Science Archives - Page 5 of 133

Trumps’ AI Action Plan Sets the Course on American Leadership in Artificial Intelligence

July 25, 2025

By The Geller Report

President Trump signs three executive orders on AI: — Accelerating permitting to build data center infrastructure — Promoting the export of American AI models abroad — Protecting Americans from woke AI models driven by Radical Left ideology at the expense of accuracy

WATCH: Trump signs 3 key AI orders to expand data centres, export U.S. AI models

President Trump’s AI executive orders are a decisive step toward reclaiming America’s technological sovereignty. Accelerating data center permitting cuts through D.C.’s bureaucratic quagmire—streamlining construction while sidestepping environmentalist roadblocks that have long stifled progress. Exporting U.S.-built AI models ensures global standards align with American innovation, not Beijing’s authoritarian framework or Brussels’ overregulated stagnation.

The third order targeting ideological capture in AI systems is critical: agencies like the EPA and DOE have weaponized “equity” metrics to distort algorithms, prioritizing DEI compliance over factual accuracy. This isn’t about censorship—it’s about dismantling a system where federal contracts reward politically-aligned models that erase biological reality, undermine meritocracy, and gaslight the public.

The orders mirror the urgency of bills like the AI Export Competitiveness Act (H.R. 7023), which prioritizes dominance over diplomacy. While critics whine about “safety,” they ignore how delayed permits and woke mandates have already ceded ground to DeepSeek and other Chinese rivals. America’s AI future must be built on efficiency, truth, and unrivaled infrastructure—not held hostage by climate alarmism or diversity quotas.

Rapid Response:

President Trump signs three executive orders on AI:

Accelerating permitting to build data center infrastructure
Promoting the export of American AI models abroad
Protecting Americans from woke AI models driven by Radical Left ideology at the expense of accuracy.

The White House:

The administration’s action plan: America must have the most powerful AI systems in the world, but we must also lead the world in creative and transformative application of those systems. Ultimately, it is the uses of technology that create economic growth, new jobs, and scientific advancements. America must invent and embrace productivity enhancing AI uses that the world wants to emulate. Achieving this requires the Federal government to create the conditions where private sector-led innovation can flourish (AI.Gov).

Christopher Rufo: Incredible: Trump has issued an executive order saying that the government will not purchase AI systems that default to black George Washington, refuse to celebrate the achievements of white people, or argue that misgendering someone is worse than a nuclear apocalypse

Executive Order: This order establishes a coordinated national effort to support the American AI industry by promoting the export of full-stack American AI technology packages.

Trump signs executive order banning government from using woke AI systems | The Post Millenial

“We don’t want woke AI.”

President Donald Trump on Wednesday signed an executive order furthering American AI dominance and banning the federal government from using any AI systems that are steeped in woke ideologies like critical race and gender theory.

Ahead of the signing, Trump said “One and for all we are getting rid of woke. Is that okay? Because I know you had to hire all woke people.”

An aide announced the series of executive orders on AI, presenting them to Trump, saying “the first executive order that we’ve prepared for your signature today relates to federal permitting for data center infrastructure. As you mentioned during your speech, this is a crucial issue affecting the entire AI industry. What this executive order will do is establish fast track permitting and ensure that the federal government is working to get data centers approved and through the permitting pipeline as quickly as possible.”

“It’s absolutely essential,” said the aide, presenting the second order, “that American AI models and American the American AI industry dominates the future of this industry around the world. What this next Executive Order will do is is promote, through various instrumentalities of the federal government, the export abroad of American AI models to ensure American AI dominance in the future.”

The last order in the stack relieved the government of having to use AI technology that is partisan in any way. “We don’t want woke AI,” said the aide, referencing Trump’s speech ahead of the signing. “We want AI models based on accurate information that give accurate information and accurate answers. This executive order will ensure that when the federal government procures or promotes different AI models, that those AI models are ideologically neutral, that they don’t embrace wokeism and critical race theory and all of these terrible theories that have done so much damage to our country.”

Christopher Rufo, who was working on anti-woke initiatives during Trump’s first term, said “Incredible: Trump has issued an executive order saying that the government will not purchase AI systems that default to black George Washington, refuse to celebrate the achievements of white people, or argue that misgendering someone is worse than a nuclear apocalypse.”

Read more at Post Millennial.

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLES:

AI in America: Removing Barriers to American Leadership in Artificial Intelligence

President Trump Marks Six Months in Office with Historic Successes

Trump Announces ‘Massive’ Trade Deal with Japan, Setting Tariffs at 15%

Skydance Tells Trump They’ll Conduct ‘Comprehensive’ Editorial Bias Review’ at CBS and End DEI Initiatives at Paramount and Bolster News Integrity at CBS

The post Trumps’ AI Action Plan Sets the Course on American Leadership in Artificial Intelligence appeared first on Dr. Rich Swier.

Democrats Go on the Defensive as Mamdani Moves the Party Further Left

July 24, 2025

By Family Research Council

Journalist Mark Halperin — who first reported former President Joe Biden’s decision to drop out of the 2024 election — claims House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) is not supportive of Zohran Mamdani’s bid for New York City’s mayor. In an interview with Axios, Halperin explained, “Hakeem Jeffries strongly believes that if Mamdani wins, [Jeffries] can’t win the majority.”

Although Jeffries denies this statement, he can’t deny that Democrats have been notably divided over Mamdani’s campaign, and multiple prominent Democrats — such as Jeffries and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) — have not yet endorsed him. When asked about a possible endorsement during an interview, Jeffries said, “I didn’t get involved in that primary election, and I don’t know him well.”

After a sit-down meeting with Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) member Mamdani last week, Jeffries showed that he was still not ready to endorse Mamdani but will “reconvene with other members of the [New York] delegation and high-level community leaders in Brooklyn upon [Mamdani’s] return to the country.”

Some other rank-and-file members have also been distancing themselves from Mamdani, such as Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.) who emphasized that Mamdani was not “speaking for our party.” Even the media is catching on after CNN’s Chief Data Analyst Harry Enton claimed the “Democratic establishment” is the biggest opponent of Mamdani’s Democratic nomination. “We have seen poll after poll after poll showing Democratic voters fed up with their leaders in Washington, fed up with their leaders in government,” Enton highlighted.

Although Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) endorsed Mamdani’s campaign during the primaries, he reportedly insisted that Mamdani censor his anti-Semitic views and statements while the New York mayoral candidate was visiting Washington. According to a close source, Sanders told Mamdani to “not let himself seem like he’s minimizing the fear Jews in New York and elsewhere feel from the threat of hate against them.” Mamdani seems to be distancing himself from his former statements supporting the phrase “globalize the intifada” — a term which notably encourages violence against Jews. Though Mamdani has not condemned the phrase, he has claimed he will “discourage” its use.

The stark contrast between Mayor Eric Adams’s (D) trip to Washington after his primary victory and Mamdani’s post-primary trip to Washington is also telling. After Adams’s primary victory in 2021, then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) invited him to speak to the House Democratic caucus and was introduced to then-President Joe Biden in the White House. But Mamdani’s four-hour Washington tour was absent of interactions with any leaders of the Democratic Party.

Republicans will look to harness the division within the party and expose the Democrats’ new leftward movements. “The radical left and the socialist wing of the Democratic Party is moving everybody to the left,” Nicole Malliotakis, the only Congressional Republican from New York City, highlighted. “[A]nd these folks who are supposedly centrists are afraid of their shadow so they’re just going along for self-preservation.”

Other radical statements from Mamdani are creating riffs in the party, such as his free-housing objectives. “If there was any system that could guarantee each person housing, whether you call it the abolition of private property, or you call it a statewide housing guarantee, it is preferable to what is going on right now,” he said in 2020. His campaign website outlines his plans to achieve this goal, including “constructing 200,000 new units over the next 10 years” from “public dollars.”

His other priorities, such as free child care, housing, transportation, and government-owned grocery stores, are key aspects of the DSA agenda. “If we want everyone to be full participants in the economy, we need worker ownership of the means of production,” Mamdani wrote on X. The self-proclaimed socialist has not given up on his radical, communist ideas, and other rank-and-file members on the Left have shown their support.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) announced her endorsement of Mamdani in a YouTube video last month promoting early voting. Democratic House members like Rep. Luz Rivas (Calif.) and Rep. Lateefah Simon (Calif.) attended an AOC-organized breakfast event for Mamdani and left “inspired” and claimed they “learned a lot.”

The country will see how the candidate’s socialist objectives play out and how long their deep flaws will stay hidden. Sources such as the Washington Examiner have already exposed the significant mathematical errors in Mamdani’s plan for government-owned grocery stores, claiming his plans to “redirect city funds” are not as simple as they seem — it will take 42 years for Mamdani to raise the $140 million he plans to spend.

A July survey conducted by HarrisX evaluated 585 of the city’s registered voters and shows Mamdani leading the race, but his margins are closing. According to the poll, Mamdani is leading with 26% of the votes, former Governor Andrew Cuomo (D) with 23%, Republican candidate Curtis Sliwa with 22%, and incumbent Mayor Adams with 13%.

AUTHOR

Caily Shriver

Caily Shriver serves as an intern at Family Research Council.

RELATED ARTICLES:

‘Do Not Come Back’ — GOP Rep’s Bill Sends Stark Warning To Criminal Illegals

Congress Must Investigate, Expose the Left’s Taxpayer-Funded NGO Complex

The Washington Stand is Family Research Council’s outlet for news and commentary from a biblical worldview. The Washington Stand is based in Washington, D.C. and is published by FRC, whose mission is to advance faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview. We invite you to stand with us by partnering with FRC.

In a shocking about face, the United Nations comes out against transgenderism; the question is why, and why now?

July 23, 2025

By Leo Hohmann

New UN study says transgender identities ‘actively erasing women and girls while placing vulnerable children at risk.’

We have some shocking news today out of the United Nations.

A U.N. draft report has warned that the push to elevate transgender identities is actively erasing women and girls, while placing vulnerable children at risk.

As noted by Slay News, the report affirms what many critics of gender ideology have long feared.

Led by Reem Alsalem, a Jordanian human rights scholar who serves as the U.N.’s Special Rapporteur on Violence Against Women and Girls, the report takes a hard line against transgender policies, warning that gender dysphoria is “socially contagious.”

The report asserts that the rise of transgenderism is negatively impacting women’s rights worldwide and seeks to “erase” real females.

The U.N. report, titled Sex-based violence against women and girls: new frontiers and emerging issues, denounces the efforts to unlink biological sex from the definition of “men” and “women.”

It further states that such moves are undermining women’s hard-won legal protections.

Alsalem describes this as an effort to “erase” women as a distinct legal category, calling it a form of “coercive inclusion” that forces women to sacrifice their own rights for the sake of others.

She writes:

“We have seen a concerted international push to delink the definition of men and women from their biological sex and erase the legal category of ‘women.’ Women are therefore being denied their rightful recognition as a distinct category in law and society.”

The report also criticizes the Orwellian redefining of words and language to erase the biological realities of women.

Terms like “birthing persons,” “menstruators,” and “vagina havers” are used in place of the word “women,” which Alsalem decries as dehumanizing and biologically reductive.

Alsalem rejects the idea that gender identity supersedes biological sex.

The report goes further by condemning the rise of gender-affirming treatments for children, which has become a deeply controversial issue in Western societies, though roundly condemned in countries like Russia and across the Global South.

Alsalem highlights the concerning co-occurrence of gender dysphoria and autism among children.

She points to the long-lasting harm caused by socially and medically transitioning children, including “persistence or intensification of psychological distress, body dissatisfaction, infertility, early onset of menopause, and sexual dysfunction.”

HERE’S MY TAKE: This is a hard rebuke, leaving no room for misunderstanding. The U.N. is now fully against the transgender mania that has been front and center for at least the last seven or eight years.

I have long believed that the transgender issue was being used by the globalists as a temporary distraction. Once it had served its purpose, it would be cast aside like a hot potato.

So what was its purpose?

Transgenderism is such a lightning-rod issue with conservatives, and rightly so, that it easily diverted attention away from other issues that the globalists see as more important for permanent implementation. Things like digital IDs and digital/programmable currencies. Under the “conservative” regime of Donald Trump, both of these essential tools of the new digital world order are being built out and readied for implementation. Trump just announced his new digital Stablecoin and he’s enforcing the transition to a biometric “Real ID.” These are the types of “advances” that are critical for building out the infrastructure of the New World Order. Transgenderism was always a side issue of temporary value to the globalists.

In other words, if your plan is to permanently strip people of their freedom, you don’t need rampant transgenderism. If your ultimate goal is to usher in a one-world government and global digital surveillance state, you can do it without transgenderism but you can’t do it without digital currencies and digital IDs.

So to see perhaps the world’s foremost globalist body, the United Nations, suddenly shift gears and come out against transgenderism, while refreshing on the one hand, it is also scary. Why is it scary? Because it signals to me that they are now confident that they no longer need this throw-away distractive issue to serve as cover while they sneak into society their more important totalitarian mechanisms. They’re confident they have enough support now to put the big game-changing policies in place that will take the world in a direction they have long sought to take it — total information awareness in a technocratic AI surveillance state where all human movement, all human consumption and all financial transactions will be tracked in real time, the makings for a true social-credit scoring system.

People, we are closer than ever to the globalist New World Order that we all knew was lurking behind the facade of our so-called “free society.” This is a world order where they, the AI-enabled technocrats who control the algorithms, decide what we eat, where we travel, who we meet, and what we are ALLOWED to spend our money on. Rights are being gradually replaced with privileges. Only the privileged with high social credit scores will be allowed to do certain things. Those who are disobedient will just have their money turned off, or restricted to a certain area for purchase of certain essentials.

Now you know why Fox News and the other more establishment “conservative” media spent so much time harping about transgenders the last seven years — transgenders in sports, transgenders in schools, transgenders in libraries, transgenders dancing in front of small children. It was an issue that could easily get the patriotic Christian right all riled up, disoriented and distracted, sapping much of the energy it would have required to stop the march toward a digital slave state. Now we find out that transgenderism was never that important to the globalists. It was just a throw-away issue, to the point where some of them are now actually condemning it.

I’m not saying this issue is going to disappear completely. We’re not there yet. But it’s the beginning of the end for transgenders being treated as one of the most-favored groups in society.

Don’t mistake this shifting position as the U.N. somehow coming out of the darkness and into the light. They’re not. They never will be on our side. The real battle is just beginning.

Please visit Leo’s Newsletter substack.

VIDEO: Dr. Mark Trozzi at Pembroke, Ontario on July 14, 2025

July 22, 2025

By Vlad Tepes Blog

Write up at RAIR.

This was a fairly casual and informal chat compared to previous presentations with Dr. Trozzi. But there are bombshells and gems in his talk in Pembroke.

I got a question in which is in a separate video at the bottom.

Here is the main portion of the talk

Mark Trozzi July 15 2025 Main talk

A more conversational part covering a lot of subjects.

Dr. Mark Trozzi July 15, 2025 Q&A conversation

And a question I managed to get in at the end. Unfortunately, it wasn’t a very positive question or answer. Expected cancer rates amongst those with multiple mRNA shots.

Dr. Mark Trozzi answers question about Cancer from the shots looking forward

The post VIDEO: Dr. Mark Trozzi at Pembroke, Ontario on July 14, 2025 appeared first on Dr. Rich Swier.

Use It or Lose It

July 20, 2025

By Linda Goudsmit

Use it or lose it is the colloquial definition of neuroplasticity, defined in more technical terms by BetterHelp online in its, February 19, 2025, article “What ‘Use It Or Lose It’ Means in Neuropsychology“:

Neuroplasticity is the ability of the central nervous system to form and reorganize neural connections in response to injury or a learning event. This trait allows the human brain to adapt and change depending on events or experiences. Human brains can adapt through learning when an individual practices a task repeatedly. However, if they do not follow through with this repetition, this adaptive ability is lost, and they lose these possible new neural pathways until they return to the practice. This phenomenon is often referred to as the central nervous system’s “use it or lose it” insurance policy.

Why is neuroplasticity so important? Because neuroplasticity is the process that establishes agency in human beings, and because neurological processes can be used constructively or exploited for destruction. In my 2024 book, Space Is No Longer the Final Frontier—Reality Is, Chapter 5: America Requires an Education Revolution explains the concept of agency, and how agency is required for freedom in a constitutional republic.

Reading is the essential foundational skill individual citizens use to access information and make informed decisions. Together, reading, writing, and arithmetic are the communication tools that equip children with agency. Understanding the psychological concept of agency is extremely important to our discussion. Encyclopedia.com ^[i] defines and discusses agency:

The concept of agency as a psychological dimension refers to the process of behaving with intentionality. Human beings exercise agency when they intentionally influence their own functioning, environments, life circumstances, and destiny. To posit that human beings have agency is to contend that they are self-organizing, proactive, self-regulating, and self-reflecting rather than reactively shaped by environmental forces or driven by concealed inner impulses.

Reading provides agency for learning because textbooks, including math and science textbooks, require the ability to read. Reading provides a sense of independence, accomplishment, and self-sufficiency. Competence is the mother of self-esteem, and learning to read is a seismic shift in a child’s perception of self. The child begins to feel his or her power. Encyclopedia.com continues:

To exercise human agency, people must believe in their capability to attain given ends. These self-efficacy beliefs are the foundation of human motivation, well-being, and accomplishment. Whatever other factors serve as guides and motivators, they are rooted in the core belief that one has the power to effect changes by one’s actions, that one’s locus of control is internal rather than external. This is because unless people believe that their actions can produce the outcomes they desire, they have little incentive to act or to persevere in the face of difficulties.

Radical leftist progressive education’s primary tool of destruction exploits neuroplasticity by deliberately replacing phonics with whole-word instruction to teach reading. The consequential illiteracy rate in America today is a national scandal.

In 2021, education reformers Samuel Blumenfeld and Alex Newman published a stunning book, Crimes of the Educators: How Utopians Are Using Government Schools to Destroy American Children.^[ii] The book describes the intentional exploitation of public education to dumb down American students and condition them for life in a socialist state:

The plan to dumb down America was launched in 1898 by socialist John Dewey, outlined in an essay titled “The Primary-Education Fetich.” In it he showed his fellow progressives how to transform America into a collectivist utopia by taking over the public schools and destroying the literacy of millions of Americans. The plan has been so successfully implemented that it is now a fact that half of America’s adult population are functionally illiterate. They can’t read their country’s Declaration of Independence. They can’t even read their high school diplomas.

The method of achieving this was simply changing the way children are taught to read in their schools. The utopians got rid of the intensive phonics method of instruction and imposed a look-say, sight, or whole-word method that forces children to read English as if it were Chinese. The method is widely used in today’s public schools, which is why there are so many failing public schools that cannot teach children the basics. This can only be considered a blatant and evil form of child abuse. (Crimes of the Educators, p. xii)

Phonics instruction follows the rules of repetition in neuroplasticity by requiring children to learn the sounds of letters and then teaching them to sound out the word letter-by-letter. In this way children acquire agency––they can read any word put in front of them, and a world of knowledge welcomes them in. Children taught with the whole-word method are expected to see sequences of unfamiliar shapes and memorize them. Whole-word instruction violates the rules of neuroplasticity. Educational reformer Bruce Deitrick Price explains this dynamic in two short paragraphs on pages 22-23 in his extraordinary 2017 book, Saving K-12: What Happened to Our Public Schools? How Do We Fix Them?^[iii]:

Just for a moment, consider the silly theory that our top educators put forward. There should be no sounding out of letters and syllables; instead, children should memorize words as graphic designs or diagrams. Put yourself in the head of a kid showing up for first grade. The teacher points to a design like “xhyld” and instructs, “This means house. When you see this say house.” So, can you memorize “xhyld“?

Probably. But will you be able to pick it out from similar designs, of which there are dozens, such as: xhydd, xyhld, xhydl, xyyld, xhdyl, xyjkl, xkyht, xygld, etc. of course, you’ll need to be ready for variations such as XHYDD, XYHLD, XHYDL, XYYLD, XHDYL, XXYJKL, XKYHT, XYGLD. Okay, maybe you have a photographic memory, so you might have a chance. But no ordinary person has even a tiny chance of being literate. You can probably feel the dyslexia creeping into your brain.

The crippling insistence on whole-word instruction is augmented by the sinister campaign to replace actual learning with artificial intelligence (AI) assistants. Marketed for convenience, students are being aggressively encouraged to use and rely on free AI assistant software tools like Grammarly, which can “think” and “write” their papers for them.

It is a diabolical campaign to dumb down the student population, steal their agency, and make them wholly dependent upon technology controlled, curated, and censored by the globalist elite. Garbage in––garbage out (GIGO)! This is an information war, and our nation’s children are the target in both form and content. Curiosity did not kill the cat––convenience did! Convenience is a catastrophic humanitarian hoax that disguises its destructive intent and sells its GIGO content and surveillance capabilities as “Smart” technology.

In a stunning article posted on Gateway Pundit, July 18, 2025, journalist Ben Kew reports, “OpenAI Unveils ‘Agent’ Feature That Can Control Your Computer and Perform Tasks Automatically.” He writes:

OpenAI is preparing to launch a new feature that may mark the latest leap forward in the artificial intelligence revolution.

On Thursday, the company unveiled ChatGPT Agent, a tool designed to carry out tasks independently using its own built-in “virtual computer.”

Consider the name of the AI assistant tool––ChatGPT Agent––which is actually stealing the user’s agency in the name of convenience! In an earlier Gateway Pundit article, on June 21, 2025, Ben Kew reports, “Terrifying MIT Study Finds ChatGPT is Rotting Our Brains.” The study documents how AI assistant tools are interfering with learning and dumbing down the population by exploiting the use it or lose it phenomenon in neuroplasticity. The insidious goal of convenience is exposed as the effort to interrupt the development of critical-thinking skills that provide adults with the ability to rationally assess facts and come to conclusions based on those facts––not on their feelings.

A terrifying new study by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) has found that extensive use of ChatGPT may be rotting our brains.

Researchers at MIT’s Media Lab asked participants to write SAT-style essays while dividing them into three groups: one used ChatGPT, another used Google, and the third relied only on their own knowledge — the “brain-only” group.

Brain activity was tracked using EEG machines, which recorded how engaged different parts of the brain were during the writing process.

The results showed that the ChatGPT group had the lowest brain activity and performed the worst overall in terms of thinking, writing quality, and focus. …

The study warned that relying too much on AI tools like ChatGPT can reduce critical thinking skills, especially in young people.

The lead researcher, Nataliya Kosmyna, said she rushed the findings out because she’s worried about AI being introduced too early in schools.

“What really motivated me to put it out now before waiting for a full peer review is that I am afraid in 6-8 months, there will be some policymaker who decides, ‘let’s do GPT kindergarten,’” she told TIME magazine.

“I think that would be absolutely bad and detrimental,” she continued. “Developing brains are at the highest risk.”

We the people must understand that AI assistant software is the weaponized tool of the globalist elite and designed to alter every aspect of education to steal your child’s agency. AI assistant tools are the tactical soldiers in globalism’s strategic information war being waged against America on the battlefield of your child’s mind. President Trump’s determination to dismantle the radical leftist, anti-American Department of Education is a giant leap forward.

Chapter 5: America Requires an Education Revolution

^[i] Encyclopedia.com; https://www.encyclopedia.com/social-sciences/applied-and-social-sciences-magazines/psychology-agency

^[ii] Crimes of the Educators: How Utopians Are Using Government Schools to Destroy American Children, Samuel Blumenfeld & Alex Newman, Post Hill Press, 2021; https://libertysentinel.org/books/

^[iii] Saving K-12: What Happened to Our Public Schools? How Do We Fix Them?

Please vist Linda’s Pundicity page: goudsmit.pundicity.com and her website: lindagoudsmit.com

Space Is No Longer the Final Frontier––Reality Is is available in paperback, hardback, and ebook formats on barnesandnoble.com, amazon.com, and directly from Ingram in paperback.

The post Use It or Lose It appeared first on Dr. Rich Swier.

New Insightful Report on Key Healthcare Policy Lessons from the COVID-19 Fiasco

July 19, 2025

By John Droz, Jr.

One of the most significant health events of our lifetime

Although it has not yet received much publicity, a very detailed Report was just published by 37 MDs and related experts about their takeaways from the COVID-19 matter. I was thoughtfully sent a copy by the lead author.

Based on four (4) relevant facts, most people would not consider adding to this powerful assessment. These facts are: 1) its extensive length, 2) its four hundred (400) technical citations, 3) the impressive number of its authors, and 4) the wide range of expertise of said authors.

But that’s what Critical Thinking is all about: we should automatically always be considering whether we can improve on: what we are told, what we are doing, what we are saying, etc.

So while you are perusing their Report, please take notes about thoughts you have. Please post them in the Comments below, and I will share them with the authors. Only after doing that, continue on here to see what I wrote back to the lead author.

Note: The lead author did reply to me, and he did not dispute the veracity of any of my eight points (below). His main defense was that the Report was too long already, and adding more material created a problem getting it published at desirable sites (like PubMed).

In that case, my first question is: were any of my points better than any of those that were in the Report?

My second question is: considering the worldwide importance of this analysis, why don’t the authors create a second (more comprehensive) Report and publish that version on the websites of some of their many supporters (like here!)? It seems unproductive to abbreviate what needs to be exposed about this extraordinarily significant international matter, due to the arbitrary word limits of some medical publishing outlets…

My Comments regarding their fine Report —

Thank you for sending that Report, as I had not seen it or heard of it(!).

In my perusal of it, I thought it was very well done.

That said, I would have added some additional comments that seem to be of great significance, yet I did not see them adequately addressed in the Report:

1 — Self-serving parties (and other bad actors) are continuously trying to conflate Science with political science. This is horrifically bad. The public must be educated about the difference, and all health agencies should publicly acknowledge the critically significant distinction.

2 — In the US, the FDA’s EUA process is severely flawed, which enabled bogus solutions to be FDA-approved (think Remdesivir), while quality treatments were passed by (think Vitamin D). [I seem to have been the only person in the world who put this scientific information in a readable table.]

3 — All treatments must be required should show Absolute and Relative efficacy (see my discussion of this). Allowing pharmaceutical companies to only show Relative efficacy is extremely misleading and a MAJOR contributor to the unscientific directions that health agencies took regarding COVID-19 treatments.

Note 1: This recommendation is consistent with an important FDA advisory publication. A key conclusion (see page 60) is that the public is: “unduly influenced when risk information is presented using a relative risk approach; this can result in suboptimal decisions. Thus, an absolute risk format should be used.”

Note 2: This recommendation is also consistent with the CONSORT 2010 Statement — Updated Guidelines for Reporting Parallel Group Randomized Trials, which states: “… presentation of both absolute and relative effect sizes is recommended…”

4 — Pharmaceutical companies should only be allowed to call a treatment “safe and effective” if: a) short and long term safety tests show Absolute risk to be very low, and b) safety tests include a statistical representative sample of subjects with one or more chronic diseases [since the majority of adult Americans have at least one chronic disease]. Note that the CDC appears to say that 95%± of U.S. COVID-19 deaths were people who had an average of four (4) co-morbidities (mostly chronic diseases). COVID is a disease of those with chronic conditions!

Note 1: Where both of these are NOT done, the FDA should be required to include in their EUA Fact Sheets for Healthcare Providers:

“This EUA was granted after a very limited scientific assessment of this product for this medical condition. As a result, the FDA has a low confidence level regarding the efficacy or long-term safety of this product for this condition.”

Note 2: Further, since the safety and efficacy for the majority of Americans from such EUA products has not been scientifically established, the FDA should prohibit any EUA product manufacturer from claiming that their product is Safe or Effective.

5 — All major health agencies (FDA, CDC, etc.) must make patient informed consent a top priority.

For example, the FDA should be obligated to promptly develop and publicize regulations for Informed Consent regarding the public’s taking of EUAs. (These should be comparable to the FDA’s informed consent conditions for clinical trial subjects [which includes many pages of conditions and caveats: see here].) EUA product recipients should effectively be considered to be clinical trial subjects!

6 — The Report’s Conclusion #4 should be broadened as it does not just apply to injections — rather to ALL COVID-19 treatments.

7 — There was not an adequate discussion in the Report about the lack of health agency support for oral pharmaceutical treatments (e.g., Ivermectin) as an alternative to injections. Of course, what oral treatments that did get their blessing (e.g., Paxlovid) were — just like with injections — severely misrepresented regarding safety and efficacy (e.g., see my table).

8 — IMO, there was not an adequate discussion in the Report about the lack of health agency support for the public to commit to boosting their natural immunity — e.g., see here and here. [For example, Dr. Fauci, Dr. Birx, et al appear to have never publicly said a single word about this.]

I would also advise that the Report authors have a 1± page Executive Summary of this important, lengthy, and technical Report.

Regards,

John Droz, Jr.

Physicist

C19Science.info

Here is other information from this scientist that you might find interesting:

I am now offering incentives for you to sign up new subscribers!

I also consider reader submissions on Critical Thinking on my topics of interest.

Check out the Archives of this Critical Thinking substack.

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

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

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

Media Balance Newsletter: a free, twice-a-month newsletter that covers what the mainstream media does not do, on issues from COVID to climate, elections to education, renewables to religion, etc. Here are the Newsletter’s 2025 Archives. Please send me an email to get your free copy. When emailing me, please make sure to include your full name and the state where you live. (Of course, you can cancel the Media Balance Newsletter at any time – but why would you?

The post New Insightful Report on Key Healthcare Policy Lessons from the COVID-19 Fiasco appeared first on Dr. Rich Swier.

The Dr. Rich Swier Report for July 17, 2025

July 17, 2025

By Editorial Board – DrRichSwier.com

The Dr. Rich Swier Report for July 17, 2025

View this email in your browser

100% of 2025 Job Growth Went to Americans Thanks to Mass Deportations

‘You Can’t Use This Feature Right Now’ — How Meta’s Facebook Censors Americans using the ‘Spam Scam’

‘Woke,’ ‘Weak,’ and ‘Out of Touch’: The Crisis of the Democratic Brand

Republicans Advances Recission Bill—With Vice President Vance Breaking Tie Vote

VIDEO: Exodus Cry Films launches July 30, 2025—World Day Against Trafficking in Persons

Dismantling Judeo-Christian Values, One Case at a Time?

Meme of the Week

VIDEO OF THE WEEK
Scottie Scheffler: “I’d much rather be a great father than a great golfer.”

The post The Dr. Rich Swier Report for July 17, 2025 appeared first on Dr. Rich Swier.

EXCLUSIVE: Epstein-Funded MIT Lab Hosted Panel On Giving Pedos Child Sex Robots

July 16, 2025

By The Daily Caller

A Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) lab previously funded in part by Jeffrey Epstein hosted a panel where attendees openly discussed the idea of using “child-size sex robots” to treat pedophiles.

The MIT Media Lab’s July 2016 conference on research questions without “social and moral constraints” included a panel discussion arguing that pedophilia should not be seen as a “moral failing” but rather a medical condition and that the development of “child-size sex robots” is an inevitability, a transcript and video of the event shows.

The Media Lab’s ties to the disgraced financier span a 17-year period in which the lab readily accepted Epstein’s cash donations and facilitated introductions with its scientists on-campus and off, according to a 2020 fact-finding report commissioned by the university. The lab’s director contemplated inviting Epstein to one of its conferences in July 2016, the report states, the same month of the conference where the child-size sex robots were proposed, the only conference the lab hosted that month, according to its website.

“Once child-size sex robots hit the market, which they will, is the use of these robots going to be a healthy outlet for people to express these sexual urges and thus protect children and reduce child abuse? Or is the use of these robots going to encourage, normalize, propagate that behavior?” said one panelist. “We can’t research it [because of reporting restrictions]. But I do wonder whether they’re doing more harm than good in these cases. Because as much as people want these sexual urges — the urges, not the act — to be a moral failing, they are a psychological issue.”

“The issue of normalization, as you brought up. How does that change of society as a whole, and the acceptance of certain kinds of behavior?” another panelist said, while warning about the possibility of the robots being diverted to a black market for entertainment. “The notion of studying sexual deviance and actual normal humans interacting with these things can provide the basis for a deeper understanding of how that operates.”

The previously unreported panel comes to light as the public’s gaze once again fixates on Epstein’s ties to academia, Wall Street and government amid the Trump administration’s move to close the book on investigating the matter any further. The Department of Justice and Federal Bureau of Investigation announced in a July 7 memo that they had uncovered no “client list” and would not make further disclosures, spurring incredulity among the president’s supporters and driving a fracture between U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi and FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino. The memo also stated “Epstein harmed over 1,000 victims.”

MIT did not answer questions from the Daily Caller News Foundation about whether the MIT Media Lab had considered inviting Epstein to the conference where “child-size sex robots” were discussed.

“The panel referenced occurred nearly a decade ago, and we can’t comment on individual programming decisions a department made. Thousands of events take place on our campus each year,” said MIT spokesperson Kimberly Allen in a statement to the DCNF. “As a general practice, we also don’t comment on the individually held and freely expressed views of any particular community member. The views of any individual community member are their own.”

“Following the independent investigation and report you reference, MIT took a number of steps, including institutional reforms to our gift acceptance processes and donating to four nonprofits supporting survivors of sexual abuse,” Allen said.

MIT shuttered its diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) office on May 28 amid President Donald Trump’s crackdown on the Ivy League. But MIT has previously received congressional scrutiny for research on censoring what researchers deemed to be “dangerous digital content” aimed at American conservatives.

A slide from a presentation at the 2016 “Forbidden Research” conference hosted by MIT Media Lab.

The July 2016 conference coincided with frequent contact between Epstein and the Media Lab through then-MIT Media Lab Director Joi Ito, who accepted money from Epstein for the media lab and for his private venture capital funds. Ito also visited Epstein’s properties, including the island of Little St. James. Epstein donated $525,000 to the lab from 2013 to 2017, well after his 2008 conviction for soliciting prostitution from someone under the age of 18, according to the 2020 fact-finding report.

Ito did not respond to a request for comment. In a 2019 public statement, Ito apologized for his “error in judgement” and said he never heard Epstein discuss his sexual crimes. In that statement, he also promised to “raise an amount equivalent to the donations the Media Lab received from Epstein and will direct those funds to non-profits that focus on supporting survivors of trafficking. I will also return the money that Epstein has invested in my investment funds.”

Epstein’s name was mentioned in connection to a July 2016 conference in the 2020 report, with Ito asking Democratic megadonor Reid Hoffman – a member of the lab’s advisory council – whether to invite the disgraced financier to a conference that same month out of concerns he’d be recognized. People may “see him and maybe know he’s involved,” Ito wrote, per a footnote in the report. The conference where the “child-size sex robots” concept was pitched was the only conference in July 2016, the lab’s website shows. Epstein ultimately did not attend.

LinkedIn Co-founder Reid Hoffman and Former MIT Media Lab Director Joi Ito are pictured awarding the labs “Disobedience Awards” in 2018. Photo credit: (MIT Media Lab, Flickr, Creative Commons)

Epstein did visit the MIT campus at least nine times between 2013 and 2017, the report states. Hoffman joined one of these meetings. The report states Epstein brought “assistants” who were young women “on some visits” to campus, including a visit in 2016, which made staff uncomfortable.

Ito and Hoffman remain connected. On July 11, 2025, Ito announced a “Radical Transformation Award” and $68,000 cash prize underwritten by Hoffman at Chiba Institute of Technology in Japan. Neither Hoffman nor the Chiba Institute responded to requests for comment.

The July 2016 conference also introduced for the first time the idea of a “Disobedience Award” – a $250,000 award underwritten by Hoffman, along with an orb-shaped trophy designed by former MIT Media Lab Associate Professor of Media Arts and Sciences Neri Oxman. Epstein himself received one of these orbs for his status as a donor to the MIT Media Lab, the Boston Globe reported.

Oxman did not respond to a request for comment.

A 2018 Disobedience Award (Photo credit: Mediated Matter Group, Creative Commons)

The MIT Media Lab began giving the Disobedience Awards at the subsequent summer conference, renamed from “Forbidden Research” to Defiance in 2017. The Media Lab hosted a ceremony honoring more Disobedience Awards recipients in November 2018.

Epstein said in a 2017 interview with Science Magazine that he supported the MIT Media Lab because the researchers there are “rebels who don’t fit in.”

“The MIT [Massachusetts Institute of Technology] Media Lab is a good example,” Epstein said. “I would say 25% of the kids there are autistic, on the spectrum. They don’t really work in groups.”

“It’s my natural bent to move toward the maverick and rebels who don’t fit in,” he said. “They were probably overlooked [in school]. They were definitely never class president.”

Epstein claimed in emails to have facilitated $7 million in donations from former Apollo Global Management CEO Leon Black and Microsoft CEO Bill Gates in 2014, according to the 2020 fact-finding report. Gates has denied that claim. Black has acknowledged giving to Epstein-linked charities but has not addressed the alleged connection to MIT directly, the report states. Requests for comment from Gates through the Gates Foundation and Black through Apollo were not responded to.

The 2020 MIT-commissioned report said that “perhaps” the July 2016 conference to which Ito and Hoffman discussed inviting Epstein was an event with the lab’s fellows.

The lab’s fellows were announced in July but it’s not clear that announcement resembled a conference.

The report’s uncertain suggestion that Ito may have weighed an Epstein invitation to the low-key “announcement of the Media Lab Directors’ Fellows” may have distracted the public from the lab’s annual summer event — the flashier conference on pushing moral boundaries that same month — according to former MIT Media Lab research scientist Babak Babakinejad, who is suing the university over allegations of research fraud.

Babakinejad purportedly blew the whistle on an agriculture project one tech blog dubbed “Theranos for Plants.”

He told the DCNF that his lawsuit should reveal documents related to Epstein as Ito sought funding from Epstein for the agricultural project’s principal research scientist, per the 2020 report.

The Media Lab’s connections to Epstein predate Ito. Ito was introduced to Epstein in February 2013 by Linda Stone, a former member of the Media Lab’s Advisory Council, at a TED Conference in Long Beach, California. Epstein was also close to MIT Media Lab Co-founder Marvin Minsky, an early artificial intelligence researcher, he told Science.

“As you might know, I was very close to Marvin Minsky for quite a long time [and] I funded some of Marvin’s projects,” Epstein told the outlet in 2017.

DCNF co-founder Tucker Carlson was critical of billionaire hedge fund manager Bill Ackman at a public event on July 11, prompting a reply from Ackman on X in which he acknowledged that Oxman, who is his wife, had received $125,000 in funding from Epstein as an artist at the MIT Media Lab.

@TuckerCarlson went on a rant yesterday @TPUSA and suggested that I was in Jeffrey Epstein’s ‘constellation of people’ who have been getting away with scams. His evidence is that ‘the most useless people have no actual skills become billionaires.” He referred to me as an example… https://t.co/x6IrjXkP7x

— Bill Ackman (@BillAckman) July 13, 2025

“I never met Jeffrey Epstein, flew on his planes, went to any of his parties and/or properties, or interacted with him ever,” Ackman said. “When my wife was a professor at MIT, she received a $125,000 grant from Epstein (prior to my knowing of her existence). She met Epstein once for 45 minutes at the request of the head of the MIT MediaLab. […] If this is why Tucker thinks I am in Jeffrey Epstein’s constellation, it’s clear he doesn’t know anything about astronomy.”

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

AUTHOR

Emily Kopp

Investigative Reporter

RELATED ARTICLES:

Trump Compares ‘Jeffrey Epstein Hoax’ To Russiagate, Blasts ‘Past’ Supporters

MIT Lobbied Against Reviewing Foreign Funds Flowing Into Universities, Emails Show

MIT Bans Diversity Statements For Faculty Hires

Meet The New WHCA President, Just As Lib As The Last WHCA President

The post EXCLUSIVE: Epstein-Funded MIT Lab Hosted Panel On Giving Pedos Child Sex Robots appeared first on Dr. Rich Swier.

Thinking vs Critical Thinking

July 13, 2025

By John Droz, Jr.

It’s important to know the difference…

I had a nice chat the other day with a friend, and the subject came up: what is the difference between normal thinking and Critical Thinking? I thought we must have covered this before here, but I couldn’t find it. My apologies…

Briefly, Critical Thinking = normal thinking + more thoroughness + wisdom.

Critical Thinking is deeper and wider than normal thinking.

The word “critical” is key. It means thinking that is cautious, reflective, questioning, skeptical, …

A Good Analysis —

From this fine discussion: Thinking is a fundamental human activity, occurring when the mind processes information and forms ideas or concepts. It can be spontaneous, random, or directed, allowing us to understand, interpret, and make decisions about the world around us. Critical thinking, however, is a refined form of thinking. It demands a deeper level of analysis, evaluation, and synthesis of information to form a judgment.

Thinking can be passive. For instance, daydreaming or recalling a memory requires thinking but not necessarily any analytical process. Critical thinking, in contrast, is always active. It involves assessing the credibility of sources, identifying biases, and weighing evidence before drawing conclusions.

While thinking can often be based on personal beliefs, feelings, or incomplete information, Critical Thinking necessitates a rigorous approach to ensure objectivity and accuracy. It’s a skill that needs to be cultivated and practiced, requiring one to be skeptical, open-minded, and methodical.

Thinking is inherent and is something we do every day without much effort. Critical thinking, on the other hand, often requires more energy and attention. It challenges one’s own beliefs and assumptions, aiming for clarity, coherence, and logical consistency.

An Example —

From this college course: answer this question with the first answer that comes to mind, no matter what it is… A student went to the campus bookstore and bought two pencils for a total of 10 cents. How much did each pencil cost?

If you answered 5 cents (a total of 10 cents divided by two pencils equals 5 cents), your thinking fits the definition of normal thinking. In other words, it was based on simple recall of memorized information. You recalled those math formulas you memorized in school in order to answer the question.

On the other hand, if you had any other answer, you weren’t just thinking normally — you were likely thinking critically, because you were doing more than relying on recall of basic information.

For those in the latter case, unconsciously their thinking/ reasoning warning light went off. Perhaps they said to themselves, “I can’t tell. Maybe: a) one pencil is bigger than the other, or b) one is a red pencil, or c) one is a bigger pencil. In these cases, one pencil may cost 6 cents and the other 4 cents.”

Or perhaps you thought, “Wait a minute, I need more information.” Maybe you questioned the whole idea of two pencils being so cheap, or you thought that this had to be some type of trick question because it was so simple.

Hopefully, this simple example makes this distinction clearer…

Takeaway —

Put yet another way, regular thinking is like taking a drink of water — which most of us do reflexively a dozen or more times a day.

Critical Thinking is more like going to a winery and trying out several sample offerings. Both times we are swallowing liquids, but at the latter we are much more attentive — and critical!

Some sample good references:

Here is other information from this scientist that you might find interesting:

I am now offering incentives for you to sign up new subscribers!

I also consider reader submissions on Critical Thinking on my topics of interest.

Check out the Archives of this Critical Thinking substack.

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

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

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

The post Thinking vs Critical Thinking appeared first on Dr. Rich Swier.

AI Industry Needs Standards To Protect Against Bad Actors

July 11, 2025

By Middle East Media Research Institute

MEMRI Daily Brief No. 805

The following is an op-ed for the Forbes Nonprofit Council by MEMRI Executive Director Steve Stalinsky, Ph.D. Titled “AI Industry Needs Standards To Protect Against Bad Actors,” it was published June 18, 2025 by Forbes.[1]

Exemplifying the legitimate fears among many who study AI and warn of its dangers, on May 23, Anthropic revealed that in a test of its new Claude Opus 4, the system chose to blackmail one of its engineers to prevent him from shutting it down. Early versions of the system had been found to comply with dangerous instructions and even expressed a willingness to assist with terror attacks. Anthropic said that these problems had largely been resolved in the current version but also openly acknowledged, on May 22, that in internal testing, Opus 4 had performed more effectively than prior models at helping users produce biological weapons.

While Anthropic should be commended for telling the truth, eliminating such assistance for terrorism should not be left up to any one party.

As AI technology has advanced meteorically, impacting society both positively and negatively, and as it becomes more commonly used across all sectors, cases like that of Opus 4 can be expected to become commonplace if nothing is done.

Concern Grows Over AI’s Use By Extremist And Terrorist Groups

Of growing concern is the wholesale adoption of AI by extremist and even terrorist groups, for outreach, recruitment and incitement and for planning and supporting actual attacks. AI could soon become a vital weapon in their online arsenal and a disruptor in both mainstream online spaces and on their own channels.

AI use in terror attacks could also be a challenge for law enforcement unless swift action is taken. In my research, I have found that groups and individuals are talking about using AI to plan terror attacks, to make weapons of mass destruction, to organize armed uprisings to overthrow the government and more. Others have discussed using AI for developing weapons systems, including drones and self-driving car bombs.

Recent examples include the man who killed 14 and wounded dozens on Bourbon Street in New Orleans on New Year’s Day 2025; he used AI-enabled Meta smart glasses in preparing and executing the attack. They also include a teen in Israel who consulted ChatGPT before entering a police station with a weapon on March 5 and trying to stab a policeman.

While Platforms Already Ban Such Activity, Enforcement Is A Challenge

Having spent over two decades heading a nonprofit whose mission includes supporting the U.S. government in counterterrorism and law enforcement as well as assisting the tech community, and in particular strategizing how to deal with terrorist use of the internet, social media and other technologies, I have for years been calling for tech companies and their CEOs to come up with best practices and industry standards to fight terrorist use of their platforms. The time for the AI industry to do so is now.

By this point, the AI industry should be capable of coming up with strategies to keep terrorists and other criminals from using their products and for companies to collaborate on industry standards to keep terrorists out. But they must be committed to doing so.

Most of these platforms ban such activity in their terms of service—but are these policies being enforced? For example, OpenAI’s ChatGPT states in its Terms of Use that a user “may not use our Services for any illegal, harmful, or abusive activity.” Its CEO, Sam Altman, said in October 2024 at a “fireside chat” at Harvard: “Should GPT-4 generate hate speech? Fairly easy for us to say no to that.”

The Acceptable Use Policy of xAI’s Grok states: “Do not harm people or property … [or] Critically harm or [promote] critically harming human life (yours or anyone else’s) … [or] develop bioweapons, chemical weapons, or weapons of mass destruction.”

Perplexity AI’s Terms of Service prohibit its use “in a manner that is obscene, excessively violent, harassing, hateful, cruel, abusive, pornographic, inciting, organizing, promoting or facilitating violence or criminal activities.”

Microsoft, Google and DeepSeek all similarly ban such activities in their terms of service.

Each one of these companies has good—and often overlapping—ideas on dealing with extremism and terrorism, and these could be the basis for a starting point for creating industry standards to follow. But enforcing these terms of service poses a challenge, as was seen from the earliest days of the industry.

Microsoft’s chatbot Tay, released in March 2016, was shut down within 24 hours after it tweeted pro-Hitler messages—yet today, the danger posed by hate groups’ use of AI has increased by orders of magnitude. One history chat app let users chat with simulated historical figures, including Hitler and Nazi propagandist Joseph Goebbels. Currently, users can still create extremist content on many AI platforms—despite terms of service not allowing it.

OpenAI CEO Sam Altman explained in an interview in 2023 that “time” is needed “to see how [the technology is] used,” that “we’re monitoring [it] very closely.” In his testimony before a Senate committee on May 8, Altman was asked by Senator Jacky Rosen whether he would consider collaborating with civil society to create a standard benchmark for AI related to antisemitism, to be used subsequently for other forms of hate, as well. Altman replied that “of course, we do collaborate with civil society on this topic and we are excited to continue to do so” but that “there will always be some debate and the question of free speech in the context of AI is novel.”

Industry And Government Leaders Must Step In – Now

The need for standards and guidelines for AI technology is clear. But to date, there have been no official moves to examine criminal and extremist use of this technology. While the National Institute of Standards and Technology has reportedly developed frameworks for responsibility in AI use, few seem to know about them.

Early on, AI leaders promised to address the spread of hate and extremism on their platforms. But they have failed to deliver, and this alone is why I believe companies themselves cannot be trusted to deal with terrorists using their products. As we saw with Claude Opus 4, AI has the potential to help facilitate unimaginable terrorist attacks. Government and industry together must act fast to prevent this from happening.

AUTHOR

Steven Stalinsky

Steven Stalinsky is Executive Director of MEMRI.

REFERENCE:

[1] Forbes.com/councils/forbesnonprofitcouncil/2025/06/18/ai-industry-needs-standards-to-protect-against-bad-actors, June 18, 2025.

The post AI Industry Needs Standards To Protect Against Bad Actors appeared first on Dr. Rich Swier.

Trump’s EPA chief clears the air on chemtrails and geoengineering, in the interest of ‘total transparency’

July 11, 2025

By Leo Hohmann

After an exhaustive investigation published on EPA websites, Director Lee Zeldin says Americans now know everything he knows about those mysterious ‘streaks in the sky’, which apparently isn’t much!

There have long been claims about the exhaust trails from commercial and military jets traveling over the United States.

You’ve all seen them. The cris-crossing across the sky of large plumes of exhaust that gradually spread out. Some days they don’t appear at all. Other days, under the same weather conditions, they are extremely heavy and mesmerizing.

Take a look at the picture below, which I shot on April 24, 2024, of the sky above my house in Georgia. I call it the Zebra Sky.

Some have suggested that these jets may be spraying a chemical cocktail included in the jet fuel of certain flights and not included in others. That might explain why the white emissions are present on some days, while on other days the sky appears pure blue even though there are just as many jets passing over our property, which is very close to the world’s busiest commercial airport, Atlanta Hartsfield International.

Now Lee Zeldin, the chief of the Environmental Protection Agency in the administration of President Donald Trump, has announced he has the answers. He says he’s investigated the claims and can clear everything up for us.

His conclusion? He’s debunking the idea that there’s anything abnormal about these “contrails.” There is absolutely no connection to geoengineering, the Trump EPA has assured us. Nor anything else sinister.

As for that other word. Um, Chemtrails? What chemtrails. The word is never even uttered by Zeldin, and the mainstream media is having a ball with this story as they’re now able to cite the Trump administration to debunk what they’ve always called conspiracy theories.

As Salon reports, “In the wake of deadly flooding in Texas, the Environmental Protection Agency has created two websites to combat conspiracy theories around weather manipulation.”

Here’s Zeldin patting himself on the back for doing such a great job of exposing truth for an administration that’s into “total transparency.”

Total transparency? I guess it’s the same kind of transparency that led to Attorney General Pam Bondi refusing to turn over the Epstein client list. After previously admitting they were on her desk, she now says they don’t exist. The government has lost whatever small amount of credibility it had when it said Epstein had no secret client list and never blackmailed anybody.

Sorry, Mr. Zeldin, but our trust in this administration’s word has been seriously breached.

First it released JFK assassination files that we were told were going to blow our minds, only to find out that there was nothing shocking or even mildly different in what was released from the same old same old.

Then came the Epstein debacle with Pam Bondi trying to redefine what she meant when she said the client list was on her desk waiting to be reviewed. It wasn’t really a client list, she now says, she was just referring to the files in general. Oh, he was a nasty pervert, a pedophile, Bondi said of Epstein, but he had no involvement in setting up politicians or other important people and making sure they were compromised. That was something we all imagined. Another conspiracy theory.

Now we’re told the chemtrails are no different. It’s all a figment of our wild imaginations to notice that they’re there on some days and absent on others. If it was just normal condensation, wouldn’t they be visible every single day that there’s a clear sky and normal air traffic? Apparently not.

So there’s nothing to see here. Move along. Just like there was nothing odd about the official JFK assassination story we received from the Warren Commission so many years ago. It was a single crazed gunman, Lee Harvey Oswald, shooting from a window in the Dallas book depository, who killed President Kennedy. End of story.

Nor was there anything out of the ordinary about Epstein. He was just a common pedophile, with no sinister attachments to the CIA, FBI, Mossad or any other agency of any government…wink, wink.

This is why no one trusts the government. It doesn’t matter who gets elected, the same old lies continue to be told, and the same old secrets continue to be covered up.

Please visit Leo’s Newsletter substack.

The post Trump’s EPA chief clears the air on chemtrails and geoengineering, in the interest of ‘total transparency’ appeared first on Dr. Rich Swier.

Republicans Hit the Accelerator on the Next Wave of Trump’s To-Do List

July 10, 2025

By Family Research Council

Passing the Big Beautiful Bill was tough, but not as tough as what faces Republicans now: selling it. Getting Americans on board with the idea when both barrels of the Democratic Party’s guns are pointed at the president’s law is becoming a full-time job for the GOP. “The test will be time,” Senator Jim Justice (R-W.Va.) agreed. “If at the end of the day, the time makes everything work — and everything works to the positive — everything’s great,” he told The Hill. In the meantime, conservatives say, one of the smartest things congressional leaders can do is to keep moving full speed ahead with the White House’s main agenda: shaking up Washington.

“These are good structural reforms,” Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) argued in defense of the law’s reforms to bloated programs like Medicaid. “We’ll be playing offense on that,” he declared. Of course, the irony of leadership’s current position is that there are plenty of conservatives who argue that the landmark legislation doesn’t go far enough. And yet, this is the Goldilocks universe of “too soft” or “too hard” that Thune and House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) have been forced to navigate since the party won its narrow majorities. As the Louisianan quipped to Wall Street Journal reporter Olivia Beavers last week in the heat of the Big Beautiful debate, “Welcome to Congress. It’s a disappointing job sometimes.”

Sure, Democrats will try to make the vote a painful one for Trump’s party (with claims that are either completely fabricated or nakedly political), but Republicans need to keep hammering home the truth. And more than that, they need to keep their foot on the gas where the law left off: slashing spending, overhauling the government, and getting America’s deficits down.

Donald Trump’s Big Beautiful Bill (BBB) was only the first lap in what Thune and Johnson’s members expect to be a long race against the machine that is Big Government. To those conservatives who were less than thrilled with the scale of the changes in the law, here’s the good news: there’s a lot more Congress can do — and they intend to.

Some of the law’s more reluctant supporters hinted at this in conversations after the bill crossed Thune’s finish line. Rep. Keith Self (R-Texas), who’d been initially critical of the Senate’s version of the BBB, was one of many who huddled and talked strategy about what could be done. “[T]here was no way that we were going to get anything back from the Senate that would have been an improvement. It just was not going to happen.” So what did conservatives and the House Freedom Caucus do? “We went outside the bill to make some requests for things that might offset the damage that the Senate did to the bill.”

As he’s done before, Johnson thought outside the box — or, in this case, the bill. “We got some things that I can’t yet talk about [in an] agreement, and we will see how they work going forward,” Self explained, before adding, “there [will be] more cost-cutting across the federal government. We simply tried to find those areas and get agreement that we will work on those going forward.”

The final language itself was much better, Family Research Council President Tony Perkins agreed, “because the Freedom Caucus began to negotiate on these issues.” Absolutely, Self nodded. “They started out with $300 billion … in savings. What we got was a trillion and a half well above that.” That’s just some of the progress that the Freedom Caucus made “[along] with other conservatives,” Self reiterated. As Perkins pointed out, fiscal priorities weren’t the only things hashed out beyond the BBB. “Some of the social issues that were of concern that were taken out in the Senate are also going to be addressed,” he previewed. “We look forward to that coming out in the public here in the very near future to see what the administration has agreed to.”

For now, it’s full speed ahead on the other tracks of Trump’s train that can deliver major DOGE-like savings. One thing that will certainly cushion the blow for BBB skeptics is being served up as we speak. Before next Friday, July 18, another $9.4 billion will be on the chopping block in the form of the White House’s rescissions package — the first, administration officials insist, of many. The targets include everything from the leftist Corporation for Public Broadcasting to excessive and wasteful foreign aid — millions of dollars of which included wildly inappropriate LGBT activism.

“A vote for rescissions is a vote to show that the United States Senate is serious about getting our fiscal house in order,” Office of Management and Budget Director Russ Vought told lawmakers in his testimony last month. Although some liberal Republicans are threatening to upset Trump’s apple cart — Senator Susan Collins (R-Maine) personally tanked a similar request in his first term — Thune knows that finding the 51 votes is a must to prove his chamber is serious about cuts.

“After all the tough talk by Republicans in the Senate about the need to reduce spending, if we can’t agree to reduce $9 billion worth of spending porn, then we all ought to go buy paper bags and put them over our heads,” Senator John Kennedy (R-La.) argued in his folksy, made-for-TV soundbite way.

And that’s not the only way Trump is hoping to prove his sincerity on shrinking government. A new report on the White House payroll credits the president with the lowest salaries in 16 years. According to Open The Books, the total for 404 employees in 2025 adds up to $44.1 million in taxpayer dollars — “the lowest it’s been since at least 2009 when adjusted for inflation.” That’s a 29% drop from Biden’s $62.2 million staff, which had almost double the lawyers (45 to Trump’s 27).

Of course, the best bite out of the country’s ballooning debt would be through appropriations — the process Trump quietly seems intent on bypassing. Still, as recently as last month, Johnson was ready to pivot immediately from the BBB to the string of 12 spending bills for the next fiscal year. “The appropriators will be marking up some of the legislation in the subcommittees to try to line all that up,” he reiterated to Perkins on an earlier version of “This Week on Capitol Hill.” “And you’re going to see, again, a reflection of even more savings in appropriations for the next fiscal year. We’ve got a lot on our plate this summer.”

That’s an understatement. There are just 22 legislative days on the House’s calendar until the next batch of government funding runs out on September 30. Because of the August recess, Republicans will have four fewer weeks to negotiate some of the trickiest debates across the 12 agency budgets. As Politico points out, the speaker’s chamber has made “some progress” with its appropriations work, passing one bill and advancing four out of committee. Appropriations Chair Tom Cole (R-Okla.) was hoping to complete the dozen markups by July 30. “We’re a little behind the eight ball on it,” Johnson acknowledged, “because [we spent] so much effort [on] the big, beautiful bill. But now we turn our attention immediately to that.”

It’s through the regular appropriations process where gigantic, across-the-board savings could actually be accomplished for every pocket of government. Unfortunately, that usually takes months of talks, combing through numbers, and ironing out possible landmines. Months that this party doesn’t have.

“It takes a long time to reach consensus and equilibrium on all the various competing ideas and priorities that people have,” the speaker told Perkins. “Which is why the regular order, regular process is so important. You have to let everybody have a say so they’ll be with you on the vote at the end. And that’s kind of the grueling process of every day in a deliberative body.” Still, he vowed, the House “is going to get it done and get it to the president’s desk as well. We’re going to spend less money. We’re in a series of scaling back government. This is a big part of it.”

But there are those who wonder if even Johnson, who’s managed to leap every impossible obstacle, can beat the clock. At this point, the Senate hasn’t passed a single funding bill of the 12. And if, as Punchbowl News wonders, the speaker can wrangle his side of the Capitol to approve a short-term continuing resolution to buy more time, his counterpart will need at least seven Democrats’ help to hit the Senate’s magic 60-vote threshold. Judging by the volcanic rhetoric on the other side, the odds of Minority Leader Chuck Schumer’s (D-N.Y.) party bailing out the GOP at this point are probably zero — leaving Republicans in a serious jam.

As Jake Sherman and John Bresnahan remind everyone, “If Congress is good at anything, it’s taking things to the brink…” And yet, with Johnson at the helm, anything could happen. “You continue to defy the critics who say you can’t get it done,” Perkins pointed out. “You’re getting it done. And I think you can get the budget process back to where it needs to be and make government accountable to the American people.”

AUTHOR

Suzanne Bowdey

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

The post Republicans Hit the Accelerator on the Next Wave of Trump’s To-Do List appeared first on Dr. Rich Swier.

EXCLUSIVE: USAID Quietly Sent Thousands Of Viruses To Chinese Military-Linked Biolab

July 8, 2025

By The Daily Caller

The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) shipped thousands of viral samples to a lab in Wuhan over the course of a 10-year program even though it had no formal agreement with the lab in place, according to previously unreported documents.

The documents show that USAID funded the exportation of 11,000 samples from Yunnan Province, where some of the closest relatives of the COVID-19 virus circulate, to Wuhan, the epicenter of the pandemic, with no apparent plan for ensuring the samples were not misdirected to bioweapons and remained accessible to the U.S. government.

A $210 million USAID public health program called PREDICT, steered by the University of California-Davis, collected viral samples in countries throughout the globe but lacked long-term storage when funding dried up, according to rudimentary plans in 2019.

USAID’s sample dispensation plan for China is sparse: “No need [sic] information from Yunnan. They were never an official lab partner for PREDICT. All samples they helped collected [sic] are sent to, tested, and stored in Wuhan.”

The “lab” refers to the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV). WIV was a close partner of USAID contractor EcoHealth Alliance and a slated partner for a PREDICT-like program supported by the State Department. The lab has poor biosafety practices and ties to the People’s Liberation Army (PLA).

One of the closest known relatives of the COVID virus is among the viruses sampled with USAID funding.

“Investigations involving USAID’s former funding of global health awards remain active and ongoing,” a senior State Department official said in a statement to the Daily Caller News Foundation. “The American people can rest assured knowing that under the Trump Administration we will not be funding these controversial programs.”

The internal documents were obtained through a FOIA lawsuit brought by U.S. Right to Know, a nonprofit newsroom and public health research group.

The shuttering of USAID – which was officially completed Tuesday – has ignited a debate about its net impact on global health. A study in The Lancet projected an association between a dropoff in USAID funding and 14 million deaths based on an epidemiological model.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in a statement Tuesday that USAID spending has often undermined rather than strengthened American interests. (RELATED: USAID Wasted Billions Of Tax Dollars On Programs That Actively Harmed Americans. Here Are The Receipts)

“Beyond creating a globe-spanning NGO industrial complex at taxpayer expense, USAID has little to show since the end of the Cold War,” Rubio said. “Development objectives have rarely been met, instability has often worsened, and anti-American sentiment has only grown.”

The now-defunct agency’s connection to the Wuhan lab complicates its global health legacy.

“The USAID $210 million contract for PREDICT should have included contractual terms that required all samples, or at least copies of all samples, be transferred to and stored by a US government facility,” said Rutgers University molecular biologist Richard Ebright told the DCNF. “The PREDICT grift did none of this.”

UC Davis did not respond to a request for comment. The State Department did not respond to a request for comment.

Today marks the first day of the State Department’s America First foreign assistance rebranding initiative, led by @SecRubio.

Consistent branding will ensure contributions made by the the United States will be immediately recognized as American.

“The redesign is very simple,… pic.twitter.com/HZnbOxU0Sq

— Department of State (@StateDept) July 2, 2025

Did USAID Fund COVID’s Ancestor?

Many of the viruses stored at the lab in Wuhan may have been sampled with U.S. funding yet remain out of reach for U.S. government entities investigating the origins of COVID.

The samples were set to be preserved for testing – with human samples preserved for 10 years – the documents show. But the documents suggest that requirement was never incorporated into a formal contract with USAID.

The two scientists supervising the samples were: Ben Hu, a virologist at the WIV, who reportedly became sick with COVID-like symptoms in 2019; and Peter Daszak, a scientist who was debarred from federal funding after the U.S. government deemed him a threat to public safety for inadequate oversight of the research in Wuhan.

Hu and Daszak did not reply to requests for comment.

The documents show PREDICT contractors discussing viral samples taken from wildlife and stored in India, Liberia, Malaysia, the Republic of Congo and China. Some of the samples were stored in virus-transport media (VTM), which allows researchers to store live viruses for later use in the lab.

“It’s not rocket science to require a contract and supporting paperwork which establishes a relationship, testing protocol, and chain of custody, when one is sending out lab samples,” said Reuben Guttman, a partner at Guttman, Buschner & Brooks PLLC who specializes in ensuring the integrity of government programs, in an interview with the DCNF. “In any scientific endeavor, you need confidence in your results. That requires paperwork to prove your methodology is sound.”

AUTHOR

Emily Kopp

Investigative Reporter

RELATED ARTICLES:

US Group Connected To Wuhan Lab Is Stonewalling Congressional Investigation Of Pandemic Origins, Committee Ranking Member Says

EXCLUSIVE: State Department Ends Decades-Long Program Paying Under-Performing Diplomats

Out Of Control Spending, Marxism And ‘DEI Privilege Walks’: How USAID Became Progressive Slush Fund Under Biden

The post EXCLUSIVE: USAID Quietly Sent Thousands Of Viruses To Chinese Military-Linked Biolab appeared first on Dr. Rich Swier.

VIDEO: The “Golden Dome” Defense Program for the U.S. Takes Off

July 7, 2025

By NEWSRAEL Telling the Israeli Story

Congress unveils an innovative framework to protect U.S. airspace, combining breakthrough technologies with international cooperation in response to evolving global threats.

Last month, Donald Trump announced an innovative initiative aimed at protecting the United States from aerial and missile threats through the “Golden Dome” program.

WATCH: Golden Dome for America: A Shield for the Nation by Lockheed Martin

Now, the Congressional Armed Services Committee has submitted a detailed nine-point proposal to the Pentagon, intended to serve as the foundation for developing the next generation of missile defense systems and forming the backbone of this initiative.

The proposal comes against the backdrop of recent geopolitical developments—particularly the ongoing wars in Ukraine and Israel—which have underscored the critical importance of robust air defense systems.

According to a recent report by Breaking Defense, the ambitious plan includes several key components. Foremost among them is a call for the rapid replenishment of all U.S. and allied missile interceptor stockpiles, with a focus on Patriot and SM-3 systems. This is to be accompanied by an accelerated deployment of next-generation interceptors under the NGI (Next Generation Interceptor) project, which includes expedited acquisition of capabilities for detection, identification, tracking, and kill.

The body of the article focuses on the creation of a novel sensor architecture that will include sensors for hypersonic systems, ballistic missiles, space-based assets, and maritime and terrestrial air defense components in Europe. Additionally, the program calls for increased investment in cutting-edge technologies such as high-power lasers, high-power microwaves, and AI-driven autonomous interceptors.

A particularly unique component of the program is the development of interception systems capable of neutralizing threats before launch—this includes cyber operations, signal jamming, and the destruction of enemy command and control systems.

The proposal also emphasizes the construction of defense systems in full cooperation with allied nations, both strategically and economically. At the same time, the U.S. will continue to invest in traditional deterrence tools, including nuclear deterrence, through ongoing development of intercontinental Sentinel missiles, B-21 bombers, LRSO cruise missiles, and Columbia-class submarines.

Finally, the plan notes continued investment in space launch research and development, while maintaining U.S. supremacy in setting behavioral norms and operational control of space-based weapons systems, in light of the growing threat from Russia and China in developing anti-satellite (ASAT) capabilities.

The post VIDEO: The “Golden Dome” Defense Program for the U.S. Takes Off appeared first on Dr. Rich Swier.

Pedophilia and Politics

July 5, 2025

By Linda Goudsmit

In an important recap of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) revelations, journalist Margaret Flavin reports on an audit of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) as discussed in a recent interview with Vice President JD Vance. Flavin’s article, “Vice President Vance Underscores Reports of Massive Waste and Corruption in Foreign Aid (Video),” posted on Gateway Pundit, June 29, 2025. The results of the audit reveal that only 12% of the money allocated to USAID for aid arrives at its destination! How is this possible?

Vance explains the corruption:

“So, we send $100,000 to this group to buy food for poor kids in Africa, okay.”

“And what actually happens is it’s not $100,000 that go to the food for the poor kids in Africa. The NGO, the non-government organization that gets that money, contracts it out to somebody else, and then they subcontract it. So, there’s like three or four middlemen.”

“Marco Rubio, who’s the Secretary of State, he’s a very good friend. What he told me is that his best estimate, after he had his team look at it, is that 88 cents of every dollar was actually being collected by middlemen.”

“So, every dollar we were spending, humanitarian assistance, 12 cents, was actually making it to people who needed it.

In fiscal year 2023, USAID distributed $7 billion of American taxpayer monies worldwide, and less than $1 billion was actually distributed to the needy. This confirms the waste, fraud, and abuse that Elon Musk’s DOGE team discovered. Secretary of State Marco Rubio responded with his March 10, 2025, announcement that 83% of USAID programs, a whopping 5200 contracts, many were cancelled saving tens of billions of American taxpayer dollars. The 1,000 remaining programs will be managed under the State Department.

Marco Rubio’s March 10, 2025 tweet:

After a 6-week review, we are officially cancelling 83% of the programs at USAID.

The 5200 contracts that are now cancelled spent tens of billions of dollars in ways that did not serve, (and in some cases even harmed), the core national interests of the United States.

In consultation with Congress, we intend for the remaining 18% of programs we are keeping (approximately 1,000) to now be administered more effectively under the State Department.

Thank you to DOGE and our hardworking staff who worked very long hours to achieve this overdue and historic reform.

So, who are the big losers in the crackdown on USAID, and what programs and policies that harmed or did not serve the national interest were they funding?

To answer this question, it is important to remember the history of USAID. Former President John F. Kennedy created USAID in November 1961 by Executive Order 10973 with the specific purpose of supplying aid when the president deems it to be in the national interest. According to journalist Mike Gonzalez at The Heritage Foundation, “USAID devolved into an agency that spent money on programs that hindered the pursuit of freedom overseas and directly contravened our national interest.” Gonzalez’s February 19, 2025 article, “The Unmasking of USAID,” explains:

“During the Obama years the U.S. Agency for International Development was used to promote abroad policies that remain controversial within American society itself and that serve no clear national security interests,” “I wrote in a 2017 Heritage Foundation study.

These agendas, I wrote, included programs that promoted—sometimes as a condition of the aid—lifestyle choices that Americans debated for decades or are still being debated, such as transgender rights and same-sex marriage or trained foreign citizens in street “activism,” “civic engagement,” and “mobilization.”…

I added in my paper that in the promotion of radical agendas in several countries, USAID has found an ideal partner in George Soros, a billionaire supporter of far-left causes worldwide. Indeed, evidence began to emerge that, under former President Barack Obama, USAID made Soros’s foundations the main implementer of its aid.

The radical leftist/Marxist programs and policies of former President Barack Obama, embraced and financed by billionaire George Soros, and expanded under the ghost presidency of former President Joe Biden, are being dismantled by MAGA President Donald Trump. And USAID is being restored to its original mission to supply aid when the president deems it to be in the national interest. The diametrically opposed interpretations of our national interest are reflected in the policies and programs of radical Democrat past presidents Obama/Biden vs MAGA President Donald Trump.

Make America Great Again (MAGA) principles follow the U.S. Constitution to protect and preserve national sovereignty and individual sovereignty in our constitutional republic. Former president Marxist Barack Obama sought to fundamentally transform America into a socialist state in his first two terms, then through ghost President Biden, and now through his ongoing support of Marxist ideology designed to create chaos and to collapse America from within. The cultural battles between Democrat Marxism and MAGA Americanism are irreconcilable differences that have bifurcated our nation and left us teetering on revolutionary divorce.

The 2017 Heritage Foundation study referenced above includes the abhorrent sexualizing of children. First introduced unsuccessfully into Hungary by Hungarian Marxist George Lukacs (1885-1971), cultural terrorism is a communist tactic designed to destroy the nuclear family which is central to the Judeo-Christian tradition that is the foundation of Americanism, our constitutional republic, and western civilization.

Before the Bolsheviks came to power, Hungary was a Catholic nation. Lukács recognized the necessity of collapsing the traditional nuclear family in Marxist revolutions, following Lenin’s dictum, “Destroy the family, you destroy the country.”

As deputy commissar for education and culture, Lukács targeted Hungary’s family unit and its traditional sexual morals. He implemented a program called cultural terrorism, which had two tactical objectives. First, target children’s minds through lectures that encouraged them to ridicule and reject Christian ethics. Second, groom them with graphic sexual content and instruction in free love and sexual intercourse. People in Hungary were so enraged it forced Lukács to flee the country. (Space Is No Longer the Final Frontier––Reality Is, pp. 124-125, Linda Goudsmit 2024)

All forty-five chapters of my 2024 book Space Is No Longer the Final Frontier––Reality Is, begin with the same opening paragraph to remind the reader that we are a world at war: Globalism vs. Nationalism:

Globalism is a replacement ideology that seeks to reorder the world into one singular, planetary Unistate, ruled by the globalist elite. The globalist war on nation-states cannot succeed without collapsing the United States of America. The long-term strategic attack plan moves America incrementally from constitutional republic to socialism to globalism to feudalism. The tactical attack plan uses asymmetric psychological and informational warfare to destabilize Americans and drive society out of objective reality into the madness of subjective reality. America’s children are the primary target of the globalist predators.

The cultural terrorism that was wholly rejected in Hungary in the 20th century, particularly the sexual component, has been wildly successful in 21st-century America and other western nations. The sexualization of children, sexual terrorism, is the nexus of the globalist elite campaign for one-world government, and the intersection of the World Economic Forum, the United Nations, and its affiliate organizations which uniformly support one-world global governance through implementation of the United Nations 17 Sustainable Goals.

All 17 Goals sound absolutely fantastic––but the language is a lie! The 17 Sustainable Goals are the roadmap to one-world governance. Each of the 17 Goals ultimately end in the surrender of your individual agency, your freedom, and your national sovereignty to the international, intergovernmental rule of the globalist elite through the agencies and authority of the United Nations. Do not be fooled by the politically seductive language of the 17 Goals. BUYER BEWARE!

Sustainable Development Goals

Goal 1. End poverty in all its forms everywhere
Goal 2. End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture
Goal 3. Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages
Goal 4. Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all
Goal 5. Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls
Goal 6. Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all
Goal 7. Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all
Goal 8. Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all
Goal 9. Build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization and foster innovation
Goal 10. Reduce inequality within and among countries
Goal 11. Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable
Goal 12. Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns
Goal 13. Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts*
Goal 14. Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development
Goal 15. Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss
Goal 16. Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels
Goal 17. Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalize the global partnership for sustainable development

* Acknowledging that the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change is the primary international, intergovernmental forum for negotiating the global response to climate change.

In Chapter 19: From Sex Education to Sexuality Education of Space Is No Longer the Final Frontier—Reality Is, I discuss Goal 3 in depth:

Goal 3 is of particular interest to this chapter, especially section 3.7:

By 2030, ensure universal access to sexual and reproductive health-care services, including for family planning, information and education, and the integration of reproductive health into national strategies and programs.

What, exactly, is the “information and education” young children will receive? Parents around the world will be shocked to learn what the United Nations and its specialty agencies consider appropriate sexual and reproductive information and education….

First, sex education is no longer just about human reproduction. The new label, Comprehensive Sexuality Education (CSE), is far more expansive and is defined on the Health and Education ^[v] section of the UNESCO website:

“Sexuality” is defined as “a core dimension of being human which includes: the understanding of, and relationship to, the human body; emotional attachment and love; sex; gender; gender identity; sexual orientation; sexual intimacy; pleasure and reproduction. Sexuality is complex and includes biological, social, psychological, spiritual, religious, political, legal, historic, ethical and cultural dimensions that evolve over a lifespan.” (International Technical Guidance on Sexuality Education, p. 17)

Key values of CSE include:

Transformative: CSE impacts whole cultures and communities, not simply individual learners. It can contribute to the development of a fair and compassionate society by empowering individuals and communities, promoting critical thinking skills and strengthening young people’s sense of citizenship. It empowers young people to take responsibility for their own decisions and behaviours, and how they may affect others. It builds the skills and attitudes that enable young people to treat others with respect, acceptance, tolerance and empathy, regardless of their ethnicity, race, social, economic or immigration status, religion, disability, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, or sex characteristics.

In the same way that the 17 Goals sound great but in reality, are catastrophic, the words sexuality and transformative are equally destructive, particularly in the context of the foundational assumption in CSE that schools are the appropriate place for sexuality education, not the home:

CSE is weaponized education on a global level. Its universal curriculum is designed to collapse existing cultures into a singular culture of the planetary Unistate and indoctrinate students with politicized education according to Marxist collectivist dogma. CSE grooms the children of the world to unite and become activists in preparation for global citizenship in the Unistate.

The deceitful manipulation of language is a weapon of war designed to dupe parents into accepting Comprehensive Sexuality Education as equivalent to the familiar and accepted Sex Education. There is no equivalence. Comprehensive Sexuality Education is a colossal deception that presents lessons in pornography as equal to lessons in human reproduction.

The globalist predators, many funded through the corruption of USAID, are advancing sexual terrorism in the United States in their attempt to legalize pedophilia––the soul murder of your children––to destroy their selfness and groom them for life in the totalitarian globalist Unistate.

Billionaire George Soros and his Open Societies Foundations (OSF) support transnational governance in the globalist Unistate. Soros-funded groups like Indivisible and MoveOn advocate the overthrow of the current world order of sovereign nation states, specifically targeting the United States under MAGA President Donald Trump. OSF is a grantmaking network of organizations dedicated to establishing “open” societies and limiting authoritarian regimes. Open Society Foundations website describes itself and its mission in glowing terms. Don’t be fooled by the lofty language––the goal of the globalist enterprise is the collapse of the United States from within:

The Open Society Foundations, founded by George Soros, are the world’s largest private funder of independent groups working for rights, equity, and justice.

The Open Society Foundations champion the search for bold, democratic solutions to our urgent, common challenges that advance rights, equity, and justice.

We do this by supporting a wide array of independent voices and organizations around the world that provide a creative and dynamic link between the governing and the governed.

Our approach seeks to counter the narrow pursuit of political self-interest and short-term opportunism—in pursuit of a sustainable future for people and planet that leaves no one behind.

In classic Orwellian word perversion, Soros’s “open” societies focus on rights, equity, and justice” limiting authoritarian regimes.” Like the UN 17 Sustainable Goals, the words sound great––until you realize the words rights, equity, and justice are tag lines for Marxist Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI)––the policies and programs designed to collapse Americanism into socialism, then communism, and ultimately feudalism in the dystopian globalist Unistate. Radical gender ideology is a core component of the radical leftist ideology advanced by George Soros, his Open Society Foundations, and its NGOs funded by USAID in order to implement the Marxist indoctrination and sexual terrorism that most definitely harmed the national interest!

The legalization of pedophilia is the medium and the message for total societal collapse––the endgame of the sexualization of children. It is the politics of pedophilia.

REFERENCES:

^[v] Health and Education;

https://healtheducationresources.unesco.org/toolkit/what-comprehensive-sexuality-education-cse

Please visit Linda Goudsmit’s pundicity page and website: lindagoudsmit.com.

Space Is No Longer the Final Frontier––Reality Is is available in paperback, hardback, and ebook formats on barnesandnoble.com, amazon.com, and directly from Ingram in paperback.

The post Pedophilia and Politics appeared first on Dr. Rich Swier.

Major Life Questions — Part 2

July 4, 2025

By John Droz, Jr.

Do we spend enough time to give these sufficient thought?

This is a follow-up to Part 1. I’ll start out by repeating the beginning of that piece…

Due to incessant bombardment of information, plus our being fully immersed in everyday concerns, we rarely step back to see things in perspective. Please give each of these some serious consideration:

Would you like to be a happier person?
Would you like to be a healthier person?
Would you like to be a more financially successful person?
Would you like to have better relationships?
Would you like to feel more fulfilled?
Would you like to better manage your time?
Would you like to have more satisfying employment?
Would you like to increase your chances of saving your soul?

What if there was ONE simple, free solution to bringing about ALL of these?!!

The Bottom Line —

Attentive readers will deduce that what can provide ALL of these things, is being a Critical Thinker!

This should not be any surprise to readers, as at the top of all of my Substack pages, I’ve listed the link for “Critical Thinking Benefits.” Please read it!

Here is other information from this scientist that you might find interesting:

I am now offering incentives for you to sign up new subscribers!

I also consider reader submissions on Critical Thinking on my topics of interest.

Check out the Archives of this Critical Thinking substack.

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

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

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

The post Major Life Questions — Part 2 appeared first on Dr. Rich Swier.

House Passes BBB as Conservatives Win ‘Significant Commitments’ on Life, Transgenderism

July 4, 2025

By Family Research Council

Congress has delivered President Donald Trump’s signature legislation, the One Big Beautiful Bill, but not without hours of mean-spirited Democratic delay and principled conservative negotiations that secured “major” commitments of executive action and future legislation to promote the pro-life, pro-family cause.

The House of Representatives passed President Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act (H.R. 1) by a 218-214 vote on Thursday afternoon. All House Democrats voted no, joined by two Republicans: Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) and Thomas Massie (R-Ky.). Massie, a libertarian-leaning Republican, opposes the bill’s high deficit and spending levels, while Fitzpatrick accused the White House of “withholding critical defense material” from Ukraine.

The bill narrowly passed the Senate Tuesday, when Vice President J.D. Vance cast the tie-breaking vote. Senators Susan Collins (R-Maine), Rand Paul (R-Ky.), and Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) voted against the bill. It now goes to President Trump’s desk.

Democrats in both chambers tried, and failed, to prevent the bill from passing Congress by President Trump’s July 4 deadline. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) forced the Senate to read the full text of the 940-page bill aloud, which lasted nearly 16 hours. Schumer also poked at the president with a procedural motion to strip the act of its formal title, “The One Big Beautiful Bill Act.” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) stalled proceedings further on Thursday morning with an eight-hour, 44-minute-long filibuster that began at 4:53 a.m. Jeffries all-but admitted he aimed to slow the bill’s passage as a procedural irritant, saying numerous times throughout his speech, “I am going to take my sweet time,” followed by a sustained standing ovation from the small gaggle of Democratic hangers-on who stayed to listen.

“It takes a lot longer to build a lie than to tell the simple truth,” replied House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) in a brief rejoinder to Jeffries’s record-breaking speech. “Scripture has been cited a lot this morning — I think mostly out of context.”

“Today was about performance for some of them,” said Johnson. “Democrats deliver performances, and Republicans deliver results.”

The narrow passage reflected the concern of pro-life conservatives, who withheld their support until obtaining promises from GOP leaders to address the pro-life, pro-family provisions stripped out by the Senate.

As fiscal conservatives, border security conservatives, and national security hawks celebrated the passage of President Donald Trump’s signature One Big Beautiful Bill, pro-life and pro-family leaders wonder aloud why their concerns got eliminated or minimized by the legislation. Family Research Council President Tony Perkins said the debate’s primary focus on taxes “reminds me of Bill Clinton back in his 1992 campaign: ‘It’s the economy, Stupid.’ It’s not the economy; it is the moral foundation of a nation that matters.” Some conservatives went as far as to call the watered-down Senate version of the bill “morally bankrupt.”

The revised Senate version of the bill “does not defund transgender surgery for minors. That is a moral issue. It only cuts funding for abortion services for one year, not the 10 in the House bill. That’s morally bankrupt,” Rep. Keith Self (R-Texas) told “Washington Watch with Tony Perkins” Wednesday night.

While many pro-life advocates — including SBA Pro-Life America and Americans United for Life — called the bill’s one-year defunding of Planned Parenthood a step forward, some former insiders say the deep-pocketed abortion industry has the resources to wait it out. “While any taxpayer money diverted away from Planned Parenthood is a good thing, defunding our nation’s largest abortion provider for just one year is not the win many of us who believe abortion is abhorrent wanted it to be,” said former Planned Parenthood director and founder of And Then There Were None, Abby Johnson, in a statement emailed to The Washington Stand. “A year is enough time for many Planned Parenthood facilities to hold out to be re-funded. Some will close, but Planned Parenthood as an organization has millions of dollars, wealthy donors, and could support those clinics if they choose.”

Planned Parenthood, which received $792.2 million in taxpayer funding in 2024, reported total net assets of $2.52 billion. “Bottom line: it’s not enough and Republicans should permanently defund the abortion giant, not just for a paltry 12 months,” said Johnson.

“A one-year defunding of Planned Parenthood is no victory; it’s a disheartening concession,” Katie Brown Xavios, national director of American Life League, told TWS. “To receive only a token punishment for those who harm women and kill the innocent is unacceptable.”

Quena González, senior director of Government Affairs at Family Research Council, called the one-year interruption “just a very short pause on defunding” on Wednesday, noting that under the revised bill, “taxpayers will still be forced to underwrite experimental gender transition procedures.”

Family Research Council backed the House version of the bill and reserved the right to score against the Senate version. Ultimately, it reconsidered after House conservatives wrung several promises out of the Trump administration and Hill leadership.

“Last night, we facilitated negotiations and conservations on key policy issues that had been removed or modified from the House version,” announced FRC President Tony Perkins on Thursday morning. “[W]e believe we will see policy outcomes that offset the changes made by the Senate.”

House Conservatives: ‘We Gained, America Gained’

Leaders of the House Freedom Caucus quickly confirmed they had obtained promises for future executive action and legislation to defund abortion and transgender procedures, as well as other policy priorities. “We got significant commitments on spending reductions outside the framework of the bill,” Rep. Andy Harris (R-Md.) told “This Week on Capitol Hill.” “We said, ‘Let’s talk about some offsets elsewhere. Let’s talk about some things the executive can do to mitigate some of the concerns about what the Senate did with our House bill,’” Harris told Perkins.

“We got a major commitment, a serious commitment on spending reduction,” as well as “a large commitment on social issues. We got an agreement that the administration will add adults to their transgender funding limitation. And we’re going to have a discussion with the administration on the egregious, cross-state trafficking in mifepristone,” he said. “We talked about looking at program integrity in food stamps and in Medicaid,” where improper payments and fraud cost “tens of billions of dollars a year.” And “on the Green New Deal/Green New Scam provisions, the administration has a pretty fair leeway to interpret some of the Senate changes” to provisions of the Biden administration’s so-called Inflation Reduction Act.

Harris also revealed the House Freedom Caucus extracted a promise from the speaker of the House to address the nation’s ever-expanding national debt. “The speaker has agreed to have another vote on a Balanced Budget Amendment, because the last one we had was in November of 2011, trillions of dollars of deficits ago,” he said.

The House Freedom Caucus left the negotiations satisfied. “Everything we did was perfectly in line with the president’s agenda. So he went along with it,” said Harris. “We gained, America gained.”

In a statement sent to The Washington Stand shortly after the vote, Rep. Self confirmed the House Freedom Caucus “moved the bill dramatically to the right on almost every front and at every stage of the process, including overnight, as a small group of us continued working with the White House to address critical policy and spending issues.”

The bill threatened to further divide the Republican Party, as many Republicans reluctantly embraced the bill as the best alternative capable of passing Congress. “People with the same principles, looking at the same facts can actually apply and analyze those facts a little bit differently and reach a little bit different conclusion,” Rep. Nathaniel Moran (R-Texas) told “Washington Watch” later on Wednesday. “This is not the end-all, be-all decision for every moral matter that we have to deal with in Congress. This is, at its core, a bill about taxes and liberty.”

Social conservatives have long seen taxes and defense spending prioritized, while promises of pro-life or pro-family action do not come to fruition. However, President Trump has repeatedly said he will govern by the motto, “Promises made, promises kept.”

In part, social conservatives in the Trump administration may be wary of submitting legislation for fear liberal Republicans will exercise their collective muscle in negotiations. Harris noted the Trump administration “didn’t want to have to send this bill back to the Senate,” where senators such as abortion-supporting Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) could assure the bill “would actually get worse.”

What Is in the One Big Beautiful Bill?

As The Washington Stand reported, the surviving provisions largely carry out President Trump’s legislative agenda:

The revised bill increases the child tax credit to $2,200, indexed for inflation, down from $2,500 in the House bill. Without action, the child tax credit would have returned its pre-Trump level of $1,000.
The bill creates “TRUMP” savings accounts for children, indexed to the stock market like a 401(k), with a $1,000 deposit from U.S. taxpayers upon the birth of each child. The bill also furthers school choice by expanding educational savings accounts.
The bill makes permanent tax advantages from the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, including expanded personal exemptions and incentives for business research and development. “For working families, The One, Big, Beautiful Bill prevents a looming $1,700 tax hike and instead puts more money in Americans’ pockets — including upwards of $1,300 for tipped workers and $1,400 for hourly workers working overtime. Families will see a nearly $11,000 boost in take-home pay,” House Ways and Means Chairman Jason Smith (R-Mo.) told TWS. “Households making under $100,000 will see a 12% tax cut compared to what they pay today. The average family of four will see nearly $11,000 more in their pockets each year. Real wages for workers will rise by as much as $7,200 a year,” Smith added on the House floor. The final bill gives qualifying senior citizens a $6,000 deduction, which the White House Council of Economic Advisers estimates will assure that 88% of seniors on Social Security have no federal income tax liability. It eliminates federal income taxes on tips up to the first $25,000, phasing out for those who earn $150,000 a year (or couples making $300,000). Taxpayers may also deduct up to $12,500 of overtime pay under the same condition; it lapses in 2028. The bill also lets people who buy cars made in America write off up to $10,000 in interest on the car’s loan.
Enhancing border security. “This bill gives President Trump the tools he needs to finish securing the border by providing $175 billion in new funding. It will allow for completion of the border wall, fund ICE deportation efforts, and hire and train new border patrol agents,” agreed Rep. Mark Harris (R-N.C.) in a statement sent to TWS. It also taxes remittances to foreign countries. “It secures our border, funds the largest mass deportation operation in American history, and delivers the tax relief working families deserve,” Rep. Brandon Gill (R-Texas) told TWS.
Securing national defense. The bill increases defense spending by roughly $160 billion, including $25 billion for a domestic “Iron Dome” missile defense system.
Student loan reform. The bill imposes a $257,500 lifetime cap on student loan borrowing and reduces provisions that allow borrowers to delay paying back their students loans.
Underwriting high-tax states and cities. The Senate version of the bill increases the state and local tax (SALT) deduction to $40,000 for the next five years.
Slowing our exit from the Green New Deal. The Senate bill ends tax credits or subsidies for green energy projects, such as wind and solar power favored by the Biden administration, for projects constructed within a year of the bill’s passage and that go into service by the end of 2027. But the latest bill removed a proposed excise tax on companies in those industries that use more than a specified amount of components (such as solar panels or batteries) made in China. The Senate version generally slows down the GOP’s efforts to phase out the Left’s cherished credits.
Slowing SNAP reform. The Senate bill delayed reforms to the much-abused Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, program in certain states.
Reforming Medicaid. Medicaid recipients capable of work and who do not have a child at home must spend 80 hours a month in paid work, community service, or schooling/vocational training. The work requirements would save taxpayers an estimated $325 billion over the next 10 years. The bill also reduces the Medicaid provider tax from 6% to 3.5% starting in the 2028 fiscal year.

Despite some well-received economic news, conservatives say the bill still spends too much money and raises the debt ceiling to $5 trillion.

Rep. Mark Harris warned, “if Washington’s overspending addiction continues, the opportunity to put our country back on a path to a sound financial future is in jeopardy. In the coming months, Republicans must use every tool at our disposal to rein in government spending. This is not the end of our work.” (Emphasis in original.) Still, he said, “The country is much better off today than it was a few days ago. There’s certainty in the average working man and woman’s pocketbook that they’re not going to get a tax increase next year” — and greater faith “that the president is watching out for them.”

Nonetheless, Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) promised TWS that conservatives would not rest long before collecting the policy commitments they earned in exchange for supporting the amended legislation.

“Celebrate today,” said Roy. “Fight again tomorrow.”

AUTHOR

Ben Johnson

Ben Johnson is senior reporter and editor at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLES:

‘What Is an American?’ Why We Remember Heroes on Our National Holiday

A Historic Week at the Supreme Court

CIA: Intelligence Community’s 2016 ‘Russian Collusion’ Claims Suffered Political Bias, Procedural Anomalies

The post House Passes BBB as Conservatives Win ‘Significant Commitments’ on Life, Transgenderism appeared first on Dr. Rich Swier.

The 3 Most Important Votes of the ‘One Big Beautiful Bill’ Vote-a-Rama

July 1, 2025

By Family Research Council

President Donald Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill” moved closer to adoption overnight, as Senate Democrats attempted to load the bill with poison pill amendments in the “vote-a-rama.” During the lengthy amendment process, which began at 9 a.m. Monday morning and continues as of this writing, anyone may offer amendments to the 940-page bill. Senate changes have already made the bill less attractive to pro-life, pro-family conservatives. Yet the revised text also removes a controversial, 10-year moratorium on states regulating artificial intelligence.

“The president’s ‘One Big Beautiful Bill’ is quickly losing its glamour in the Senate. The bill now appears to be a contestant in a beauty pageant for a tractor pull,” said FRC Action Chairman Tony Perkins. “The Senate version currently defunds big abortion providers like Planned Parenthood for only one year, instead of ten. That’s a huge disappointment. The first Senate version defunded gender transition procedures in Medicaid (not in Obamacare, as the House did, nor in Medicare or in the tax code, as had been proposed). But the current version will subject even that slimmed-down provision to a 60-vote threshold, meaning the provision will not pass the Senate, and Americans will continue to pay for gender transition experimentation on vulnerable individuals.”

Perkins wondered only if Senate Republican leaders were “completely out-muscled by the parliamentarian, or worse yet, didn’t try to secure the key components of the House version.” Senate GOP inaction “shows an unacceptable lack of political will.”

“Will senators fight to defund abortion providers for the maximum-allowable 10 years? Will they fight to defund gender procedures that bring trauma and life-long harm, or will they be satisfied with a show-vote on gender transition procedures?” asked Perkins.

Here are three of the most important votes that took place over the last 24 hours.

1. The Senate Continues to Defund Planned Parenthood

The Senate version of the bill reduced the 10-year defunding of Planned Parenthood to only one year. But overnight, the Senate narrowly voted down an amendment to strike down even that brief funding interlude, on a 51-49 vote. Two “pro-choice” Republicans, Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, voted with the Democrats to fund the nation’s largest abortion business, which committed 402,230 abortions and received $792.2 million in taxpayer funding in 2024.

“The Republicans’ bill will cut millions of women off from birth control, cancer screenings, essential preventative health care — care they will not be able to afford anywhere else,” alleged Senator Patty Murray (D-Wash.). “It will take another step towards enacting the Republicans’ plan for a backdoor nationwide abortion ban. How does it do this? By defunding Planned Parenthood.” Republicans, she said, were “happy to cut off this life-saving care.”

But Kristen Day, executive director of Democrats for Life, rebutted the talking point. “Defunding Planned Parenthood is not one of them. Community Health Centers and Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) provide comprehensive healthcare, and there are more of them!” she said. “Let’s fully fund real healthcare.”

“Senate Democrats just failed in their attempt to remove the meager tip (10%) that Senate Republicans were offering to the taxpayers and pro-life Americans,” said Perkins.

Kristan Hawkins of Students for Life of America said, “Let me be clear: Defunding Planned Parenthood for one year would be one small step that we celebrate, while we will still fight for all those at risk by the Abortion Goliath’s predatory & violent business. One giant leap would be full debarment.”

2. Senate Nixes the 10-year Moratorium on States Regulating Artificial Intelligence (AI)

On a nearly unanimous vote, the Senate adopted a bipartisan amendment from Senators Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) and Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) to eliminate the One Big Beautiful Bill’s controversial, 10-year moratorium on AI regulation. If enacted, the provision would have struck down an estimated 75 existing state laws and barred any further protections for the next decade, including laws against AI-generated child pornography.

Blackburn and Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas) had sought a compromise that would reduce the decade-long federal ban on state AI regulations to five years and allow states to protect children from exploitation, and safeguard people’s images and likenesses, provided those regulations did not impose an “undue or disproportionate burden” on artificial intelligence. “Find you a senator who looks at defunding gender transition procedures the way Ted Cruz looks at protecting AI,” joked Quena González, senior director of Government Affairs at Family Research Council, on social media.

But Blackburn eventually broke with Cruz, saying the proposed compromise did not do enough for “those who need these protections the most. This provision could allow Big Tech to continue to exploit kids, creators, and conservatives. Until Congress passes preemptive legislation like the Kids Online Safety Act and an online privacy framework, we can’t block states from making laws that protect their citizens.” On the House floor, Blackburn listed a litany of AI regulations Congress had failed to pass, which states have adopted. On Friday, 17 Republican governors urged congressional leaders to strike the AI moratorium, saying it “threatens to undo all the work states have done to protect our citizens from the misuse of artificial intelligence.”

Cruz withdrew his amendment a little after 4 a.m. Tuesday, paving the way for the House to adopt Blackburn’s amendment on a strongly bipartisan basis: 99-1. Senator Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) cast the lone no vote.

3. Democrats Extend Taxpayer-Funded Benefits to Criminal Illegal Immigrants

Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas) offered an amendment that would have reduced federal Medicaid funding to states that cover illegal immigrants charged with serious crimes. Under Senate parliamentary procedure, the measure needed to clear a 60-vote threshold but passed with only 56 votes. One Republican, Susan Collins of Maine, voted against the measure. Meanwhile, five Democratic senators voted in favor: Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire, Catherine Cortez-Masto of Nevada, and Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock of Georgia. “Illegal aliens should be on a flight back to their home country, not on Medicaid (funded by American taxpayers)!!!” said Rep. Keith Self (R-Texas). On Monday, the Senate rejected an amendment from Blackburn that would have prevented states from allowing illegal immigrants to enroll in Medicaid.

The Senate also rebuffed numerous attempts to maintain or further extend Green New Deal tax credits and subsidies. Senator Mike Crapo (R-Idaho) spoke in opposition to many of the measures, branding taxpayer funding of “mature industries” as “wasteful.”

House conservatives laid much of the blame for the One Big Beautiful Bill Act’s lost beauty at the footsteps of Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough, a former Al Gore adviser. “The Senate parliamentarian over the last few days has said that a lot of our deficit reduction measures were invalid under the Byrd rule. They’ll have to be changed and modified,” Rep. Andy Harris (R-Md.) told “Washington Watch” regular guest host Jody Hice on Friday. Many have asked for the Senate to overrule the parliamentarian, something Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) has repeatedly and recently refused to do. “I’ve asked for her to be fired. I don’t know why you would be the Republican leader of the Senate and have a parliamentarian who was hired by Harry Reid 12 years ago,” Rep. Greg Steube (R-Fla.) told “Washington Watch” Monday.

House conservatives said changing the original text of the bill too much risks upsetting the key agreements that allowed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act to pass the House, where Republicans also hold only a three-vote majority. “It was a very carefully negotiated compromise. And as they wander away from that, it becomes less and less likely that it’s going to succeed when it comes back out to the House,” said Harris. “We want this to succeed. We want President Trump to succeed. But the safest thing they could do is take our House bill and just pass it the way we pass it, or make some very small changes.”

“If they try to send it over to the House with a large increase in the budget deficit, then I think we’re going to have to go back to the drawing board,” warned Harris.

House leaders want the bill to meet President Trump’s deadline of July 4, making a speedy House vote likely. “I’ve been talking with [Senate Majority] Leader Thune constantly through the process and with individual senators, encouraging them to change the House product as little as possible,” Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-La.) told “This Week on Capitol Hill” Saturday.

“I will have to wait about 72 hours for the bill to lay over before we can vote. But the plan would be if it’s in shape that we could use it,” said Johnson. A prompt House vote “would also allow for the president to have a big, beautiful bill signing on Independence Day. And I certainly hope we can keep that deadline.”

As the Senate nears a final text, senators on both sides of the aisle can agree on one thing: They want the nearly day-long marathon known as “vote-a-rama,” to end. “It’s like an all-night party, but without the party,” quipped Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah) in the wee hours of Tuesday morning.

“I just want to go home,” agreed Senator John Fetterman (D-Penn.). “I’ve already missed our entire trip to the beach.”

AUTHOR

Ben Johnson

Ben Johnson is senior reporter and editor at The Washington Stand.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Policy Has Consequences: Anti-Family Polices in Cuba Are Affecting Real People

The War of the Machines: Peter Thiel, J.R.R. Tolkien, the Antichrist, and Technology

Two Polls Reveal Public Support Is Growing for Prayer, Chaplains in Schools

Obey … or be Punished

June 30, 2025

By Karen Schoen

“Science can be described as a process of discovering things. It’s a systematic and organized way of acquiring knowledge about the natural world through observation, experimentation, and analysis.”

Did you know there are multiple ways to reach the same conclusion, Just like there are multiple roads to get you to the same place? To say only one road exists and all other roads are wrong is the same consensus that says you must believe what the experts say without question. This is the way our children are taught. There is only one road and you must follow that road or you are considered an outcast.

Money Power Control

Experts can be proven wrong, but they must be challenged. That is the critical thinking component currently missing from our schools. We no longer teach our students to challenge, we teach them to accept. Claims are made and government subsidies are given to corporations to create the product that the government wants. This is the product that fits the Agenda.

Good or bad, right or wrong, the product is forced on people while ignoring the consequences. Profit (money and grants), mandates (control) and propaganda (power), used by the rulers, nudges the sheeple into the desired results. Often science has nothing to do with the processes or outcomes. These policies are forced on the public, without discussion of consequences. Any challenge is met with, “You can’t challenge the science.”

According to H. Sterling Burnett, “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.” Yet, very few will stand up and say, show me the proof! How is that possible? The Media in lock step with the Government, is masking the true results. The statistics are manipulated by computer modeling of a specified time frame so the results are created as desired. How often do we hear, “this is the hottest or coldest temperature in recorded history. ” Did you know that recorded history only goes back 150 years?

After reading an article about how man was destroying the planet, I decided to email the author. I asked him what the temperature was when Columbus discovered America in 1492. He said no one kept records then, so he didn’t know. I asked how far back the records go and he said 150 years. I said, “So your article should really say that this is the hottest day we have had in 150 years, not recorded history.” I asked him how old the planet was. I got no answer. I asked, “Isn’t 150 years out of 4.5 Billion years (the age of the earth) too small to make a comparison?” I got no answer. Yet, this kind of manipulation is what our students learn.

Another lie about climate change is that all-to-familiar image of the poor polar bear sitting on a tiny piece of ice floating in the ocean. Yes, the ice is melting, but only if you take photos in the summer or if the ice has been affected by a volcano. But that doesn’t mean the oceans will rise and the houses near the ocean will be washed away. Information like that is designed to scare the students enough so that they will go home and chastise their parents. Communists can use this to drive a wedge between the child and parents to break up the family.

Obey or be Punished

Not teaching science in school eliminates teaching the students to have the ability to reason and think. The part of the brain that regulates logic, reason and critical thinking never develops properly. The student grows up learning to accept, comply and become an obedient little follower. Students are not taught HOW to think. Rather, they are taught WHAT to think. Hitler was successful for this very reason. Hitler very effectively used indoctrination to force children to Obey or Be Punished. Hitler’s move to ban the Boy Scouts also allowed for indoctrination of impressionable children letting Nazis remove children from the influence of their parents, many of whom opposed the regime. Again, driving a wedge between children and parents and the family. Read about it here:

Issues that we think of as absurd become normalized. We see that example today. Grandmothers are jailed for praying and criminals committing murder are released! Students under 18 can’t vote or carry a gun but can change their gender without parental consent.

Pornography can be read in school but not at a school board meeting! Gays rally for Hamas without knowing that, in Palestine, Hamas beheads gays!

Our school system is not broken.

Things that are not taught are not taught for a reason.

Dumb people accept more from their government.

Today, we have wonderful tools to learn the truth. It is up to us to share that information. Join me with H Sterling Burnett, from Heartland Institute on this week’s show, as we discuss Truth in Science vs. the Propaganda of Science.

Please visit Karen’s Newsletter substack.

Get Involved. Join rinoremovalproject.org and or Reclaimcampaign.com

Support President Trump, and make sure our students get a traditional American education. Phonics in K-3, Cursive in 3-5, Singapore Math, civics.

Join the Florida Citizens Alliance, goflca.org Help save America, mentor a child.

Show: Sat and Sun 7AM ET and 5PM ET

Show Link https://www.americaoutloud.news/the-prism-of-americas-education/

Podcasts and Articles: karenbschoen.com karenschoen.substack.com

Guest: H Sterling Burnett, editor, journalist ClimateRealism.com

Website: heartland.org, ClimateRealism.com, Climate Change Weekly.

The post Obey … or be Punished appeared first on Dr. Rich Swier.

‘Outright Massacre’: Senate GOP Takes Sledgehammer To Biden’s Green Energy Subsidies

June 29, 2025

By The Daily Caller

The Senate dealt a series of blows to solar and wind energy in the latest version of President Donald Trump’s “big, beautiful” bill — taking a page out of House Republicans’ playbook to crack down on green energy tax credits enacted under former President Joe Biden.

The Senate’s new proposal would move up the deadline for solar and wind projects hoping to qualify for production and investment tax credits by requiring them to produce electricity by the end of 2027. The additional cuts to green energy tax credits follows the president’s public broadside against the upper chamber’s initial proposal, which delayed the termination of solar and wind subsidies.

“Windmills, and the rest of this ‘JUNK,’ are the most expensive and inefficient energy in the world, is destroying the beauty of the environment, and is 10 times more costly than any other energy,” Trump wrote in a post to Truth Social on June 21. “It is time to break away, finally, from this craziness!!!”

The upper chamber’s revised bill would also create a new tax on wind and solar projects whose components are sourced from foreign entities of concern, such as China.

Senate Democrats referred to the creation of a new excise tax penalizing the renewable industry’s reliance on Chinese materials as “economic self-sabotage” and an “outright massacre” for the solar and wind industry.

Republican Utah Sen. Mike Lee was one of several GOP senators pushing the upper chamber to aggressively crack down on solar and wind tax credits in the president’s landmark bill. The Utah Republican favors a wholesale repeal of green energy subsidies, though Congress is likely to stop short of that given opposition from moderate Republicans.

We must get this done

And we will! https://t.co/ZbkexF2yqA

— Mike Lee (@BasedMikeLee) June 27, 2025

Republican North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis told reporters Saturday that the Senate finance panel’s decision to accelerate the termination of solar and wind subsidies by the end of 2027 was “disappointing.” He also suggested that failure to maintain the green energy tax breaks would have negative economic consequences for his state.

Tillis is one of several GOP senators that has pledged to vote against the president’s landmark tax and immigration bill, citing the legislation’s reforms to Medicaid.

Elon Musk, the world’s richest man and former Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) lead, blasted Senate Republicans for rolling back green energy subsidies within their proposal, accusing GOP senators of putting “millions of jobs” on the chopping block.

“The latest Senate draft bill will destroy millions of jobs in America and cause immense strategic harm to our country!” Musk, the founder of the electric vehicle manufacturer, Tesla, wrote on his social media platform, X. “Utterly insane and destructive. It gives handouts to industries of the past while severely damaging industries of the future.”

Proponents of terminating green energy subsidies argued that the green energy industry’s messaging revealed its dependency on government funds in order to be profitable.

“If, as supporters of the IRA [Inflation Reduction Act] are complaining, repealing these subsidies will ‘kill’ their industry, then maybe it shouldn’t exist in the first place,” American Energy Alliance president Tom Pyle said in a statement Saturday. “Extending green giveaways on the backs of American taxpayers is shortsighted and neglectful.”

The conservative House Freedom Caucus (HFC) has also urged the Senate to adopt the House-passed language that put solar and wind tax credits on a faster route to termination.

Several HFC members, including Republican Reps. Chip Roy of Texas and Ralph Norman of South Carolina, suggested they would not vote for the Senate’s proposal if it failed to adhere to the House language accelerating the termination of green energy subsidies.

“That’s got to go,” Norman told the DCNF in an interview Thursday. “The President wants it to go. He wants to abolish all of them. We agree with that.”

AUTHOR

Adam Pack

Congressional Reporter.

The post ‘Outright Massacre’: Senate GOP Takes Sledgehammer To Biden’s Green Energy Subsidies appeared first on Dr. Rich Swier.

Rapid Response:

The White House:

My Comments regarding their fine Report —

The Dr. Rich Swier Report for July 17, 2025

A Good Analysis —

An Example —

Takeaway —

Steven Stalinsky

Did USAID Fund COVID’s Ancestor?

The Bottom Line —

House Conservatives: ‘We Gained, America Gained’

What Is in the One Big Beautiful Bill?

1. The Senate Continues to Defund Planned Parenthood

2. Senate Nixes the 10-year Moratorium on States Regulating Artificial Intelligence (AI)

3. Democrats Extend Taxpayer-Funded Benefits to Criminal Illegal Immigrants

Money Power Control

Obey or be Punished

STAY INFORMED