDonald

Kerry McDonald is a Senior Education Fellow at FEE and host of the weekly LiberatED podcast. She is also the author of Unschooled: Raising Curious, Well-Educated Children Outside the Conventional Classroom (Chicago Review Press, 2019), an adjunct scholar at the Cato Institute, and a regular Forbes contributor.

RELATED VIDEO: Atlanta students call out dangerous school conditions

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column and podcast are republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

18 Spectacularly Wrong Predictions Made Around the Time of the First Earth Day In 1970. Expect More This Year.

The prophets of doom were not simply wrong, but spectacularly wrong.


Today (Sunday, April 22) is Earth Day 2018 and time for my annual Earth Day post…..

In the May 2000 issue of Reason Magazine, award-winning science correspondent Ronald Bailey wrote an excellent article titled “Earth Day, Then and Now” to provide some historical perspective on the 30th anniversary of Earth Day. In that article, Bailey noted that around the time of the first Earth Day in 1970, and in the years following, there was a “torrent of apocalyptic predictions” and many of those predictions were featured in his Reason article. Well, it’s now the 48th anniversary of Earth Day, and a good time to ask the question again that Bailey asked 18 years ago: How accurate were the predictions made around the time of the first Earth Day in 1970? The answer: “The prophets of doom were not simply wrong, but spectacularly wrong,” according to Bailey.

Here are 18 examples of the spectacularly wrong predictions made around 1970 when the “green holy day” (aka Earth Day) started:

1. Harvard biologist George Wald estimated that “civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind.”

2. “We are in an environmental crisis which threatens the survival of this nation, and of the world as a suitable place of human habitation,” wrote Washington University biologist Barry Commoner in the Earth Day issue of the scholarly journal environment.

3. The day after the first Earth Day, the New York Times editorial page warned, “Man must stop pollution and conserve his resources, not merely to enhance existence but to save the race from intolerable deterioration and possible extinction.”

4. “Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make,” Paul Ehrlich confidently declared in the April 1970 issue of Mademoiselle. “The death rate will increase until at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next ten years.”

5. “Most of the people who are going to die in the greatest cataclysm in the history of man have already been born,” wrote Paul Ehrlich in a 1969 essay titled “Eco-Catastrophe! “By…[1975] some experts feel that food shortages will have escalated the present level of world hunger and starvation into famines of unbelievable proportions. Other experts, more optimistic, think the ultimate food-population collision will not occur until the decade of the 1980s.”

6. Ehrlich sketched out his most alarmist scenario for the 1970 Earth Day issue of The Progressive, assuring readers that between 1980 and 1989, some 4 billion people, including 65 million Americans, would perish in the “Great Die-Off.”

7. “It is already too late to avoid mass starvation,” declared Denis Hayes, the chief organizer for Earth Day, in the Spring 1970 issue of The Living Wilderness.

8. Peter Gunter, a North Texas State University professor, wrote in 1970, “Demographers agree almost unanimously on the following grim timetable: by 1975 widespread famines will begin in India; these will spread by 1990 to include all of India, Pakistan, China and the Near East, Africa. By the year 2000, or conceivably sooner, South and Central America will exist under famine conditions….By the year 2000, thirty years from now, the entire world, with the exception of Western Europe, North America, and Australia, will be in famine.”

9. In January 1970, Life reported, “Scientists have solid experimental and theoretical evidence to support…the following predictions: In a decade, urban dwellers will have to wear gas masks to survive air pollution…by 1985 air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half….”

10. Ecologist Kenneth Watt told Time that, “At the present rate of nitrogen buildup, it’s only a matter of time before light will be filtered out of the atmosphere and none of our land will be usable.”

11. Barry Commoner predicted that decaying organic pollutants would use up all of the oxygen in America’s rivers, causing freshwater fish to suffocate.

12. Paul Ehrlich chimed in, predicting in 1970 that “air pollution…is certainly going to take hundreds of thousands of lives in the next few years alone.” Ehrlich sketched a scenario in which 200,000 Americans would die in 1973 during “smog disasters” in New York and Los Angeles.

13. Paul Ehrlich warned in the May 1970 issue of Audubon that DDT and other chlorinated hydrocarbons “may have substantially reduced the life expectancy of people born since 1945.” Ehrlich warned that Americans born since 1946…now had a life expectancy of only 49 years, and he predicted that if current patterns continued this expectancy would reach 42 years by 1980, when it might level out. (Note: According to the most recent CDC report, life expectancy in the US is 78.8 years).

14. Ecologist Kenneth Watt declared, “By the year 2000, if present trends continue, we will be using up crude oil at such a rate…that there won’t be any more crude oil. You’ll drive up to the pump and say, `Fill ‘er up, buddy,’ and he’ll say, `I am very sorry, there isn’t any.’”

15. Harrison Brown, a scientist at the National Academy of Sciences, published a chart in Scientific American that looked at metal reserves and estimated the humanity would totally run out of copper shortly after 2000. Lead, zinc, tin, gold, and silver would be gone before 1990.

16. Sen. Gaylord Nelson wrote in Look that, “Dr. S. Dillon Ripley, secretary of the Smithsonian Institute, believes that in 25 years, somewhere between 75 and 80 percent of all the species of living animals will be extinct.”

17. In 1975, Paul Ehrlich predicted that “since more than nine-tenths of the original tropical rainforests will be removed in most areas within the next 30 years or so, it is expected that half of the organisms in these areas will vanish with it.”

18. Kenneth Watt warned about a pending Ice Age in a speech. “The world has been chilling sharply for about twenty years,” he declared. “If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age.”

MP: Let’s keep those spectacularly wrong predictions from the first Earth Day 1970 in mind when we’re bombarded in the next few days with media hype, and claims like this from the Earth Day website:

Global sea levels are rising at an alarmingly fast rate — 6.7 inches in the last century alone and going higher. Surface temperatures are setting new heat records about each year. The ice sheets continue to decline, glaciers are in retreat globally, and our oceans are more acidic than ever. We could go on…which is a whole other problem.

The majority of scientists are in agreement that human contributions to the greenhouse effect are the root cause. Essentially, gases in the atmosphere – such as methane and CO2 – trap heat and block it from escaping our planet.

So what happens next? More droughts and heat waves, which can have devastating effects on the poorest countries and communities. Hurricanes will intensify and occur more frequently. Sea levels could rise up to four feet by 2100 – and that’s a conservative estimate among experts.

What you probably won’t hear about from the Earth Day supporters is the amazing “decarbonization” of the United States over the last decade or so, as the falling CO2 emissions in the chart above illustrate, even as CO2 emissions from energy consumption have been rising throughout most of the rest of the world. Energy-related carbon emissions in the US have been falling since the 2007 peak, and were at their lowest level last year in a quarter century, going back to 1992. And the environmentalists and the “Earth Day” movement really had very little to do with this amazing “greening” of America. Rather, it’s mostly because of hydraulic fracturing and the increasing substitution of natural gas for coal as a fuel source for electric power, see related CD post here.

Finally, think about this question, posed by Ronald Bailey in 2000: What will Earth look like when Earth Day 60 rolls around in 2030? Bailey predicts a much cleaner, and much richer future world, with less hunger and malnutrition, less poverty, and longer life expectancy, and with lower mineral and metal prices. But he makes one final prediction about Earth Day 2030: “There will be a disproportionately influential group of doomsters predicting that the future–and the present–never looked so bleak.” In other words, the hype, hysteria and spectacularly wrong apocalyptic predictions will continue, promoted by the virtue signalling ”environmental grievance hustlers.”

Reprinted from AEI.


Mark J. Perry

Mark J. Perry is a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and a professor of economics and finance at the University of Michigan’s Flint campus.


Twitter: Ads that ‘contradict the scientific consensus’ on climate change now prohibited

‘Trash, Human Waste And Needles’: Biden Ignores Environmental Crisis Facing Seattle During Earth Day Visit

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

VIDEO: There Never Was A Mask Mandate — Only Anti-God Capitulation

There is no “science” to any of these hyper-constitutional orders from government; there is only political, science fiction that is now permeating our Republic. In this edition of The Ledger Report – Post-Constitutional America, Graham Ledger details how to live by the commandment, Love Thy Neighbor, in the era of un-Godly and illegal mandates, like forcing people to muzzle their right to free speech on airplanes.

Please subscribe free to The Ledger Report by clicking here: www.GrahamLedger.com

©Graham Ledger. All rights reserved.

GOP lesson: DeSantis deployed states’ rights, and his popularity soared

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis won in 2018 over Andrew Gillum by 32,000 votes, or four-tenths of one percentage point. Very, very close in a big purple state. Since that victory, DeSantis has endured relentless attacks on every conceivable issue, non-issue and fake issue.

National outlets such as 60 Minutes and state publications in every market gaslit and flat-out lied about DeSantis, from Covid deaths to transgenderism in schools to the fictional “don’t say gay” bill. Late-night former comedians, Hollywooders, corporate cowards and the White House have all singled out DeSantis for vilification for years now. “DeathSantis” has trended on the media message board Twitter repeatedly.

And yet, three years later DeSantis has dramatically increased his popularity in Florida, as have Republicans in general if voter registration means anything. A recent St. Pete Poll conducted for Florida Politics, both left of center outfits, found Governor DeSantis with a plus-16 point approval rating —  54% to 38% of registered voters.

Further, a recent University of North Florida poll of registered Florida voters found giant margins for DeSantis over either of his Democrat contenders. He leads former Governor and party flip-flopper Charlie Crist by 19 points and Florida Agriculture Commissioner Nikki Fried by 21 points. Those numbers will close by November, of course. But the poll was of registered voters, which is not as good for Republicans typically as super voters. And DeSantis has nearly $100 million for re-election while his contenders each have a few million and a primary yet.

How is this stunning success in popularity among ordinary voters possible when every conceivable media, social media and cultural mover has vilified DeSantis for three years?

In a word: Interposition.

This is the states’ rights idea that any state in a federation such as the United States has a right and the authority to interpose itself between an overbearing federal government and the state. The Constitution is riddled with its implications in the separation of powers between the federal government and state governments. The Federalist Papers discuss it. It was an essential element of states rights federalism and used previous to the Civil War. That terrible conflagration became inevitable to rid the nation of the moral scourge of slavery, but the price was a rolling forth of power consolidating in Washington, D.C. at the cost of the states.

However, it’s not like interposition was ever outlawed. States could still practice it, but that requires spinal fortitude. And this fundamental states’ right now more than ever.

Never using the term “interposition” publicly, DeSantis nevertheless practiced this essential concept repeatedly during Covid. He stood between a federal shutdown and shutting down Florida. Even the three-week Florida “shutdown” was minimal as the list of who could remain open, including churches, was very long. He blocked the federal government from mandating shots in Florida, even keeping corporations from acting as fronts to enforce the mandates. When the federal government curtailed Florida’s access to monoclonals for what appeared to be petty personal reasons, DeSantis bypassed the federal stock and bought monoclonals on the open market.

Even in the latest kerfuffle over the Parental Rights in Education bill there is a form of interposition by the Republican Legislature and DeSantis because the U.S. Department of Education holds so much (extra-constitutional) leverage over school districts, and they have created a state legal bulwark against federal infringement.

Most recently, DeSantis challenged his own party leadership in the Legislature over long-time gerrymandered Congressional boundaries to provide a black district in North Florida. Legislative Republicans kept the district similar to what it had been, which also had the side-benefit of clumping a lot of Democrats into one district. DeSantis believes drawing districts based on race is openly unconstitutional. This is the sort of principled stand that wrong-foots so many in the political world, but is often appreciated by voters. More Republicans should understand this.

Naturally, the media lost its mind at every one of these actions, but the policies were relatively popular among Floridians. The fact that they have proven to be right in hindsight by the data is awesome for Floridians, but not the first point. The first point is that a state Governor had the kahonas to place himself and the authority of his state government between the federal government and the people of his state, executing this still-standing states’ right.

Every Republican Governor should take note, because blue states have practiced this with less popular policies, such as sanctuary states and cities. It’s the way a federalist government is to work. Time for GOP state leaders to see it and step up. They have a template.

There are two other key lessons for Republicans everywhere in the way DeSantis’ popularity has thrived while under constant elitist assaults.

  • Know what you believe and why, and be ready and willing to defend it. Principles may not matter with a lot of politicians and government statists, but they still matter with voters. Take note.
  • Do not shrink from confrontation, particularly with the media, but not with any other entity either. Obviously the Republican base loves to see its leaders punch back. Pugilistic President Trump made that clear, and DeSantis has done plenty of it himself, albeit in a different style. Based on polls, the appreciation of a Governor standing up for the rank-and-file residents of a state is also popular.

DeSantis may be the most visible and forward in this respect, but he is not the only one. Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds comes to mind as acting similarly in a different personality. And while Texas Governor Greg Abbott has been a disappointment, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has interposed his office repeatedly in lawsuits, the most recent of which was against the Biden Administration’s mask mandates for airlines and airports in Texas.

This sort of Republican leadership is a no-squish zone. And that is where we live now. The old, rollover, play nice Republicans — you know who you are, Mitt Romney — who get bulldozed by Democrats and fear the media chattering classes, no longer work or are wanted by the voters.

©Rod Thompson, The Revolutionary Act. All rights reserved.

RELATED VIDEO: DeSantis Signs Bill, and the Mouse is NOT Happy


Why the Feds Are Clinging to Their Mask Mandate

Airports have been the main stages for security and hygiene “theater.”

Bureaucrats cling to power. It’s their institutional predisposition.

So it was no surprise on Wednesday when the Department of Justice appealed the recent Federal court ruling that struck down the mask mandate imposed on mass transportation by the Centers for Disease Control.

As the appeal demonstrates, governments are especially reluctant to give up emergency powers. When they do, the relinquishment is grudging and only partial.

That is a big reason why big government keeps getting bigger. As economist Robert Higgs showed in his book Crisis and Leviathan, since the early 20th century, the US government has exploited every national emergency to seize emergency powers. After the crisis subsides, government power recedes, but never all the way back to pre-crisis levels. In this way, the federal government “ratchets up” its power, at the expense of our liberty, crisis after crisis.

This “ratchet effect,” as Higgs termed it, is on vivid display in airports especially. There, the travel mask mandate persisted long after the pandemic panic subsided and many other COVID policies were rolled back. And if the DOJ’s appeal succeeds, it may return and linger even longer.

The wretched ratchet effect is also manifest in the many post-9/11 airport security policies that the Transportation Security Administration continues to enforce more than two decades after the crisis that spawned them.

A curious aspect of many of these policies is how seemingly petty they are. Why is the government so adamant about travelers removing their shoes at security and wearing masks? The effectiveness of such measures has been shown to be highly dubious at best. Moreover, such compelled performances of “security theater” and “hygiene theater” don’t even seem to provide much material benefit to the government. What’s the point of ratcheting up that kind of power?

I suspect a major purpose of such petty policies is the mass inculcation of obedience. Security theater and hygiene theater are part and parcel of a broader “obedience theater.” Humiliating compulsory gestures like removing your shoes and wearing your mask are obeisances: symbolic ritual acts of self-abasement and submission.

It’s not about keeping you safe or healthy. It’s about showing you who’s boss.


Dan Sanchez

Dan Sanchez is the Director of Content at the Foundation for Economic Education (FEE) and the editor-in chief of FEE.org.

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

Matt Gaetz drops MOAB on woke Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin

Woke Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin needs to be challenged like this at every opportunity.

Same guy who ordered a 60 day “stand down” by military to look for and weed out “extremists” in the military meaning conservatives and/or Trump supporters after January 6th, 2020 events in Washington, D.C.

Austin is nothing more than an Obama clone and would not have been a 4 star and SecDef if he wasn’t totally left leaning and WOKE.

Watch: Defense Secretary Austin Speechless After Rep. Matt Gaetz Absolutely Annihilates Him

By Alex Miller – April 5, 2022

Fireworks went off when Rep. Matt Gaetz clashed with Biden’s Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin who was trying to defend his request to increase the defense budget.

Gaetz accused Austin of being too focused on wokeism instead of defining the nation and called the Pentagon out for being behind China and Russia on hypersonic weapons.

“This is the most capable, most combat critical force in the world, it has been and it will be so going forward, and this budget helps us to do that,” Austin said.
“Not if we continue down this path. Not if we continue to embrace socialism,” Gaetz replied.

“The fact that you’re embarrassed by your country, by your military. I’m sorry for that,” Austin shot back.

“Oh no, I’m embarrassed for your leadership,” Gaetz responded. “I am not embarrassed for my country. It’s disgraceful that you would sit here & conflate your failures with those of uniformed service members.”

Gatez started to explain how the US military has fallen behind the Chinese when Austin cut in and asked, “What do you mean? We’re behind in hypersonics? How do you make that assessment?”

There was a lot of cross-talk but then Gaetz added, “your own people brief us that we’re behind and China is winning.”

That shut Austin up.

Read more.

©Royal A. Brown, III. All rights reserved.

Obamacare: Where Does It Hurt?

The problems with Obamacare are well-known.  So are the lies.

Let’s start with the lies.  Obamacare fans are still crowing about the program’s record enrollment this year – 14.5 million.  Undoubtedly, it will be mentioned when former President Obama visits the White House tomorrow to celebrate Obamacare.  What they’re not telling you is they promised 21 million people would sign up for Obamacare when it was passed.  I don’t see how falling 50 percent short of your goal is anything to crow about.  And the only reason enrollment is high this year is because Obamacare subsidies are temporarily jumbo-sized.  Temporarily.  An HHS report indicates enrollment could fall back to 11 million next year if the bigger subsidies are not made permanent.

Now for the problems.  President Obama promised families would save $2,500 a year on their health insurance, but premiums have tripled since Obamacare was signed into law. Congressman Byron Donalds says he’s never paid higher premiums than under Obamacare.  But locking higher subsidies into place permanently, as Biden and the Democrats want to do, will be inflationary.  Higher subsidies will cost $220 billion over the next decade and, thanks to looser eligibility requirements, benefit the wealthy – people making more than six figures – more than low income families.  It’s foreseeable health insurers will raise prices. The problem will be worse in the one-third of counties that still only have one or two Obamacare insurers; they’ll raise prices even more.  This is so typical of Democrats – they cause a problem, then turn around and say, ‘oh, but we’ll HELP you,’ offering Band-Aids to fix the problems they created in the first place.  It’s one of their machines for buying votes.

And you’ll notice Obamacare pushed government assistance into the middle class, way beyond the poverty level where government assistance programs first started.  Making it so the middle class and now even well-off people can’t function without the assistance of the federal government – what do you suppose that’s about?  Whatever the Democrats’ ulterior motive, it’s the wrong direction.  And it’s a trap.  Democrats are working to cut off escape routes like short-term plans so there’s no escape. The increased availability of cheaper short-term plans was very popular under Trump, but Democrats want to cut them to three months with no renewal.  [Heartland Institute Health Care News, p. 5]

The problems with Obamacare don’t end there.  Obamacare’s crowning achievement was supposedly covering people with preexisting conditions, but stories persist of cancer victims being denied coverage.  No, you can’t keep your doctor and you can’t keep your plan.  Obamacare’s regulatory burden has cost small business $64.6 billion and more than 3.3 billion hours of lost productivity.  Some insurers continue to trip up on Obamacare’s adverse selection problem – the idea that the sickest people sign up for Obamacare plans.  Adverse selection hits the insurers’ bottom line and they’re getting out of the marketplace.  That problem is baked into Obamacare’s design and can’t be fixed.  Finally, Obamacare did nothing to fix the problem of people not going to the doctor because they can’t afford it.

We’re stuck with all these problems for the moment, because there’s no chance of repealing Obamacare any time soon.  But that doesn’t mean we should accept this crazy contraption as normal or fall for it the next time the Democrats promise us the earth, the moon, and the stars.

Visit The Daily Skirmish and Watch Eagle Headline News – 7:30am ET Weekdays

©Christopher Wright. All rights reserved.

8 Commonsense Proposals to Alleviate Climate Change

Climate change is real, but you should be skeptical of lawmakers who refuse to repeal legislation that is contributing to the problem.

Here’s a thought: Let’s start addressing climate change by ending government policies that make it worse. Let’s repeal laws and regulations that force people and companies to act in inefficient ways that waste energy and produce unnecessary emissions. Stop creating perverse incentives by penalizing efficient companies, subsidizing inefficient ones, and pushing production to nations that produce more pollution for every item produced. Ending these destructive policies will improve both our environment and our economy.

The ecologists’ slogan “Think Globally, Act Locally” is entirely appropriate to the issue of anthropogenic carbon dioxide (CO2). Emissions anywhere impact the climate everywhere. Policies that, instead of reducing emissions, simply move them to other countries accomplish nothing.

Domestic regulations, taxes, and tariffs aimed at reducing global warming may have the unintended effect of increasing the cost of domestic production to the point that companies offshore their operations. Similarly, increasing energy costs here will shift energy-intensive industry from the United States to places like Mexico, China, and India. At best, such policies merely move emissions elsewhere, at worst they increase them.

Shifting the production of goods and resources away from countries with efficient economies to less efficient nations does more harm than good. Making a widget with 10 BTUs of energy in the United States is better for the planet than making the same widget in China with 40 BTUs. Producing a barrel of oil here is better for the planet than producing it in RussiaVenezuela, or Iran – countries that have proved unwilling or unable to protect the environment.

The federal government’s Energy Information Agency (EIA) projects that the nation’s energy needs will continue to grow for at least the next thirty years, and that “[p]etroleum and natural gas [will] remain the most-consumed sources of energy in the United States through 2050.” One reason is that gas turbines are the only practical backups for the wind turbines and solar panels that the government has determined will replace traditional power plants.

Because the sun doesn’t always shine and the wind doesn’t always blow, backup is necessary. Currently, battery storage can power a city for no more than a few hours. That leaves pumped storage plants and natural gas fired turbines as the only reserve power sources that can come online quickly enough to stabilize the grid when wind and solar fail. However, pumped storage plants, which pump water up into reservoirs during times of low energy demand and then release the water through turbines during times of peak demand, are limited by geography and by environmentalists opposed to constructing new reservoirs.

Mandating wind and solar, then, means mandating natural gas. Without reliable backup, homeowners and companies will relocate or install their own generators. Burning gasoline, diesel, and natural gas at hundreds of thousands of homes and businesses across the nation will do nothing to reduce CO2 emissions.

Given that natural gas plants are essential—having been made so by government dictates—the infrastructure needed to supply them is also essential. That includes production, refining, and transportation.

The EIA’s report also predicts that “the transportation sector will consume the majority of [petroleum and other liquid] fuels, particularly motor gasoline and diesel” through 2050. Electric vehicles (EVs) currently make up less than 5% of the global auto market and about 4% of the American market. While they may someday replace gasoline and diesel-powered cars in significant numbers, that day is not yet here.

The Biden Administration is intent on shutting down natural gas and oil production in the United States while, at the same time, asking other countries such as Saudi ArabiaVenezuela, and Iran to increase their production. But burning Iranian or Venezuelan natural gas instead of American gas does not reduce emissions.

The Administration is accusing domestic oil companies of greedily raising the price of gasoline (at a time of general inflation, when all prices are rising) while expressing surprise that those same greedy corporations don’t take advantage of higher prices and produce more petroleum. But why would an oil company invest millions of dollars to expand operations when Biden is promising to shut down production once he’s solved his immediate political problems caused by rising prices? Why, after Democrats have proposed taxing away oil company profits, would anyone invest in firms that are targeted for extinction?

When President Biden killed the Keystone Pipeline on his first day in office, City Journal noted:

The symbolic victory of the pipeline’s cancellation will not have any measurable effect on the decarbonization of the U.S. economy. Keystone’s untimely demise will not change the rate of our national consumption of fossil fuels; instead, American consumers will simply be forced to buy more oil from countries like Saudi Arabia, Russia, and Venezuela. More of our gas will be imported by plane or ship rather than from a net-zero emission pipeline—and we’ll pay more for it at the pump, too.

Pipelines are the safest and most efficient way in which to transport natural gas, petroleum, and petroleum liquid products. Forcing oil and gas to be moved by ship, rail, or truck instead makes little sense economically or ecologically.

Under Governor Andrew Cuomo, the state of New York banned fracking for natural gas and obstructed the construction of new natural gas pipelines. As a result, the state has had to generate more electricity with fuel oil, which produces more CO2 and pollution than does natural gas, and the state has also had to import natural gas from Russia and Trinidad and Tobago.

“In 2016,” according to the Wall Street Journal, “Officials in Massachusetts and New Hampshire blocked financing for the $3 billion Access Northeast Pipeline, which would have reliably provided fuel to three New England states.” Consequently, a tanker sailed into Boston Harbor in 2018 carrying Russian LNG (liquified natural gas).

The Merchant Marine Act of 1920 (the “Jones Act”) forbids transporting goods between American ports on ships that aren’t American built, owned, registered, and crewed. The Act’s carbon footprint is enormous because it prevents us from taking advantage of the veritable conveyor belt of foreign-flagged ships that circle the nation and frequent American ports. A Japanese ship, for example, dropping off goods in, say, Seattle, can’t pick up goods from there and deliver them to San Francisco or Los Angeles.

Because there are currently fewer than one hundred cargo ships that are compliant with the Jones Act, many American products must be sent by rail, truck, or air even though they could be far more efficiently —and with far fewer CO2 emissions—transported by sea.

The Act also increases Americans’ cost of buying domestic goods by raising the cost of transporting them. As a result, Americans are led to import more foreign products than they otherwise would, producing more CO2 in the process. Moreover, there are currently no Jones Act-compliant LNG transport ships. As a result, Puerto Rico buys natural gas from Russia rather than from Texas or Louisiana. Similarly, prohibitions on new pipelines have forced states like Massachusetts and New York to ship in natural gas rather than buying it from Pennsylvania. And, because of the Jones Act, they must purchase their gas, not from the U.S., but from countries like Russia, France, Algeria, and Norway.

After pipelines and ships, the safest, most efficient, and least polluting way by which to transport petroleum products is rail. Working to kill any option save keeping gas in the ground, however, the Biden Administration suspended authorization for transporting LNG by rail tank cars.

In September 2021, President Biden nominated Saule Omarova to lead the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC). Omarova supported a “National Investment Authority” (NIA) that, in her words, would be responsible for “devising, financing, and executing a long-term national strategy of economic development and reconstruction.” Banks, under control of the NIA, would direct capital investments toward politically approved technologies and investments and away from industries, such as petroleum, that are out of favor.

In January 2022, not dissuaded by his earlier failure, Biden nominated Sarah Bloom Raskin, an advocate of climate-related banking regulation, to the Federal Reserve Board.

The current strategy for addressing climate change—using wind and solar—requires natural gas-fueled turbines for backup. Yet the current administration is doing everything in its power to short circuit the strategy by blocking domestic production and transport of natural gas and starving the industry of capital.

We are quickly leaving ourselves with the only option of importing natural gas from Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Russia, and Iran—countries that don’t necessarily wish us well. Putin is threating Europe with gas cutoffs to force them to acquiesce to his takeover of Ukraine. Do we really want to subject ourselves to the same sort of extortion?

Clear-cutting forests in the United States and rain forests in the Amazon to grow biofuel crops isn’t green. This commonsense notion is backed by research in 2007-20082014, and now in 2022. In February of this year, the National Academy of Sciences published a study that found that corn-based ethanol is “likely at least 24% more carbon intensive than gasoline due to emissions resulting from land use changes to grow corn, along with processing and combustion.”

This article’s proposals for reducing domestic CO2 emissions are, admittedly, only a drop in the ocean. While the United States emits about 11 percent of global CO2, China emits 27 percent, exceeding all other developed nations combined. Moreover, emissions from Asia and Africa are growing rapidly. Yet even though our political leaders are unwilling or unable to eliminate domestic laws and regulations that decrease efficiency and increase emissions, they confidently assure us that they can overcome global economic and political issues and craft international agreements that will address global warming.

I am neither a climate change denier nor a skeptic. Climate change is real, and we should address it. But I am skeptical that legislators who cannot or will not repeal legislation that is contributing to the problem will provide any real solutions.


Richard Fulmer

Richard Fulmer worked as an engineer and a systems analyst, and is now retired and a free-lance writer. He has published some thirty articles and book reviews in free market magazines and blogs. With Robert L. Bradley Jr., Richard wrote the book, Energy: The Master Resource, which was required reading in classes at four different universities, including the University of Texas and the University of Toronto. He is currently working on another book, Caveman Economics: Basic Economics in 25 Prehistoric Tales.

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

Why Are Biden/Harris Not Being Impeached?

“Life can only be understood backwards; but it must be lived forwards.” – Soren Kierkegaard

Our perverted Commander in Chief, a known traitor, crook and liar, Joe Biden, took an Oath when he became the President of this, my beloved country. We know he and the DemonRats stole the election but either way – here he is.

The oath is found in Article II of the Constitution. It contains 35 words and goes as follows:
“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

Humm….. I am calling him out as should all Republicans, patriots and those that love this country. He has broken that Oath from day one!

The Vice President, “laughing hyena” Kamala Harris also took the oath, but hers and all VPs oaths are longer. Hers went as such:- “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.”

Humm….. I am calling her out as should all Republicans, patriots and those that love this country. She has broken that Oath from day one!

There is much evidence of both of them betraying those Oaths. The biggest maybe being our own sovereignty and security.

Let’s look at the Southern border where Biden has totally abdicated every responsibility he had. He has pretty much destroyed all security and control we as a nation have over who enters our country. His actions have allowed criminals, gangsters, drug cartels, Islamic terrorists, sickness and diseases and other evil doers free access to our country. The free flow of fentanyl and other terrible drugs has bought massive problems to our inner cities causing thousands of deaths and terrible addictions.

His latest attack against “We, the people” is his order to lift the Title 42 public health order put in by Trump. This was a very good and successful tool during the China Virus, which was helped by Fauci and our tax dollars, whereby we could expel illegal migrants, quickly and efficiently, Up to February this year up to 55% of illegals were returned and denied access.


We expect tens of thousands of illegals to scurry like rats off a sinking ship across our border, which will totally over run our reduced and low morale resources and will flood all corners of our country along with the massive demand on already stretched social services.

Our total idiot of our DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, states that his department has, 

“put in place a comprehensive, whole-of-government strategy to manage any potential increase in the number of migrants encountered at our border.”

Right!!! What a freaking joke. Mark my words America and keep an open eye on the borders. Maybe take a trip and see for yourselves the flood of people pouring over our border.

I could at this stage add a lot of treasonous and oath breaking actions taken by this foul and obnoxious, totally un-American administration for which they should have been or should be impeached. Their energy policies, their economic policies, their Green New Deal policies, their spending policies. Their support of groups determined to destroy our constitutional republic like BLM, ANTIFA etc. Their eradication of constitutional rights due every citizen of our constitutional republic, like the January 6th protesters whose civil rights are openly violated. They are judged guilty and not the other way round. You are innocent until proven guilty.

That is just a small sample of impeachable actions taken by this criminal administration. Where are our GOP representatives? Why are they not doing their jobs?

America. This country needs a massive enema. In fact two. Both parties need that tube up their collective rear ends removing every oath breaking and corrupt politician. The Democrats and the GOP are equally corrupt and satanic.

One day we as a nation will stand against the tyranny that our leadership had placed us in. We will rise up and defend this beloved country. We will eradicate the threat that our politicians have placed upon us. We will punish them the way they need to be punished.


©Fred Brownbill. All rights reserved.

The Reptilian Brains of Terri’s Executioners — ‘A CULTURE OF DEATH’

Author’s Note: Earlier today, I read this riveting article by Michelle Malkin, Never Forgotten: The Lies About Terri Schiavo, in which she describes in detail the vicious lies that were perpetuated by the powers-that-be in this case and, of course, dutifully and malevolently, repeated ad infinitum by the craven media. It is my hope that together, Malkin’s and my article below, originally published in 2005 after Terri’s death, will give you a broad picture of this tragic case.

The Reptilian Brains of Terri’s Executioners

For decades, neuroscientists have recognized that the brain has three distinct systems. One is derived from primitive reptiles that were adept at survival strategies. Another includes the limbic system––often called the “seat of emotions.” The third includes the neocortex and prefrontal lobes (comprising the right and left hemispheres of the brain) that account for thinking, verbal abilities, and other “higher” functions.

My theory is that Terri’s putative husband Michael, his attorney George J. Felos, and Judge George Greer–who ruled for years against Terri’s right to life–have highly developed reptilian brains and prefrontal lobes, but that they are sorely lacking in anything resembling a normal limbic system.

What exactly is the limbic system? Located just below the neocortex, it is the part of the brain that governs––among other emotions––affection, feelings, and most of all, empathy.

What is empathy? Simply, it is the ability to feel what others are feeling. It is not sympathy, which is feeling sorry for someone or that something happened. Empathy, on the other hand, is the ability to put oneself in the place of another person and actually experience the feelings they are experiencing––be they joy, anxiety, fear or pain.

Persuasive research over the past several decades, conducted by the most prestigious science institutions both in America and abroad, has relied on PET and more recently fMRI scans (the “f” stands for functional) that visualize brain activity to demonstrate that structural and functional abnormalities in several brain regions (the limbic system, the amygdala, the hippocampus, et al) account for a lack of empathy.

People who lack empathy are called sociopaths, a euphemistic version of what was once called psychopaths. Like all cold-blooded killers, they are literally incapable of feeling what another person feels. While they may be expert at affecting what amounts to a parody of normality and integrity, charm, and intellect, underneath their guises is a total inability to “feel your pain.”


You can call it bad character, or you can say, as liberals and retro psychotherapists do, that the unfeeling person––like the terrorists who murdered nearly 3,000 innocent Americans on September 11, 2001––are “victims” of their upbringings or circumstances.

I say that no matter the source of the behavior, people lacking the kind of empathy that allows them to kill without remorse––for instance, to starve a healthy woman to death––are no different than other 21st Century terrorists and deserve the same consequences: indictment, conviction, and imprisonment.

While antidepressant, anti-anxiety and anti-psychotic drugs have successfully treated millions of people with biologically driven mental illnesses––there is NO CURE for sociopaths!

Does this describe the likes of Michael Schiavo, Felos and Greer? You decide.

From what I observed, all of them are reptilian in their icy coldness, and malevolent fakers when they use the “higher centers” of their brains to dissemble and pretend that they “feel” what they clearly don’t feel at all.

They all knew exactly what starvation would entail for Terri, who at the time of her court-ordered death sentence was vibrantly healthy, save for her limited mental function. To name but a few horrifying symptoms that she probably experienced were:

  • Skin rashes that they knew she couldn’t scratch as well as irritation of all her tissues, particularly of the tongue, mouth, and vagina,
  • Shrinking of her vital organs like the heart and lungs,
  • Uncontrollable diarrhea and/or painful contractions of her intestines,
  • Frightening weakness that she never felt before,
  • Swelling from fluid under her skin,
  • Immune deficiency,
  • Psychotic thinking.

And these merchants of death were also aware that the dehydration they ordered––depriving Terri of water––would entail:

  • Unbearable, unquenchable thirst,
  • Muscle weakness and therefore painful cramps,
  • Nausea and vomiting,
  • Deep rapid breathing and/or, to Terri, a frightening increased heart rate,
  • Dried out skin in her nose as well as the pain of cracked lips,
  • The shutdown of her kidneys,
  • Loss of consciousness.


Ostensibly unmoved by her plight were a triumvirate of reptiles: Terri’s money-hungry husband had already collected a million dollars in a malpractice settlement about his claim that doctors failed to diagnose her so-called but still-undocumented bulimia, and he also stood to receive $1.2 million as the heir to the remainder of that judgment; his seemingly euthanasia-infatuated attorney; and the idealogue judge.

All of them were unmoved by Terri’s agonizingly slow death because they claimed she would have chosen that fate for herself. Never mind the absence of a signed Living Will or videotape of her wishes.

During the nearly two weeks that Terri suffered after her feeding tube was removed, empathic people throughout the world had a heightened awareness of their own hunger pangs and thirst, and the merciful availability of the food and drink at their fingertips. But the reptiles didn’t.

When Michael Schiavo––who had obviously been busy following the money––decided that “for better or worse, through sickness and health, ‘til death do us part” were inconvenient elements of the marital oath he swore before God and chose not to divorce Terri nor to seek an annulment of their marriage but opted instead for bigamy and to father two children.

And the normal empathy that develops when people become parents didn’t appear to happen to Michael. Instead of “feeling” the pain that Terri’s parents experienced and identifying with their determination to care for their daughter “in sickness and in health,” he seemed to feel––as all reptiles do––nothing.

And in what federalist.com called “the final act of selfish cruelty, [he] arrived only minutes before her death [and] denied the request of her parents, Mary and Bob Schindler, to remain with Terri for her final breath.”


The website’s commentary went on to cite the words of Pope John Paul II, whose empathy for humanity and evolved morality provided stark contrast to the reptilian natures of Michael Schiavo and company. Last year, the Pope––on a feeding tube himself in his final days–– effectively declared his `living will’ in a speech to doctors and ethicists, saying: “The administration of water and food, even when provided by artificial means, always represents a natural means of preserving life, not a medical act.” He described the denial of such care “euthanasia by omission.”

As far back as 1950, Five Star General Omar Bradley stated what could be aptly applied to the Terri Schiavo case: “We have grasped the mystery of the atom and rejected the Sermon on the Mount…the world has achieved brilliance without conscience. Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants.”

“What can we expect?” asks Christopher Flickinger in an article in www.therant.us. “For those citizens with handicaps or disabilities, you are forewarned – someone may have his eye on you. If you’re blind, deaf, mute, in a wheelchair, on crutches, use a walker or a cane, walk with a limp or have an appendage missing, you better mind your P’s and Q’s. One little slip-up, just one, and someone could deem your life unfit for living, take away your wheelchair, put you in a Hospice center and starve you to death. [The] excuse would be, “Well, they’re worthless shells of a human. Those cripples have been draining my pocketbook for years – all those ramps and elevators and special parking spots. Forget about legislation in order to fix Social Security. I’ll fix it myself by lightening our load… With this new precedent of social Darwinism sweeping the nation, there’s no end to the possibilities. In a way, we’ll pick-up where Hitler failed. Forget about a master race. We’re more interest in preserving the lives of those who can win the race. And as for everyone else, Pandora’s box is now wide open.”

In Schiavo’s case, criminal proceedings may yet ensue. According to NewsMax.com, Florida’s Department of Children and Families had received 89 allegations that Schiavo had abused his wife – but Judge Greer (surprise!) ruled that DCF summaries of those allegations must remain secret to everyone except (surprise!) Michael Schiavo himself. However, The St. Petersburg Times and the Tampa Tribune have now filed lawsuits for the release of the abuse summaries.

It’s too late for Terri––and the millions of babies who were the victims of infanticide through abortion since her death––but it’s not too late for American citizens to take careful note of those elected officials––overwhelmingly liberals––who through their support of abortion and now euthanasia are responsible for what has become a “culture of death” in our country, and to boot them out of office or make sure they are never elected or reelected.

©Joan Swirsky. All rights reserved.

State Department announces gender ‘X’ marker for U.S. passports

“Today the State Department and DHS announced new steps that will improve the travel experience for transgender Americans.”

The Democrat’s latest fetish is now bordering on obsession. Their sex-obsessed policies should scare the hell out of every rational American.

State Department will offer ‘X’ gender marker for U.S. passports

The announcement was part of a suite of federal actions unveiled by the Biden administration on International Transgender Day of Visibility.

By Quint Forgey, Politico, March 31, 2022:

The State Department on Thursday announced that it will make an “X” gender marker available on U.S. passports beginning April 11, and the option to select the marker for other forms of documentation will become available next year.

On State Department public forms, the “X” gender marker will be defined as “Unspecified or another gender identity.” Secretary of State Antony Blinken said in a statement that the definition “is respectful of individuals’ privacy while advancing inclusion.”

The news of the State Department’s “X” gender marker comes after the department announced last June that it would begin allowing U.S. passport applicants to self-select their gender as “M” or “F,” and that it would no longer require medical certification if an applicant’s choice did not match the gender on their other documentation.


Disney Removes Use of “Girls” and “Boys” May Kill “Prince” and “Princess”

School Nurse Fired for Exposing School Putting 11-Year-Old on Puberty Blockers

Biden pushing more ‘COVID relief’ but covering up billions lost to mass fraud

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

Quick note: Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. We will not waver. We will not tire. We will not falter, and we will not fail. Freedom will prevail.

Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Follow me on Gettr. I am there, click here. It’s open and free.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.

FDA Announces Real Meat Will Be Banned in 2024?

United States to Ban Real Meat?


  • Evidence that The Great Reset is rapidly approaching can be seen in the recent decision by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to ban real meat, and if history is any indication, the same decision may be taken by other countries as well. The U.S. ban is slated to take effect April 1, 2024
  • The decision comes on the heels of repeated public appeals to the Western world by Bill Gates to stop eating real meat as a climate control effort
  • According to the FDA, natural beef production is a primary culprit of climate change. University of California researchers have measured the amount of methane emitted by the average cow, concluding cattle “are the No. 1 agricultural source of greenhouse gases worldwide”
  • Each year, a single cow produces about 220 pounds of methane, and methane from cattle is 28 times more potent in warming the atmosphere than carbon dioxide
  • Livestock raised in massive industrial farming arrangements, aptly called “confined animal feeding operations” (CAFOs), have also been identified as a source of foodborne illness, and is yet another reason why the FDA has decided to ban real meat in favor of synthetic beef

Evidence that The Great Reset is rapidly approaching can be seen in the recent decision by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to ban real meat, and if history is any indication, the same decision may be taken by other countries as well. The U.S. ban is slated to take effect April 1, 2024.

The decision comes on the heels of repeated public appeals to the Western world by Bill Gates to stop eating real meat and transition to lab-grown synthetic “beef” instead.

Gates Spearheads Fake Beef Climate Solution

As explained in the Navdanya International report, “Bill Gates & His Fake Solutions to Climate Change,” an excerpt of which was published by The Defender in April 2021:1

“One of Bill Gates’ most recent promotions is his prescriptions of synthetic foods for developed countries as a means to combat climate change. In a recent interview with MIT Technology Review, Gates says he thinks ‘all rich countries should move to 100% synthetic beef.’

Fake food replaces animal products with highly processed food grown in labs, like fake meat, fake dairy products or fake eggs. It is made possible by technical innovations such as synthetic biology, which involves reconfiguring the DNA of an organism to create something entirely new.

For instance, plant-based meat companies like Beyond Meat and Impossible Foods use a DNA coding sequence from soybeans or peas to create a product that looks and tastes like real meat. Some companies are also investing in cell-based meat, grown from real animal cells, but it has yet to reach the market.

More and more firms are getting involved in this fast-growing market, like Motif Foodworks (plant-based meat and dairy alternatives), Ginkgo Bioworks (custom-built microbes), BioMilq (lab-grown breast milk), Nature’s Fynd (fungi-grown meat and dairy alternatives), Eat Just (egg substitutes made from plant proteins), Perfect Day Food (lab-grown dairy products) or NotCo (plant-based animal products made through AI), to name but a few.”

Beef Production Pegged as ‘Prime Culprit’ of Climate Change

According to Gates and other synthetic beef proponents — and now the FDA — natural beef production is a primary culprit of climate change.

A number of institutions have evaluated the environmental impact of cows and other livestock over the years, including University of California, Davis, where researchers like Frank Mitloehner have been busy measuring the amount of methane emitted by the average cow.2 According to UC Davis:3

“Cattle are the No. 1 agricultural source of greenhouse gases worldwide. Each year, a single cow will belch about 220 pounds of methane. Methane from cattle is shorter lived than carbon dioxide but 28 times more potent in warming the atmosphere, said Mitloehner, a professor and air quality specialist in the Department of Animal Science.”

Meat Is Also Implicated in Foodborne Disease

Livestock raised in massive industrial farming arrangements, aptly called “confined animal feeding operations” (CAFOs), have also been identified as a source of foodborne illness. Covered in feces and urine, dehydrated and often sickly, these animals are slaughtered using mechanized tools and procedures that convey these infection-loaded excreta into the final meat product.

The food and food-contaminant combination that causes the most harm to human health is campylobacter, which sickens more than 1.5 million people4 and costs the U.S. an estimated $1.3 billion a year. In second place is toxoplasma, costing society another $8 billion5 annually.

Despite the obvious reality of foodborne illness, very little was actually known about which foods were the riskiest until a report6 from the University of Florida’s Emerging Pathogens Institute revealed the pathogen-food combinations most likely to make you sick. The report, issued in 2011, showed that the data overwhelmingly pointed to tainted meats as the prime culprits.

Realizing that pasteurization of animal products such as milk falls way short of protecting human health, the U.S. Department of Agriculture in 2014 proposed tackling the No. 1 source of costly foodborne illness — raw meat — by placing restrictions on the sale of raw meat.

The proposal didn’t go anywhere, but the FDA is now pointing to it as yet another reason to ban natural meat sales altogether. Lab-grown synthetic “beef” does not have any of these issues, they claim, due to the fact that all of the ingredients in each batch can be carefully controlled.

Beef Consumption Is ‘Unsustainable’

As reported by UC Davis:7

“With the escalating effects of climate change, that fact has advocates urging the public to eat less beef. They contend it’s an unsustainable diet in a world with a population expected to reach nearly 10 billion by 2050.”

As mentioned, Gates is one such anti-beef advocate. In mid-February 2021, he gave an interview with MIT Technology Review, in which he suggested that that synthetic beef, such as Impossible Foods (which he cofounded with Google and Jeff Bezos), “is a key part of climate action,” as it would eliminate a key source of global greenhouse gas emissions.8

Gates has also suggested that synthetic beef could eliminate the “protein problem,” i.e., the fact that we’re facing a global shortage of protein-rich foods in the wake of the COVID pandemic.9

The strong recommendation to replace beef with fake meat is made in Gates’ book “How to Avoid a Climate Disaster: The Solutions We Have and the Breakthroughs We Need,” which was released in February 2021. As for the issue of taste, Gates assured MIT Technology Review10 that:

“You can get used to the taste difference, and … they’re going to make it taste even better over time.”

The irony of Bill Gates — who lives in a 66,000-square-foot mansion and travels in a private jet that uses up 486 gallons of fuel every hour11 — talking about how to save the environment isn’t lost on everyone. Two days after his MIT Technology Review interview, The Nation criticized Gates’ contradictions, including the fact that his jet-setting lifestyle also makes him a carbon “super emitter”:12

“According to a 2019 academic study13 looking at extreme carbon emissions from the jet-setting elite, Bill Gates’s extensive travel by private jet likely makes him one of the world’s top carbon contributors — a veritable super emitter. In the list of 10 celebrities investigated — including Jennifer Lopez, Paris Hilton, and Oprah Winfrey — Gates was the source of the most emissions.”

Impossible Foods Holds 14 Patents, Has 100+ Pending

Impossible Foods’ products resemble nothing found in nature. That’s why the company holds 14 patents, with at least 100 more pending. “It’s not food; it’s software, intellectual property” — 14 patents, in fact, in each bite of Impossible Burger with over 100 additional patents pending for animal proxies from chicken to fish.

Natural foods cannot be patented, but Impossible Foods’ products certainly can be. Impossible Foods’ products are heavily processed and created in production rooms — not grown in or found in nature. Their science project creations are also heavily protected.

And the creator holds all the cards. They own the “food” and are the only ones allowed to make the “food.” All fake meat consumers lacking options for real food will be dependent on the patented ultraprocessed goo.

Circumventing Problematic Labeling Challenge

The idea is that by making the transition from real beef to synthetic “meats” in wealthier nations first, we would have the best chance of positively impacting the environment while simultaneously reducing world hunger.

In the interview, Gates admitted that use of regulation might be required “to totally shift the demand.” With that statement, he’s basically proven his “prophetic powers” yet again. At the time, he confessed that “the politics are challenging,” especially with regard to labeling. He told MIT Technology Review:

“There are all these bills that say it’s got to be called, basically, lab garbage to be sold. They don’t want us to use the beef label.”

The controversy became clear during a July 2018 public meeting convened by the FDA to discuss the naming of lab-grown meat. As reported by The Atlantic,14 various speakers referred to the lab concoctions as “clean meat,” “artificial meat,” “in vitro meat,” “cell culture products,” “cultured meat” or “culture tissue.”

Each term had its advocates and critics and consensus seemed impossible to reach. Now, with the ban on real meat sales in the U.S., the FDA basically resolves this challenge, as no special labels will be required. ALL beef products will be adulterated.

Some will be plant-based, while others will be based on tissue cells grown on a lattice. Mosa Meat, for example, grows their meat after harvesting a small number of cells from livestock “who are then returned, almost unscathed, to their fields.”15 A single tissue sample is said to be able to yield 80,000 quarter-pound hamburgers.

Yesterday’s Science Fiction May Become Tomorrow’s Reality

Food inventors are even working on cultured meat from human cells, bringing to mind the 1973 dystopian science fiction film “Soylent Green.” The movie takes place in New York in 2022. The Earth is severely overpopulated, and for sustenance, people are given rations of water and Soylent Green, which supposedly is a high-protein food made from plankton.

In the end, you discover in this futuristic nightmare fantasy of controlling big corporations, that the high-protein drink is actually made from people. Now, in the year 2022, scientists are working on lab-grown “meat” made from human cells that are harvested from the inside of human cheeks.16 As reported by Tech Times in November 2020:17

“A new ‘DIY meal kit’ that can be used to grow steaks that are made mostly from human cells … Called ‘Ouroboros Steak,’ this is named right after the circular symbol of a snake known for eating itself tail-first. This hypothetical kit would later on come with everything that one person would need in order to use their own cells to grow miniature human meat steaks …”

These kits are not yet commercially available, but it begs the question of what possesses someone to think that eating a lump of meat made from your own body could be a viable idea? The question must also be raised about whether this is cannibalism.

Those defending the concept claim that since you’re eating your own body, it’s not cannibalism. However, if it ever becomes commercially available, what’s to prevent someone from growing meat from other people’s cells — and selling it? And the ick factor aside, how could this impact the spread of disease? For example, tribal cannibalism in Papua, New Guinea,18 led to a prion disease, which nearly wiped out a tribe of people.

In many villages, after an individual died, the villagers would cook and consume the body in an act of grief. Scientists who studied the tribe believe that one person developed a sporadic incident of Crutchfield-Jakob disease, also known as mad cow disease. Eating the neurological tissue then spread the disease throughout the tribe.

How Will FDA’s Decision Impact Public Health?

While much attention is placed on taste — making products that, taste-wise, mimic real beef — few if any are talking about the proverbial elephant in the room, which is the health impacts of fake beef.

Tissue growth inside an animal occurs when the blood supply delivers appropriate nutrients to produce healthy muscle growth. This requires that the animal is fed a whole and balanced diet, from which the body extracts the necessary nutrients in an appropriate amount to feed the cells.

The human body then extracts the nutrients found in regeneratively and biodynamically pastured meat. However, as science has demonstrated in the last two decades, growing cells on sugar causes growth, but will not yield health. The sheer ability to grow lab-cultured meat does not indicate that the end product will have any health benefit to the end consumer.

One primary problem I foresee is the fact that plant-based fake meat contains excess amounts of omega-6 fat in the form of linoleic acid (LA). This, I believe, is one of the most significant contributors to ill health and chronic disease, as excessive LA leads to severe mitochondrial dysfunction, decreased NAD+ levels, obesity, insulin resistance and a radical decrease in the ability to generate energy.

The genetic engineering used to produce the flavor and texture of real meat does not reproduce healthy fatty acid composition because the substrate is canola and sunflower oils as the primary sources of fat. The sunflower oil used in both Impossible Burgers and Beyond Meats is 68% LA,19 which is an extraordinarily high amount.

It is dangerous because LA is susceptible to oxidation and causes oxidation byproducts called OXLAMs (oxidative linoleic acid metabolites). These byproducts devastate your DNA, protein, mitochondria and cellular membranes. This means that fake meat is failing all measures of sustainability and health.

Facing an Uncertain Future

I’ve often stated that if every American decided to purchase humanely raised organic beef, the CAFO system and the ultra-processed and patented fake meat industry would collapse overnight. With the nationwide ban on real meat racing toward us — 2024 is only two short years away — the window of opportunity for change is rapidly closing.

For now, however, sourcing your foods from a local farmer is still one of your best bets to ensure you’re getting wholesome food, and I would encourage you to do so while you still can. The following organizations can help you locate farm-fresh foods in your local area:

1.Local Harvest — This website will help you find farmers markets, family farms, and other sources of sustainably grown food in your area where you can buy produce, grass-fed meats, and many other goodies.

2.Farmers Markets — A national listing of farmers markets.

3.Eat Well Guide: Wholesome Food from Healthy Animals — The Eat Well Guide is a free online directory of sustainably raised meat, poultry, dairy and eggs from farms, stores, restaurants, inns and hotels, and online outlets in the United States and Canada.

4.Community Involved in Sustaining Agriculture (CISA) — CISA is dedicated to sustaining agriculture and promoting the products of small farms.


This is an April Fool’s article and the FDA ban on real meat is a fictional scenario. A primary reason why we post April Fool’s articles is to act as warnings. We want to wake people up to see what could happen if actions aren’t taken to protect and preserve freedom.

Over the years, many of our April Fool’s “jokes” have come true, including our fictional prediction of adult vaccine mandates and internment camps. This isn’t a coincidence. This is planned, and you can see it happening around you. The future of your personal and medical freedoms has not yet been decided. The ending will depend on you.

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

Proof Covid Wasn’t as Bad as It Appeared — How the Pandemic Was Fabricated


  • The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and individual states are now backtracking on their COVID death statistics, showing those of us who claimed deaths were being overcounted were right all along
  • March 14, 2022, the CDC removed 72,277 COVID deaths from the tally, including 24% of those attributed to children under 18. They claim a “coding logic error,” a faulty algorithm, had “accidentally” counted deaths that weren’t related to COVID, such as drowning deaths and drug overdoses
  • The CDC used the false death statistics among children to push for COVID shots for 5- to 7-year-olds back in November 2021
  • As of February 2, 2022, the U.S. Health and Human Services is no longer collecting data on hospitalizations and deaths from COVID-19
  • Deaths were initially exaggerated for political — both national and geopolitical — purposes, and now they’re being downplayed for the same reason. Democrats know they cannot win in the midterms unless they declare victory over COVID-19

For the past two years, I and many others have detailed the ways in which COVID-19 deaths have been overcounted to create the illusion of the pandemic being far worse than it actually is.

Now, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and individual states are backtracking on their death statistics, showing we were right all along. Deaths were initially exaggerated for political purposes, and now they’re being downplayed for the same reason.

CDC Removes More Than 72,000 COVID Deaths

As reported by The Defender,1 March 14, 2022, the CDC had removed 72,277 “COVID deaths” from the tally, including 24% of those attributed to children under 18.2,3 They claim a “coding logic error,” a faulty algorithm, had “accidentally” counted deaths that weren’t related to COVID. As reported by Udumbara:4

“Some of the pediatric deaths attributed to COVID-19, according to a search of the CDC’s Wonder system, include deaths where drowning or drug use was listed as the primary cause of death.”

Meanwhile, the CDC used the false death statistics among children to push for COVID shots for 5- to 7-year-olds. In November 2021, CDC director Rochelle Walensky cited that data to justify the recommendation to issue emergency use authorization for the Pfizer shot for this age group.5

Somehow, we’re supposed to believe that it took the CDC two years to realize this error. It’s simply not believable, and The Epoch Times has filed a Freedom of Information Act request for internal communications relating to the data change.6

Ironically, the adjustment comes on the heels of fact-checking articles “debunking” claims that COVID deaths have been overcounted. For example, in early March, Health Feedback claimed there’s “no evidence COVID deaths have been overcounted,” and that “the evidence suggests the opposite.”7 Yet here we are. Deaths were clearly overcounted, not undercounted. That fact check didn’t age well.

CDC Has Been Turned Into a Propaganda Agency

According to Dr. Meryl Nass, a member of the Children’s Health Defense scientific advisory committee, the CDC is cherry-picking data to justify its public health policies, and when it gets caught, it simply blames its “outdated IT systems.” In a March 19, 2022, article, she wrote:8

“CDC is not a public health agency. It is a public propaganda agency that collects a massive amount of data. CDC marshals its huge data library to create presentations that support the current administration’s public health policies …

A 2007 Senate oversight report on the CDC noted the agency spent $106 million on the Thomas R. Harkin Global Communications (and Visitor) Center, and summarized its 115-page report with the following:

‘A review of how an agency tasked with fighting and preventing disease has spent hundreds of millions of tax dollars for failed prevention efforts, international junkets, and lavish facilities, but cannot demonstrate it is controlling disease.’”

Health Officials End Reporting COVID-19 Deaths

Curiously, three months before the CDC started changing its mortality statistics, the U.S. Health and Human Services stopped collecting data on hospitalizations and deaths from COVID-19 altogether. The HHS announced9 changes to the reporting requirements for hospitals and acute care facilities January 6, 2022. The new guidelines, which took effect February 2, note “The retirement of fields which are no longer required to be reported,” which include the “previous day’s COVID-19 deaths.”

What are they trying to hide? Are they stopping the flow of data to prevent examination and analysis? According to some, the HHS hospital data are among the best we have in the U.S., so ending that data collection doesn’t make sense. January 2021, Alex C. Madrigal, co-founder of the COVID Tracking Project, wrote:10

“In a series of analyses that we ran over the past several months, we came to nearly the opposite conclusion of other media outlets. The hospitalization data coming out of HHS are now the best and most granular publicly available data on the pandemic.”

An unnamed federal health official spoke with a reporter from WSWS,11 calling the move to stop reporting COVID-29 hospital deaths “incomprehensible.” The official added:

“It is the only consistent, reliable and actionable dataset at the federal level. Ninety-nine percent of hospitals report 100% of the data every day. I don’t know any scientists who want to have less data.”

Changing Definitions Justify the COVID Narrative

From the start of the pandemic, changing definitions have allowed authorities to manipulate data in whatever way they needed. Now, states are starting to change the way they define a “COVID death,” resulting in lowered mortality rates. In Massachusetts, for example, COVID deaths dropped by 3,700 after the state changed its definition to be in alignment with that of the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists.12

As reported by CBS Boston:13

“The state said currently the COVID death definition includes anyone who has the disease listed as a cause of death on their death certificate. It also includes anyone who had a diagnosis within 60 days but did not have it listed as a cause on their death certificate. Under the new definition, the timeframe is changed to 30 days for people without a COVID diagnosis on their death certificate.”

For the record, counting someone who died of any cause as a COVID death simply because they tested positive within 30 days of their death is still a grossly inaccurate way of determining the true death toll from this virus, because we know PCR tests have a false positive rate of about 97% when run at 35 cycles or greater,14 as was the norm from the start.

Results From At-Home Tests Aren’t Reported

Case counts are also being adjusted downward. In mid-January 2022, the Biden administration started distributing half a billion at-home COVID tests to the American public,15 and the results from those are not being reported anywhere.16 As a result, case counts will be skewed downward. According to 13NewsNow:17

“… the fallibility of case counts is the reason health officials track several COVID-19 metrics, like hospitalizations, deaths, and now, even viral samples in the wastewater18 — metrics that do not necessarily rely on people to go get tested or report the results they get at home.”

And yet the HHS is no longer requiring hospitals to report COVID deaths, which is one of the metrics health officials are supposedly focusing on in lieu of tracking cases. Don’t get me wrong, PCR testing was a scam from the start and I’m not suggesting we should pay much attention to those data. The point here is that the tracking of COVID data has been fatally flawed from the start.

What they’re really trying to do is shift toward passive monitoring, starting with wastewater sampling.19 Eventually, the goal is to monitor every person’s biological processes in real-time, and this is part and parcel of the transhumanist Fourth Industrial Revolution and The Great Reset.

CDC Hides Data

To make matters even murkier, the CDC is also hiding data on COVID hospitalizations and the COVID jab. The stated justification for not making certain data public is that people are “misinterpreting” the data. In other words, the data show that the COVID jabs don’t work, and the CDC doesn’t want that to be widely known.

It has also collected data on the effectiveness of COVID-19 boosters, but for some reason has not included the data for 18- to 49-year-olds in any of its publications. “Coincidentally,” this is “the group least likely to benefit from extra shots,” the Times pointed out, adding:21

“Much of the withheld information could help state and local health officials better target their efforts to bring the virus under control. Detailed, timely data on hospitalizations by age and race would help health officials identify and help the populations at highest risk. Information on hospitalizations and death by age and vaccination status would have helped inform whether healthy adults needed booster shots.”

COVID Has Served a Purely Political Agenda

Over the past two years, the pandemic has been used to usher in a range of radical changes that would never have been accepted were it not for widespread panic. It was used to implement illegitimate voting rules, which appear to have had an impact on the 2020 elections.

It was used to announce the urgent need for a “Great Reset” and a Fourth Industrial Revolution. It’s been used to strip people of basic human rights, and to justify radical environmental policies that will result in lower standards of living.

It was also used to abruptly transition the vaccine industry from conventional vaccine manufacturing using eggs to the use of risky gene transfer technology. The only thing the pandemic has not been used for is to make recommendations that actually improve public health. And throughout, data have been massaged and manipulated to justify the unjustifiable.

Now, it appears data are being manipulated yet again — this time to artificially end the COVID crisis so that the Biden administration can take credit for it during the upcoming elections. As stated in a February 24, 2022, letter from Impact Research, titled “Taking the Win Over COVID-19”:22,23

“It’s time for Democrats to take credit for ending the COVID crisis phase of the COVID war, point to important victories like vaccine distribution and providing economic stability for Americans, and fully enter the rebuilding phase that comes after any war. Below we lay out some strategic thoughts for Democrats positioning themselves on COVID-19 …”

Strategic positioning includes declaring the crisis phase over; pushing for “feeling and acting more normal;” and taking the side of people who are burned out on COVID and don’t want to hear about it anymore. Not setting a standard of zero COVID as the “victory condition,” and to “stop talking about restrictions and the unknown future ahead.”

“If Democrats continue to hold a posture that prioritizes COVID precautions over learning how to live in a world where COVID exists, but does not dominate, they risk paying dearly for it in November,” the letter states.24

Dr. Anthony Fauci perhaps did not receive this memo, as he is out there signaling that we can expect a return to COVID restrictions at any given point. In a mid-March CNN interview, he stated that “we need to be flexible” and “if we see a resurgence, we have to be able to pivot and go back to any degree of mitigation that is commensurate with what the situation is. We can’t just say ‘We’re done, now we’re going to move on.’”

Based on what we’ve seen so far, I wouldn’t be surprised if this “pivot” back into COVID crisis mode were to occur right before the midterm elections.

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

Wisconsin school district says parents ‘not entitled’ to know child’s sexuality

It’s the end of the world as we know it.

Any parent who delivers their child in the claws of a government school is ….. unfit.

WI school district says parents ‘not entitled’ to know child’s sexuality, pushes ‘heterosexual privilege’ list

District’s push for ‘gender-nonconforming’ accommodations has irked parents and educators

By Timothy H.J. Nerozzi | Fox News March 22, 2022;

A school district in Eau Claire, Wisconsin, has become the center of a parent-teacher firestorm after leaked documents revealed instructors told parents they must “earn” the right to know their children’s sexual identity, and showed the school pushed a “heterosexual privilege” checklist.

The district’s aggressive push for “gender-nonconforming” accommodations has irked parents and educators who say the school’s training and policy changes surrounding the issue have gone too far.

“The actions of the Eau Claire Area School District are not only dangerous to the mental, emotional and physical health of its students, but they also violate the constitutional rights of parents to make choices about their family life and upbringing of their children,” said Ian Prior, senior adviser at America First Legal and creator of the Fight for Schools PAC.

Of particular scorn in the district’s guidance was a slide stating, “Some transgender, non-binary, and/or gender-nonconforming students are not ‘open’ at home for reasons that may include safety concerns or lack of acceptance. School personnel should speak with the student first before discussing a student’s gender nonconformity or transgender status with the student’s parent/guardian.”

Groups of parents expressed outrage at the notion they had to earn access to their children’s information.

“Remember, parents are not entitled to know their kids’ identities. That knowledge must be earned,” a training slideshow for the Eau Claire School District told school staff.

Read the rest…..

RELATED VIDEO: DON’T BUY THEIR GARBAGE: Chris Salcedo warns against woke companies and Gov-Ed

RELATED ARTICLE: DEMOCRATS DUMBING DOWN AMERICA: Largest university system in US eliminates standardized testing requirement

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

Quick note: Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. We will not waver. We will not tire. We will not falter, and we will not fail. Freedom will prevail.

Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Follow me on Gettr. I am there, click here. It’s open and free.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.