On Thursday, Joe Rogan and Marvel megastar Josh Brolin traded stories about the preponderance of Covid vaccine injuries among their friends. Brolin even described contracting “a mild case of Bell’s palsy” earlier this year, which Rogan attributed to the vaccine, noting he knew several people who suffered facial paralysis following Covid vaccination.
There is no perfect medicine. The benefits and harms of any treatment must be carefully considered in order to prescribe the safest, most effective course of action for a patient. While the FDA and CDC continue to extol the benefits of the Covid vaccines, they have ignored a growing body of evidence that these products can also be harmful. The code of medical ethics demands a transparent and balanced accounting of their impact on the American people. Only then can we set the best course for healthcare policy and future pandemics.
An honest accounting begins with clinical trials, supposedly “the most rigorous in history.” Pfizer’s own legal arguments suggest otherwise. Responding to a whistleblower lawsuit alleging major deviations from protocol, Pfizer’s lawyers noted that the company’s “Other Transactions Authority” agreement (OTA) with the Pentagon didn’t require clinical trials to comply with FDA regulations because the vaccine was a military prototype for “medical countermeasures.” This agreement allowed Pfizer to “grade its own homework,” so to speak — a point emphasized by DOJ lawyers in a separate filing in Pfizer’s support.
This effort revealed 1,233 deaths in the first three months of the vaccine rollout, and a litany of injuries: “industrial-scale blood diseases: blood clots, lung clots, leg clots; thrombotic thrombocytopenia, a clotting disease of the blood vessels; vasculitis, dementias, tremors, Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s, epilepsies.”
These harms are echoed by data from V-safe, a smartphone-based tool created by the CDC. Among 10.1 million registered V-safe users, 7.7 percent reported side effects so serious they were compelled to seek medical care, many more than once.
The main culprit is the Covid spike protein encoded in the vaccine’s mRNA technology. This protein is an antigen, or foreign immunogenic substance, located on the outer coat of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, that triggers an immune response. The mRNA in the shots instructs the body’s cells to produce identical spike proteins, inducing the immune system to create antibodies that bind to them, theoretically protecting vaccinated individuals against the virus. Unfortunately, this plan has a fatal flaw: The spike itself is toxic and potentially deadly.
Hundreds of peer-reviewed articles have demonstrated the spike’s potential for harmindependentof the rest of the virus. Potential complications include myocarditis, blood clots, neurological injuries, and immune dysfunction. Pfizer’s own pre-market biodistribution studies show that vaccine components leavethe injection site in the arm and penetrate every major organ system within hours, where mRNA can linger for weeks, forcing cells to churn out more and more of the toxic spike protein, which can persist for months. There is no way to predict how much spike protein the mRNA injections will produce in any individual, and there is no “off switch.”
These trends coincided with mass Covid vaccination, including an unaccountable 59 percent surge in deaths among Americans ages 15-44 in the third quarter of 2021 compared to 2019. Crucially Covid contributed only part of this excess mortality: in that quarter the US suffered around 201,000 excess deaths, with Covid officially accounting for 123,000, leaving 78,000 excess deaths — 39 percent of the total — still unexplained.
Medical ethics demand a balanced approach to every intervention, weighing potential benefits against potential harms. However, in the case of the Covid vaccines, federal agencies have chosen only to proclaim benefits. By surfacing data that bear upon both the positive and negative impacts of the Covid vaccines, and evaluating the pandemic performance of CDC, FDA, and other health agencies, the new administration can restore confidence and integrity in medicine and public health.
Harvey Risch, Senior Scholar at Brownstone Institute, is a physician and a Professor Emeritus of Epidemiology at Yale School of Public Health and Yale School of Medicine.
Your Support is Critical
The Prickly Pear is focused on delivering timely, fact-based news, and citizen opinion that reflects our mission to “inform, educate and advocate about the principles of limited government and personal liberty.”
To achieve that mission, Prickly Pear often engages with like-minded contributors and organizations who share our values. We encourage to support these partners in any way you can, as these partners make our efforts possible.
Direct support of the Prickly Pear can be made at the link below. Every dollar is greatly appreciated!
https://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.png00ThePricklyPear.orghttps://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.pngThePricklyPear.org2025-01-16 01:30:002025-01-16 01:30:00Big Pharma Continues to Hide the Truth
With less than 10 days until President-elect Donald Trump’s inauguration, Republicans worry that government bureaucracy will prevent the new president from starting his term with a fully confirmed Cabinet.
Cabinet and Cabinet-level nominees traditionally face extensive paperwork obligations, including FBI background checks and financial disclosures, but Republicans are now suggesting that this bureaucratic process has the potential to obstruct Trump’s agenda in the early days of his administration. As the Washington saying goes, “Personnel is policy.” The Senate needs to act quickly if senators want the Trump agenda to become the Trump reality.
Some Senate Republicans have proposed beginning the hearings for Trump’s nominees while the rest of their required paperwork is being completed. Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, for example, has scheduled a hearing next week for energy secretary nominee Doug Burgum as he continues to complete his paperwork and send it to senators.
ADVERTISEMENT
A majority of both Trump and Joe Biden’s initial Cabinet or Cabinet-level nominees who were not withdrawn were confirmed either in February or March of the president’s first year in office.
During Trump’s first term, his secretary of defense and secretary of homeland security nominees were the only nominees confirmed the first day. Those picks, Jim Mattis and John Kelly, had a much easier time navigating the national security bureaucracy as both were retired four-star Marine Corps generals. Their stars also evoked a certain level of deference from senators considering their confirmation.
By the end of January 2017, Trump had five total Cabinet-level nominees confirmed (four department heads and the ambassador to the United Nations). The last initial Trump department nominee to be confirmed was the head of the Department of Agriculture, Sonny Perdue, who took office on April 25, 2017. Alex Acosta, Trump’s second nominee to lead the Department of Labor, was confirmed by the Senate two days later.
It was not until May 2017 that the Senate had fully confirmed all of Trump’s Cabinet and Cabinet-level posts.
Biden had similar results getting his nominees confirmed before the end of his first month in office. He had four Cabinet-level positions filled by the end of January 2021. Those were his nominees to lead the Defense Department, State Department, and Treasury Department, plus the director of national intelligence. Biden’s last initial Cabinet-level nominee was confirmed just four months later, in May 2021.
Recent reporting on the nominees for the second Trump Cabinet has suggested that secretary of state nominee Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla.; ambassador to the United Nations nominee Rep. Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y.; and director of Central Intelligence Agency nominee John Ratcliffe are the most likely to be confirmed on Day One.
ADVERTISEMENT
Rubio appeared cheerful in a post about a meeting he had last month with Sen. Jim Risch, R-Idaho, and the hawkish Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., about his nomination.
Both Rubio and Stefanik have experience with contentious hearings through their time in Congress, and they both still have connections on Capitol Hill. Stefanik, known for her grilling of university presidents during a hearing on campus antisemitism, has not yet resigned her seat in the House of Representatives and has served in House GOP leadership, which means she has extensive relationships with both House and Senate members.
Before Ratcliffe served as the director of national intelligence from May 2020 until the end of Trump’s first term, he also was a member of Congress. The combination of legislative and national security experience will serve as a boon for the CIA-bound Ratcliffe. But Rubio has an even greater advantage because he is not only a member of the body considering his nomination but is considered a leading voice on foreign affairs.
Having won both houses of Congress and the White House, Republicans are tasked now with governing. They will have a lot on their plate in the upcoming months, including passing one or more reconciliation bills to attempt to implement many of Trump’s priorities, such as deporting illegal aliens, renewing the American energy industry, and passing tax cuts. Failing to implement such “America First” priorities has the potential to imperil the Republicans during the midterm elections.
The Prickly Pear is focused on delivering timely, fact-based news, and citizen opinion that reflects our mission to “inform, educate and advocate about the principles of limited government and personal liberty.”
To achieve that mission, Prickly Pear often engages with like-minded contributors and organizations who share our values. We encourage to support these partners in any way you can, as these partners make our efforts possible.
Direct support of the Prickly Pear can be made at the link below. Every dollar is greatly appreciated!
https://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.png00ThePricklyPear.orghttps://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.pngThePricklyPear.org2025-01-16 01:28:002025-01-16 01:28:00Trump Faces Starting Term Without a Cabinet
Editors’ Note: The cast for deportation can be made on a number of foundations: national security, rule of law, economics, and religious. The author is correct that Progressives will soon be playing on our heart strings and religious people are likely vulnerable to such arguments. The author makes a good case that it is permissible under Christian doctrine and we hardly need to point out that Israel has made most effective use of walls to control population flows.
The Bible, the ballot, the border.
Donald Trump’s resounding victory in November indicates widespread public support for radical action on immigration.
In October, a Marquette Law School poll showed support for “deporting immigrants who are living in the United States illegally back to their home countries” at 68% among registered voters. After the election, a separate poll found that 57% of respondents favored deporting at least 11 million people living here illegally.
ADVERTISEMENT
The once and future president has a clear mandate to restore law and order to our immigration system. The question is how long it will last.
Legacy media outlets are sure to flood the airwaves with heart-wrenching images. The press would like nothing more than for deportation to generate maximally painful images of crying abuelas with a dozen American grandchildren being loaded into ICE vans, idealistic DREAMers killed by cartel violence after being deported to Guatemala, and jackbooted thugs beating good samaritans with nightsticks as they use their bodies to shield the migrants claiming sanctuary at their Unitarian church.
In the ideal scenario for Democrats, these sympathetic victims replace Laken Riley as the face of the immigration issue, Trump’s approval numbers tank, Americans’ folk-libertarian instincts shift blue, and they win big in the 2026 midterms.
Trump and his team appear to recognize this danger and are already attempting to mitigate the potential PR backlash. Prominent figures like Vice President-elect J.D. Vance and incoming border czar Tom Homan have emphasized that early deportation efforts will focus on criminals and national security threats. But as Homan also acknowledged, tackling criminal migrants “first” implies that non-criminal ones will follow.
Trump’s 2024 victory relied in part on maintaining his decisive margins among white evangelicals while flipping the Catholic vote red. These voters in particular must resist attempts to co-opt their faith in service of progressive globalism. And for the sake of their own souls, they’ll need to do so without embracing racial or ethnic hatred.
ADVERTISEMENT
To that end, it seems useful to return to New Testament passages on civil government.
“[R]ulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God’s servant for your good,” Paul wrote to the Roman church. “But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God’s wrath on the wrongdoer.”
Similarly, Peter instructed his readers to submit “to every human institution, whether it be to the emperor as supreme, or to governors as sent by him to punish those who do evil and to praise those who do good.”
Taken together,these verses outline the biblical vision of politics: the civil realm exists to punish criminals, deter would-be offenders by making them fear punishment, and uphold public morality. Civil magistrates who violate or neglect these duties sin against the people God has entrusted to him. (A regime that does so flagrantly enough may even lose its legitimacy—though the bar is pretty low, considering that Peter and Paul were writing about an empire that condoned infanticide and slave rape, ruled by the arch-degenerate Nero.)
All this remains true. What’s changed is that we no longer live under an autocracy. In every political order depicted in the Bible, there is a sharp divide between rulers and ruled.
In a republic, those two roles coexist in every eligible voter. The authority to determine public policy devolves indirectly upon the electorate. As a private citizen, the Christian must turn the other cheek, go the extra mile, and all the rest. But when he steps into the voting booth, he participates in the duties of the collective magistrate.
This includes voting for policies that would be sinful to undertake for oneself. If my father were murdered, my duty as a Christian citizen would be to refrain from vengeance. But as a partial magistrate (that is, voter), my duty would be to see the killer imprisoned or executed. I might, with perfect consistency, forgive my father’s murderer and then vote for a DA who would seek the death penalty.
This can be a difficult balance to strike. I might stab the killer myself, thus improperly executing the vengeance that belongs to me only in my impersonal capacity as a partial magistrate. Or I might vote for a soft-on-crime DA, thus improperly allowing my moral duties qua individual to override my moral duties qua voter. To commit the latter error would be a sin against my law-abiding neighbors, for whom I (as partial magistrate) bear responsibility.
It used to be only rulers who bore this burden of dual personhood. The Torah’s command to welcome the foreigner forbade King David (as an Israelite) to mistreat his Philistine-born servants. It did not require him (as king) to let 100,000 Philistine men walk across the border. Today, we’re all in the same situation.
It’s recently become fashionable among immigration hardliners to attack Christian charities that serve illegal immigrants. But while it’s perfectly legitimate to denounce NGOs that facilitate human trafficking or lobby for open borders, when it comes to supplying basic human needs, it’s time to set politics aside. Does offering aid to illegal immigrants incentivize more illegal immigration? Maybe. It’s not your job to worry about that.
The way churches (and individual Christians) should respond to mass migration is by feeding the hungry, giving drink to the thirsty, welcoming the stranger, and caring for the sick. So donate your spare coat to the clothing drive, volunteer to teach free ESL classes, drop a casserole at the shelter, provide legal aid to those navigating the asylum system, and help a migrant dad make car payments so he can feed his family driving Uber.
Then go cast your vote for those who stand for fully enforcing immigration law, knowing full well they plan to deport the people you’re trying to serve. (You could even continue serving immigrants once they’re deported, whether through direct financial support or by partnering with churches or other organizations in their home countries.)
This vision of political theology does not require mass deportations. It does, however, dispense with the objection that aggressive immigration enforcement is somehow un-Christian. People of goodwill can disagree on the ideal immigration system, but the current anarchy is unacceptable.
Individual charity demands that you help those in need. Political charity demands that you (in your role as partial magistrate) maintain order and punish wrongdoing. Perhaps in other forms of government it would be possible to avoid this complicated dual responsibility. But not in ours.
The Prickly Pear is focused on delivering timely, fact-based news, and citizen opinion that reflects our mission to “inform, educate and advocate about the principles of limited government and personal liberty.”
To achieve that mission, Prickly Pear often engages with like-minded contributors and organizations who share our values. We encourage to support these partners in any way you can, as these partners make our efforts possible.
Direct support of the Prickly Pear can be made at the link below. Every dollar is greatly appreciated!
https://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.png00ThePricklyPear.orghttps://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.pngThePricklyPear.org2025-01-16 01:26:002025-01-16 01:26:00The Christian Case for Deportation
The House bill to protect girls’ sports wasn’t remarkable for passing — it passed last year. What was remarkable is what the vote says about Democrats. In the first big test of whether Joe Biden’s party had learned its election lessons, the answer was a shocking and resounding “no.”
Every Democrat but two — Texas Reps. Vicente Gonzalez and Henry Cuellar — ignored the rallying cry of November 5 and stood stubbornly on the side of radical transgenderism, leaving our nation’s daughters vulnerable to injury, lost privacy, and stolen innocence.
Perhaps the most astonishing detractor of Rep. Greg Steube’s (R-Fla.) Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act was Massachusetts’s Rep. Seth Moulton (D), who spent the better part of November fending off the Left’s mob after he had the audacity to agree with 72% of Americans that biological boys don’t belong on girls’ teams, in their locker rooms, or atop their podiums. The Marine veteran spoke frankly and refreshingly about his party’s wildly out-of-step views on transgenderism after the election, declaring, “I have two little girls, I don’t want them getting run over on a playing field by a male or formerly male athlete, but as a Democrat, I’m supposed to be afraid to say that.”
Turns out, he wasn’t afraid to say it — he was afraid to defend it. Proving that his party is still wearing an “ideological straitjacket,” as Moulton called it last year, less than 1% of Democrats sided with parents on an issue that most of us still can’t believe is an issue at all. “One of the most common-sense bills that we’ve had is the bill that says men cannot play in women’s sports,” Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) said Tuesday. Not a single Democrat supported the legislation when it was brought up in 2023, but that was before the GOP’s nationwide ad blitz outing the Left’s obsession with biological men in girls’ spaces.
And yet, even in deep blue states like New York, 66% of locals are demanding an end to this transgender madness — just a handful of points shy of the national average. “We all know that New York is a liberal state, so this tells you that this should not be a liberal, conservative or Democrat and Republican issue,” state Senator George Borrelo (R) insisted.
Now, Moulton, who was prematurely anointed as a voice of reason among Democrats, claims the bill is “too extreme.” “I’ve stated my belief that our party has failed to come to the table in good faith to debate an issue on which the vast majority of Americans believe we are out of touch,” the congressman told The Washington Post. “We should be able to discuss regulations for trans athletes in competitive sports, while still staunchly defending the rights of transgender Americans to simply exist without fear of danger or oppression. But instead, we’ve run away from the issue altogether. As a result, Republicans are in charge and continue to set the agenda with extremist bills like this.” As he once said to placate the party’s bosses, “I have nuanced views on these issues.”
Unfortunately for Moulton, voters’ views aren’t nuanced when it comes to defending the dignity and rights of women. If political expedience was the goal, this liberal failed miserably. He stood up to the bullies — then surrendered to them. And while not every constituent would have agreed with him, they’d have at least respected Moulton for going to bat for what he thought was right. Now he’s just another weak-kneed Democrat under the thumb of an inflexible, intolerant party. A fraud. In the words of incomparable Senator John Kennedy (R-La.), maybe it’s time to go to Amazon and buy a spine.
“I remember when Rep. Moulton was more concerned with what was best for his daughters than what his party thought. I wish this year’s Rep. Moulton could meet November 2024 Rep. Moulton and catch some of 2024 Seth Moulton’s courage,” FRC’s Quena González told The Washington Stand. “The flimsy reasons he gave for voting today against protecting women is hogwash. All obfuscation aside, there’s a word for not standing up to your little girls — it’s called moral cowardice. And there’s a word for not standing up on an issue that you concede lost your party the last election — it’s called electoral insanity.”
While it would be easy to get lost in the Democrats’ suicidal tendencies, the reality is, House Republicans did do what the country demanded — moving this crucial bill one step closer to reality. Doreen Denny, who, like many conservatives, has been waiting for the day when reason would prevail in Congress, celebrated with The Washington Stand that “the overwhelming mandate of the November election is getting results on Capitol Hill.” Denny, the senior advisor for Concerned Women for America, applauded the GOP majority “for standing for women.” “Now,” she urged, “it’s time for the Senate to get this bill across the finish line.”
But even Denny couldn’t help but shake her head at the asinine, self-defeating strategy of the Left. “Today’s vote could have been a turning point for bipartisanship on this issue,” she told TWS. “Instead, only two Democrats voted in favor of the Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act. What a shame. It proves radical special interest groups promoting the trans agenda continue to have a death grip on the Democratic Party.”
The bill’s sponsor, Greg Steube, is flabbergasted that all but two members are willing to gamble on a proposal that has almost three-quarters of the country’s support. “This is going to be an election issue for them in two years,” he told Family Research Council President Tony Perkins on Tuesday’s “Washington Watch.” “Maybe they think that two years is a long time from now. But we saw this as an election issue just a couple of months ago during the presidential race. … This is an overwhelmingly supported issue across America. So it is very shocking. … But it just shows you how out of touch Democrats are with the majority of America.”
Asked to speculate why Joe Biden’s party refuses to line up behind biological reality and fairness, the Florida Republican says it all comes down to fear. “The bottom line is, politically, they’re afraid of their left flank. And if a progressive Democrat comes along and fights them on this issue, the far Left of their party will root out any type of reason on these issues.”
And not only that, Steube argued, they’ll use lies to do it. Perkins pointed to Democrat Ayanna Pressley’s (Mass.) string of falsehoods on the House floor before the vote. “Imagine you are eight years old, trying out for the soccer team, and your coach demands that you show them your genitals. That is abuse. That is exploitation. That is egregious. But it is exactly what this Republican bill does.” Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) went so far as to say the proposal would “unleash predators on girls,” without, as Fox News points out, explaining how.
Look, Steube countered, “None of this that they’re arguing is ever going to happen. It’s a lie. It’s to try to enrage people [to think], ‘Oh, that’s horrible,’ and ‘Republicans are bad.’ … And the mainstream media is going to perpetuate that lie. It’s just unfortunate … [because] the bill is very short. It’s like a page and a half or two pages or whatever it is. Read it for yourself if you don’t believe me. But that’s exactly what it [says]: the gender you were assigned biologically at birth will determine what sport you play.”
Understanding the pressure they must have faced, others, like González, applauded the two members who defected to support the bill. “The Congressional Hispanic Caucus still refuses to admit Republicans,” he pointed out to TWS. “It sounds like at least two Democrats realize that, on the policy of protecting little girls, most Democrats are out of step with actual Hispanics. I guess Latinos aren’t Latinxs after all,” he quipped. “Who knew?”
The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.
Jihadist social media accounts have been ablaze with incitement and celebration of the California wildfires. In one such case, a pro-ISIS jihadist TikTok account posted a graphic showing a man carrying a firebomb against the red backdrop with a wildfire burning.
NEWSMAX — The fires have burned more than 40,000 acres.
The graphic shows Arabic writing that roughly translates into English as “The time is now.” The following scene shows a burned-out section of Los Angeles with lyrics that say in Arabic, “O what victory for whoever gains martyrdom honestly, his sins will be wiped away as his blood spills and the flowers are perfumed by its scent, and his wounds will smell like musk.”
Islamic terrorists typically post songs called nasheeds that are paired with images of violent acts on social media. They often serve as a sign for sleeper cells to go into action. This was the case prior to the ISIS attacks in France a decade ago.
“Your blood will flow for your heinous crimes.” Videos like these define a conflict (between Islam and the West or between Islam and hypocrites or apostates), place blame, and evoke moral outrage toward enemies,” the Carter Center noted in a report on ISIS terrorism.
“Such scenes are designed to convince individuals who experienced the conflict firsthand as well as those Daesh propaganda seeks to reinforce a simplistic but emotionally satisfying division of the world into two camps — good and evil. All people are subsumed under this division; no gray zone can remain. They demand explicit action on behalf of the audience: Join the fight.”
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms Los Angeles office (ATF) noted in a post on X that it was investigating a possible arson cause for the fires.
“ATF will take the lead in determining the origin and cause of the Pacific Palisades fire. Certified fire investigators have been on scene and will continue to work in conjunction with state and local investigators to determine the cause of this tragic event,” the statement said.
Jihadists have discussed using wildfires as a form of terrorist activity for years. Al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) told how lone jihadists could set wildfires in the Western U.S. in Issue #9 of its Inspire Magazine in 2012.
The article titled “It is of your freedom to ignite a firebomb” written by the anonymous “AQ Chef” discussed the massive amount of property damage that could happen if jihadists used firebombs. It encouraged jihadis to pray to Allah and to find wooded areas with large amounts of dry undergrowth and in areas that have high winds. The issue went into detail how to build firebombs.
Los Angeles has both.
“The burning of hundreds of hectares of wood that is used in wooden commercial products causes significant losses to the factories and companies of wooden products and everything that is linked to this trade. Especially when the cause of fire is deliberate and organized frequently. That means the continuity of loss. It also means more losses for insurance companies,” Inspire said. “… [T]he most important damaging result that is the spreading of terror among the targeted community.”
ISIS similarly urged its supporters to create wildfires in California in 2020.
Satellite images show that three fires began simultaneously.
Jihadist involvement in setting some of the fires has yet to be determined.
Several individuals were arrested and were believed to have committed arson in connection with the fires.
A man was arrested in the Woodland Hills section of Los Angeles Thursday after being observed carrying a blowtorch. California State Parks officials similarly announced Friday the arrest of a female suspect on suspicion she was involved in arson.
Police detained a man identified as Ruben Montes on Sunday after he was observed lighting fires in Irwindale.
Accounts from across the Muslim world celebrated the fires saying they were punishment for American support for Israel.
Khalid Griggs, imam of the Community Mosque at Winston-Salem and a leader of the Islamic Circle of North America, posted an image on his Facebook profile comparing the Los Angeles wildfires with Gaza.
5Pillars, a British Islamist site, similarly celebrated the fires saying they were divine retribution for Gaza.
“Whilst I feel for the innocents who have lost their homes, and am not suggesting that all those who have been affected deserved it, I can’t help but view these wildfires as a general lesson for us all, from Allah SWT,” 5Pillars writer Maria Akbar wrote.
“It was Israel, backed by the U.S., that set Gaza alight with their bombs and rockets; and now LA is being set alight by the Almighty.”
The article continued, “The Israelis/Americans destroyed buildings, homes and businesses in Gaza; now the same is happening in LA. Everything people worked for, their livelihoods, memories, lives, has been destroyed in an instant.”
Although terrorism has yet to be established with California wildfires the celebration and calls for incitement by Islamist accounts could be a warning for the future.
One individual in Cairo was representative of countless other accounts saying, “America is incapable of putting out fires and needs your prayers. O Allah, rain gasoline on 95 on them,” wrote Mahmoud R Nasr, a participant in an Islamist Facebook group.
Other accounts show AI-generated images of downtown Los Angeles in flames.
Pro-Taliban accounts celebrated the wildfires on social media.
“Taliban media activists happy about the terrible fire on American soil Afghan Taliban media activists have expressed their joy over the Los Angeles fires by launching a campaign. This is while the Taliban regime receives cash from American taxpayers every week,” Aamaj News, an Afghan news account loyal to the former government of Afghanistan, said.
AUTHOR
JOHN ROSSOMANDO
John Rossomando is an experienced national security and counterterrorism analyst and researcher who writes for Newsmax and has been featured in numerous publications and has been consulted by numerous U.S. government agencies.
The nation’s largest cities, run by Democrats, are crime-infested, debt-ridden places making their liberal leaders a very good living.
They call it The Big Easy. While New Orleans has earned a reputation for its laid-back lifestyle, its government has long been known as an easy, sleazy den of corruption and incompetence.
It’s a good-paying gig if you can get it.
ADVERTISEMENT
In fact, there’s much cheese to be made as a “dedicated” public servant in the nation’s largest Democrat-led cities — even while they burn.
Take New Orleans’ top crimefighter, Police Superintendent Anne Kirkpatrick, the old gal with the Kristen Wiig Target Lady hairdo. She’s raking in more than $300,000 a year. Kirkpatrick started her tenure as superintendent in September 2023 at an annual salary of $337,943, according to a new report from government spending tracker Open The Books.
That’s a hefty paycheck, even for a 65-year-old seasoned law enforcement veteran who appears to be a dedicated soldier for the left’s three pillars of public safety: diversity, equity, and inclusion.
‘I Didn’t Know About Them’
Understandably some of her fellow citizens are questioning the value Kirkpatrick brings to her post after a U.S. born-radicalized jihadist with an ISIS flag drove a pickup truck through a crowd of Bourbon Street revelers on New Year’s Day, killing 14 and injuring dozens more. Questions of confidence definitely popped up when Kirkpatrick admitted that she had no idea that New Orleans had in 2017 put barriers in place in an attempt to impede such attacks in the tourist-rich district. The barriers were not up at the time but have since been installed.
“Actually, we have them. I didn’t know about them, but we have them, and so we have been able now to put them out,” the apparently overmatched Kirkpatrick toldreporters a day after one of the deadliest terrorist attacks on U.S. soil.
As NBC News reported, “the 700-pound steel barriers, which are certified by the Department of Homeland Security, were credited with preventing casualties in a similar incident last year in California at the Rose Parade.” The security barriers were reportedly taken down because they had been malfunctioning, with city crews in the middle of installing a new bollard system. Apparently the bewildered police superintendent wasn’t aware of all of that.
ADVERTISEMENT
City officials did not return The Federalist’s requests for comment.
‘When You Mess Up, You Fess Up.’
Bizarrely, Kirkpatrick was under investigation after a similar car-versus-pedestrian incident near the same area where the New Year’s terrorist attack took place. The police superintendent was driving in the French Quarter when her vehicle struck a man and a woman. The female received minor injuries.
Kirkpatrick told NOLA that she was on duty at the time, having just visited an injured police officer in the hospital when she made a left-hand turn and didn’t notice the pedestrians.
“I’m so sorry for what happened last night. I’m so grateful that the two people involved really are going to be fine. Just terribly sorry,” the superintendent said in August. The status of the investigation is not clear. In a subsequent interview, Kirkpatrick said, “When you mess up you fess up. And that is also part of leadership and leading the way. And even myself, if you mess up, I own this, I apologize for it, and then I will take the consequences for it and then we’re gonna move on.”
According to Open The Books, Kirkpatrick has collected nearly $3 million since 2016. She previously served as police chief in Oakland, California, where her 2017 starting salary grew from $250,003 to $334,090 by 2019, OTB reports.
“The Oakland Police Commission voted unanimously to fire Kirkpatrick without cause in February 2020. She sued for wrongful termination, claiming she was fired for speaking out against alleged corruption in the Commission, an independent civilian group that oversees Oakland’s police,” the watchdog notes in its report.
She won in federal court. A judge in 2022 ordered the city of Oakland to pay Kirkpatrick $1.5 million in damages, including a full year’s salary of $337,675, according to OTB. She had sought $3 million, part of it in “emotional damages.”
Kirkpatrick, “one of the most tenured police executives in the country,” is steeped in the politics of DEI. As a National Press Foundation bio notes, the police superintendent is a national instructor at the FBI’s Law Enforcement Executive Association’s Leadership Training Program, “where she instructs on topics including, but not limited to, Bias and Diversity, Emotional Intelligence and Leading Generations.”
‘With Distinction and Integrity’
Kirkpatrick is pulling down a much heftier salary than New Orleans’ leftist Mayor LaToya Cantrell, according to Open The Books’ review. But the mayor will muddle through somehow on her $188,370 annual compensation.
Of course, Cantrell is a real high flier. She got busted a few years back bumping up her unnecessary “official” overseas flights to first class. According to New Orleans’ Fox 8, the Democrat and three of her top aides enjoyed a junket to France so the mayor could sign a “sister-city agreement.” Not willing to fly with the peasants in coach, Cantrell bumped up her seating arrangements to the elite section — charging New Orleans taxpayers $18,000 for the privilege.
“About a week after she returned from France, Cantrell traveled to Switzerland for another signing of a ‘sister city’ agreement. Her flight there cost just over $9,800, and she spent more than $11,000 for the six days in Ascona, Switzerland,” Fox 8 reported.
Cantrell had long refused to pay the city back for the extravagance, despite a city policy clearly stipulating that if city employees want to travel in business or first-class, they do so on their own dime.
“All expenses incurred doing business on behalf of the City of New Orleans will not be reimbursed to the City of New Orleans. I do my job and I will continue to do it with distinction and integrity every step of the way,” Cantrell huffed.
She ultimately agreed to pay back the nearly $29,000, but only after the New Orleans City Council threatened to take the unauthorized travel expenses out of her salary.
‘Accusation After Accusation’
Cantrell and Gilbert Montano, the city’s chief administrative officer, were implicated last year in a 25-count indictment unsealed in September. Neither has been charged, but they are referenced in the indictment against Randy Farrell of Metairie, “a licensing inspector accused of conspiring to offer bribes to city officials to dissuade an investigation of illicit permitting activity,” Fox 8 reported.
A previous federal indictment was issued July 19, accusing Jeffrey Vappie, a former member of the mayor’s police security detail, of defrauding the taxpayers by submitting false timecards to the NOPD for work he never did. The indictment charges that, instead of conducting police work during those hours, he was “carrying on a personal and romantic relationship with public official 1.”
“How I came in seems to be how I’m going out,” Cantrell said at the beginning of her Oct. 1 budget presentation to the City Council, according to a recording from Fox 8. “Accusation after accusation after accusation. But also a track record of delivering results.”
Crime Pays
While Cantrell did Europe in style and Kirkpatrick made law enforcement diversity, equity and inclusion a top priority, New Orleans continued to hold the dubious honor as one of the most dangerous cities in America. While the former “Murder Capital” boasts of a significant decline in violent crimes from the record numbers a few years ago amid the national “defund the police” movement, celebrating FBI crime statistics can be a tricky business. As John R. Lott, Jr. reported in October in The Federalist, the bureau has been caught fudging the numbers in the Biden years.
“While the FBI claims that serious violent crime has fallen by 5.8 percent since Biden took office, the NCVS [National Crime Victimization Survey] numbers show total violent crime has risen by 55.4 percent,” the story, originally published by RealClearInvestigations, notes.
That’s the same FBI, by the way, that missed an Islamic State-inspired terrorist’s deadly intentions because it was too busy hosting DEI-ladened recruitment sessions.
“#FBINewOrleans is holding a Diversity Agent Recruiting event and we want to meet you! Agents and FBI executives will provide first hand information about a rewarding career. Apply now to see if you qualify for the July 17th event in Metairie, LA here: https://ow.ly/YWh250RPl15,” an inclusive X post advertised in June.
The story is the same all over. The nation’s largest cities, run by Democrats, are crime-infested, debt-ridden places that are making their leftist leaders a very good living.
According to a salary review by Open The Books for The Federalist, the mayors of the nation’s five-largest cities hauled in a combined $1 million-plus in total compensation in 2023 — not counting kickbacks.
While California Burns
Karen Bass, the grossly incompetent mayor of Los Angeles, raked in compensation totaling more than $300,000, according to OTB’s records. As the Los Angeles-area burns from “unprecedented” wildfires, Bass is on the hot seat for slashing the city’s fire-fighting budget. As the wildfires raged out of control, the Democrat mayor was in West Africa— attending the inauguration of Ghana’s president. Bass was one of four delegates representing President Joe Biden.
Her predecessor, like Bass, pumped plenty of DEI into “fire protection,” according to my Federalist colleague Beth Brelje.
In January 2022, then-Mayor Eric Garcetti checked multiple DEI boxes by appointing Kristin Crowley as fire chief, the first female, LGBT chief in Los Angeles. That year, according to LAFD data, “of the more than 6,500 applicants to LAFD, 70% were people of color and nearly 8% … were female,” which was “double the … percentage of female firefighters within the Department” at the time.
Crowley, according to OTB’s review, collected “an absurd $439,772 — $412,493 base pay and $27,278 ‘other’ pay.”
Crowley has pushed the banner of DEI inside the Los Angeles Fire Department.
“As the fire chief, if confirmed, I vow to take a strategic and balanced approach to ensure we meet the needs of the community we serve,” she said, as Newsweek quoted her. “We will focus our efforts on increasing our operational effectiveness, enhancing firefighter safety and well-being, and fully commit to fostering a diverse, equitable and inclusive culture within the LAFD.”
Los Angeles’ top cop, Jim McDonnell, was sworn in in November at a $450,000 base salary, one of the highest police chief salaries among the nation’s largest cities, according to the Associated Press.
And if you’re scoring along at home, Brian K. Williams, Bass’ deputy mayor for public safety, was on administrative leave after being accused of making a bomb threat to city hall, the Associated Press reports. The FBI searched Williams’ home last month, and the matter remains under investigation.
Crime and Debt
New York City Mayor Eric Adams, facing corruption charges, collected $258,041.16 in total compensation in 2023, according to OTB. The mayor is looking at some big legal bills ahead of an April trial tied to his alleged relationship with Turkish government officials. Prosecutors accuse Adams of accepting tens of thousands of dollars in improper gifts, including extravagant international travel packages from wealthy foreign businesspeople. Earlier this week, federal prosecutors said “law enforcement has continued to identify additional individuals involved in Adams’ conduct, and to uncover additional criminal conduct by Adams.”
The Democrat, who has pleaded not guilty, blasted the prosecutors at a press conference.
“You know, even Ray Charles can see what’s going on. And I have an attorney, Alex Spiro, he is handling that. I’ve said over and over again, I’ve done nothing wrong. Let the attorneys do that. I have to run the city,” Adams told reporters Tuesday.
Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson — Let’s Go Brandon! — was set to earn about $221,052 last year following a pay raise tied to inflation, according to Illinois Policy. Chicago City Council members, the publication reported, pulled down a comfortable salary of just shy of $146,000 after a whopping 9.6% pay raise in 2023, even as crime and debt continued to devour the Democrat-led Windy City.
“Chicago is not only the nation’s murder capital but leads the nation in mass shootings. Last year, there were 83 mass shootings, which Chicago Police define as three or more,” Illinois Policy reported in July.
Left Coast Corruption
Ousted San Francisco Mayor London Breed was the highest-paid mayor in the nation, raking in $383,760 in total salary and benefits in 2023, according to Open The Books.
Breed’s tenure in office was so disastrous that even the most devout liberals in the leftist city couldn’t take any more. The Democrat lost her bid for reelection in November amid chaos in San Francisco’s streets. Her leftist leadership only exacerbated the city’s homeless, drug, and brazen retail theft crises. Breed’s fellow Bay Area Marxist, Oakland Mayor Sheng Thao, suffered a worse fate — she was ousted in a recall election after just two years into a four-year term under a cloud of corruption.
Breed, too, faced a corruption scandal heading into November’s election after the former director of the mayor’s multi-million dollar “Dream Keeper” initiative, billed as an “ambitious social equity program,” was suspected of improperly spending funds. Breed faced “mounting scrutiny” after the San Francisco Chronicle investigation exposed troubling expenditures.
Despite the crime, the incompetence, and the corruption, voters in the America’s biggest cities continue to elect leftist mayors. NBC News called the Dem stranglehold on mayoral seats — effectively 10 of 10 liberals leading the 10 most-populated communities in 2023 — the new “Blue Wall.” That same year, Democrats controlled all but three mayor’s offices in the nation’s 25 most-populous cities, according to the corporate news outlet.
“Those 25 cities are home to 38 million residents, about 12% of the country’s total population and more people than the combined populations of 21 states,” the NBC News noted.
‘Mentality of Liberal Failure’
While Democrats still dominate the city electoral map, President-elect Donald Trump “made significant inroads in surprising places,” from blue havens like New Jersey, New York, and Hawaii, according to an AP analysis of November’s vote totals. AP VoteCast, a survey of more than 120,000 voters nationwide, “found that Trump made substantial gains among Black and Latino men, younger voters, and nonwhite voters without a college degree, compared with his 2020 performance.”
In the Bronx, for instance, Trump picked up 27 percent of the vote, unheard of in the deep blue bastion, according to the New York State Board of Elections. It was the best showing by a Republican presidential candidate there in 40 years, NBC News reported.
“Even Chicago, the bluest of blue cities, is getting Trumpier,” Chicago Magazine reported post-election.
“In the last three elections, Donald Trump has steadily increased his share of the vote here, from 12.4 percent in 2016, to 15.8 percent in 2020, to 21.4 percent” in November’s election, the publication noted. “In Illinois as a whole, Trump’s percentage jumped from 40.5 percent in 2020 to 44.3 percent this year.”
Of course, lots of Democrats, uninspired by fill-in candidate Vice President Kamala Harris, sat out the election. But Patricia Easley (aka “P Rae”), a black conservative activist and mega MAGA backer from Chicago, last summer predicted growing support for Trump in her city, as black voters especially grow tired of generations of broken promises from Democrats.
“Our goal is to get people away from the mentality of liberal failure that is happening in our city,” Easley, the founder of conservative group ChicagoRed, told me at July’s Republican National Convention.
The Prickly Pear is focused on delivering timely, fact-based news, and citizen opinion that reflects our mission to “inform, educate and advocate about the principles of limited government and personal liberty.”
To achieve that mission, Prickly Pear often engages with like-minded contributors and organizations who share our values. We encourage to support these partners in any way you can, as these partners make our efforts possible.
Direct support of the Prickly Pear can be made at the link below. Every dollar is greatly appreciated!
https://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.png00ThePricklyPear.orghttps://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.pngThePricklyPear.org2025-01-15 01:30:002025-01-15 01:30:00Crime, Corruption, And Incompetence Pay Well For Leftist Big City Leaders
30-year Treasury bonds sold at auction on Friday at highest yield in at least 16 years despite Fed’s 100 basis points in rate cuts.
Since the Fed’s 100 basis points in rate cuts, the 10-year Treasury yield has risen by 114 basis points, including by 9 basis points on Friday, to 4.77%, the highest since November 2023, upon news of a continued solid labor market in an economy that is growing substantially faster than the 15-year average growth rate, with inflation re-accelerating in the wings. And seeing these upside risks to inflation, the Fed is gingerly shifting back into its wait-and-see mode.
Also on Friday, the 20-year yield rose to 5.04%; the Treasury Department sold 30-year bonds at auction with a yield of 4.91%, the highest auction yield since before the Financial Crisis; and a daily measure of mortgage rates rose to 7.24%.
The Effective Federal Funds Rate (EFFR), which the Fed targets with its policy rates, has remained at 4.33% since the December rate cut, down by 100 basis points from the pre-cut levels (blue). I’m not sure we’ve ever seen anything like this before – a 114-basis-point surge of the 10-year yield while the Fed cut by 100 basis points – but there’s a good reason for it.
ADVERTISEMENT
The reason for this phenomenon of the Fed cutting by 100 basis points while longer-term yields soar by over 100 basis points is the unusual situation the economy went through, and why the Fed cut rates.
Normally the Fed cuts rates when it sees a recession on the horizon. And the bond market, also seeing a bad economy ahead, begins to send longer-term yields lower.
But this time around, the Fed cut without a recession in sight, with a solid labor market and above average economic growth despite the highest policy rates in decades. It cut by 100 basis points because inflation cooled a lot from 9% in 2022. But it cooled a lot without a steep recession and big job losses, it cooled despite the economy growing at an above-average rate, which is another rarity. It caused major recession predictors that normally work well to produce false positives.
The yield curve un-inverted last year and is steepening nicely.
Short-term yields haven’t really budged since before the December rate cut, which had already been fully priced in at the time. Now there is no more rate cut priced in within the short-term window of those securities before they mature. For example, on Friday, the 3-month yield was 4.32%, same as in the days just before the December rate cut.
But everything from the 2-year yield and longer has risen substantially since the rate cut. This caused the yield curve, which had gracefully un-inverted entirely just before Christmas, to steepen.
The yield curve had inverted in July 2022, when the Fed’s big rate hikes pushed up short-term Treasury yields very fast, but longer-term yields rose more slowly, and so the short-term yields blew past them.
ADVERTISEMENT
The chart below shows the yield curve of Treasury yields across the maturity spectrum, from 1 month to 30 years, on three key dates:
Gold: July 25, 2024, before the labor market data spiraled down (which was a false alarm).
Blue: September 16, 2024, just before the Fed’s rate cuts started.
Red: Friday, January 10, 2025.
This yield curve is getting closer to looking healthy again, though it remains relatively flat and the steepening process still has some ways to go:
The Prickly Pear is focused on delivering timely, fact-based news, and citizen opinion that reflects our mission to “inform, educate and advocate about the principles of limited government and personal liberty.”
To achieve that mission, Prickly Pear often engages with like-minded contributors and organizations who share our values. We encourage to support these partners in any way you can, as these partners make our efforts possible.
Direct support of the Prickly Pear can be made at the link below. Every dollar is greatly appreciated!
https://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.png00ThePricklyPear.orghttps://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.pngThePricklyPear.org2025-01-15 01:28:002025-01-15 01:28:00Treasury Yield Curve Steepens, as Long-Term Yields Coddle Up to 5% while Short-Term Yields Stay Put, Not Seeing Any Rate Cuts. Mortgage Rates Rise to 7.24%
“El Rushbo” – Rush Limbaugh – wrote that “Words mean things.” For that reason, leftists change the meanings of words, and seduce us into changing our words, in order to confuse public discussion. Thus, liberals can’t bring themselves to say “abortion”; their euphemisims are “choice” and “reproductive rights “Gun control” is “gun safety.” ”Pedophiles are “minor attracted persons.” Genital mutilation is “gender-affirming treatment.”
Here are a few words which I invite you to help me save from liberal dumb-speak.
IMMIGRANT/MIGRANT
There was a time when we all understood that “immigrant” and “migrant” were different words, with different meanings. Some time in the last decade, politicians and the media started using the words interchangeably, and recently, “migrant” has almost completely replaced “immigrant.”
ADVERTISEMENT
A “migrant” goes to a place temporarily. For example, migrant workers go to a place to work (such as to harvest crops), then return to their homes at the end of the work season. Cliff swallows migrate from Argentina to San Juan Capistrano, California in the summer, and return in the winter. “Immigrants,” on the other hand, go to a place with the intention of remaining permanently.
Are the millions of people who have crossed our borders in recent years here temporarily, on vacation or to work, or have they come here intending to remain? Clearly, they are not migrants; they are immigrants. Please let’s stop talking about illegal (or undocumented) migrants, and please correct those who call them migrants. They are not migrants; they are immigrants.
AFFECT/IMPACT
The verb “affect” means “to act upon; to produce a change upon.” In recent years, TV talking heads have decided to turn the noun “impact” into a verb. Now they say “Inflation impacts middle class voters” instead of “Inflation affects middle class voters.” The definition of “impact” as a verb is – are you ready? — “to affect.” So why does everybody say “impact” nowadays, and rarely “affect”? I don’t know; apparently “they” (whoever they are) decided that “impact” sounds cooler. Well, “they” are wrong. It doesn’t sound cooler; it sounds like somebody is trying to impress somebody, and it affects my mood negatively. Harrumph!
FENTANYL
Note to politicians and TV talking heads: it is pronounced fentaNIL, not fentaNOL. Rhymes with fill, hill, kill Bill. Fentanyl is an important topic, worthy of discussion, but if you can’t even pronounce it, I have no interest in whatever you might have to say; you have no credibility. As soon as I hear “fentaNOL,” I tune out. It’s similar to “nuclear,” which is pronounced “new clear,” not “new cue lar. President Bush used to do that, and I always thought “Yesterday, he couldn’t even pronounce newcuelar, and today he has the launch codes!” So please, fentaNIL, not fentaNOL.
BULLET/CARTRIDGE
A cartridge has four parts: the case, the gunpowder, the primer, and the bullet. When the firing pin hits the primer, it causes a spark. The spark ignites the gunpowder, which turns into a rapidly expanding gas. The expanding gas forces the bullet out of the case, like a cork popping out of a champagne bottle. The bullet goes speeding down the barrel and comes out with a very loud noise (again, like a champagne bottle), leaving behind the empty case with a used-up primer. When people say that a gun had bullets in the clip, they mean there were cartridges in the magazine. (Don’t get me started on clip and magazine!)
MAN/GENTLEMAN; WOMAN/LADY
Some of us actually know how to define “man” and “woman.” (XY chromosomes; XX chromosomes. Simple.) The words “man” and “woman” are not interchangeable with “gentleman” and “lady.” “Gentleman” and “lady” are “honorifics,” words intended to convey honor, respect, admiration. A gentleman is a man, and a lady is a woman, who exhibits excellent manners and proper behavior. How silly it sounds to hear a police officer say “I observed the lady setting the homeless person on fire,” or “I observed the gentleman shooting the schoolchildren.” Those are not admirable behaviors, are they? Please, “man” and “woman” are perfectly good words; don’t be afraid to use them. Save the honorifics for those who deserve them.
ADVERTISEMENT
COPSPEAK
Come to think of it, police officers never “see”; they “observe.” Maybe it is compensation for feelings of inadequacy; they feel like they have to talk highfalutin’. No police officer ever wrote a report saying that he got out of his car. He “exited his vehicle.” What about you? Do you exit your vehicle, or do you just get out of your car? Also, a police officer will never utilize the word “use” when he can use the word “utilize.”
THANK YOU/YOU’RE WELCOME
It used to be generally understood that the appropriate response to “Thank you,” is “You’re welcome.” Recently, people have stopped saying “You’re welcome.” Now, if you say “Thank you” to a waiter or waitress, he or she will reply “No problem,” or “Of course,” or some other alternative to the newly unpopular “You’re welcome.” OK, I understand that the folks at Chick-Fil-A have adopted “My pleasure” as sort of a trademark, but nobody else has a decent excuse. It’s especially amusing to hear guests on TV talk shows. When the host says “Thank you,” the guest replies “Thank YOU.” This could go on indefinitely. “No, thank YOU.” “Well, thank you more!” “Oh yeah? Thank you even more, to infinity plus infinity zillion!” Just say “You’re welcome,” people!
THANK YOU
You’re welcome.
Your Support is Critical
The Prickly Pear is focused on delivering timely, fact-based news, and citizen opinion that reflects our mission to “inform, educate and advocate about the principles of limited government and personal liberty.”
To achieve that mission, Prickly Pear often engages with like-minded contributors and organizations who share our values. We encourage to support these partners in any way you can, as these partners make our efforts possible.
Direct support of the Prickly Pear can be made at the link below. Every dollar is greatly appreciated!
https://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.png00ThePricklyPear.orghttps://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.pngThePricklyPear.org2025-01-15 01:26:002025-01-15 01:26:00May I Have A Few Words, Please?
The officials who vet migrants are bound as a matter of policy to ignore that there is any such thing as an Islamic jihad, so vetting failures of this kind are bound to happen.
“Egyptian Student Added to CIS National Security Vetting Failures Database,” by Todd Bensman, Center for Immigration Studies, January 10, 2025:
An 18-year-old Egyptian student at Virginia’s George Mason University who now stands charged with multiple terrorism offenses related to a mass casualty plot on Israel’s consulate in New York is the latest addition to the Center for Immigration Studies National Security Vetting Failures Database. The entry brings the total number of analyzed failure cases to 50.
In March 2023, the Center published the database collection to draw “remedial attention” to ongoing government vetting failures lest they “drift from the public mind and interest of lawmakers, oversight committee members, media, and homeland security practitioners who would otherwise feel compelled to demand process reforms”, according to an explanatory Center report titled “Learning from our Mistakes”.
The FBI arrested Abdullah Ezzeldin Taha Mohamed Hassan on December 17, 2024, for allegedly plotting a mass casualty attack on the Israeli consulate in New York. The case is pending in the Eastern District of Virginia.
Hassan, an Egyptian National, entered the United States in July 2022 as a juvenile and lived in Falls Church, Va., although as of January 2025 the visa granted for him to enter had not been publicly reported.
As a juvenile, he may have entered with parents or relatives on a temporary non-immigrant visa, such as a tourist visa or a J-2 student exchange visa, or even on an F-1 student visa, as there is no age limit for student visas. The U.S. State Department would, however, approve any of these visa types and conduct a personal interview of minors older than 14, like Hassan, who was 15 at the time.
However it was that Hassan entered, perhaps even if he illegally crossed a land border and claimed asylum, he was clearly already radicalized as an Islamic extremist, a circumstance that visa adjudicators or even federal law enforcement agents at the border, apparently could have discovered in his online social media accounts.
This is knowable because, within weeks or months of the juvenile Hassan’s 2022 entry, his social media accounts alerted the FBI, which sent agents to interview him “due, in part, to Hassan’s support for ISIS online”, the recent charging documents said.
Although no charges were filed in 2022, at some point soon after the FBI interviews, the U.S. government reportedly decided a mistake had been made. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) put Hassan into deportation proceedings, which were pending by the time he enrolled in George Mason University (GMU) to study information technology, probably in 2023 or 2024.
Hassan was still an enrolled active student in the summer and fall of 2024 when FBI agents were again actively investigating him undercover and saw him on the GMU campus, an agent affidavit said.
Again, Hassan’s online activities on several X social media accounts had drawn FBI attention. The bureau sent in an undercover agent online upon discovering that Hassan, who portrayed himself as an admirer of Osama bin Ladin and ISIS branches in Afghanistan and West Africa, was openly fantasizing about killing infidels and wanted to martyr himself in a mass-casualty attack.
Court documents reveal examples of Hassan’s alleged posts of him musing about killing Jews and, in one case, noted that a football player’s forehead was a “sniper’s dream”.
In one X account, Hassan boastfully shared an AI analysis of his profile that stated: “Based on our AI agent’s analysis of your tweets, you are a young radical Islamist extremist who is obsessed with jihad and violence against perceived enemies. Your tweets suggest a deep-seated hatred and intolerance towards those of other faiths, particularly Jews.”
https://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.png00DrRichSwier.comhttps://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.pngDrRichSwier.com2025-01-14 15:51:192025-01-14 15:51:19Muslim University Student Who Plotted Jihad Massacre is Latest Failure of Officials Who Vet Migrants
Five hundred Navy SEALs, veterans, and other supporters are planning to march in support of Defense Secretary Nominee Pete Hegseth as he appears before senators for his confirmation hearing on Tuesday.
BREITBART — That morning, his supporters will meet at the Vietnam Memorial Wall at 9 a.m. EST and march to different war memorials, including the Korean War Veterans Memorial, the D.C. War Memorial, and the World War II Memorial, and conclude near Capitol Hill with remarks from military leaders and prominent supporters. Participants will carry American flags as they march.
The march is being organized by Navy SEAL veteran Bill Brown, who also organizes the yearly NYC Seal Swim — which Hegseth, a combat veteran, has taken part of in support of Navy SEALs. Robert Sweetman’s 62romeo organization is co-organizing.
“The SEAL March for Pete Hegseth and attendance at hearing demonstrates strong and unwavering support from the warrior class for Pete Hegseth as he moves forward with his confirmation to become Secretary of Defense,” a press release for the event said.
“These veterans and patriots will be there to show all Senate members that they stand firmly behind Pete, affirming their trust in his leadership and commitment to defending the values they’ve fought for,” it added.
The release notes the march will be a “peaceful, respectful demonstration in the spirit of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s legacy of nonviolent action.”
SEALs and veterans also plan to fill the room where Hegseth’s confirmation hearing is taking place.
The day before, on Monday at noon at the Courtyard Washington in D.C./Foggy Bottom, a smaller group will gather for a Meet & Greet event organized by 62Romeo. Attendees will include Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-AL), Rep. Keith Self (R-TX), and Navy SEAL veterans Bill Brown, Robert Sweetman, Kaj Larsen, Mitch Aguiar, Ian Schinelli, Jeff Gum, and others who have served with Hegseth.
https://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.png00DrRichSwier.comhttps://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.pngDrRichSwier.com2025-01-14 15:51:172025-01-14 15:51:17Hundreds of Navy SEALs, Veterans to March in D.C. to support U.S. Secretary of Defense Nominee Pete Hegseth
Dr. King believed in faith, family and freedom. President-elect Donald J. Trump also believes if faith, family and freedom.
Dr. King and Donald J. Trump are both convicted felons.
Both Dr. King and Donald J. Trump have been persecuted for what they believe in.
Both were the victims of an assassin. Donald J. Trump was wounded, Dr. King was killed.
For too long we have fallen into the trap of judging people by the color of thier skins and ignoring the content of their characters. Be it politicians, workers, friends and associates.
I believe that we the people will, beginning on January 20, 2025, go back to the future and judge people solely on the content of their characters.
We will move away from an autocracy and toward a meritocracy in America from the school house to the White House and from the school room to corportate board rooms across America.
We will no longer idolize those solely based upon race or color but rather embrace and hold in esteem those among us of high moral character.
It is time to make America moral again.
It is time to make America healthy again.
And finally, it is time to make America great again!
https://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.png00DrRichSwier.comhttps://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.pngDrRichSwier.com2025-01-14 14:51:302025-01-14 14:51:30I have a dream that beginning on January 20, 2025 all Americans will begin judging people by the content of their characters, not the color of their skin
As President-elect Trump prepares to return to the White House this January, many continue to question his choices for key cabinet positions. Perhaps his most controversial appointment so far is Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (commonly referred to as RFK) as Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services. And a recent vaccine-related controversy is not helping.
Before Christmas, The New York Times released a story detailing that Aaron Siri, a vaccine injury attorney and a member of RFK’s legal team, petitioned the Food and Drug Administration in 2022 to revoke its approval of the Polio Vaccine, which is still being reviewed. Since the story broke, RFK has distanced himself from Siri and insists he is “all for” the polio vaccine. His spokesperson also released a statement indicating, “Mr. Kennedy believes the Polio Vaccine should be available to the public and thoroughly and properly studied.”
Not everyone is convinced. Congressman and polio survivor Steve Cohen believes “his position on vaccines disqualifies him for consideration as a Secretary of Health and Human Services.” Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell (also a polio survivor) denounced efforts to “undermine public confidence in proven cures” and urged RFK to “steer clear of even the appearance of association with such efforts.”
ADVERTISEMENT
His associations with Siri aside, RFK has been an outspoken skeptic about vaccines—questioning their benefits and emphasizing their alleged harms. As the incoming HHS Secretary, he will have considerable influence over the FDA. President-elect Trump previously stated he would let RFK “go wild” on health policy, and he’s reaffirmed his support since.
While RFK’s skepticism of vaccines and future influence over the FDA causes many to panic, he primarily emphasizes “transparency” in the vaccine development and approval process. Many politicians and the FDA’s vaccine chief agree. To that end, let us review the historical role the FDA played in regulating vaccines.
Although the modern FDA began in 1962, the agency did not regulate vaccines until 1972. By then, the US already had vaccines for smallpox, diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, polio, measles, mumps, and rubella. All these vaccines were grandfathered in and are currently part of the standard vaccine schedule—meaning the FDA played a modest role in approving and regulating them.
Since 1972, the FDA has only approved seven vaccines that appear on the vaccine schedule: Hib, hepatitis A, hepatitis B, varicella, pneumococcal, influenza, and rotavirus. Some of these play a relatively minor role in public health. Only 27 states require children to get the Hepatitis A vaccine before starting school. Rarely serious or fatal, varicella, also called chickenpox, was considered mild enough that parents with infected children commonly hosted “chickenpox parties” to expose others purposefully. Influenza vaccines (flu shots) do not follow the standard FDA review process because they are annually updated. Despite being FDA approved, the rotavirus vaccine was taken off the market in 1999 due to rare but serious side effects. Another rotavirus vaccine was approved in 2006 and 2008.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, the FDA issued emergency use authorizations for three COVID-19 vaccines. However, under Operation Warp Speed, each vaccine underwent an accelerated approval process, significantly truncating the usual FDA review process for new vaccines. Eventually, these vaccines received full FDA approval without undergoing the entire process.
However, the US also produced a pandemic-related vaccine in record time before the modern FDA existed. As I previously wrote in The Beacon:
ADVERTISEMENT
From 1957-1958, the 1958 influenza (often referred to as the Asian Flu) spread through the United States, infecting 20 million individuals and causing 116,000 deaths. At this time, the FDA held significantly less regulatory authority and did not regulate vaccines.
Similar to Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccine, medical scientists developed a vaccine for the 1958 influenza before the virus reached the United States. Without the FDA prolonging approval, cooperation between public health agencies and private vaccine developers distributed 60 million doses of the vaccine during the first two months of the pandemic.
Consequently, hospitals were not overwhelmed and there was “no serious disruption of community life” during the 1957-1958 pandemic. As an article written at the time in the Journal of the American Medical Association noted, quick development, approval, and distribution of the vaccine “made it possible for a nation to organize in advance of an oncoming epidemic for the first time in history.”
RFK has the potential to dramatically change vaccine policy. To do that, he will need to influence the FDA strongly and unprecedentedly. Unfortunately, I do not think many concerned citizens understand how involved (or uninvolved) the FDA has been in vaccination policy. This article is my attempt to promote transparency.
https://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.png00ThePricklyPear.orghttps://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.pngThePricklyPear.org2025-01-14 01:30:002025-01-14 01:30:00RFK, Vaccines, and the FDA
Asset management behemoth BlackRock wrote a letter to institutional investors Thursday announcing its exit from an emissions-focused investor group, according to the Financial Times (FT).
The firm, which manages over $10 trillion and has been a leader in environmental, social and governance (ESG) investing, has left the Net Zero Asset Managers (NZAM) coalition — a United Nations – sponsored collection of financial services companies that have pledged to achieve net-zero portfolios by 2050 or sooner, the FT reported. The move comes less than two weeks before President-elect Donald Trump, who plans to embrace fossil fuels in his second term, takes office, and follows the exits of a slew of other corporations, including Goldman Sachs Group, Wells Fargo & Co., Citigroup, Bank of America, Morgan Stanley and JPMorgan Chase & Co. (RELATED: UN Reportedly Moves To Unlock Tens Of Millions In Climate Funding For Country Run By Terrorists)
In the letter to investors, vice-chair Philipp Hildebrand wrote that the asset manager’s membership in NZAM had “caused confusion regarding BlackRock’s practices and subjected us to legal inquiries from various public officials,” according to the FT.
ADVERTISEMENT
The firm began its ESG initiative in 2020, with CEO Larry Fink stating that “climate risk is investment risk” and that climate change would spark a “fundamental reallocation of capital.” However, the world’s largest asset manager exit has been backpedaling on its ESG efforts as of late, only supporting about 4% of the 493 environmental and social investment proposals shareholders put forward between the end of June 2023 and the end of June 2024, down from a rate of 47% in 2021.
BlackRock has also walked back some of its diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) efforts, editing their DEI language to be less racially oriented.
Fellow investment firm Vanguard left NZAM in 2022, while financial services firm State Street remains in the environmental coalition.
“The news of BlackRock’s departure from NZAM should be music to the ears of every American consumer,” Will Hild, executive director of conservative nonprofit Consumers’ Research, told the Daily Caller News Foundation. “NZAM is an illegitimate cartel of asset managers pushing harmful and costly net zero policies across the entire economy. The activities of NZAM and its members raise prices on Americans everywhere from the gas pump to the grocery store.”
When reached for comment, BlackRock referred the DCNF to a report confirming their departure from NZAM.
The Prickly Pear is focused on delivering timely, fact-based news, and citizen opinion that reflects our mission to “inform, educate and advocate about the principles of limited government and personal liberty.”
To achieve that mission, Prickly Pear often engages with like-minded contributors and organizations who share our values. We encourage to support these partners in any way you can, as these partners make our efforts possible.
Direct support of the Prickly Pear can be made at the link below. Every dollar is greatly appreciated!
https://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.png00ThePricklyPear.orghttps://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.pngThePricklyPear.org2025-01-14 01:28:002025-01-14 01:28:00‘A Huge Win’: Woke ‘Cartel’ Of Financial Giants Dealt Death Blow 11 Days Before Trump Takes Office
I hope you do, because you’re about to be sacked with some.
Here we go. . . First, climate change does cause forest fires. That isn’t how this works. Fires require an ignition source and fuel.
Ignition sources may be natural (e.g., lightning) or it can be man-made (e.g., by accident from improperly disposed cigarette butts, improperly discarded pellet / wood stove ash, an out-of-control campfire or fallen power lines, or perhaps even intentionally by arson). But, climate change is not one of them.
The origin of the Pacific Palisades fire hasn’t been determined. But, what is known is that it is being fueled by dried out vegetation and is being stoked by Santa Ana Winds (SAWs) with hurricane-force wind gusts. These winds are a byproduct of a tight horizontal pressure gradient between a tropospheric ridge situated over the Great Basin and a cut-off low spinning over Baja California. Southwesterly downslope flow accelerated by a tight gradient can easily dry out vegetation, especially small-diameter fuels like twigs and leaves, priming a forest for a fire should one be ignited.
While the warming atmosphere — and, for sake of argument, we will assume that it is entirely due to mankind’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions — might make weather conditions more conducive for forest fires in Southern California, there is yet to be an established “consensus” on exactly how fires will change in the region with increased global warming. The reason for this is because air temperature during the event and precipitation deficits over the preceding weeks and/or months aren’t the only — or necessarily even the most important — factors in fire burn area (e.g., Keeley et al., 2021).
Keeley et al. (2021) found that all SAW-driven fires in Southern California that occurred between 1948 and 2018 had a human ignition source. While the majority between 1948 and 1983 were linked to campfires, arson and powerline failures have been the dominant cause since 1984. These results are similar to those in Balch et al. (2017), which found that 97% of fires in Southern (Mediterranean) California were caused by a human ignition source between 1992 and 2012.
The maximum temperature during SAW-driven fires ranged from 42.6-95.4°F (5.9-35.2°C). For January, these values ranged from 44.1-81.1°F (6.7-27.3°C). With a statistical t-test, they found that fires that burned over 1,000 hectares (2,471.05 acres) were not linked to higher-than-average air temperatures, and this also held true for very large fires burning >5,000 hectares (12,355.27 acres). Only 5-20% of the variation in area burned during winter is explained by air temperature.
Precipitation surplus / deficits in the week before a SAW event also did not play a significant role in the incidence and severity of wind-driven fires in the area between 1948 and 2018. This is largely because small-diameter fuels like twigs and leaves will dry out quickly when the weather conditions change.
The study concludes that 75% of SAW events do result in forest fires.
Rather, more human ignitions increase the likelihood that a fire escapes containment and becomes a large destructive fire, regardless of air temperature or soil / fuel moisture conditions both preceding and during a fire event. So, while rising air temperature and lower precipitation can increase fire risk in the future, it is a very small part of the bigger picture.
Keeley et al. (2021) concludes that,
“ ℎ ℎ ℎ ℎ .”
What’s more, it is unclear at this point in time exactly how SAW events will change in response to a warming climate.
One study, Rolinski et al. (2019), has found a recent observational increase in SAW days over the past two decades and links this to increased jet stream ridging patterns in California.
However, Guzman-Morales & Gershunov (2019) finds that a weakening of the southwest pressure gradient that drives these SAWs in their global climate models (GCMs) in response to GHG forcing on the climate system, although the trends are diminished in the late autumn and winter months.
There is evidence of some influence of GHG forcing on creating a more favorable fire weather environment in Southern California in recent decades.
However, burn area associated with SAW events isn’t very dependent on the air temperature during the fire, and antecedent precipitation and fuel moisture aren’t very critical either. This is because downslope airflow is sufficient enough to dry out most vegetation in just a matter of hours, creating a tinderbox should a forest be set ablaze. And, how SAW evolve with a changing climate is unclear.
But, placing powerlines underground can significantly reduce fire risk in the future, and having better forest management (e.g., controlled burning and mechanical thinning of underbrush) will as well.
Climate change is real, but grifters like Senator Bernie Sanders need to stop pinning every natural disaster that happens on it, and using these crises as a crutch to advance their political agendas. Junk science is bad for policymaking and leads to ineffective solutions to the challenges facing society.
*****
This article was published by CFACT, the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow, and is reproduced with permission.
Image Credit:YouTube Screenshot Inside Edition
Your Support is Critical
The Prickly Pear is focused on delivering timely, fact-based news, and citizen opinion that reflects our mission to “inform, educate and advocate about the principles of limited government and personal liberty.”
To achieve that mission, Prickly Pear often engages with like-minded contributors and organizations who share our values. We encourage to support these partners in any way you can, as these partners make our efforts possible.
Direct support of the Prickly Pear can be made at the link below. Every dollar is greatly appreciated!
https://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.png00ThePricklyPear.orghttps://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.pngThePricklyPear.org2025-01-14 01:26:002025-01-14 01:26:00The California Fires Are Not Climate
Iran has increased its oil exports every year since Joe Biden’s administration took office, and last year it exported an average of 1.55 million barrels of oil.
Shandong Ports Group, one of the largest oil terminals that receives oil from Iran, Russia and Venezuela, has banned the entry of oil tankers that have been sanctioned by the United States, in parallel with the significant decline in Iranian oil exports in the past two months.
Most of Iran’s oil is transported to Chinese refineries through this port.
Iran also supplies another part of its oil to the ports of Dalian and Jawshan, to small and independent Chinese refineries, called Teapots, but its volume is much smaller than the oil unloaded in Shandong.
To secretly export oil to China, Iran needs oil tankers called the “ghost fleet” (or “dark fleet”) and to deliver its oil to the ports where the automatic identification system should be turned off.
In October and September, the US imposed sanctions on dozens of tankers belonging to the “ghost fleet,” and Iran’s oil exports to China fell to less than 1.3 million barrels in November and December, 550,000 barrels less than in September.
Reuters reported, citing Kepler statistics, that Shandong ports received 1.74 million barrels of Iranian, Russian and Venezuelan oil per day last year, equivalent to 17% of China’s total oil imports.
Now, no tanker on the sanctions list will be able to deliver Iranian, Venezuelan and Russian oil to Shandong ports.
Reuters has published the names of eight very large oil tankers, each with a capacity of two million barrels, that unloaded their cargoes at Shandong ports last month, most of which were Iranian oil.
In this regard, Homayun Falakshahi, a senior expert at Kepler, told Radio Farda that the most important factor in the fall in Iran’s oil exports in the past two months is the imposition of US sanctions on dozens of “ghost fleet” oil tankers.
He said that since September, unsold oil reserves in Iranian waters have more than doubled to 20 million barrels.
Mr. Falakshahi also stressed that the so-called “teapot” refineries have low efficiency and are highly polluting, and the Chinese government has asked them to renovate or retire.
In recent months, at least three “teapots” have officially declared bankruptcy.
The source of Iran’s declining oil exports is also the fact that Donald Trump, the US president-elect, is set to enter the White House in less than two weeks and is expected to revive the “maximum pressure” policy against Iran.
Sanctions imposed on Iran during his previous term in office reduced daily oil exports from 2.5 million barrels to 350,000 barrels.
Following his sweeping electoral victory in November, President-elect Donald Trump is reportedly preparing 100 executive orders for his first day in office, mostly centered on securing the nation’s neglected southern border.
In an interview Thursday, Trump ally and Republican Senator Markwayne Mullin (Okla.) discussed the president-elect’s plans. “He says he has almost 100 executive orders that will go a long ways towards securing the border again and also put the energy sector back in play again and actually build a … ‘drill, baby, drill’ process where we can become energy-independent again.” Mullin added, “All that can be done through executive order, but, as he said, it’s not permanent” without congressional support.
Newly-minted GOP Senate Majority Leader John Thune (S.D.) also emphasized that congressional Republicans must deliver on Trump’s agenda. “This past November, the American people gave President Trump and Republicans a mandate. Now the time has come to begin executing on it,” Thune said in a floor speech Wednesday. Noting the incoming Trump administration’s focus on border security, he continued, “One of the most important issues in this last election was the illegal immigration crisis. … For the last four years, the Biden administration’s open-border policies have wreaked havoc in both border communities and those far from the border.”
Republicans in the House are also looking to grant congressional permanence to Trump’s immigration policies. On Thursday, Rep. Brandon Gill (R-Texas) introduced a bill to reinstate the “Remain in Mexico” policy previously employed under Trump’s first administration. The legislation would reverse the Biden administration’s “parole” program and require those seeking or claiming asylum in the U.S. to await their appointed court dates in Mexico, instead of releasing migrants into the U.S.
According to an Axios report, Trump and several of his closest policy advisors met with GOP senators late Wednesday and unveiled roughly 100 planned executive orders, mostly focused on border security and immigration. Stephen Miller, an immigration hardliner and Trump’s homeland security advisor and deputy chief of staff for policy, shared that likely executive actions included reinstating Title 42, which allows for the rapid expulsion of illegal immigrants under public health concerns; continuing construction of the border wall, a policy Miller is credited with devising; and utilizing part of the Immigration and Nationality Act to allow state and local law enforcement to assist Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) with detaining and deporting illegal immigrants, a key promise of Trump’s successful 2024 campaign.
Trump’s mass deportation plans have consistently garnered widespread support across the nation. Surveys from both April and September of last year found that over half of Americans endorse the mass deportation of illegal immigrants. While some Democratic officials, including mayors and governors, have vowed not to cooperate with ICE to deport illegal immigrants — or, in some cases, have suggested even outright opposing federal deportation efforts — a recent poll found that a supermajority of voters in even deep-blue Democratic stronghold such as Maryland support requiring state and local law enforcement to work with ICE in carrying out deportations. Overall, 76% of Marylanders — including 96% of Republicans, 77% of Independent voters, and even 65% of Democrats — want state and local authorities to cooperate with ICE in deporting illegal immigrants who have committed crimes.
A number of prominent Democrats have recently shifted their positions on deportations, from full-throated support for “sanctuary cities” to promising to aid ICE. Governors J.B. Pritzker (Ill.) and Jared Polis (Colo.) and mayors like Eric Adams of New York City have abandoned opposition to ICE’s deportation program — Adams has even pledged his support — after initially indicating opposition. Even Governor Kathy Hochul (N.Y.) said that she would be the “first one to call up ICE” to manage deportations in her state.
According to the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), California, Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, North Dakota, Oregon, Rhode Island, Utah, Vermont, and Washington are all currently considered “sanctuary” states. There are also 157 counties and 45 cities across other states listed as “sanctuary cities” as of this week.
The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.
https://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.png00DrRichSwier.comhttps://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.pngDrRichSwier.com2025-01-13 13:51:302025-01-13 13:51:30Border Bonanza: Trump Slated to Enact 100 Executive Orders to Tackle Immigration Crisis
Arizona Congressman David Schweikert has been banging the drum about budget excesses. And for a long time, the public, the political class, and the markets have largely ignored his warnings. His speeches are often given for YouTube but to an empty Congressional chamber.
But with the interest rate on the long bond actually rising over 1% AFTER the Fed cut interest rates, you have to wonder if we have not entered a new stage in this long-going debt crisis. What does it mean when the Fed gives a cut, but the markets say otherwiseand send interest rates in the opposite direction? Has the Fed lost control of rates? If so, why? And if they have lost control, what does that mean?
The old joke is that deficits do not matter anymore…until they do.
ADVERTISEMENT
At this point in time, there is great hope that we can cut out a lot of waste and fraud from the budget with DOGE, Elon Musk, Vivek Ramaswamy, and Donald Trump. We are all for cutting such waste and fraud, but we fear it will not be nearly enough.
In that regard, it is unclearwhat “success” would look like.
We suspect cutting something around $500 billion would be considered a tremendous success. However vast that sum, it would be little to reverse our negative course. Overwhelmingly, the spending comes from Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and related programs. Insofar as these three programs are concerned, Congress does not even vote on these benefits, and they are on automatic pilot. In addition, no reform of these programs is on the table. DOGE can make recommendations, but how much of this will get through a closely divided House of Representatives?
Moreover, much of this has to do with poor demographics and extending benefits to people who have not paid into the system, like the mass of illegals. It is not clear that pro-natal policies have worked anywhere to increase the birth rate, and even if they did, it would take YEARS to reverse the demographic problem.
These programs are not even in the official “debt ” numbers. They are “unfunded liabilities”. However, with both trust funds for Social Security and Medicare running down, a future unfunded liability now becomes a present liability that must be funded. In short, unfunded liabilities must now be dealt with by raising taxes, borrowing, or inflating the currency.
The hope of Trump 2.0 largely rests on the idea that we can grow out of our debt problem. Through tax cuts, deregulation, and unleashing the American entrepreneurial spirit, we can quickly increase revenue to pay down some of our bloated debt.
ADVERTISEMENT
We hope and pray that this can be done but remain skeptical.
Trump faces at least four significant headwinds in significantly ramping up growth:
The Democrats have not given up and will fight like hell, tying deregulation up in court and blocking reform in the House and Senate. Weak-kneed Republicans cannot be depended on to carry the day. There is little evidence that either Democrats or RINOs have learned much from the last election.
The US dollar is soaring, putting pressure on the economies of many less developed countries (many of our customers) and making US industrial activity uncompetitive, making industrial recovery difficult. Chinese stocks and bonds are sliding badly; their economy is not recovering after repeated stimulus from their ham-fisted Communist government. China’s recession will be felt around the world.
Interest rates are rising against the “instructions” from the Fed. This reminds me of the 1980s and the “bond vigilantes,” where market forces took rates higher because they lacked confidence that inflation could be controlled. Rising rates will tend to suppress economic activity, even as Trump attempts to stimulate growth.
Despite what the press tell you, Biden did not hand over a healthy economy to Trump. Instead, it is an economy ginned up by the rapid growth of government and $9 trillion in deficit spending. Moreover, the internal finances of the government and much of the private sector are characterized by excessive debt, which will be adversely affected by interest rates perversely moving higher.
To be sure, there are positives. Deregulation is something that can be done if not blocked by constant lawsuits. AI may well deliver productivity gains. Cheaper energy and ending wars will all help. So we are not saying not to try; we are saying it won’t be easy given the circumstances Biden has left Trump to clean up.
Finally, the public does not know how much Biden and the Democrats have wrecked public finances. The government itself is subject to the discipline of rising rates and will not be in a position to be of great help if things turn south. If they start again with excessive intervention (QE and other liquidity provisions) or resume massive deficit financing, this could aggravate both inflation and rising rates.
To get a better sense of the scale of the problem of wrecked public finance, take time to listen to Schweikert’s rant below:
Your Support is Critical
The Prickly Pear is focused on delivering timely, fact-based news, and citizen opinion that reflects our mission to “inform, educate and advocate about the principles of limited government and personal liberty.”
To achieve that mission, Prickly Pear often engages with like-minded contributors and organizations who share our values. We encourage to support these partners in any way you can, as these partners make our efforts possible.
Direct support of the Prickly Pear can be made at the link below. Every dollar is greatly appreciated!
Arizona Congressman David Schweikert has been banging the drum about budget excesses. And for a long time, the public, the political class, and the markets have largely ignored his warnings. His speeches are often given for YouTube but to an empty Congressional chamber.
But with the interest rate on the long bond actually rising over 1% AFTER the Fed cut interest rates, you have to wonder if we have not entered a new stage in this long-going debt crisis. What does it mean when the Fed gives a cut, but the markets say otherwiseand send interest rates in the opposite direction? Has the Fed lost control of rates? If so, why? And if they have lost control, what does that mean?
The old joke is that deficits do not matter anymore…until they do.
ADVERTISEMENT
At this point in time, there is great hope that we can cut out a lot of waste and fraud from the budget with DOGE, Elon Musk, Vivek Ramaswamy, and Donald Trump. We are all for cutting such waste and fraud, but we fear it will not be nearly enough.
In that regard, it is unclearwhat “success” would look like.
We suspect cutting something around $500 billion would be considered a tremendous success. However vast that sum, it would be little to reverse our negative course. Overwhelmingly, the spending comes from Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and related programs. Insofar as these three programs are concerned, Congress does not even vote on these benefits, and they are on automatic pilot. In addition, no reform of these programs is on the table. DOGE can make recommendations, but how much of this will get through a closely divided House of Representatives?
Moreover, much of this has to do with poor demographics and extending benefits to people who have not paid into the system, like the mass of illegals. It is not clear that pro-natal policies have worked anywhere to increase the birth rate, and even if they did, it would take YEARS to reverse the demographic problem.
These programs are not even in the official “debt ” numbers. They are “unfunded liabilities”. However, with both trust funds for Social Security and Medicare running down, a future unfunded liability now becomes a present liability that must be funded. In short, unfunded liabilities must now be dealt with by raising taxes, borrowing, or inflating the currency.
The hope of Trump 2.0 largely rests on the idea that we can grow out of our debt problem. Through tax cuts, deregulation, and unleashing the American entrepreneurial spirit, we can quickly increase revenue to pay down some of our bloated debt.
ADVERTISEMENT
We hope and pray that this can be done but remain skeptical.
Trump faces at least four significant headwinds in significantly ramping up growth:
The Democrats have not given up and will fight like hell, tying deregulation up in court and blocking reform in the House and Senate. Weak-kneed Republicans cannot be depended on to carry the day. There is little evidence that either Democrats or RINOs have learned much from the last election.
The US dollar is soaring, putting pressure on the economies of many less developed countries (many of our customers) and making US industrial activity uncompetitive, making industrial recovery difficult. Chinese stocks and bonds are sliding badly; their economy is not recovering after repeated stimulus from their ham-fisted Communist government. China’s recession will be felt around the world.
Interest rates are rising against the “instructions” from the Fed. This reminds me of the 1980s and the “bond vigilantes,” where market forces took rates higher because they lacked confidence that inflation could be controlled. Rising rates will tend to suppress economic activity, even as Trump attempts to stimulate growth.
Despite what the press tell you, Biden did not hand over a healthy economy to Trump. Instead, it is an economy ginned up by the rapid growth of government and $9 trillion in deficit spending. Moreover, the internal finances of the government and much of the private sector are characterized by excessive debt, which will be adversely affected by interest rates perversely moving higher.
To be sure, there are positives. Deregulation is something that can be done if not blocked by constant lawsuits. AI may well deliver productivity gains. Cheaper energy and ending wars will all help. So we are not saying not to try; we are saying it won’t be easy given the circumstances Biden has left Trump to clean up.
Finally, the public does not know how much Biden and the Democrats have wrecked public finances. The government itself is subject to the discipline of rising rates and will not be in a position to be of great help if things turn south. If they start again with excessive intervention (QE and other liquidity provisions) or resume massive deficit financing, this could aggravate both inflation and rising rates.
To get a better sense of the scale of the problem of wrecked public finance, take time to listen to Schweikert’s rant below:
Photo credit: Gage Skidmore
Your Support is Critical
The Prickly Pear is focused on delivering timely, fact-based news, and citizen opinion that reflects our mission to “inform, educate and advocate about the principles of limited government and personal liberty.”
To achieve that mission, Prickly Pear often engages with like-minded contributors and organizations who share our values. We encourage to support these partners in any way you can, as these partners make our efforts possible.
Direct support of the Prickly Pear can be made at the link below. Every dollar is greatly appreciated!
https://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.png00ThePricklyPear.orghttps://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.pngThePricklyPear.org2025-01-13 01:30:002025-01-13 01:30:00Congressman Schweikert Unleashes Fiery Rant on Budget Chaos
Democratic fundraising platform ActBlue may have raked in millions through fraudulent donations, according to the testimonies of elderly Americans who said federal election records do not reflect their giving.
Eighteen registered Democrats in Connecticut, all over the age of 70, appear to have donated $1.9 million to Democratic causes, including ActBlue, through hundreds of thousands of small donations from 2016 to 2024, according to a review of Federal Election Commission filings by Dominic Rapini, cybersecurity company CEO and a former Connecticut Republican candidate for office.
Curious about the donation patterns, Rapini tracked down some of the Connecticut residents and asked them if they really did make thousands of small donations, sometimes multiple in a day, through ActBlue.
ADVERTISEMENT
Several of the supposed donors told Rapini they did not make any of the reported donations, nor did they know anything about how their names were being used, Rapini told The Daily Signal.
An 88-year-old retired Yale University professor, for example, supposedly made 7,539 donations for a total of $213,163, according to FEC records. After Rapini informed him about the significant donations in his name, he signed an affidavit saying, “I believe this does not reflect my donation frequency or dollars I have donated.”
According to Rapini, who has analyzed numbers for three decades in the tech industry, this is a possible case of alleged identity theft and money laundering. A contribution made by one person in the name of another is illegal.
“When I examine the donation patterns tied to these alleged ‘smurfs,’ the irregularities jump off the page, revealing behavior that defies both human logic and common sense,” he told The Daily Signal. “To safeguard trust in our election process, we must confront these anomalies head-on.”
Rep. Bryan Steil, R-Wis., chairman of the House Administration Committee, told The Daily Signal he’s aware of similar reports from across the country.
“In response, last fall, I shared the findings of our investigation with several state attorneys general,” Steil said in an emailed statement. “The committee and I remain fully available to collaborate with any state law enforcement officials who wish to access the information we have gathered on this critical issue.”
ADVERTISEMENT
An elderly acupuncturist and registered Democrat appears to have made 17 donations in 2022 through ActBlue totaling $317. In an email to Rapini, she promised she hasn’t made political contributions since 2016.
“I can promise you I have NOT made donations myself to the [Democratic National Committee] or Democratic local party since 2016 … ,” she said. “Anything past that are fake and/or manipulated donations.”
A 91-year-old woman appears to have made 2,591 donations totaling $41,000, according to FEC filings. She signed an affidavit with Rapini denying making the reported donations.
Another 75-year-old woman looks to have made 4,270 small donations adding up to $32,323. She too signed an affidavit with Rapini denying making the donations in this frequency or quantity.
ActBlue is currently under congressional investigation for alleged laundering of foreign money laundering.
ActBlue came under fire on Oct. 29 because of its donor-verification policies. In a letter that day to ActBlue, Steil said foreign actors from Iran, Russia, Venezuela, and China could use the platform to launder illicit money for use in U.S. political campaigns.
The Democratic fundraising platform admitted in 2023 to Steil that it didn’t require contributors to use a card verification value, or CVV, to donate on its website with a credit card. Those security codes are meant to ensure that the person making a purchase physically possesses the credit card.
ActBlue responded to The Daily Signal’s request for comment about the affidavits by referring The Daily Signal to a post on its blog, which says, “Because of how reporting works for intermediaries, contributions made on platforms like ours often show up more than once in public FEC records, because both ActBlue and the receiving campaign or committee must report the contributions.
“FEC rules require ActBlue to itemize every contribution made through its platform, regardless of amount,” the post says.
“Additionally, FEC reports often lump multiple donors with the same name together,” the post continues. “This can make it difficult to easily identify which contributions should be associated with each individual donor, especially donors with common names.”
Rapini said whether the suspicious donation patterns come from “sloppy data systems at the FEC” or “nefarious actors laundering money through unsuspecting elderly donors,” an investigation is needed.
“Transparency and accountability are nonnegotiable when it comes to protecting the integrity of our democracy,” he said.
The Prickly Pear is focused on delivering timely, fact-based news, and citizen opinion that reflects our mission to “inform, educate and advocate about the principles of limited government and personal liberty.”
To achieve that mission, Prickly Pear often engages with like-minded contributors and organizations who share our values. We encourage to support these partners in any way you can, as these partners make our efforts possible.
Direct support of the Prickly Pear can be made at the link below. Every dollar is greatly appreciated!
https://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.png00ThePricklyPear.orghttps://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.pngThePricklyPear.org2025-01-13 01:28:002025-01-13 01:28:00Where Does the Money Come From? Elderly Democrats Say Donations Made in Their Names Aren’t Genuine
The United States House of Representatives passed House Resolution 29, also known as the “Laken Riley Act” on Tuesday, which passed with a bipartisan 264-159 vote, including Arizona leaders.
The legislation allows illegal immigrants to be taken into custody if they face accusations of crimes related to stealing, and it’s named after the college student who was killed by an illegal immigrant in Georgia last year.
“In November, President Trump was given a mandate, Congress was given a mandate, and that was to secure our border,” Republican Rep. Andy Biggs said in a video following the vote.
ADVERTISEMENT
The entire Arizona Republican congressional delegation voted for the bill, as well as Democratic Rep. Greg Stanton. On the Senate side, both Democratic Sens. Mark Kelly and Ruben Gallego are supporting the bill.
“Not only am I voting yes on the Laken Riley Act, I’m cosponsoring the bill,” Gallego tweeted. “Arizonans know better than most the real consequences of today’s border crisis. We must give law enforcement the means to take action to prevent tragedies like what occurred to Laken Riley.”
Arizona Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs also referred to the bill as “an important step forward that will help keep our communities safe and secure our border” in an X post.
The split between Arizona Democrats on the legislation became evident on Wednesday, with Rep. Yassamin Ansari slamming the bill’s proposals.
“The murder of Laken Riley was a horrific tragedy. But the anti-immigrant bill being pushed by House Republicans will do nothing to prevent this kind of violence or reform our broken immigration system,” Ansari wrote in a statement. “Instead, it serves as a license to discriminate against our immigrant communities, including DREAMers.”
“Under this legislation, someone charged-just charged, not found guilty—could be immediately deported. This is a gross miscarriage of justice, and I voted no,” the Phoenix area congresswoman added.
The bill is among the first voted on by the new Congress, which began last Friday. With President-elect Donald Trump set to take office on Jan. 20, it’s likely that he will sign the bill and implement various other tough immigration and border security-related proposals from the executive branch.
Image Credit: The Center Square and Cameron Arcand
Your Support is Critical
The Prickly Pear is focused on delivering timely, fact-based news, and citizen opinion that reflects our mission to “inform, educate and advocate about the principles of limited government and personal liberty.”
To achieve that mission, Prickly Pear often engages with like-minded contributors and organizations who share our values. We encourage to support these partners in any way you can, as these partners make our efforts possible.
Direct support of the Prickly Pear can be made at the link below. Every dollar is greatly appreciated!
https://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.png00ThePricklyPear.orghttps://libertyfirst.org/wp-content/uploads/logo_v6_225x110.pngThePricklyPear.org2025-01-13 01:26:002025-01-13 01:26:00Arizona Democrats Split On ‘Laken Riley Act’
