Federal ‘COVID’ Spending Just Hit $41,870 Per Taxpayer. Did You See That Much in Benefit?

For the same $6 trillion in expenditure, the government could have given every federal taxpayer a $41,870 check.


President Biden just signed his sweeping $1.9 trillion spending package into law. Once this bill hits the books, total taxpayer expenditure on (ostensibly) COVID relief will hit $6 trillion—which, roughly estimated, comes out to $41,870 in spending per federal taxpayer.

Did you see anywhere near that much in benefit?

The sheer immensity of this spending is hard to grasp. For context, $6 trillion is more than one-fourth of what the US economy produces in an entire year, according to Fox Business. The COVID spending blowout is at least eight times bigger than the (inflation-adjusted) price tag of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s “New Deal.”

Moreover, the COVID spending bills have all lost huge sums of money to unrelated carve-outs, politician pet projects, corporate bailouts, fraud, waste, and worse.

In the latest $1.9 trillion package, more than 90 percent of the spending is not directly related to containing COVID-19. Only 1 percent of the money, about $15 to $20 billion, is spent on vaccines. Meanwhile, hundreds of billions go to bailing out poorly managed state governments’ budget holes that predate the pandemic and $86 billion rescues failing pension plans. Meanwhile, billions more go to Obamacare expansion and subsidizing public schools long after the pandemic.

And that’s just scratching the surface.

The numbers here really are quite damning.

For the same $6 trillion in expenditure, the government could have given every federal taxpayer a $41,870 check. Or, to think about it a bit differently, it could have written every American roughly an $18,181 check.

Let’s compare this to what most Americans actually received.

Only someone who fully collected expanded unemployment benefits throughout the pandemic and received all $3,200 in total of the stimulus payments likely received more than $18,181 in direct benefit from this spending package. And that’s a relatively small fraction of the public.

Because of the way the government used outdated (and arbitrary) income data to determine eligibility, many more taxpayers saw nothing or little in exchange for their $41,870 share of the cost, perhaps just the initial $1,200 stimulus or none at all. (Meanwhile, billions in checks went to dead people).

So, for almost all Americans, the actual benefits of the multiple pieces of lengthy stimulus legislation come in far, far below the figure that they would have received if the entire pile of money was just even split up and sent out.

How can that possibly be considered a success? In fact, it’s actually a net negative.

Too often, the stimulus conversation is simply framed around whether we should give money to a certain group of people or program—rather than also including the trade-offs and costs.

The question isn’t just: Should we send people $1,400 “stimulus” checks? It is, instead: Should we send people $1,400 stimulus checks at the cost of taking the equivalent amount (or more if you factor in waste) from other people? It’s not just whether we should send $350 billion to state and local governments—but should we do so at the cost of taking an average of $2,442 per federal taxpayer?

Money doesn’t grow on trees. Or, as the great economist Ludwig von Mises put it, the government “does not have the powers of the mythical Santa Claus.”

“The truth is the government cannot give if it does not take from somebody,” Mises wrote in Bureaucracy. “They cannot spend except by taking out of the pockets of some people for the benefit of others.”

The government cannot create wealth out of thin air. It can only give anyone anything via three ways:

  • Directly increasing taxes, which discourages economic growth and directly takes money away from people
  • Running up debt, which means much higher taxes in the future plus interest, creating a drag on economic growth
  • Printing money, which “stealth taxes” the public via inflation

There’s no such thing as a free lunch, and, much to the chagrin of spend-happy politicians’, Santa Claus is not real. Government spending doesn’t create wealth; it only transfers wealth, generally destroying a lot of it in the process.

So, unless Americans are actually seeing equal or greater benefit from spending compared to its cost, it’s a raw deal for taxpayers. And for the federal government’s “COVID” spending binge, it’s not even close.

Don’t believe me? Well, did you see $41,870 in benefit from these programs? Or even $18,181?

For almost everyone, the honest answer is no.

COLUMN BY

Brad Polumbo

Brad Polumbo (@Brad_Polumbo) is a libertarian-conservative journalist and Opinion Editor at the Foundation for Economic Education.

RELATED VIDEO: Dr. David Martin explains that this is not a COVID vaccine, and calling it such is a con to get people to accept it as one.

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

The Façade Of The Covid Fraud

Actually, this is an account of much more than the façade of the fraud. When we analyze all aspects of it, we have to conclude that the Covid plandemic is up there with the biggest lies of all time. It is even bigger than the plan to tear down the Great Wall of China which resulted in the Boxer Rebellion that claimed thousands of lives.

Currently, of all the lies resulting in the Kangaroo Court attempting to impeach former President Trump, the biggest one of all is the one about President Trump inciting the riot at the capitol on Jan. 6th. Nevertheless, the perennial lie that just keeps ballooning as it continues – is the COVID-19 fraud.

According to Jon Rappoport’s January 29th article in the peoplesvoice.org, he is explaining that there is no Covid pandemic, but then he asks why are people dying? He does a great job of explaining it and I am in complete agreement with his contention.  He points out that the whole notion that Covid-19 is one health condition is a lie. COVID is not one thing.

He states that this is both the most difficult and yet the simplest point to accept and understand and that we shouldn’t reject the existence of the virus and then say, “So what is the cause of people dying?” There is no ONE CAUSE. There is no one illness. There is no “it.”

Jon goes on to tell us that the biggest sources of illnesses we are dealing with are lung conditions: various kinds of pneumonia: flu and flu-like disease, TB, and other unnamed lung/respiratory problems all of which are being relabeled as Covid. It’s a repackaging scheme. People are dying for those traditional reasons, and their deaths are being called “COVID.”  The old is artificially made new, but it is still old.

In this wide-ranging group of people who have traditional lung conditions, by far the largest component are the elderly and frail.

They are dying in nursing homes, in hospitals, in their own homes and apartments. In addition to their lung problems, they have been suffering from a whole host of other conditions and they’ve been treated with toxic drugs. They’re terrified that they might receive a diagnosis of “COVID,” and if they’re given that diagnosis, they’re isolated and cut off from friends and family. They give up and die basically of loneliness.

This is forced premature death.

My wife’s niece was recently diagnosis with COVID and her doctor didn’t send her to the hospital. He told her that they would just kill her there; so, she stayed home and a relative carried her to the doctor’s office a number of times for treatment. I am now happy to report that she is successfully overcoming whatever she had.  The fact that people were dying in hospitals, regardless of whether it was from COVID or not, it was labeled Covid which allowed the hospital to receive a huge payment from the government for each death.

America’s hospitals were given a vested interest, not only in people dying, but perhaps in allowing them to die when ventilators were use.  And evidently, according to what is being reported, this practice is being implemented all over the country.

The article continues…

Rappoport states that none of the “COVID deaths” in the entire world requires the existence of a new virus.  For instance, in Wuhan, where the whole business began, the first “COVID” cases of pneumonia occurred in a city whose air is heavily polluted. In China, every year, roughly 300,000 people die from pneumonia. That means millions of cases. None of these deaths need to be explained by invoking a new virus.

Add to this the fact that the PCR test for the virus is irreparably flawed and useless (for a variety of reasons I have explained in other articles). The test spits out false-positives like a fire hose. Thus, the high case numbers. The authorities have to go to such extremes to paint a picture of a spreading viral epidemic…in order to plant fear and thus compliance in the citizenry.  However, there is no evidence that an actual germ is traveling around the world felling people. The “evidence” is invented.

The “pandemic” is invented.

The fraud is promoted.

If you think there are other major reasons to explain “why all these people are dying,” keep in mind that “lung” conditions are an expanded category worldwide. For instance, there are about one billion cases of flu-like illness every year on planet earth.  Repackaging/relabeling just a small percentage of those cases alone would account for all official COVID death numbers.

What’s new about COVID is the story. That’s what is being sold: a story about a virus.

Not only are these lies resulting in a huge amount of fraud but also in the fact that hundreds, maybe even thousands, are being allowed to die who very possibly could have overcome whatever their illnesses were.  They were deprived of several more years of life, especially if they were only in their seventies, or maybe even their early eighties.

I’m looking forward to my 94th birthday. And since I really don’t have much wrong with me, I think I can avoid hospitals for several years; maybe even forever. I have arthritis, but who doesn’t at my age. I manage to keep it tolerable with the use of apple cider vinegar and honey. This also keeps my immune system up to par. I haven’t had a cold or any kind of a virus for 60 plus years. The only time I had the flu was when I took a flu shot and that was 63 years ago. I haven’t taken anymore flu shots, and I don’t intend to every take another.

According to the research done over a hundred years ago by Dr. D.C. Jarvis of Vermont, the excess acid which enters the bloodstream is kicked out and distributed throughout the remainder of the body to form a bed of immunity against viruses and a host of other illnesses.  In Jarvis’s book on arthritis, he states that viruses and other common illnesses cannot live in a body with an acid medium.

If God continues to bless me as He has all of my life, I expect to continue writing these articles for maybe six or seven more years. My proofreader recently told me that if I reached the point that I couldn’t remember all the words for writing an article to just send her the skeleton and she would put the meat on it and I believe her.

Back to what this façade of a plandemic, this contrived, concocted illness and what it is all about.

It’s at the root of aiding and bringing to fruition the one hundred plus year old conspiracy to bring in the New World Order, i.e., a socialist/communist global government.

Perhaps I shouldn’t have used the word “conspiracy,” since it appears most people have a problem wrapping their minds around it, or even to discern a smidgen of how it operates, but this is their “agenda.” Some folks are able to understand how it incrementally, over periods of time, can successfully arrive at the goal of a totalitarian dictatorship running the entire planet.  It truly is a conspiracy.

The few people who notice we’re on a slippery slope only occasionally catch a glimpse of something that seems dark and dangerous…but they forget it as few of them have had academic history lessons for the last 100 years.

Nevertheless, the fake pandemic was the key to the globalists’ agenda, i.e., the conspirators’ strategy in deploying the plan to first steal the 2020 Presidential election.

Covid provided the excuse, “necessity” for the so-called authority for mail in ballots. The plan worked perfectly and despite all the documented evidence of fraud, the judicial system in America is as connected to the Deep State as is the DOJ. According to reported cases of evidence, tons of fake ballots were delivered to various district aiding in the duplicitous election results. In many precincts, there were far more mail-in ballots than there were registered voters.

Numerous reports now claim that speaking truthfully about the stolen election could result in being labeled as terrorist activity and those who engage in same could possibly face legal consequences.

Natural News has rightfully stated,

“We must now conclude that both political parties (Dems and the GOP) are pro-vaccine, pro-death and anti-humanity. Big Pharma and the global genocide industry have captured all the political leaders everywhere (with bribes and campaign donations), and no prominent political party will dare tell the truth about how vaccines are being used to help rid the world of what globalists consider to be “excess population.”

“A group of Utah doctors have discovered something terrifying in recent mammogram screenings taken at the Breast Care Centre in Salt Lake City, Utah. Women who were recently injected with experimental COVID vaccines suffer from abnormal inflammation of the lymph nodes in their breasts. According to the Intermountain Health Care doctors, women who take the covid-19 vaccines are showing symptoms of breast cancer.” Here is the full report.”

When all aspects of the COVID “crises” are viewed analytically and truthfully, we have to conclude that from the very outset the Covid-19 vaccine was concocted and contrived to produce perceived crises of fear among the people. Like lemmings, they have gone along with the façade of fraud resulting in the globalist totalitarians completely destroying the liberty and freedoms of America.  Their intention is to bring our country down to the level of third world nations.

Many believers understand the end times, the rapture of the church, and the anti-Christ’s reign, but believers in other nations who have experienced the slavery and destitution of communism had hoped the Lord would come for them.  We don’t know the time when we will be caught up to forever be with Him.  Only God know.  Until then we must work to save our nation, we must trust in the Lord’s plans for all his people in our Judeo-Christian society.  Hard times often bring new believers in the Lord, and as those of us who believe in the one true God, we must be ready to help those who need to know Him.

Should we be approaching the end times spoken of in Daniel, Thessalonians and Revelation, let me encourage all of those who do not know Jesus to make every effort possible to accept Him as your personal Savior, thereby avoiding being left behind to go through the many terrors during the seven years of anti-Christ’s reign.

I agonize when thinking about the many who have neglected taking care of this most important thing. I think of the many parents who have not exposed their precious children to the saving knowledge of Messiah and leading them to the Lord God Almighty.

Whatever happens in America, the Lord God has it all in His Hands.

©J.W. Bryan. All rights reserved.

Are there ‘ex-gays’? Milo Yiannopoulos says ‘Yes’ and he should know

The flamboyant gay activist speaks out in favour of ‘conversion therapy’.


The flamboyant gay activist Milo Yiannopoulos made headlines this week. The conservative British polemicist and writer says that he is now an “ex-gay”.

The news was overshadowed by the hullabaloo over a couple of other Brits who were interviewed by Oprah Winfrey.

Yiannopoulos is not as well known as the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, but he has a message which is more important than their woes. He is speaking out about his lived experience as a gay man at a time when Australia and most Western nations are outlawing not only therapeutic assistance but even the slightest suggestion that a person’s sexual attraction could change.

And the most unlikely witness to this is Yiannopoulos.

The Victorian Change and Suppression (Conversion) Practices Prohibition Act 2021 “denounce[s] and give[s] statutory recognition to the serious harm caused by change or suppression practices”.

Parliament believes that “conversion therapy” is “deceptive and harmful both to the person subject to the change or suppression practices and to the community as a whole”.

However, plenty of critics, including LGB Alliance Australia, the Victorian Women’s Guild, and the Institute for Civil Society have shown that it is Parliament which is being deceptive. It is clearly causing harm to the bodies, rights and protections of homosexuals, women, and children. The only beneficiaries of this law are the pharmaceutical, medical and surgical industries.

“Of course, I was never wholly at home in the gay lifestyle — Who is? Who could be?” Yiannopoulos declared in an interview.

On a personal note, I feel the same way and so do others who have walked away from the cult of LGBTQ+ indoctrination, liturgies and identity politics.

To dare to leave the cult is damning. “Serious harm will befall you… your government supports you and believes in you… you are not broken and in need of fixing!” Australian leaders Steve Miles, Chief Minister Andrew Barr and Premier Daniel Andrews ingratiate themselves with LGBTQ+-identifying youth, pouring millions of dollars into mental health programs that seldom help their pain.

For Yiannopoulos to leave the cult – and his boyfriend, who has now been demoted to housemate – to pursue another man named Christ, rejecting decades-old doctrines of the LGBTQ+ sect for the millennia-old doctrines of the Catholic Church, will be a serious blow to LGBTQ+ proselytizing.

Yiannopoulos is confirming what a multitude of ex-gaysex-lesbians and ex-transgenders have been saying for years. (Check out the state of current research in this excellent Australian report, “Free To Change: Survey of 78 ex-LGBT people”.) Sexual attraction and deep-rooted insecurities around a person’s male or female identity can and do indeed change with the right help.

Yiannopoulos’ openness in his LifesiteNews interview is uplifting:

My own life has changed dramatically, though it crept up on me while I wasn’t paying attention.               

It feels as though a veil has been lifted in my house — like there’s something more real and honest going on than before. It’s been a gradual uncovering, rather than a dramatic reveal. Maybe that lack of theater or spectacle is a sign the gay impulses truly are receding?

What, we should ask, is so harmful in this story to Yiannopoulos or to the community?

A recent story in Newsweek backs up what Yiannopoulos says. Scott Newgent, a 48-year-old, told her story of medical transition from female to trans-male. It reveals the brutal reality of attempts to assuage what in part is often a mental disorder.

This biological female underwent seven surgeries, experiencing a pulmonary embolism, an induced stress heart attack sepsis, a 17-month recurring infection, 16 rounds of antibiotics, three weeks of daily intravenous antibiotics, arm reconstructive surgery, lung, heart and bladder damage, insomnia and hallucinations, and PTSD. This cost a mere US$1 million. She also lost her home, car, career and marriage.

Anyone with a scrap of decency needs to reflect on what this woman has undergone at the hands of medical professionals. Each of these doctors was playing a role in a parodic operetta, singing a lie – that a genetic female can truly become male, and a genetic male a female. Our politicians are voting in laws to permit the same traumas and tragedies and threatening resistance with up to A$200,000 fines and 10 years imprisonment.

What do Australian state governments gain by pointing people down the pathway of trans-perdition? My guess is that they desperately need some respite from incessant tirades of LGBTQ+ activists who will not stop until everyone experiences the same level of pain – and until everyone believes the lie that this pain must be reframed as “freedom”.

Now Western Australia is set to follow Queensland, the Australian Capital Territory and Victoria. Premier Mark McGowan has promised – with fewer than five days before a state election — that he is “opposed to gay conversion therapy as a cruel and misinformed practice”.

A 28-year-old man in Western Australia, a survivor of childhood sexual abuse as well as a victim of and rape, wrote to McGowan on December 15 last year. He asked:

Will Western Australia be a safe place for me to continue to safely walk along what to date has been a pretty treacherous journey concerning my sexuality?       I will be considering whether to stay and invest in Western Australian society or to return over to the Eastern states in the New Year and so would be grateful for a response prior to Christmas if possible.

McGowan responded this week, stating that, if re-elected, he “remains committed to LGBTIQ+ law reform”, including considering “legislation in relation to the recognition of a person’s sex, change of sex, or intersex status”.

The abuse survivor and rape victim wrote back within hours informing McGowan as follows:

I left Victoria and came to WA [Western Australia] to address and start the recovery process from these horrendous traumas in my life, knowing that Victoria would no longer remain a safe place for me to recover. At times I have been left experiencing depression, suffering from anxiety and panic attacks, as well as feeling suicidal.          

Since starting therapy, counselling, and prayer here in WA around my same-sex attraction, past gender dysphoria, childhood sexual abuse, and rape, these health issues mentioned above have decreased dramatically and I am experiencing the most mental stability I have in my entire life.           

I am now deeply fearful for my own wellbeing as a resident in WA and for the wellbeing of many others like me. With the potential banning of successful and life-giving therapy, counselling and prayer around sexuality and gender confusion, what will happen to my mental health? Will I be forced back into the mental hell that I used to experience?

Australian politicians would benefit from heeding Yiannopoulos’ parting words:

The best advice I can give others in my situation is: Check your pride, not your privilege. So often it’s vanity or conceit or self-satisfaction that gets in the way of accepting Christ. Learn to catch it before it takes root, and difficult things suddenly don’t seem so difficult.

Those exiting the LGBTQ+ community all know that gay pride negatively affected their mental health and that embracing humility opened up an unimagined world of benefits.

Yes, bigotry is still very much alive and well. And it spews forth from the ranks of those who claim to suffer the most intolerance. As Alexandra Marshall states in her article in The Spectator, “the needs of the collective outrank the personal rights of the individual to decide their sexual orientation”.

What is a healthy way forward?

Yiannopoulos said in his interview: “Over the next decade, I would like to help rehabilitate what the media calls ‘conversion therapy’. It does work, albeit not for everybody.” I suggest that more people, young and old alike, join him in backing sound methods of conversion therapy. A change of heart (and policy) might help the young fellow snubbed by Premier McGowan.

James Parker was a gay rights’ activist. He now facilitates True Identity, an informal network that supports those struggling with sexuality & gender identity issues. More by James Parker

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

The Silencing of Covid ‘Vaccine’ Skeptics

“….who should be the ultimate authority over each human being’s genetic software code? If we truly live in a free society, wouldn’t it stand to reason that we would want to have an energetic debate over how to answer that question?” Leo Hohmann


It is no surprise in this day and age that social media is trying to silence anyone with questions about the safety and efficacy of the Covid vaccine, or whatever you want to call the Pfizer or Moderna shot because it isn’t a vaccine in the normal sense that we are accustomed to receiving for the flu, for example.

Before I start a war here on what I will just call “The Shot,” my philosophy is this: Do your own research, and choose what you think is best for you.  After all, haven’t we been told for decades now that we have “choice” when it comes to our bodies.

Easier said than done because everywhere you turn these days, the question looms:  Did you get the shot?

If you say no, the look that follows is usually a stern one.  Is that because the person asking has had the shot and thinks you are mean and selfish and will be a walking Covid time bomb? If so, why are they worried, they are now protected by The Shot, right?

Or, are they deep-down wondering if they did the right thing themselves by allowing the injection that will alter their body’s God-given genetic code.

Of course, there are those who haven’t gotten The Shot and do want your opinion.

I guess you get my drift.  For now, I’m holding off.

I’m not an anti-vaxer. In fact, as I cleaned out accumulated paperwork from a busy life this winter, I came across medical records from when I traveled to Vietnam in 1998. My doctor then insisted I be vaccinated for what looks like every tropical disease known to mankind that year.  I got the works!

I’m older and wiser now and I think that we simply do not know enough about the new pharmaceutical injection being shoved down our throats (jabbed into our arms!).  Indeed it is the big campaign that frankly makes me a skeptic. I am resisting being herded.

I am angry too because I see all around me that the tyranny being created by The Shot question is literally destroying friendships and breaking-up family relationships and generally furthering the destruction of social cohesion, the last thing this country needs right now.

Did you see that Twitter has new rules in its efforts to silence skeptics? 

Mention your concern about The Shot five times and you are toast at Twitter.

Of course for me that doesn’t matter as they have already suspended my account and taken away my followers.

Adding insult to injury they won’t let me delete my account (it sits there unused).  Why can’t I delete it?  Because, they inform me, it is suspended!

See the story at Natural News:

VAX THOUGHT POLICE: Anyone who criticizes coronavirus vaccines FIVE times will be banned from Twitter

(Natural News) Anyone caught spreading “misleading information” about Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) vaccines on Twitter will be given five chances to stop before being forever banned from the social media platform, the company recently announced.

A new “strike system” will reportedly keep track of the number of times a Twitter user says something bad about Chinese virus vaccines. Each time the punishment will increase until eventually that user is struck from the platform for good.

This is Twitter’s way of ensuring that as many people as possible are misled into taking an experimental gene therapy “vaccine” that will forever alter their DNA through genetic engineering and reprogramming.

I thought all Covid vaccine skeptics were on the political right!

Look at this, Robert Kennedy Jr., a big Dem with an anti-shot campaign, is banned from Instagram!  Me and Kennedy on the same side of anything!  Remarkable!

From the UK Daily Mail:

Anti-vaxxer Robert F Kennedy, 67, is BANNED from Instagram for ‘repeatedly sharing false claims about COVID-19’ – including theory that Bill Gates is pursuing Marxist plot to destroy US sovereignty

It is one thing to silence our speech, but imagine if the fascists get to this stage and demand proof that you took The Shot to board a plane, or to take part in other types of public events and gatherings!

America’s Frontline Doctors Call on the Government and the Commercial Airline Industry to Abandon Requiring COVID-19 Vaccines

Ironically I saw that the World Health Organization is opposing any restrictions involving so-called vaccine passports because it would limit the movement of poor migrants (less likely to have been vaccinated) around the world.

All of that is a lead-up to the primary article I want to bring to your attention.

It is from Leo Hohmann a couple of days ago entitled:

Moderna’s top scientist: ‘We are actually hacking the software of life’

These are concluding paragraphs but please read the whole thing…..

These scientists truly believe that the human body is nothing more than a machine that can be hacked into and reordered according to some programmer’s instructions.

The same ground-breaking nature of this research that excites some, is what horrifies others.

A person’s genetic makeup is, as Dr. Zak said, “the software of life.”

If this is true, then who should be the ultimate authority over each human being’s genetic software code? If we truly live in a free society, wouldn’t it stand to reason that we would want to have an energetic debate over how to answer that question? Shouldn’t it be the number-one issue being debated in Congress and the media? Instead, nobody is allowed to even ask these questions without being threatened, censored, rebuked, deplatformed. Members of the corporate media who dare broach the question get fired.

Contrary to what some scientists believe, we are not machines. We are human beings with bodies, souls and free wills. Anyone who tries to mandate the acceptance of an experimental gene-altering treatment is going against the international Nuremberg Codes, which require informed consent of any experimental treatment.

Read it all.

And, now I am going to do a test and put this on my facebook page. It will be off topic as my page is mostly about refugees and immigration, but I hear facebook is scouring its pages looking for people who are asking questions about The Shot.

p.s. Yesterday I wrote a post on how Biden is p******-off the progressives because he hasn’t yet signed the order to allow 62,500 refugees into the US before September 30th.  People on Facebook are very interested in the refugee/migration issue as my facebook data indicates—I had a reach of 100,000 there in the last month.

Across Africa and the Middle East, Refugee Plane Tickets to America Canceled

EDITORS NOTE: This Frauds, Crooks and Criminals is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

BIDEN’S BORDER CHAOS: DHS Seeks Volunteers to Assist With ‘Overwhelming’ Surge at Southern Border

Why do we have Customs and Border service? Chaos. Why do we have Customs and Border service? Chaos.

America will be unrecognizable by the end of this stolen election regime.

DHS Seeks Volunteers to Assist With ‘Overwhelming’ Surge at Southern Border

By Isabel van Brugen, The Epoch Times, March 9, 2021:

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is seeking volunteers from among its agencies to assist in dealing with an “overwhelming” migrant surge at the U.S.-Mexico border, as the Biden administration continues to deny that there’s a crisis.

“Today, I activated the Volunteer Force to support Customs and Border Protection (CBP) as they face a surge in migration along the Southwest Border,” DHS Secretary Mayorkas said in an email to employees on March 8, obtained by several news outlets.

“You have likely seen the news about the overwhelming numbers of migrants seeking access to this country along the Southwest Border,” Mayorkas said.

“President Biden and I are committed to ensuring our Nation has a safe, orderly, and humane immigration system while continuing to balance all of the other critical DHS missions.”

DHS volunteers, in a non-law enforcement capacity, will work to carry out tasks such as assisting in control rooms, doing housekeeping, preparing meals, doing supply and prescription medicine runs, and managing property, Fox News reported.

Mayorkas said in his email that in 2019, under the Trump administration, more than 900 volunteers had been deployed to support their CBP colleagues “during a similar migration surge.”

“Please consider joining the Volunteer Force to again provide needed humanitarian support along the Southwest Border and relief for our CBP colleagues,” Mayorkas wrote.

“I also realize these are uncertain times and being away from home may be concerning. But today your colleagues need assistance carrying out their mission to help others, and DHS is going to support you while deployed,” he said. “Your health and wellbeing will remain priorities.”

Illegal Crossings Spike

The number of illegal crossings at the southern border has steadily risen since October 2020. The number of encounters at the southwest border between October 2020 and January was 296,259, an increase from 164,932 in the year-earlier period, according to data from the CBP, representing a 79.6 percent increase.

Since taking office on Jan. 20, President Joe Biden has signed a flurry of executive orders that dismantled the Trump administration’s border security measures.

On his first day in office, Biden signed executive orders and issued memos to temporarily suspend deportations of illegal aliens, reverse former President Donald Trump’s ban on travel from terror-prone countries, halt border wall construction, stop adding people to the Trump-era 2019 “Remain in Mexico” program, preserve and fortify the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, and release a sweeping immigration package to Congress that includes amnesty for millions of asylum seekers and illegal immigrants.

The attorneys general of Arizona and Texas have sued Biden over a memo from the administration that ordered a freeze on the majority of deportations for 100 days. A federal judge temporarily blocked the order on Jan. 26.

The Biden administration’s proposal to legalize about 11 million illegal aliens living in the United States—something he vowed during his campaign—was formally introduced by Democrats in Congress last month.

Situation ‘Unstable’

After visiting the CBP facility in Edinburg, Texas, at the southern border over the weekend, Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-Texas) described the situation as “unstable.” He noted that the areas he toured have been seeing a huge spike in migrants, with more than 6,000 apprehended at just one station.

On March 6, Texas began an operation to counter the growing crisis, activating and deploying National Guard troops and other law enforcement officers to the border to combat drug and human smuggling.

Biden hasn’t yet acknowledged the crisis or announced any concrete plans to address the growing numbers of illegal crossings. When asked by a reporter this week whether there’s a crisis at the border, Biden replied, “No, we’ll be able to handle it.”

The White House and the DHS didn’t immediately respond to a request by The Epoch Times for comment.

RELATED ARTICLE: The new border chaos: a crisis of Biden’s own making

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense permenently banned us. Facebook, Twitter, Google search et al have shadowbanned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Help us fight. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever. Share our posts on social and with your email contacts.

America’s Medical Guinea Pigs, Depopulation and Eugenics [Part 1]

“There is absolutely no need for vaccines to extinguish the pandemic.  I’ve never heard such nonsense talks about vaccines.  You do not vaccinate people who aren’t at risk from a disease.  You also don’t set about planning to vaccinate millions of fit and healthy people with a vaccine that hasn’t been extensively tested on human subjects.” – Dr. Michael Yeadon – Former Vice President and Chief Scientist of Pfizer

“One of the medical profession’s greatest boasts is that it eradicated smallpox through the use of the smallpox vaccine. I myself believed this claim for many years. But it simply isn’t true!” –  Dr. Vernon Coleman

“I am no longer ‘trying to dig up evidence to prove’ vaccines cause autism. There is already abundant evidence. This debate is not scientific but is political.” –   David Ayoub


A recent Johns Hopkins study claims more than 250,000 people in the U.S. die every year from medical errors. Other reports claim the numbers to be as high as 440,000. Medical errors are the third-leading cause of death after heart disease and cancer.  Medication errors account for one out of 131 outpatient deaths and one out of 854 inpatient deaths. Medication-related errors occur frequently in hospitals; not all result in actual harm, but those that do are costly. These are accidental deaths, but since tort reform, negligence and medical malpractice have risen.  Tragedies occur because of error, but there’s a far darker side.

American citizens have been used as guinea pigs for decades, resulting in hundreds of thousands of early and often painful deaths of those in the general populace and in our military.

Nuclear Guinea Pigs

From the 1940s to 1970s, American citizens were used as “nuclear guinea pigs,” to borrow a phrase from the Congressional report that lays out the record. They were deliberately exposed to dangerous radioactive substances. These experiments were scientifically, as well as ethically, questionable. Rep. Edward Markey (D-MA) pressed the Department of Energy for documents on Americans who suffered.  Link, Link

At the time, the dangers of radio-iodine were known and Markey detailed these tests which took place all over America.  Subjects included elderly people, prisoners, the terminally ill, and even babies. Ostensibly, these people, or those legally competent to act for them, had consented to the tests. But it’s hard to believe that it was truly informed consent.  These experiments were repugnant because human subjects were essentially used as guinea pigs and calibration devices.

Neither were there recommendations or medals for America’s atomic vets who were subject to over 27 nuclear tests over three months when they had been assigned to witness Operation Hardtack I, a series of nuclear tests in the Pacific.  When the blasts went off and the men covered their eyes, they could see their bones through their hands.  The National Association of Atomic Vets who suffered through these tests had higher rates of cancers and health issues.  John Wayne, Susan Hayward, and 90 other people developed cancer after filming “The Conqueror” near a nuclear testing site.

When the vast wartime factories of the Manhattan Project began producing plutonium in quantities never before seen on earth, scientists working on the top-secret bomb-building program grew apprehensive.  Fearful that plutonium might cause a cancer epidemic among workers and desperate to learn more about what it could do to the human body, the Manhattan Project’s medical doctors embarked upon an experiment in which eighteen unsuspecting patients in hospital wards throughout the country were secretly injected with the cancer-causing substance.  Most of these patients would go to their graves without ever knowing what had been done to them.

Reporter Eileen Welsome spent 10 years researching the fifty-year cover-up surrounding the plutonium injections as well as the deceitful nature of thousands of other experiments conducted on American citizens in the postwar years.  The result was her Pulitzer Prize-winning book, The Plutonium Files.

Tuskegee Syphilis

In 1932, the government used 623 men as human guinea pigs in a 40-year medical experiment. This in itself is bad enough, but for 40 years these black men, predominately poor and uneducated, were deliberately kept in the dark about what was happening to them. This “experiment” continued for 20 years after the Nuremburg trials and the set of standards that came out of the trials called the Nuremburg codes. The civilized world agreed that human beings would not be used as research animals and that doctors would never forget their first duty to heal their patients.

The United States Public Health Service (PHS) (now the CDC) conducted this experiment. More than half of the 623 men had syphilis, the others, a control group, did not. They were told they were being treated for “Bad Blood.” The men were told they’d get free lunches, free medical care, free burial and 100 dollars. That may sound odd, but at the time burial money and free medical care were coveted. Despite the development of penicillin in the early 40’s and the availability of it by 1944, the men were never treated. In actuality, the “experiment” was to see what illnesses developed and how long it took the men to die.

No PHS officer who had been directly involved in the study felt any contrition.  Link

Polio Vaccine and SV40

In 2010, I wrote about the polio vaccine and its lasting effects.  In the 1960s, we had both needle and sugar cube vaccines for polio, even though polio was officially over and done with in 1959.  The vaccine was grown on Simeon monkey kidneys and contaminated with SV-40 monkey viruses which caused soft tissue cancers for those who received the vaccine. From 1954 to 1963, almost every dose of polio vaccine produced in the world was given to 98 million Americans and was contaminated with the cancer-causing virus. Despite knowing this vaccine caused cancer, the government continued giving it to Americans.

Former virologist, John Martin, MD, PhD, said, “SV-40 infection is now widespread within the human population almost certainly as a result of the polio vaccine.” This vaccine was given to millions of American and European children. SV-40 has been discovered in tumors of children never inoculated with the vaccine leading most scientists to believe it is genetically passed.

When questioned on the safety of the polio vaccine he developed, Jonas Salk said, “It is safe, and you can’t get safer than safe.”  Sadly, the polio vaccine’s growth on Simeon Monkey kidneys has caused an American cancer epidemic in baby boomers.

Ed Haslam’s book, Dr. Mary’s Monkey gives the full story along with The Virus and the Vaccine by Bookchin and Schumacher. The latter two authors reported the story in the Atlantic Monthly Magazine.

Millions of Americans are unaware that government officials and leading scientists have played Russian roulette with the health of American citizens for over a century.  The US Government has a secret history of grisly experiments.  Sadly, despite the Nuremburg Codes, these unethical medical and psychological human experiments continue today and here come the Covid-19 vaccines.

Covid-19 Vaccines

Out of dozens of drug makers, Pfizer, Moderna, AstraZeneca, and Johnson and Johnson are the leading vaccine producers.  Most Americans are not aware that all vaccine makers worldwide have been given a free pass from any legal prosecution regarding any deaths or injuries caused by the new vaccines.  Pfizer is still engaging in phase 3 trials for two more years, which means their covid-19 vaccine is still very much in experimental stages, even though it is widely offered to the public.

Many scientists and physicians have stated there is no real necessity for a vaccine, that the numbers of deaths from Covid, along with their skewed PCR false positive tests, are inflated to promote fear in the public allowing lockdowns, masks and the destruction and elimination of middle class small businesses.  Overall COVID-19 recovery rate is between 97% and 99.75%.  So why the vaccine?

The same thing was accomplished by Tennessee Governor Bill Haslam and his good buddy, our former Senator Lamar Alexander, who promoted internet taxes even on those companies who had no physical presence in your state, overriding the 1991 Supreme Court decision. Small businesses were bought out by Amazon and others and they lost the ability to survive by government’s forced implementation of 25,000 nationwide tax codes at a cost far above their yearly sales.

The ultimate goal is the total elimination of the middle class, while government and big business grow larger and stronger.

Weaponized Medicine

It is a well-known fact that Anthony Fauci denied the use of the safe and cheap 60-year-old drug Hydroxychloroquine for treatment in early diagnosis of COVID-19.  He preferred his more expensive drug, Remdesivir, along with the vaccine that he and Bill Gates promoted to end Covid-19, an untested and dangerous inoculation that will fill their personal coffers.

He also originally stated that mask wearing was unnecessary, but changed his mind and now has decided we should wear two masks to keep Covid from spreading, albeit there is no proof whatsoever that masks stop Covid.  In fact, masks actually can make you more susceptible to the virus…because we touch them, re-use them, carry them in our purses, and inundate them with countless germs that we then breathe into our lungs every time we reuse it.  And how thrilled the totalitarian dictatorial commies in our governments were when they saw how many lemmings donned the face diapers in compliance with the draconian orders.

And those astronomical death counts…!  As I’ve previously mentioned, the John Hopkins report stated that there were no more deaths in 2020 than there were in previous years.  Yes, the yearly death rate is the same.  Why?  Because in 2020, no one seemed to die of seasonal flu, cancer, heart disease, diabetes, etc.  Every death was Covid.

Covid actually killed the ability for Americans to think, use logic and common sense.  What Covid ultimately decimated was the economy, the working middle class and millions of jobs.  It destroyed forever millions of small businesses, human connection, love and compassion. Even more barbaric was the cruelty of our elderly loved ones dying alone without family being close.

Now those same mask-wearing American lemmings are standing in line hoping and praying for an untested vaccine to be shot into their arms, not once, but twice.

Depopulation and Eugenics

Is that the ultimate goal?  It certainly seems that way when a Chinese virus was released upon the world, and five democrat governors thought nothing of putting Covid infected patients in nursing homes, ultimately killing tens of thousands more elderly with susceptible comorbidities.  One need only read Earth Summit, Agenda 21, the United Nations Programme of Action from Rio.  They’re main goal is depopulation.

And Anthony Fauci has long been funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.  Fauci was photographed with a coterie of globalist elites in 2001 at the Carnegie Medal of Philanthropy event. The unassuming government bureaucrat was present alongside such titans of globalism as Ted Turner, David Rockefeller, George Soros, and Bill Gates Sr. Records reveal that Gates Sr. was a board member of Planned Parenthood prior to the Roe v. Wade 1973 Supreme Court decision, and Bill Gates himself said in a video clip that his father was the “head of Planned Parenthood.”

Bill Gates believes we need a vaccine to stop the spread of Covid-19…even though 98% of the people who contract Covid recover…Robert Kennedy, Jr. has made it clear what he thinks of Bill Gates and his devastating vaccine results in foreign countries.

The origin of the Gates Foundation is that both his father’s foundation and his own foundation were merged into the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Population control was very much a core facet of both foundations. Both father and son are strong eugenicists.  Their beliefs are much like those of Margaret Sanger…only healthy seed must be sown.

The eugenics movement took root in the United States in the early 1900‘s, led by Charles Davenport (1866-1944), a prominent biologist, and Harry Laughlin, a former teacher and principal interested in breeding.  It became a popular social movement that peaked in the 1920s and 30s but was perused and used by the Nazis. During this period, the American Eugenics Society was founded, in addition to many local societies and groups around the country (PBS 1998).  Members competed in “fitter family” and “better baby” competitions at fairs and exhibitions. Movies and books promoting eugenic principles were popular. A film called The Black Stork (1917), based on a true story, depicted as heroic a doctor that allowed a syphilitic infant to die after convincing the child’s parents that it was better to spare society one more outcast.

The eugenics movement in the US quickly focused on eliminating negative traits just like Margaret Sanger’s hatred of black Americans.  “Undesirable” traits were concentrated in poor, uneducated, and minority populations. In an attempt to prevent these groups from propagating, eugenicists helped drive legislation for their forced sterilization (Norrgard 2008). The first state to enact a sterilization law was Indiana in 1907, quickly followed by California and 28 other states by 1931 (Lombardo n.d.). These laws resulted in the forced sterilization of over 64,000 people in the United States.

At first, sterilization efforts focused on the disabled but later grew to include people whose only “crime” was poverty. These sterilization programs found legal support in the Supreme Court. In Buck v. Bell (1927), the state of Virginia sought to sterilize Carrie Buck for promiscuity as evidenced by her giving birth to a baby out of wedlock (some suggest she was raped). In ruling against Buck, Supreme Court Justice Wendell Holmes opined, “It is better for all the world, if instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime, or to let them starve for imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind.  Three generations of imbeciles are enough” (Black 2003). This decision legitimized the various sterilization laws in the United States.

In particular, California’s program was so robust that the Nazi’s turned to California for advice in perfecting their own efforts. Hitler proudly admitted to following the laws of several American states that allowed for the prevention of reproduction of the “unfit” (Black 2003).

The US eugenics movement began to lose power in the 1940s and was completely discredited following the horrors of Nazi Germany. With modern advances in genetic testing, it is important to keep America’s eugenics history in mind. Yet, can we avoid repeating this dark chapter, if so many in our country don’t know about it?

As did Sanger, Gates believes in the eugenicist Thomas Malthus’s idea that the sustainability of the world’s resources is completely dependent upon maintaining population control. Ironically, Gates believes that improving health care, primarily through vaccinations, will accomplish this.

Conclusion

In part two we’ll discuss the many deaths and disabilities already evident from the unnecessary Operation Warp Speed Covid vaccines.

©Kelleigh Nelson. All rights reserved.

China’s Role in Global Lockdowns: The Smoking Gun

This time last year, Americans were blindsided by a shocking policy to shut down the US economy to control a virus. The presumption of the officials who enacted this policy is that it would be far more deadly than it turned out to be. They further presumed that the virus could be controlled using state power, precisely as China had claimed to have done in Wuhan.

There are so many problems with all these presumptions, and AIER has covered them almost daily since January 2020. What we’ve lacked until now is an inside look into how US officials, the architects of the lockdowns, went about their decision-making. What were their influences? Who was pushing for these policies?

For the better part of a year, evidence has been mounting that the Chinese Communist Party played an outsized role. We have Dr. Fauci on the record praising the Wuhan response, and many World Health Organization officials as well. AIER has published much of this evidence already. Our December 8, 2020, article on the topic prompted a steady torrent of DDoS attacks on our site that continue to this day.

Thanks to a Freedom of Information Act request initiated by Judicial Watch, we now have 300 pages of emails that landed on Fauci’s email account. They are a picture of chaos. Within that chaos, there is one dominant influence: China. We learn that a US delegation actually went to China to learn about the pandemic response in mid-February. We see US officials praising the Communist Party and the “lockdowns” while plotting them right here in the US.

There is much more to discover within the Fauci emails, which are revealing despite all the redactions. For your reading pleasure or disgust, we offer them here:

*****

The article first appeared on March 5, 2021 and is reproduced with permission from AIER,  The American Institute for Economic Research.

PODCAST: Biden Risks COVID-19 Spread With Reckless Illegal Immigration.

GUESTS AND TOPICS:

MYRON EBELL

Myron Ebell is director of the Center for Energy and Environment at the Competitive Enterprise Institute. Ebell also chairs the Cooler Heads Coalition, which comprises representatives from more than two dozen non-profit organizations based in the United States and abroad that challenge global warming alarmism and oppose energy rationing policies.

TOPIC: Texas blizzard is a preview of Biden’s blackout agenda!

KELSEY BOLAR

Kelsey Bolar is a senior policy analyst at Independent Women’s Forum. She is also an editor of BRIGHT, a morning newsletter for women, by women, a contributor to The Federalist, and a senior fellow at The Steamboat Institute. She is a frequent guest on Fox News, Fox Business. Previously, Bolar worked for The Daily Signal and The Heritage Foundation as a senior writer and producer. There, she co-hosted the weekly podcast, “Problematic Women,” produced videos that received millions of views, and regularly appeared on radio and TV.

TOPIC: Biden Risks COVID-19 Spread With Reckless Illegal Immigration.

RYAN CINNATE AND BLAKE KERVEN

Ryan Cinnante and Blake Kerven are on a mission to get Major Kurt Chew-Een Lee America’s first Marine Corps officer of Asian heritage a posthumous Congressional Medal of Honor. Major Lee heroically engaged in direct combat with Communist Chinese and North Korean soldiers while leading 8000 US Marines to safety during the battle of The Chosen Reservoir.

As progressive ideology infiltrates America’s sanctuaries, author and pastor Lucas Miles exposes “religious trojan horse” in his new book The Christian Left already a #1 chart-topping Amazon title before it’s release. The book unveils how liberal thought has entered America’s sanctuaries exchanging the Trinity of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit for the trinity of diversity, acceptance and social justice. The book includes an in-depth look at church history, world politics and pop culture in order to address the rise and agenda of the “Christian Left”.

©Conservative Commandoes Radio. All rights reserved.

VIDEO: Numbers In The New CDC Report DESTROY The Case For Mask Mandates

What the Democrats have done to this country using the China flu is a crime against humanity. Stunning Revelation. Game Over.

Here is the remarkable true story:

Numbers In The New CDC Report DESTROY The Case For Mask Mandates

By: Patrick Howley, National File, March 6, 2021

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) released a report Friday in which it quietly admitted that the mask mandates in America were allegedly responsible for less than a 2 percent decrease in COVID case growth after ONE HUNDRED DAYS. But still the CDC advises wearing masks, despite their own numbers. 

The CDC claims that between March 1 and December 31 of 2020 the mask mandates, which were executed in the vast majority of United States counties, stopped COVID case growth rates by one half of one percent after 20 days and by less than 2 percent after 100 days.

NATIONAL FILE REPORTED:

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) stands accused of violating federal law by inflating Coronavirus fatality numbers, according to stunning information obtained by NATIONAL FILE.

CDC illegally inflated the COVID fatality number by at least 1,600 percent as the 2020 presidential election played out, according to a study published by the Public Health Initiative of the Institute for Pure and Applied Knowledge. The study, “COVID-19 Data Collection, Comorbidity & Federal Law: A Historical Retrospective,” was authored by Henry Ealy, Michael McEvoy, Daniel Chong, John Nowicki , Monica Sava, Sandeep Gupta, David White, James Jordan , Daniel Simon, and Paul Anderson. (READ THE LANDMARK RESEARCH HERE)

The CDC is now legally requiring red-blooded Americans to wear face masks on all public transportation as globalists try to push the concept of “double-masking” on the populace. Since the election, the World Health Organization admits that PCR tests are not totally reliable on the first try and a second test might be needed. This corresponds with CDC’s quiet admission that it blended viral and antibody test results for its case numbers and that people can test positive on an antibody test if they have antibodies from a family of viruses that cause the common cold. Hospitals in Florida had so many accuracy complications that Orlando Health had to admit that its 9.4 percent positivity rate got recorded at 98 percent. (READ: The TRUTH About Fauci and Gates And NIH Owning A Stake in the Vaccine).

“The groundbreaking peer-reviewed research…asserts that the CDC willfully violated multiple federal laws including the Information Quality Act, Paperwork Reduction Act, and Administrative Procedures Act at minimum. (Publishing Journal – Institute for Pure and Applied Knowledge / Public Health Policy Initiative) Most notably, the CDC illegally enacted new rules for data collection and reporting exclusively for COVID-19 that resulted in a 1,600% inflation of current COVID-19 fatality totals,” the watchdog group All Concerned Citizens declared in a statement provided to NATIONAL FILE, referring to the Institute for Pure and Applied Knowledge study.

“The research demonstrates that the CDC failed to apply for mandatory federal oversight and failed to open a mandatory period for public scientific comment in both instances as is required by federal law before enacting new rules for data collection and reporting. The CDC is required to be in full compliance with all federal laws even during emergency situations. The research asserts that CDC willfully compromised the accuracy and integrity of all COVID-19 case and fatality data from the onset of this crisis in order to fraudulently inflate case and fatality data,” stated All Concerned Citizens.

“On March 24th the CDC published the NVSS COVID-19 Alert No. 2 document instructing medical examiners, coroners and physicians to deemphasize underlying causes of death, also referred to as pre-existing conditions or comorbidities, by recording them in Part II rather than Part I of death certificates as “…the underlying cause of death are expected to result in COVID-19 being the underlying cause of death more often than not.” This was a major rule change for death certificate reporting from the CDC’s 2003 Coroners’ Handbook on Death Registration and Fetal Death Reporting and Physicians’ Handbook on Medical Certification of Death, which have instructed death reporting professionals nationwide to report underlying conditions in Part I for the previous 17 years. This single change resulted in a significant inflation of COVID-19 fatalities by instructing that COVID-19 be listed in Part I of death certificates as a definitive cause of death regardless of confirmatory evidence, rather than listed in Part II as a contributor to death in the presence of pre-existing conditions, as would have been done using the 2003 guidelines. The research draws attention to this key distinction as it has led to a significant inflation in COVID fatality totals. By the researcher’s estimates, COVID-19 recorded fatalities are inflated nationwide by as much as 1600% above what they would be had the CDC used the 2003 handbooks,” stated All Concerned Citizens.

“Then on April 14th, the CDC adopted additional rules exclusive for COVID-19 in violation of federal law by outsourcing data collection rule development to the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists (CSTE), a non-profit entity, again without applying for oversight and opening opportunity for public scientific review. On April 5th the CSTE published a position paper Standardized surveillance case definition and national notification for 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) listing 5 CDC employees as subject matter experts. This key document created new rules for counting probable cases as actual cases without definitive proof of infection (section VII.A1 – pages 4 & 5), new rules for contact tracing allowing contact tracers to practice medicine without a license (section VII.A3 – page 5), and yet refused to define new rules for ensuring that the same person could not be counted multiple times as a new case (section VII.B – page 7),” stated All Concerned Citizens.

“By enacting these new rules exclusively for COVID-19 in violation of federal law, the research alleges that the CDC significantly inflated data that has been used by elected officials and public health officials, in conjunction with unproven projection models from the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME), to justify extended closures for schools, places of worship, entertainment, and small businesses leading to unprecedented emotional and economic hardships nationwide. A formal petition has been sent to the Department of Justice as well as all US Attorneys seeking an immediate grand jury investigation into these allegations,” All Concerned Citizens stated.

So…do you still trust the globalist oligarchs?

NATIONAL FILE reported: National Institutes of Health (NIH) own a financial stake in the Bill Gates-funded Moderna Coronavirus vaccine, raising big questions about the supposed impartiality of the federal government’s policy decisions during the Coronavirus outbreak. NIAID director Dr. Anthony Fauci, a financial ally of Bill Gates whose institute is part of NIH, has been critical of Hydroxychloroquine and the FBI even raided a health spa serving intravenous vitamin C, which are competitors to a vaccine. (RELATED: Eight NIH Coronavirus Panel Experts Disclose Financial Relationships With Price-Hiking Drugmaker Gilead).

“We do have some particular stake in the intellectual property” for the Moderna vaccine stated Francis Collins, the director of NIH, in a revelatory recent Economic Club panel discussion. “One of the vaccines– the one that’s furthest along– what started, actually, at the federal government in our own Vaccine Research Center at NIH– then worked with a biotechnology company called Moderna to get to where we are now, with very impressive Phase I results and getting ready to go into a large-scale trial as early as July. That one, of course, we do have some particular stake in the intellectual property. Others, though, come from companies who’ve invested their efforts into getting them to the point where they might now be ready for a trial,” Collins stated.

Newly published documents from Public Citizen have massive implications. Public Citizen states:

“The U.S. government may jointly own a potential coronavirus vaccine. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) has played a critical role in coronavirus research for years. Building off this work, federal scientists have helped design and test mRNA-1273—a vaccine candidate developed in partnership with Moderna.[2] The federal government has filed multiple patents covering mRNA-1273. In this report, we describe two patent applications that list federal scientists as co-inventors.[3] If the government successfully pursued its patent filings, the resulting patents would likely confer significant rights. We also review recently disclosed contracts between NIH and Moderna. The agreements suggest that NIH has not transferred its rights, but instead maintains a joint stake.”

Journalist Patrick Howley exposes the Coronavirus “Contact Tracing” program in the first-ever episode of NATIONAL FILE TV. Dr. Anthony Fauci funded the Coronavirus bat research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, believed to be the source of the outbreak, then the Political Class tried to suppress treatment as Fauci’s friend and associate Bill Gates prepared mass vaccinations and the economy got battered. And the whole episode was written out, planned, in advance.

RELATED ARTICLES:

CDC Says Fully-Vaccinated People Can Gather Without Masks

CDC Caught Inflating COVID Death Numbers By At Least 1600 Percent While Trump Was President

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense permenently banned us. Facebook, Twitter, Google search et al have shadowbanned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Help us fight. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever. Share our posts on social and with your email contacts.

Science, Politics, and COVID: Will Truth Prevail?

The following is adapted from a speech delivered on February 18, 2021, at a Hillsdale College National Leadership Seminar in Phoenix, Arizona.


The COVID pandemic has been a tragedy, no doubt. But it has exposed profound issues in America that threaten the principles of freedom and order that we Americans often take for granted.

First, I have been shocked at the unprecedented exertion of power by the government since last March—issuing unilateral decrees, ordering the closure of businesses, churches, and schools, restricting personal movement, mandating behavior, and suspending indefinitely basic freedoms. Second, I was and remain stunned—almost frightened—at the acquiescence of the American people to such destructive, arbitrary, and wholly unscientific rules, restrictions, and mandates.

The pandemic also brought to the forefront things we have known existed and have tolerated for years: media bias, the decline of academic freedom on campuses, the heavy hand of Big Tech, and—now more obviously than ever—the politicization of science. Ultimately, the freedom of Americans to seek and state what they believe to be the truth is at risk.

Let me say at the outset that I, like all of us, acknowledge that the consequences of the COVID pandemic and its management have been enormous. Over 500,000 American deaths have been attributed to the virus; more will follow. Even after almost a year, the pandemic still paralyzes our country. And despite all efforts, there has been an undeniable failure to stop cases from escalating and to prevent hospitalizations and deaths.

But there is also an unacknowledged reality: almost every state and major city in the U.S., with a handful of exceptions, have implemented severe restrictions for many months, including closures of businesses and in-person schools, mobility restrictions and curfews, quarantines, limits on group gatherings, and mask mandates dating back to at least last summer. And despite any myths to the contrary, social mobility tracking of Americans and data from Gallup, YouGov, the COVID-19 Consortium, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have all shown significant reductions of movement as well as a consistently high percentage of mask-wearing since the late summer, similar to the extent seen in Western Europe and approaching the extent seen in Asia.

With what results?

All legitimate policy scholars today should be reexamining the policies that have severely harmed America’s children and families, while failing to save the elderly. Numerous studies, including one from Stanford University’s infectious disease scientists and epidemiologists Benavid, Oh, Bhattacharya, and Ioannides have shown that the mitigating impact of the extraordinary measures used in almost every state was small at best—and usually harmful. President Biden himself openly admitted the lack of efficacy of these measures in his January 22 speech to the nation: “There is nothing we can do,” he said, “to change the trajectory of the pandemic in the next several months.”

Bizarrely, though, many want to blame those who opposed lockdowns and mandates for the failure of the very lockdowns and mandates that were widely implemented.

Besides their limited value in containing the virus, lockdown policies have been extraordinarily harmful. The harms to children of suspending in-person schooling are dramatic, including poor learning, school dropouts, social isolation, and suicidal ideation, most of which are far worse for lower income groups. A recent study confirms that up to 78 percent of cancers were never detected due to missed screening over a three-month period. If one extrapolates to the entire country, 750,000 to over a million new cancer cases over a nine-month period will have gone undetected. That health disaster adds to missed critical surgeries, delayed presentations of pediatric illnesses, heart attack and stroke patients too afraid to go to the hospital, and others—all well documented.

Beyond hospital care, the CDC reported four-fold increases in depression, three-fold increases in anxiety symptoms, and a doubling of suicidal ideation, particularly among young adults after the first few months of lockdowns, echoing American Medical Association reports of drug overdoses and suicides. Domestic and child abuse have been skyrocketing due to the isolation and loss of jobs. Given that many schools have been closed, hundreds of thousands of abuse cases have gone unreported, since schools are commonly where abuse is noticed. Finally, the unemployment shock from lockdowns, according to a recent National Bureau of Economic Research study, will generate a three percent increase in the mortality rate and a 0.5 percent drop in life expectancy over the next 15 years, disproportionately affecting African-Americans and women. That translates into what the study refers to as a “staggering” 890,000 additional U.S. deaths.

We know we have not yet seen the full extent of the damage from the lockdowns, because the effects will continue to be felt for decades. Perhaps that is why lockdowns were not recommended in previous pandemic response analyses, even for diseases with far higher death rates.

To determine the best path forward, shouldn’t policymakers objectively consider the impact both of the virus and of anti-virus policies to date? This points to the importance of health policy, my own particular field, which requires a broader scope than that of epidemiologists and basic scientists. In the case of COVID, it requires taking into account the fact that lockdowns and other significant restrictions on individuals have been extraordinarily harmful—even deadly—especially for the working class and the poor.

Optimistically, we should be seeing the light at the end of the long tunnel with the rollout of vaccines, now being administered at a rate of one million to 1.5 million per day. On the other hand, using logic that would appeal to Lewis Carroll’s Mad Hatter, in many states the vaccines were initially administered more frequently to healthier and younger people than to those at greatest risk from the virus. The argument was made that children should be among the first to be vaccinated, although children are at extremely low risk from the virus and are proven not to be significant spreaders to adults. Likewise, we heard the Kafka-esque idea promoted that teachers must be vaccinated before teaching in person, when schools are one of the lowest risk environments and the vast majority of teachers are not high risk.

Worse, we hear so-called experts on TV warning that social distancing, masks, and other restrictions will still be necessary after people are vaccinated! All indications are that those in power have no intention of allowing Americans to live normally—which for Americans means to live freely—again.

And sadly, just as in Galileo’s time, the root of our problem lies in “the experts” and vested academic interests. At many universities—which are supposed to be America’s centers for critical thinking—those with views contrary to those of “the experts” currently in power find themselves intimidated. Many have become afraid to speak up.

But the suppression of academic freedom is not the extent of the problem on America’s campuses.

To take Stanford, where I work, as an example, some professors have resorted to toxic smears in opinion pieces and organized rebukes aimed at those of us who criticized the failed health policies of the past year and who dared to serve our country under a president they despised—the latter apparently being the ultimate transgression.

Defamatory attacks with malicious intent based on straw-man arguments and out-of-context distortions are not acceptable in American society, let alone in our universities. There has been an attempt to intimidate and discredit me using falsifications and misrepresentations. This violates Stanford’s Code of Conduct, damages the Stanford name, and abuses the trust that parents and society place in educators.

It is understandable that most Stanford professors are not experts in the field of health policy and are ignorant of the data about the COVID pandemic. But that does not excuse the fact that some called recommendations that I made “falsehoods and misrepresentations of science.” That was a lie, and no matter how often lies are repeated by politically-driven accusers, and regardless of how often those lies are echoed in biased media, lies will never be true.

We all must pray to God that the infamous claim attributed to Nazi propagandist Joseph Goebbels—“A lie told once remains a lie, but a lie told a thousand times becomes the truth”—never becomes operative in the United States of America.

All of the policies I recommended to President Trump were designed to reduce both the spread of the virus to the most vulnerable and the economic, health, and social harms of anti-COVID policies for those impacted the most—small businesses, the working class, and the poor. I was one of the first to push for increasing protections for those most at risk, particularly the elderly. At the same time, almost a year ago, I recognized that we must also consider the enormous harms to physical and mental health, as well as the deaths attributable to the draconian policies implemented to contain the infection. That is the goal of public health policy—to minimize all harms, not simply to stop a virus at all costs.

The claim in a recent Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) opinion piece by three Stanford professors that “nearly all public health experts were concerned that [Scott Atlas’s] recommendations could lead to tens of thousands (or more) of unnecessary deaths in the U.S. alone” is patently false and absurd on its face. As pointed out by Dr. Joel Zinberg in National Review, the Great Barrington Declaration—a proposal co-authored by medical scientists and epidemiologists from Stanford, Harvard, and Oxford—“is closer to the one condemned in the JAMA article than anything Atlas said.” Yet the Great Barrington Declaration has already been signed by over 50,000 medical and public health practitioners.

When critics display such ignorance about the scope of views held by experts, it exposes their bias and disqualifies their authority on these issues. Indeed, it is almost beyond parody that these same critics wrote that “professionalism demands honesty about what [experts] know and do not know.”

I have explained the fact that younger people have little risk from this infection, and I have explained the biological fact of herd immunity—just like Harvard epidemiologist Katherine Yih did. That is very different from proposing that people be deliberately exposed and infected—which I have never suggested, although I have been accused of doing so.

I have also been accused of “argu[ing] that many public health orders aimed at increasing social distancing could be forgone without ill effects.” To the contrary, I have repeatedly called for mitigation measures, including extra sanitization, social distancing, masks, group limits, testing, and other increased protections to limit the spread and damage from the coronavirus. I explicitly called for augmenting protection of those at risk—in dozens of on-the-record presentations, interviews, and written pieces.

My accusers have ignored my explicit, emphatic public denials about supporting the spread of the infection unchecked to achieve herd immunity—denials quoted widely in the media. Perhaps this is because my views are not the real object of their criticism. Perhaps it is because their true motive is to “cancel” anyone who accepted the call to serve America in the Trump administration.

For many months, I have been vilified after calling for opening in-person schools—in line with Harvard Professors Martin Kulldorf and Katherine Yih and Stanford Professor Jay Bhattacharya—but my policy recommendation has been corroborated repeatedly by the literature. The compelling case to open schools is now admitted even in publications like The Atlantic, which has noted: “Research from around the world has, since the beginning of the pandemic, indicated that people under 18, and especially younger kids, are less susceptible to infection, less likely to experience severe symptoms, and far less likely to be hospitalized or die.” The subhead of the article was even clearer: “We’ve known for months that young children are less susceptible to serious infection and less likely to transmit the coronavirus.”

When the JAMA accusers wrote that I “disputed the need for masks,” they misrepresented my words. My advice on mask usage has been consistent: “Wear a mask when you cannot socially distance.” At the time, this matched the published recommendations of the World Health Organization (WHO). This past December, the WHO modified its recommendation: “In areas where the virus is circulating, masks should be worn when you’re in crowded settings, where you can’t be at least one meter [roughly three feet] from others, and in rooms with poor or unknown ventilation”—in other words, not at all times by everyone. This also matches the recommendation of the National Institutes of Health document Prevention and Prophylaxis of SARS-CoV-2 Infection: “When consistent distancing is not possible, face coverings may further reduce the spread of infectious droplets from individuals with SARS-CoV-2 infection to others.”

Regarding universal masks, 38 states have implemented mask mandates, most of them since at least the summer, with almost all the rest having mandates in their major cities. Widespread, general population mask usage has shown little empirical utility in terms of preventing cases, even though citing or describing evidence against their utility has been censored. Denmark also performed a randomized controlled study that showed that widespread mask usage had only minimal impact.

This is the reality: those who insist that universal mask usage has absolutely proven effective at controlling the spread of the COVID virus and is universally recommended according to “the science” are deliberately ignoring the evidence to the contrary. It is they who are propagating false and misleading information.

Those who say it is unethical, even dangerous, to question broad population mask mandates must also explain why many top infectious disease scientists and public health organizations question the efficacy of general population masking. Tom Jefferson and Carl Heneghan of the University of Oxford’s Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine, for instance, wrote that “despite two decades of pandemic preparedness, there is considerable uncertainty as to the value of wearing masks.” Oxford epidemiologist Sunetra Gupta says there is no need for masks unless one is elderly or high risk. Stanford’s Jay Bhattacharya has said that “mask mandates are not supported by the scientific data. . . . There is no scientific evidence that mask mandates work to slow the spread of the disease.”

Throughout this pandemic, the WHO’s “Advice on the use of masks in the context of COVID-19” has included the following statement: “At present, there is no direct evidence (from studies on COVID-19 and in healthy people in the community) on the effectiveness of universal masking of healthy people in the community to prevent infection with respiratory viruses, including COVID-19.” The CDC, in a review of influenza pandemics in May 2020, “did not find evidence that surgical-type face masks are effective in reducing laboratory-confirmed influenza transmission, either when worn by infected persons (source control) or by persons in the general community to reduce their susceptibility.” And until the WHO removed it on October 21, 2020—soon after Twitter censored a tweet of mine highlighting the quote—the WHO had published the fact that “the widespread use of masks by healthy people in the community setting is not yet supported by high quality or direct scientific evidence and there are potential benefits and harms to consider.”

My advice on masks all along has been based on scientific data and matched the advice of many of the top scientists and public health organizations throughout the world.

At this point, one could make a reasonable case that those who continue to push societal restrictions without acknowledging their failures and the serious harms they caused are themselves putting forth dangerous misinformation. Despite that, I will not call for their official rebuke or punishment. I will not try to cancel them. I will not try to extinguish their opinions. And I will not lie to distort their words and defame them. To do so would repeat the shameful stifling of discourse that is critical to educating the public and arriving at the scientific truths we desperately need.

If this shameful behavior continues, university mottos like Harvard’s “Truth,” Stanford’s “The Winds of Freedom Blow,” and Yale’s “Light and Truth” will need major revision.

Big Tech has piled on with its own heavy hand to help eliminate discussion of conflicting evidence. Without permitting open debate and admission of errors, we might never be able to respond effectively to any future crisis. Indeed, open debate should be more than permitted—it should be encouraged.

As a health policy scholar for over 15 years and as a professor at elite universities for 30 years, I am shocked and dismayed that so many faculty members at these universities are now dangerously intolerant of opinions contrary to their favored narrative. Some even go further, distorting and misrepresenting words to delegitimize and even punish those of us willing to serve the country in the administration of a president they loathe. It is their own behavior, to quote the Stanford professors who have attacked me, that “violates the core values of [Stanford] faculty and the expectations under the Stanford Code of Conduct, which states that we all ‘are responsible for sustaining the high ethical standards of this institution.’” In addition to violating standards of ethical behavior among colleagues, this behavior falls short of simple human decency.

If academic leaders fail to renounce such unethical conduct, increasing numbers of academics will be unwilling to serve their country in contentious times. As educators, as parents, as fellow citizens, that would be the worst possible legacy to leave to our children.

I also fear that the idea of science as a search for truth—a search utilizing the empirical scientific method—has been seriously damaged. Even the world’s leading scientific journals—The Lancet, New England Journal of MedicineScience, and Nature—have been contaminated by politics. What is more concerning, many in the public and in the scientific community have become fatigued by the arguments—and fatigue will allow fallacy to triumph over truth.

With social media acting as the arbiter of allowable discussion, and with continued censorship and cancellation of those with views challenging the “accepted narrative,” the United States is on the verge of losing its cherished freedoms. It is not at all clear whether our democratic republic will survive—but it is clear it will not survive unless more people begin to step up in defense of freedom of thought and speech.

COLUMN BY

Scott W. Atlas

Scott W. Atlas is the Robert Wesson Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University. He previously served for 14 years as professor and chief of neuroradiology at Stanford University Medical Center. He earned his B.S. from the University of Illinois in Urbana-Champaign and his M.D. from the University of Chicago School of Medicine. An ad hoc member of the Nominating Committee for the Nobel Prize in Medicine and Physiology, he was a senior health care advisor to a number of presidential candidates in 2008, 2012, and 2016. From July to December 2020, he served as Special Advisor to President Trump and as a member of the White House Coronavirus Task Force. He is the editor of Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Brain and Spine, now in its fifth edition, and is the author of several books, including Restoring Quality Health Care: A Six-Point Plan for Comprehensive Reform at Lower Cost.

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

Number of Illegal Border Crossings Now 6 Times What Obama Team Considered ‘Crisis’

There is a catastrophic crisis that could add another quarter of a million to the population of illegal aliens in this country in less than a year.

According to former officials in the Obama administration, the standard for a border crisis was 1,000 attempted crossings a day. Who was on the team that set that standard? President Joe Biden—then vice president—and Alejandro Mayorkas, then deputy secretary, and now secretary, of homeland security.

When the Trump administration ended, the U.S. was deporting more people than were illegally coming into the country. In less than a month under Biden, the number of people illegally coming into the country is more than 6,000 per day—that’s six times the crisis level as set by the Obama team.

According to a source with knowledge of what’s happening at our southern border, the Border Patrol, in one day, encountered 4,700 people trying to illegally enter the U.S. About another 900 were observed but not detained. In addition, another 400 were detained and sent back. This volume is straining resources at the border.

And it is not just the numbers. This is fueling a public health crisis. One source in the Department of Homeland Security estimates 15%-25% of people who illegally cross the border are COVID-19-positive. According to a recent press report, asylum-seekers, which the president has also let in in record numbers, are testing positive for COVID-19 after being released by the Border Patrol.

And the numbers are fueling a public safety crisis. According to one report, human traffickers are so overwhelmed with business they are using wristbands to keep track of their clients.

The cash that flows into the pockets of cartels and transnational gangs, in turn, fuels their opioid business, which poisons and kills our neighbors and children, as well as many other nefarious activities that make our communities less safe.

At a time when state and local governments are stretched to provide services to their citizens and unemployment reminds high, the federal government is dumping the flood of illegal immigrants into communities across the country.

Finally, this flood is feeding a humanitarian crisis. Encouraging illegal immigration fuels a number of dangers that put the lives of migrants at risk. A dramatic example of that just happened in California, where over a dozen illegal immigrants were killed in a traffic accident, having been unsafely packed in a van driven by smugglers.

If these dramatic consequences don’t add up to a crisis, then the Titanic is still just running late. Yet, the secretary of homeland security has said there is no crisis. On camera when asked by a reporter, the president of the United States said there is no crisis.

In fact, in one week, the administration said there is no crisis, reportedly drafted a supplemental appropriation request to deal with the crisis, and blamed the crisis on former President Donald Trump.

The president should be honest with the American people. There is a crisis. The crisis was caused by a raft of open border policies rapidly implemented by this administration (such as stopping construction on the border wall and promoting amnesty for illegal aliens), which in effect are advertisements to attract more illegal immigration.

The president should immediately put a stop to implementing initiatives that proactively attract illegal immigration.

*****

This article was first published on March 3, 2021 in The Daily Signal and is reproduced with permission from The Heritage Foundation.

16 States Are Now Following The Science

It took an entire year, but lockdowns and mask mandates are officially incredibly unpopular with half of the country, to the point that governors are rapidly making sweeping changes to their year-long COVID-19 policies.

Jumping onto the coattails of pro-individual freedom leaders like governors Ron DeSantis (R-Florida) and Kristi Noem (R-SD), the governors of Mississippi and Texas decided Tuesday to announce an end to business restrictions and statewide mask mandates.

Both Tate Reeves (R-MS) and Greg Abbott (R-TX), who had long taken a nanny state approach to the COVID-19 crisis, acted almost simultaneously to announce the end of statewide restrictions.

The centrally planned solutions to COVID-19 have failed spectacularly, and the American people have taken notice of this reality. Hundreds of millions have now been through a full year of government-imposed tyranny on both a federal and state level. Whether it was a travel ban, an endless series of lockdowns, mask mandates, countless emergency orders, business closures, and the like, not a single top-down order from the federal or state level did anything productive for the well-being of Americans.

None of it worked. All of it served as a net negative. The people have noticed.

Now that their constituents have had enough, politicians on the Right are fast departing from the COVID tyranny and attempting to secure what is left of their political aspirations.

Abbott and Reeves are not the only GOP governors moving fast in ending the restrictions. Several other governors have recently acted to roll them back.

On February 12, Montana Governor Greg Gianforte lifted his statewide mask mandate.

On February 8, Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds lifted Iowa’s statewide mask mandate along with several other restrictions.

On February 22, North Dakota took it a step further. Its legislative body took the bold step in voting to make mask mandates illegal.

As of March 2, there are now 16 states that no longer have statewide mask orders.

However, across the political divide, there remains no end in sight to the corona madness. Much of the Left continues to embrace and root on endless COVID-19 restrictions, and the hijacking of individual rights in the name of a virus.

Governor Gavin Newsom of California took to Twitter in describing the end of restrictions as“absolutely reckless.”

It took long enough, but it’s now official: Governors who continue to impose lockdowns and mask mandates are fast becoming as popular as Red Sox fans in the Yankee Stadium bleachers, at least in half of the country. The internal polling is out, and the draconian restrictions are being abandoned in droves. History will not be kind to the remaining high-handed holdouts.

*****

This article first appeared on March 3, 2021 and is reproduced by permission of AIER,  American Institute for Economic Research.

THE BIG LIE: Beto O’Rourke slanders GOP as ‘Cult of Death’ — ‘Literally Want to Sacrifice’ Lives

In a rant on Wednesday on MSNBC’s Deadline, failed presidential candidate and gun-grabbing former Rep. Robert Francis “Beto” O’Rourke called the Republican Party  a “cult of death” after Republican Texas Gov. Greg Abbott lifted the COVID-19 mask mandate.

“They literally want to sacrifice the lives of our fellow Texans, for I don’t know, for political gain? To satisfy certain powerful interests within the state? This isn’t hyperbole,” O’Rourke claimed. No, it is not hyperbole; it’s a lie. In fact, it is the coronavirus hysteria itself, not the lifting of the mask mandate, that was, and continues to be, exploited for political gain — by Democrats.

“I think to many of us it appeared to be a cult of personality, the Republican Party in the era of Trump, and it probably still holds true. It’s hard to escape the conclusion that it’s also a cult of death,” O’Rourke blathered. Actually, it’s easy to escape that conclusion because it too is a lie, a demagogic demonization of O’Rourke’s political enemies.

O’Rourke rambled on falsely about “extraordinarily anti-democratic elements… literally running the government of the state of Texas” with an “indifference” that “is killing people in my community and throughout the state of Texas.”

The truth is that Texans and Americans all over the country have had enough of the leftist fear-mongering and exploitation of the coronavirus, and of the economic devastation wrought by the draconian lockdowns. The lifting of the mask mandate is the first step toward liberating Americans from this Democrat power grab.


Robert Francis “Beto” O’Rourke

5 Known Connections

On a variety of key political issues, O’Rourke:

  • strongly favors the expansion of Obamacare as a step toward a government-run, single-payer healthcare system;
  • favors government-enforced affirmative action policies designed to compensate nonwhites and women for the effects of past and present discrimination;
  • favors the implementation of a pathway-to-citizenship for illegal aliens, in part because “Americans don’t want to do the millions of jobs that non-native-born residents are willing to do”;
  • strongly opposes Voter ID laws as racist schemes that are designed to suppress minority voting;
  • believes that the nationalization of banks and corporations is more appropriate than government bailouts of those entities when they fail economically; and
  • calls for a significant increase in the national hourly minimum wage requirement for all workers.

To learn more about Robert Francis “Beto” O’Rourke, click here for his profile link.

©Discover the Networks. All rights reserved.

Texas says all businesses allowed to open 100%, ends statewide mask mandate

Reason and logic prevails! Texas Governor says statewide mask mandate ends March 10th and all businesses can reopen at 100% capacity.

https://twitter.com/Breaking911/status/1366838646310060035?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1366838646310060035%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fgellerreport.com%2F2021%2F03%2Ftexas-says-all-businesses-allowed-to-open-100-ends-statewide-mask-mandate.html%2F

Gov. Abbott to reopen Texas at 100% capacity, end statewide mask mandate

By: Joshua Hoggardm, Texomas, Mar 2, 2021:

LUBBOCK (KFDX/KJTL) — Gov. Greg Abbott announced Tuesday during a press conference in Lubbock a new executive order allowing all businesses to open at 100% capacity and ending the statewide mask mandate, effective Wednesday, March 10.

Gov. Abbott said he will be issuing a new executive order rescinding many of his previous orders issued during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Gov. Abbott said all businesses of any type will be able to open at 100% capacity beginning Wednesday, March 10.

Additionally, Gov. Abbott said the statewide mask mandate will be ending.

Gov. Abbott said hospitalizations in the state are the lowest they’ve been at in months, active COVID-19 cases are at their lowest numbers since November 2020, and the positivity rate is lower than 10%.

Gov. Abbott also announced 216,000 vaccines were administered in Texas on Tuesday alone, with over a million shots being distributed per week in the state.

Gov. Abbott also said over half of senior citizens in Texas will have received a vaccine shot by next Wednesday, and by the end of March every senior who wants a shot will be able to get one.

RELATED TWEET:

RELATED ARTICLES:

Texas and Mississippi to lift mask mandates and roll back Covid restrictions

Angry Nurse Has Had It with the Covid-19 Hoax

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense permenently banned us. Facebook, Twitter, Google search et al have shadowbanned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Help us fight. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever. Share our posts on social and with your email contacts.

More people are DYING of COVID under Biden ☭

Democrats are the party of death. Celebrated Democrat hero Cuomo killed tens of thousands of seniors.

More people are dying of COVID under Biden

Yet the media has stopped blaming the President

By: Stephen L. Miller, The Spectator, February 24, 2021

Monday marked a solemn day for America, as the coronavirus death toll in the United States crossed the 500,000 mark. By this weekend, 100,000 will have died during Joe Biden’s short tenure as President. One hundred thousand. Think about that for just a second. Let that sink in.

We could do what all the Trump-deranged pundit class did when the 45th president was in charge. That is, compare the COVID death count ‘under this President’s watch’ to various unrelated historical atrocities. One hundred thousand deaths is the same death toll as the German Peasants’ War, a populist revolt in 1524 which lasted an entire year. Put another way, you could say that, in the month since Joe Biden has been President, COVID-19 casualties have exceeded the death tally of the crisis in Congo during the first half of the 1960s. The equivalent of 20 full-size 737 passenger planes continue to fall out of the sky every day.

The pundits have stopped doing that, funnily enough. Since the end of Donald Trump’s presidency, CNN ombudsman Brian Stelter has ceased comparing COVID deaths to 9/11. So has Vox’s Aaron Rupar, unofficially the worst person on Twitter. The public was told over and over not to look away or forget these victims. Yet as soon as Biden entered the White House, that’s exactly what the majority of the media did.

It took the United States four full months to reach the first 100,000 deaths. Under Biden, that mark will be met in just over one month, even as he demands we ‘mask up’ and the population begins to expand the vaccination process. With no end in sight, the United States is on track to surpass the entirety of casualties under the Wars of Alexander the Great.

Shouldn’t the Biden administration be held to the same account of the previous administration? Every life lost to COVID is a life that could have been saved and if Biden insists on comparing COVID deaths to horrors such as World War One, World War Two and Vietnam, then perhaps they should ask what should be done about the country from which this great attack was launched.

Or perhaps we should just stop using obnoxious historical examples of events and disasters that were not COVID, to use against this pandemic.

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. Quick note: Tech giants are snuffing us out. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense permenently banned us. Facebook, Twitter, Google search et al have shadowbanned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. Help us fight. Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW more than ever. Share our posts on social and with your email contacts.

PODCAST: Face-Masks Are Here To Stay

As a child of the 1950s, I have seen a lot of changes in terms of safety over the years:

  • Back then, nobody wore seat belts in automobiles. Most cars didn’t even have them. Today, they are standard equipment, along with air bags. In most states, you can be issued a ticket for not wearing them, but as a kid from a different era, I still resist using them as it doesn’t feel natural to me.
  • I loved riding my bicycle just about everywhere. I took it to school every day, rode it to my Little League games, to go fishing or visit a neighbor, etc. At that time nobody wore a helmet, and yet I didn’t know of anyone falling off their bike and hurting themselves. Today it is a requirement with some states issuing fines for not wearing them. As for me, I refuse to wear a helmet as I never wore one as a child. I still think they look stupid, but people have embraced them as the government enforces their use.
  • We rode on skate boards and went down steep driveways, all without helmets and leg or arm pads, none of which existed at the time. If you were going to crash, you simply learned to slow down and fall on grass. It was no big deal. Now it is.
  • In Little League, we wore canvass “ear muffs” to protect our heads at the plate. When we would have a pick-up game though, we just wore baseball hats, just like the major leagues. Today, Little League includes full helmets with face guards.

We also played hockey without face masks, including myself as a goalie; we went down winter hills on sleds without any protection; we shot BB guns and slingshots in the fields (and No, we didn’t “shoot our eyes out”); we learned to shoot bow and arrows; we lit firecrackers; went fishing and used knives to clean our catch, and; we even played lawn darts (aka, “Jarts”). Remarkably, we all survived unscathed and enjoyed ourselves immensely. In truth, it was a glorious time to be a kid. When I describe this to parents today, they look at me like I have three eyes, that I am some kind of glutton for punishment.

The same is true with surgical face-masks. In the depths of the many influenza outbreaks we have had, very few people wore face-masks. Today, thanks to COVID-19, we are told by our government to wear them everywhere. President Biden wants to send a face-mask to each American and have us wear them until at least 2022. There are also new requirements to wear face-masks on government property, including our national parks.

The question though becomes, “When can we stop wearing them?” There are some medical institutions now questioning the effectiveness of face-masks on COVID-19; others suggest we need to wear multiple layers of face-masks.

My feeling is, face-masks are here to stay. It is now the “new normal,” just like seat belts, helmets, and other safety equipment. Even if 100% of the American public was properly vaccinated, we would still be asked to wear face-masks. Why? Because government officials will claim there is a new “strain” of some kind which will likely come and go in perpetuity. So, in all likelihood, the government will never tell us to put the masks away. It is not in their best interest to do so as it represents a form of control and is deemed to be politically correct to wear, particularly among Democrats.

Even if the government declared “the coast is clear,” people will likely continue to wear face-masks in supermarkets, social gatherings, at work and school, and wherever. The government has created a new habit, which people will be reluctant to give up. Years from now, you will tell your grandchildren, “I remember when I was a kid, we never wore face-masks, not until the government mandated their use.” They will look at you and say, “Wow, you are really old, aren’t you?”

You will know face-masks are a permanent fixture of our society when you start seeing television commercials featuring designer masks. They will likely be embraced by the fashion industry who will use it as an excuse for changing our wardrobe. Over time, we’ll look like a nation of holdup artists ready to stickup gas stations and convenience stores.

As for me, like I said, I’m a child of the 1950s. I will continue to resist seat belts and helmets. Heck, I’ll even play a game of lawn darts if anyone has them. And I have no intention of wearing face-masks 24/7. I guess I like to live on the edge.

(I would like to give a tip of the hat to A.R. in Dunedin for the inspiration for this piece).

Keep the Faith!

P.S. – For a listing of my books, click HERE.

EDITORS NOTE: This Bryce is Right podcast is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. All trademarks both marked and unmarked belong to their respective companies.

Rand Paul Blasts Transgender Biden Nominee For Endorsing Sex Changes For Young Children

Kentucky Republican Sen. Rand Paul, during a Senate confirmation hearing, railed against President Joe Biden’s nominee for assistant Health and Human Services secretary, Dr. Rachel Levine, a transgender health official in Pennsylvania, over Levine’s support for gender reassignment surgery.

“According to the WHO, gender mutilation is recognized internationally as a violation of human rights,” Paul said. “American culture is now normalizing the idea that minors can be given hormones to prevent the biological development of their secondary sexual characteristics. … Do you believe that minors are capable of making such a life-changing decision as changing one’s sex?”

Levine gave a non-answer.

Thank you for your interest in this question. Transgender medicine is a very complex and nuanced field,” Levine said. “If I am fortunate enough to be confirmed as the assistant secretary of health, I will look forward to working with you and your office.”

Paul pressed further. “The specific question was about minors, let’s be a little more specific since you evaded the question,” Paul said. “Do you support the government intervening to override the parent’s consent to give a child puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and/or amputation surgery of breasts and genetalia? You have said that you’re willing to accelerate the protocols for street kids.”

Paul highlighted the story of Keira Bell, a 23-year-old woman who read online at a young age about transsexuals and thought that’s what she might be before pursuing gender reassignment medicine she now deeply regrets.

“She ended up getting these puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, she had her breasts amputated,” Paul said, going on to cite Bell’s present anguish over her teenage decision: “‘The rest of my life will be negatively affected,’ she said.”

“What I am alarmed at is that you’re not willing to say absolutely minors shouldn’t be making decisions to amputate their breasts or to amputate their genitalia,” Paul said.

Levine offered the same non-answer, saying, “Senator, transgender medicine is a very complex and nuanced field.”

Paul wrapped up his time outlining the double-standards wielded by Democrats who raised hysteria over the malaria medication hydroxychloroquine used for the novel Wuhan coronavirus but now actively promote scientifically dubious treatments for minors with gender dysphoria.

“We wouldn’t let you have a cut sewn up in the ER, but you’re willing to let a minor take things that prevent their puberty and you think they get that back? You give a woman testosterone enough that she grows a beard. You think she’s going to go back looking like a woman when you stop the testosterone?” Paul said. “None of these drugs have been approved for this. They’re all being used off-label. I find it ironic that the left that went nuts over hydroxychloroquine being used possibly for COVID are not alarmed that these hormones are being used off-label. There’s no long-term studies. We don’t know what happens to them.”

Dozens of people, however, Paul noted, regret the permanent changes they went through at a young age.

Left-wing activists in the corporate board rooms of Silicon Valley wielding unprecedented influence in the modern American public square have suppressed dissent on widespread acceptance of transgender medicine targeting children. Last weekend, billionaire Jeff Bezos’ Amazon pulled conservative scholar Ryan T. Anderson’s 2018 book “When Harry Became Sally: Responding to the Transgender Moment” from its online store after a three-year stint. Now when online shoppers search for the book on the mega-retailer website, the second book to come up is “Let Harry Become Sally.”

Anderson’s book was also pulled from the Apple Books app but has since been restored.

Levine’s nomination to a top public health role runs at odds with the administration’s unofficial slogan to “Believe in Science.”

Levine botched the coronavirus response in Pennsylvania and promoted the idea that Americans ought to be wearing masks through the end of 2021, an anti-science statement in line with remarks from Anthony Fauci, teeing up the idea that Americans ought to wear face masks forever.

Levine’s appointment to the senior post, however, marks another progressive win for the identity politics-obsessed Democratic administration choosing a transgender person for the role.

*****

This article first appeared February 25, 2021 at The Federalist and is reproduced with permission.

MCLAUGHLIN: The Republican Party Changed Forever — For The Better — Under President Donald Trump

In 2020, President Donald J. Trump created one of the greatest voter coalitions in American political history, bringing millions of new voters into the Republican Party and expanding the GOP’s vote among African Americans and Hispanic Americans.

The electoral votes that decided this election were determined by a mere 44,000 votes out of a record almost 160 million ballots cast. And two of the three states that decided the electoral outcome — Georgia and Wisconsin — were decided themselves by contested recounts.

These states, and the nation at large, did not see Independents and Republicans who voted for Trump in 2016 swing away from him. They came out and voted for Trump and Republicans again.

Instead, a record turnout of early, pro-Democrat Party voters was facilitated by changes to state election laws to create mail-in ballots and drop boxes funded by hundreds of millions of dollars from pro-Biden corporate non-profits like Secure Democracy.

President Trump’s record 74+ million Republican votes built a solid foundation that down-ballot Republicans benefitted from. Many of these voters solely came out for Trump, and the candidates on the Republican ticket reaped the rewards, as our poll indicated Trump voters supported down-ballot Republicans at least 90% of the time.

During his own reelection campaign, Trump campaigned extensively for the entire Republican ticket, participating in over 50 TeleRallies for congressional candidates and issuing hundreds of tweets for Republican candidates.

The results? President Trump’s popularity among folks who otherwise would not come out and vote enabled Republicans to gain 12 seats in Congress with zero losses by GOP incumbents. Every House Republican in a tossup race won. A record 35 Republican women won election to Congress. Republicans won 59 of 98 partisan state legislative chambers – a net gain of 2 state houses and 141 seats across the country.

Election Day voting has decreased from 76% in 2004 to only 36% in 2020, while early voting, mostly by mail and drop box, increased to 64% in 2020. In many cases these changes led to charges they enabled ballot harvesting, which need to be re-examined as state election reforms are considered.

According to our 2020 post-election poll, 29% of all voters voted by U.S. mail and they preferred Biden 61%-39%. Another 11% said they voted by drop box and they voted for Biden 68%-32%.

Those who voted early in person were virtually even—Biden 51% to Trump 49%, and among those who voted on Election Day Trump won big 62%-36%. It is evident by the data that if Trump had not worked around the clock to rally the GOP vote, it would have been a Biden landslide.

This is why Trump is leading the effort to preserve honest elections and ballot integrity, and Republicans solidly agree. We need changes so this doesn’t happen again.

Never before has a president in American history challenged the permanent Washington political class the way Trump has, and never before has a President been persecuted by the political establishment the way Trump has been.

But just like both phony impeachments, these attacks have backfired and made him even stronger among the American people.

Our January poll of battleground state voters, 74% said impeachment was politically motivated to stop Trump from running again, and 65% agreed by continuing to attack Trump, Biden and Pelosi were making things worse and keeping the country divided. 77% thought Congress should be expediting the Trump-created vaccine and economic aid over impeachment.

And 48% to 36%, they were less likely to vote for a member of Congress who voted for impeachment, including 80% of Trump voters and 76% among Republicans.

Rasmussen Reports found among Republicans that 72% want the Republican Party going forward to be more like Trump, while only 20% prefer to be more like the average GOP member of Congress. 73% say Trump is still the kind of leader the Republican Party needs.

Country Club Beltway Republicans need to realize the Republican Party has been changed forever — for the better — because of Trump’s leadership and they need to stop blaming him for their failings. In order to regain the House and Senate in 2022, the GOP needs to continue to broaden the Trump coalition and not discourage Trump voters from coming out again in 2022 and 2024.

Like Judge Smails found out in the classic movie Caddyshack, the caddies are now running the country club.

They need to learn to live with it.

COLUMN BY

JOHN MCLAUGHLIN

John McLaughlin is CEO and Partner at McLaughlin & Associates.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Trump Endorses Primary Opponent For Congressman Who Voted To Impeach

‘He Is The Leader Of Our Party’: Jim Jordan Dismisses ‘A Handful Of People’ In GOP Who Oppose Trump

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

Federal Reserve Bank of New York Study Finds Biden-Harris ‘Equity’ Proposal Would Make Racial Inequality Worse

A recent Federal Reserve Bank of New York found that a monetary shock would raise stock prices by 5 percent, raising the annual incomes of white people by as much as 300 percent more than those of blacks.


The Biden-Harris administration has made stamping out racial “inequities” the focus of all its policies. But the government interventions proposed to close these gaps will only “accentuate inequalities for extended periods” of time, according to a recent study.

Days before the 2020 election, Kamala Harris announced a plan to replace equality with equity in government policymaking. Rather than treating people equally, politicians committed to advancing equity would try to assure an equality of outcome between racial and ethnic groups. In one of the many executive orders Joe Biden signed on his first day in office, the president promised an “ambitious whole-of-government equity agenda” to fight “systemic racism.”

This includes the prospect of instrumentalizing the Federal Reserve’s control over monetary policy to equalize wealth across racial categories. His campaign platform, which pledges to “strengthen the Federal Reserve’s focus on racial economic gaps,” states that “the Fed should aggressively enhance its surveillance and targeting of persistent racial gaps in jobs, wages, and wealth” and then report “what actions the Fed is taking through its monetary and regulatory policies to close these gaps.”

The idea has a full slate of supporters, who want to add effecting racial equity to the Federal Reserve’s two existing mandates of “maximum employment and price stability.” Elizabeth Warren, Kirsten Gillibrand, and Maxine Waters introduced the Federal Reserve Racial and Economic Equity Act last year, which instructs the Federal Open Market Committee “to minimize  and  eliminate  racial  disparities  in  employment,  wages,  wealth,  and  access  to  affordable credit.” And Rep. Ayanna Pressley raised the issue with Fed Chairman Jerome Powell during a House Financial Services Committee hearing last Tuesday.

It is, shall we say, a going concern.

These politicians would have the Fed keep interest rates artificially low and the monetary supply growing, based on the Phillips Curve. Jared Bernstein, one of Biden’s economic advisers, believes that lower interest rates and what are traditionally regarded as inflationary policies will juice the economy enough to decimate persistent pockets of poverty.

As it turns out, the policy would backfire, thanks to the law of unintended consequences.

The Federal Reserve Bank of New York tested the impact of a “monetary policy shock” on the black-white racial gap. While such a “policy increases employment of black households more than white households, the overall effects are small” – a mere 0.2 percentage points.

But the “solution” creates two new problems. Low interest rates and inflation punish savers and reward investors by making more capital available and driving people to seek a higher rate of return in the stock market. The study found that a monetary shock would raise stock prices by 5 percent, raising the annual incomes of white people by 200 percent to 300 percent more than those of blacks.

The Fed also made the startling discovery that inflationary policies result in inflation. The proposed policy would raise “house prices by over 2% over a five year period.” That will only deepen the 30-point home ownership gap between whites and blacks. Home ownership accounts for approximately 60 percent of the average household’s wealth.

In the end, the equity-building policy actually “exacerbates the wealth difference between black and white households, because black households own less financial assets that appreciate in value.”

Critical theory’s single-minded focus on “equity” constitutes a four-fold error of collectivism:

  • It assumes an individual’s race, sex, ethnicity, or other self-identification category is the most important aspect of his or her identity;
  • It asserts that the individual’s well-being is controlled by membership in these discreet groups
  • It presumes the individual’s lot in life can be dictated by government intervention; and
  • It posits that the individual has been harmed when his or her income, wealth, and living standards increase if other groups benefit even more at the same time, widening the gap between population cohorts.

Measuring “wealth inequality” has its share of empirical pitfalls. But critical theory causes its true believers to advocate for policies that are self-defeating on their own terms.

This is all the more frustrating, since the United States has recent experience in how to improve the status of the poor and minorities. President Donald Trump’s administration did not rely on Fed policy to achieve record-breaking employment for blacks and Hispanics. These results came about through a combination of tax cuts and deregulation, which freed the pent-up creativity and innovation that had been lying dormant under more restrictive policies. While they were active, black and Hispanic wealth grew by 1,100% to 2,200% more than whites, according to the Federal Reserve:

Between 2016 and 2019, median wealth rose for all race and ethnicity groups … Growth rates for the 2016–19 period were faster for [b]lack and Hispanic families, rising 33 and 65 percent, respectively, compared to [w]hite families, whose wealth rose 3 percent, and other families, whose wealth rose 8 percent.

These gains came from a president whom critical theory proponents regard as indifferent or hostile to minorities’ interests. The legislation contained no special provisions to boost “equity” by increasing minority wealth. Yet these policies, which generally tended to reduce the role of government in people’s lives, succeeded because they allowed individuals greater margin to pursue their God-given talents for the service of others.

Perhaps the wisest counsel to reduce racial inequities comes from the Apostle James: “My brothers and sisters, believers in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ must not show favoritism” (James 2:1).

This Acton Institute article was republished with permission.

COLUMN BY

Ben Johnson

Rev. Ben Johnson is a senior editor at the Acton Institute. His work focuses on the principles necessary to create a free and virtuous society in the transatlantic sphere (the U.S., Canada, and Europe).

RELATED ARTICLES:

Cuomo’s Controversial COVID Policy Linked to Higher Nursing Home Deaths, Study Finds

Dolly Parton’s Powerful Message About the American Dream (and What Her Critics Get Wrong)

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

Understanding How Much Big Tobacco Is Driving Nicotine & Marijuana Vaping

Not only does Big Tobacco continue to find ways to lure children into buying new nicotine products, it is moving in on the marijuana industry to scale pot sales up to or beyond the level of diminishing tobacco sales. Most people are unaware of the growing relationship between marijuana and tobacco companies. But that doesn’t mean it’s not happening.

Altria (formerly Phillip Morris) owns 35 percent of Juul, has registered to lobby for pot legalization in Virginia, and is patenting two marijuana vaping devices in the US, according to Cannabis Wire. “Altria supports the federal legalization of cannabis under an appropriate regulatory framework. As a stakeholder in this industry, we intend to work with policy makers and regulators in support of a transparent, responsible, and equitable operating environment for the sale of cannabis,” Altria spokesperson George Parman told the publication. (Emphasis added.)

Big wins for Big Tobacco

The Grocer is an English magazine that caters to grocery and convenience stores in Great Britain. The Brits haven’t caught up yet with American concerns about vaping, first with the EVALI diseases and deaths we experienced last year, second with the stunning increases in vaping by adolescents who have never smoked, and third with the fact that many are vaping THC as well as nicotine.

So, the Brits are selling vape pens and e-liquids in grocery stores. Parents may want to register to access this free article to see some of the best pictures of vape-pen brands available in one place.

It turns out that Altria is not the only tobacco company in the vaping business. Vype is made by British American Tobacco. BAT also is test-marketing Vuse to enable people to vape CBD. Logic is Japan Tobacco International’s vape pen. Subscribe to Logic’s emails and JTI will sell you a starter vape pen for $1.00. Blu is made by Imperial Tobacco. In fact, the top 10-selling vape pens in the UK are all made by tobacco companies. Because the pandemic has shut down most vape shops in England, the vape brands of the tobacco giants have seen soaring sales there.

Think that will change when the pandemic is behind us? Doubtful.

Read The Grocer article here.


At the speed of Juul: Measuring the Twitter conversation related to ENDS and Juul across space and time (2017–2018)

Yoonsang Kim and colleagues at the universities of Chicago and Georgia State as well as VeraCite Inc, in La Jolla, California, collected Juul-related and other electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) data on Twitter between 2017 and 2018. They found the amount of Juul tweets increased 67 times, from 18,849 tweets in the first quarter of 2017 to 1,287,028 tweets in the last quarter of 2018.

They also found that Juul tweets spread rapidly across the nation. By the end of the study period, people in 84 percent of US counties were posting about Juul.

Further, despite intense scrutiny by the FDA and Juul’s voluntary effort to end its social media account, Juul tweets intensified rather than abated.

Tweets about other ENDS products decreased by 25 percent as Juul tweets increased.

Read full text of this Tobacco Control article published by BMJ Journals here.


Do JUUL and e-cigarette flavors change risk perceptions of adolescents? Evidence from a national survey
Kiersten Strombotne and colleagues from the Universities of Boston, Oxford, and Yale conducted a national survey of 1,610 high school students aged 14-18 who had heard of either e-cigarettes or Juul.

They found, although no scientific evidence supports this, that youth believe certain flavors make e-juice less harmful than other flavors in both Juuls and other e-cigarette brands. The researchers say their findings support the idea that a flavor ban could reduce the appeal of both Juul and other e-cigarettes and result in protecting adolescent health.

Read full text of this Tobacco Control article published by BMJ Journals here.


E-cigarette and cigarette purchasing among young adults before and after implementation of California’s tobacco 21 policy
California raised the minimum age for tobacco purchases to 21 in 2016. Little is known about the effect this T21 law has had on reducing underage tobacco product sales.

Sara Schiff and colleagues from the University of California, Los Angeles analyzed data from a population-based prospective cohort in southern California the year before and after the state passed T21. This involved 1,609 people ages 18 and 19 before and 1,502 people ages 19 and 20 after passage of the law.

Among past-month users, the researchers also examined where participants purchased tobacco products before and after the law, whether they were refused purchase based on their age after T21, as well as whether participants perceived if it were more difficult to buy cigarettes and e-cigarettes then.

They found negligible changes after the law passed. Some 64 percent of past-month users bought cigarettes from gas stations and 82 percent bought e-cigarettes from vape shops despite their underage status. About half thought it was harder to do so but were still able to. The researchers conclude that better enforcement of T21 is needed to achieve what the law intended: to reduce tobacco use by youth.

Read full text of this Tobacco Control article published by BMJ Journals here.


What parents need to know about teen vaping and what they can do about it
JAMA Pediatrics has published a Pediatrics Patient Page on Vaping for parents of school-age children.

The page summarizes:

  • what the health risks are for teens who vape,
  • how to tell if your teen is vaping,
  • what parents can do to prevent teens from vaping,
  • what parents can do if their teen is addicted to vaping, and
  • sources for more information about teen vaping.

Access this JAMA Pediatrics resource for information about adolescent vaping here.

©National Families in Action. All rights reserved.