Recently the Florida Surgeon General Dr. Joseph A. Ladapo MD, PhD. released an analysis on the COVID- 19 mRNA vaccines. Right away he and his scientists and medical experts were attacked. Going on Fake News his Tweet was removed. But I have to believe that with a great outcry from the medical community his tweet and the medical proof was put back up.
Recently a link was sent to me from a obscure far left website that attacked his credentials. Granted they all play as medical experts on the internet, but how do their medical credentials compare?
Crickets.
Here’s Dr. Ladapo’s Credentials.
He attended college at Wake Forest University, and earned an MD and a PhD in Health Policy from Harvard University.[ He completed a residency and fellowship in internal medicine at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, a teaching hospital of Harvard Medical School. He was a professor of medicine at New York University and UCLA. He became acting Florida surgeon general in September 2021,
Let’s hope that Republicans especially in blue districts point out the huge rise in crime since January 2021. And the recent alleged kidnapping and killing of a white person by a black made page 21 on a large city newspaper. But no white folks have started to riot.
But aren’t you glad Democrats have a zillion “crime” proposals that will take guns away from the law-abiding? Just think of what might have happened if we introduced guns into this situation! Under Biden’s “Safer America Plan,” attempted kidnappings will be fought mano a mano: a delicate 130-pound woman vs. a 6-foot, 175-pound man.
Yeah, you can definitely trust Democrats on crime, America.
Democratsenthusiasticallysupported the 2020 BLM riots that did more than a billion dollars’ worth of damage just in the first two weeks and left at least 25 people dead.
Sad that this is reported first in the UK. The UK’s DailyMail.com reported that the committee has formally withdrawn its subpoena for fundraising information from the Republican National Committee and former President Donald Trump.
The outlet added that, according to sources familiar with the situation who spoke to The Washington Post, lawyers for the RNC and software vendor Salesforce were informed last week of the committee’s withdrawal of the subpoena.
“The subpoena issued earlier this year sought records from Salesforce on the performance metrics and analytics related to email campaigns from Donald Trump, his reelection campaign and the RNC,” DailyMail.com reported. “It comes as the panel prepares for at least one more hearing this month.
“We said all along that this subpoena was unconstitutional,” RNC spokeswoman Emma Vaughn said after it was withdrawn. “This is a victory for freedom of speech, privacy, and Americans’ right of political association without fear of partisan reprisal.”
President Joe Biden criticizes state legislatures for passing election reforms in a speech July 13, 2021, at the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia. (Photo: Drew Angerer/Getty Images)
Joey gave a speech attacking over 70 million Americans. Let’s look at his accomplishments. Snicker snicker snort snort. So let’s look at the great things he’s done since January 20th, 2021.
First day he put thousands of Americans out of work with his shut down of the pipeline, fracking and drilling on federal land. Those jobs were good paying and most were union. Joe bag of donuts.,000
Price of gas quickly doubled, open borders, defeat and retreat in Afghanistan, Inflation, three vaccines but over 600,000 deaths, and the Russia/ Ukraine war.
Did I mention higher crime rates, out of control spending, higher cost of living, and a DOJ going after American citizens and a former President.
A detail image of the Duke Blue Devils flag during the national anthem before the game between the Kansas Jayhawks and the Villanova Wildcats during the 2022 NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament Final Four semifinal at Caesars Superdome on April 2, 2022 in New Orleans, Louisiana. (Chris Graythen/Getty Images)
Witnesses have reportedly come forward saying no racial slurs were heard during the BYU-Duke women’s volleyball match last Friday, in which Duke’s Rachel Richardson, the only Black starter for the Blue Devils, said she was heckled throughout “the entirety of the match.”
Richardson said in a statement that BYU officials were not quick enough to address the situation upon the initial grievance from the Duke bench. BYU noted that the fan, who the Salt Lake Tribune said was a Utah Valley University student sitting in the student section, was banned from all athletic venues on campus.
The BYU Cougar Chronicle — a student newspaper at the university — said “a source inside the BYU athletic department” said: “Ms. Richardson complained of hearing a racial slur during the second set but didn’t not point anyone out. Officials discussed briefly and stationed policemen there…there were no more complaints until after the match.”
The Chronicle spoke to several students seated in the student section during the game that claimed they “heard absolutely nothing,” and that the banned fan did not yell a racial slur before being escorted out of the game.
The fan was escorted out of Smith Fieldhouse due to “interfering with guests,” not for shouting racial slurs, said the BYU Athletics official. BYU officials said that several athletic employees have been going through footage of the game and have yet to find any evidence of racial slurs being shouted.
“Various BYU Athletics employees have been reviewing video from BYUtv and other cameras in the facility that the volleyball team has access to for film review,” BYU officials said in a statement. “This has been ongoing since right after the match on Friday night. The person who was banned was the person identified by Duke as using racial slurs. However, we have been unable to find any evidence of that person using slurs in the match.”
Here’s who they are attacking.
There is also the police report from BYU police Det. Sgt. Richard Laursen, who stood next to the banned fan throughout the fourth set, saying the man may have “(A)sparger syndrome or could have autism,” per the Deseret News. The BYU athletics official also told the BYU student-led newspaper the man was mentally challenged.
“When a mentally challenged fan approached a Duke player, the Duke team then suddenly recognized the handicapped man’s ‘voice’ as the same one shouting slurs,” the BYU Athletics official told the Chronicle. “They never saw or pointed out a face, just a voice. They banned this man. Not for slurs, but for interfering with visiting guests. BYU Athletics staff went through footage of the entire game and the man Duke identified was never seated in the student section. Her story doesn’t add up, BYU banned an innocent man to appease the mob and make their PR mess go away. While I don’t know if Ms. Richardson genuinely misheard something or intentionally made up this story, it certainly does not constitute the criticism BYU has gotten. There is zero evidence of a slur being said. Not a single witness, besides Ms. Richardson, has come forth. Not a single cell phone video or BYUtv’s several camera angles caught a single thing. How unlikely when this person supposedly said a slur during ‘every single serve.'”
I want to thank one of the writers from Substack for this great article.
For several months, The Dossier has reported on the unscientific, political mRNA mandates being pursued by executive branch agencies within the Biden Administration, particularly the Department of Defense, which has unlawfully forced active duty service members to get injected with the gene juice.
The Dossier
Biden Admin officials scramble to escape blame for unlawful Pentagon order mandating mRNA for troops
Lawyers representing America’s service members are beginning to produce victories defending the U.S. Armed Forces against forced compliance with biomedical gene therapy experiments, and suddenly, nobody in the Pentagon wants to take accountability for their legally dubious mRNA injection order…
It seemed obvious to anyone thinking clearly about this issue that the government’s mRNA mandates, especially in the military, are being leveraged to create ideological conformity within the ranks. Clearly, “readiness” is not a serious explanation for the mRNA mandate, given the minuscule threat posed by the coronavirus to young men, coupled with the troubling side effect profile of the shots.
The Dossier
Military whistleblowers: DOD’s legally dubious mRNA mandate has harmed readiness, produced widespread injuries
A group of active U.S. military pilots are coming forward as whistleblowers to challenge both the legal and moral nature of the Department of Defense mRNA mandate, and they’ve produced some shocking testimonials that challenge virtually all of the mainstream narratives about a supposedly “safe and effective” mRNA vaccine…
12 days ago · 219 likes · 69 comments · Jordan Schachtel
Picket reported, via a whistleblower, that this is exactly what is happening at the FBI. This newly fired agent was allegedly dismissing unvaccinated agents to ensure political compliance within the Bureau.
The agent was allegedly “known for pushing out unvaccinated agents from the FBI’s election squad whom he suspected to be Trump supporters,” the story reads.
This is the real reason for the mRNA mandate. It’s the best way to clean house, ideologically.
Through an even wider scope, COVID Mania as a whole has involved powerful enterprises conducting routine power grabs, dividing up civil society, and installing political compliance tests into every avenue of daily life. The FBI’s reported role in this process serves as just one example of many more to come.
It all began on August 24, 2021, when Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin issued a memo mandating mRNA “vaccination” for the active military, but with the stipulation that this mandate only applied to fully licensed products. This was because, as The Dossier understands, it is illegal to force service members to take an EUA vaccine.
Sec Def Lloyd Austin memo
The Sec Austin memo and the guidance that followed created an issue, because, as The Dossier readers are well aware of by now, the FDA licensed versions of the mRNA shots never actually made it to market, rendering the initial vaccine mandate useless.
This is where the infamous September 14, 2021 memo comes into play.
Dr Terry Adirim, the woman who signed the memo, is a devoted democrat political activist and, as a medical doctor, advocates for “gender-affirming prescriptions” for “transgender” children. At the time, she was the acting assistant secretary of defense for health affairs (under a Biden political appointment). Adirim’s memo attempted to justify mandating EUA shots as if they were FDA approved.
Terry Adirim Twitter profile
Dr Adirim’s deceptive memo described the EUA and FDA licensed vaccines as “interchangeable,” adding that the Defense Department can “use doses distributed under the EUA to administer the vaccination series as if the doses were the licensed vaccine.” Adirim failed to note that the EUA vaccines were only administratively interchangeable, but not *legally* interchangeable, as made clear by the FDA. This should have rendered any mandate unenforceable.
In other documents and statements, she routinely made claims that FDA licensed vaccines were available to troops, when that was not in fact the case.
Following the mRNA injection order, untold thousands of service members were coerced — under threat of both administrative and criminal action — to take a “vaccine” that they wanted no part of. Unsurprisingly, this mandatory novel gene therapy injection has harmed combat readiness and produced widespread, serious, long term injuries throughout the armed forces.
The Dossier
Military whistleblowers: DOD’s legally dubious mRNA mandate has harmed readiness, produced widespread injuries
A group of active U.S. military pilots are coming forward as whistleblowers to challenge both the legal and moral nature of the Department of Defense mRNA mandate, and they’ve produced some shocking testimonials that challenge virtually all of the mainstream narratives about a supposedly “safe and effective” mRNA vaccine…
The Pentagon’s unlawful order is being challenged in court by lawyers representing all branches of the military. On Thursday, the Marine Corps became the latest service branch granted a class wide injunction against the mandate.
Since leaving the Pentagon, Adirim has sought to distance herself from the letter, claiming that “crazy” attempts to hold her accountable are misguided, because it was “The Secretary” (Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin) who “directed vaccinations.” Neither Austin nor the Pentagon has confirmed that the Secretary of Defense ordered Adirim to sign off on the unlawful mandate.
Adirim remains in government as the program executive director of the VA’s Electronic Health Record Modernization Integration Office. As a government official, both she and the Secretary of Defense are easily accessible to testify via a congressional subpoena, should congress want to investigate their controversial memos. As Adirim’s memo has come under scrutiny, she has decided to lock her social media accounts.
Washington, D.C., has a vaccine mandate requiring students aged 12 and older to be inoculated against COVID-19. Many black students will not meet that requirement. Pictured: D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser attends a news conference May 2, 2018, on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C. (Photo: Alex Wong/Getty Images)
Remember when Joe and Kamala said don’t get the jab cause it’s the Trump vaccine? But then they jumped the line and got theirs. Well the black folk listened and they still aren’t taking the jab. Especially the children. Well Mayor Bowser of DC has a surprise for you.
During a press conference, Bowser, a Democrat, admitted there are no alternative options, including virtual learning, for students who cannot attend school due to the District’s vaccine mandate, meaning unvaccinated children will effectively be left without an education.
Some interesting numbers from The Daily Signal. Over 40% of blacks ages 12-17 are not vaccinated, according to city data. Among black teens aged 16-17, 42% are unvaccinated.
Updated data from the government’s vaccine numbers website shows 47% of the black children in the district ages 12-15 had not completed their primary vaccination series necessary to go back to school in person.
A bizarre string of events is unfolding at the American Historical Association (AHA). Last week, AHA president James H. Sweet published a column in the organization’s magazine on the problem of “presentism” in academic historical writing. According to Sweet, an unsettling number of academic historians have allowed their political views in the present to shape and distort their interpretations of the past.
Sweet offered a gentle criticism of the New York Times’s 1619 Project as evidence of this pattern. Many historians embraced the 1619 Project for its political messages despite substantive flaws of fact and interpretation in its content. Sweet thus asked: “As journalism, the project is powerful and effective, but is it history?”
Within moments of his column appearing online, all hell broke loose on Twitter.
Incensed at even the mildest suggestion that politicization is undermining the integrity of historical scholarship, the activist wing of the history profession showed up on the AHA’s thread and began demanding Sweet’s cancellation. Cate Denial, a professor of history at Knox College, led the charge with a widely-retweeted thread calling on colleagues to bombard the AHA’s Executive Board with emails protesting Sweet’s column. “We cannot let this fizzle,” she declared before posting a list of about 20 email addresses.
Other activist historians joined in, flooding the thread with profanity-laced attacks on Sweet’s race and gender as well as calls for his resignation over a disliked opinion column. The responses were almost universally devoid of any substance. None challenged Sweet’s argument in any meaningful way. It was sufficient enough for him to have harbored the “wrong” thoughts – to have questioned the scholarly rigor of activism-infused historical writing, and to have criticized the 1619 Project in even the mildest terms.
New York Times columnist and 1619 Project contributor Jamie Bouie jumped in, casually dismissing Sweet’s concerns over the politicization of scholarship with contemporary “social justice” issues. 1619 Project creator Nikole Hannah-Jones retweeted the attacks on Sweet, even though she has previously invoked the “journalistic” and editorial nature of her project to shield it from scholarly criticism by historians.
Other activist historians such as the New School’s Claire Potter retorted that the 1619 Project was indeed scholarly history, insisting that “big chunks of it are written by professional, award-winning historians.” Sweet was therefore in the wrong to call it journalism, or to question its scholarly accuracy. Potter’s claims are deeply misleading. Only two of the 1619 Project’s twelve feature essays were written by historians, and neither of them are specialists in the crucial period between 1776-1865, when slavery was at its peak. The controversial parts of the 1619 Project were all written by opinion journalists such as Hannah-Jones, or non-experts writing well outside of their own competencies such as Matthew Desmond.
The frenzy further exposed the very same problems in the profession that Sweet’s essay cautioned against. David Austin Walsh, a historian at the University of Virginia, took issue with historians offering any public criticism of the 1619 Project’s flaws – no matter their validity – because those criticisms are “going to be weaponized by the right.” In Walsh’s hyperpoliticized worldview, historical accuracy is wholly subordinate to the political objectives of the project. Sweet’s sin in telling the truth about the 1619 Project’s defects was being “willfully blind to the predictable political consequences of [his] public interventions.” Any argument that does not advance a narrow band of far-left political activism is not only unfit for sharing – it must be suppressed.
Within hours of the AHA’s original tweet of Sweet’s article, the cancellation campaign was in full swing. Predictably, the AHA caved to the cancellers.
One day after the offending article went live, the AHA tweeted out a “public apology” from Sweet. It reads like a forced confession statement, acknowledging the “harm” and “damage” allegedly caused by simply raising questions about the politicization of scholarship toward overtly ideological activist ends. It did not matter that Sweet’s criticisms were mild and couched in plenty of nuance, or that they even came from a center-left perspective that also criticized conservative historians for politicizing the debate around gun rights. Sweet was guilty of pointing out that partisan political activism undermines scholarly rigor when the lines between the two blur, because the overwhelming majority of that activism inside the history profession currently comes from the political left. And for that, the very same activists extracted an obsequious apology letter. Its text, reproduced below, reads like a “struggle session” for academic wrongthink.
Sweet’s apology excited the activist wing of the profession, though it did little to placate their ire. The resignationdemands continued, because Sweet’s apology was “insincere” and because his argument would be used by the “wrong” people – i.e. anyone who dissents from a particular brand of progressive activist orthodoxy. Simply criticizing the 1619 Project would play into the tactics of “Right-wingers, Nazis, and other bad-faith actors” who could use Sweet’s commentary “in the service of white supremacism and misogyny” announced Kevin Gannon, a historian who’s primarily known for scolding other scholars on twitter when they deviate from the profession’s far-left orthodoxies.
In this branch of academia, it does not matter whether the 1619 Project was truthful or factually accurate. The only concerns are whether its narrative can be weaponized for a political cause or used to deflect scrutiny of the same. As is often the case in the pseudo-moralizing political crusades of academia, the loudest demands against Sweet also came from the least-productive academics – historians with thin CVs and little in the way of original scholarly research to their names, although they do maintain 24/7 Twitter feeds of progressive political commentary.
Lora Burnett, one of the more vocal cancellation crusaders after the initial article posted, scoffed at Sweet, announcing “this apology was basically, ‘sorry I made you sad but I’m still right.’” She continued: “lamenting ‘inartful expression’ is apparently easier than admitting to flawed argument, unsupported claims, and factually incorrect assertions.” Note that Burnett and the other detractors never bothered to explain how Sweet’s argument was flawed or unsupported. Nor did they attempt to pen a rebuttal, which could have produced a constructive dialogue about the role of political activism in shaping historical scholarship. It was sufficient to denounce him as guilty for holding the wrong opinions. No matter the apology that Sweet made, the campaign to eject him from the history profession’s markedly impolite company would continue.
Meanwhile, the rest of the world began to take notice of the bizarre spectacle playing out at the main professional organization for a major academic discipline. As criticisms mounted on the AHA’s twitter feed, the organization moved to shut down debate entirely. They locked their twitter account, and posted a message to members denouncing the public blowback as the product of “trolls” and “bad faith actors.”
Keep in mind that only 24 hours earlier, the AHA had no problem with hundreds of activist historians flooding their threads with actual harassing behavior by bad faith actors. It tolerated cancellation threats directed against its president, calls to flood the personal email accounts of its board with harassing messages and denunciations of Sweet, and dozens of profane, sexist, and personally degrading attacks on Sweet himself. There were no AHA denunciations of those “trolls” or their “appalling” behavior, and no statements calling for “civil discourse” while the activist Twitterstorian mobs flooded the original thread with obscenity-laced vitriol and ad hominem attacks on Sweet.
Sadly, this type of unprofessional belligerence is now the norm on History Twitter. It would never be tolerated from any other perspective than the far-left, but it is valorized in the profession as long as it serves that particular set of ideological objectives.
The final irony is that the AHA only shuttered its twitter feed from the public when it could no longer restrict the conversation to the activist mob calling for Sweet’s cancellation. It’s the same brand of intellectual closure that Sweet’s offending column warned against in its final passage: “When we foreshorten or shape history to justify rather than inform contemporary political positions, we not only undermine the discipline but threaten its very integrity.”
Phillip W. Magness is Senior Research Faculty and Research and Education Director at the American Institute for Economic Research. He is also a Research Fellow at the Independent Institute. He holds a PhD and MPP from George Mason University’s School of Public Policy, and a BA from the University of St. Thomas (Houston).
Prior to joining AIER, Dr. Magness spent over a decade teaching public policy, economics, and international trade at institutions including American University, George Mason University, and Berry College.
Magness’s work encompasses the economic history of the United States and Atlantic world, with specializations in the economic dimensions of slavery and racial discrimination, the history of taxation, and measurements of economic inequality over time. He also maintains active research interest in higher education policy and the history of economic thought. In addition to his scholarship, Magness’s popular writings have appeared in numerous venues including the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, Newsweek, Politico, Reason, National Review, and the Chronicle of Higher Education.
Minneapolis police shoot, kill man after 6-hour standoff in apartment building Minneapolis police shot and killed a man following an hours-long standoff at an apartment building in the Seward neighborhood where multiple shots were fired. FOX9 Video
Last weekend we had a situation where Minneapolis PD had to take down ( good shoot ) a person who was firing away. A woman was in fear for her life and two sons because bullets were coming through her apartment wall. After a six hour standoff police snipers took the man out.
So what happens is that a group of protestors show up to defend the shooter. SMH.
Protestors gathered to express their rage that police shot Andrew “Tekle” Sundberg, a black man who was shooting into his neighbors apartment where Arabella Yarbrough and her children live, leaving bullet holes in their kitchen. As Yarbrough stands outside trying to get the crowd to disperse, protestors scream at her: “You’re alive, shut up!” When she says, “there’s bullet holes in my kitchen,” a protester shouts back: “Not in you, though!”
I can’t do this one justice. Watch this remarkable video:
I, for one, am tickled pink that our ruling class has finally come out against child rape. This is something new. For several decades now, the position of government officials, both political parties, think tanks, the Bush family, district attorneys and the entire media has been: We’re going to foist primitive, peasant cultures on America and then lie to the public about how this is changing our country.
We recently found out about one big way that third-world immigrants are enriching us. Soon after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, the media began talking nonstop about a “10-year-old rape victim” who couldn’t get an abortion in Ohio and had to travel to Indiana. The “10-year-old rape victim” was discussed on a loop on MSNBC and even made it into a speech by President Joe Biden.
But then, a bunch of spoilsports started questioning whether “10-year-old rape victim” existed. The attorney general of Ohio said on July 12 he had no evidence of a 10-year-old rape victim, despite the reporting of such a crime being mandatory.
With their backs against the wall, the pro-abortion crowd broke longstanding strictures against mentioning the rapey-ness of our “New Americans” by producing the rapist: Gerson Fuentes, 27, an illegal alien from Guatemala.
Oh, now I see.
The abortion ladies thought they could get away with revealing the child rape victim, while refusing to reveal the child rape perpetrator. When that failed, they wantonly defied the rest of their coalition and told the truth about one of the Democrats’ pets, an illegal immigrant.
Once the pro-abortion crowd identified the rapist, nothing about the story was surprising. It has all the earmarks of an immigrant child rape:
The crime is particularly vile — CHECK!
The raping had been going on for some time — CHECK!
The rapist is shocked that anyone thinks he did anything wrong — CHECK!
Luckily, I am Johnny on the Spot when it comes to immigrant child-rapists, having included nearly 100 such cases in my book “Adios, America!” — as well as the sensational, flood-the-zone news coverage the U.S. media devote to criminal immigrants. (Sarcasm.)
As far as I know, there’s only one group in the country trying to keep a running tally of immigrant child rapes: North Carolinians for Immigration Reform and Enforcement (NCFire.info). Here’s NCFire’s list of illegal immigrant child rapists in North Carolina, so far this year:
2022 Monthly Child Rapes by Illegal Aliens:
6. June 2022: 20 illegal aliens arrested for 42 child rape/child sexual assault charges
5. May 2022: 18 illegal aliens arrested for 42 child rape/child sexual assault charges
4. April 2022: 19 illegal aliens arrested for 72 child rape/child sexual assault charges
3. March 2022: 30 illegal aliens arrested for 110 child rape/child sexual assault charges
2. February 2022: 27 illegal aliens arrested for 84 child rape/child sexual assault charges
1. January 2022: 18 illegal aliens arrested for 96 child rape/child sexual assault charges
Again, that’s only in a single state. And only when the immigrant is illegal.
WHY DOESN’T THE PUBLIC KNOW ABOUT THIS?
Unfortunately, our media are too busy reporting on apocryphal gang rapes by the Duke lacrosse team and “frat boys” at the University of Virginia to bother mentioning the epidemic of child rape by immigrants from peasant cultures pouring into our country by the million.
How far into the stories about UVA and Duke did you have to read to find out that the (falsely) accused rapists were “privileged white men”?
By contrast, whenever the media deign to mention an immigrant rapist, the story will appear in — at most — one local newspaper. Further, both the heinous nature of the crime and the immigration status of the rapist will be hidden. (How about a news report on the Duke lacrosse case, appearing exclusively in the local paper at the bottom of page A-18, titled, “Area Men Arrested.”)
In 2013, an illegal alien from Guatemala, German Rolando Vicente-Sapon, was convicted of kidnapping his 16-year-old cousin, transporting her to the U.S. (also illegally), and holding her as his sex slave for years.
Only one newspaper in the country reported the story: the Chattanooga Times Free Press.
Quiz: Was the headline —
“Illegal Alien sentenced for Incest, Child Rape, Kidnapping and Sex Slavery,” OR
There’s no question that the national media would never have breathed a word about the Fuentes case — but for the doubters. So a big shoutout to the feminists for putting abortion-on-demand above open borders. If only politicians cared as much about our country as pro-choicers do about abortion.
