Howard said that his congresswoman was able to get two contracted helicopters for search and rescue, but he also pointed out that local authorities are stopping even the media from seeing how bad the destruction is. He related a story that sheriff’s deputies in the Lake Lure area wouldn’t let CNN video the devastation.
He also gave an example of the buck-passing that’s going on in North Carolina: //
Howard pointed out that some of his colleagues are funding their rescue missions out of their own pockets. At the same time, Air Force helicopters are grounded and personnel aren’t working because they’re awaiting Title 10 orders that aren’t coming from above. //
Howard said that he doesn’t “know what kind of conspiracy” is behind this bureaucratic nightmare. In my more cynical moments, I can’t help but wonder if Gov. Roy Cooper (D-N.C.) and the Biden-Harris administration are willing to let Republican voters in a reliably red part of the state fend for themselves — and die. I don’t want to believe that, but it’s hard to shake that gut feeling. //
“I hope these politicians get fired,” he concluded. “I hope people get pissed off. They'll probably kick me out of the state of North Carolina for doing this. But you know what? I don't care. Because if I can save one more life for it, it's f***ing worth it to me.”
If only politicians in D.C. and North Carolina cared this much.
[If only churches cared this much about saving people!]. //
Jeroboam Maximus Decimus Cassius
7 hours ago edited
Those in power do care about one aspect of this, though. If they slow walk rescue and recovery efforts, no actual polling [voting at polling places] can take place in the worst affected counties, all Republican, a mere month from now. This could give the swing state of NC to the Democrats and probably would hand the Senate seat in Florida to them as well. It might also make a difference in Georgia.
Taxpayer-funded data locked behind insurance firm's paywall //
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) cannot reveal weather forecasts from a particularly accurate hurricane prediction model to the public that pays for the American government agency – because of a deal with a private insurance risk firm.
The model at issue is called the Hurricane Forecast Improvement Program (HFIP) Corrected Consensus Approach (HCCA). In 2023, it was deemed in a National Hurricane Center (NHC) report [PDF] to be one of the two "best performers," the other being a model called IVCN (Intensity Variable Consensus).
The FCC’s war on Musk may have contributed to Helene’s death toll, which is already at 138 Americans across six states, with many hundreds still missing. //
Among the serious problems facing rural victims is an inability to communicate with potential rescuers as roads are washed out, telecommunications are down, electricity is out, and people are facing fatal flooding.
It didn’t have to be this way.
In 2020, the Federal Communications Commission awarded Musk’s Starlink an $885.5 million award to help get broadband access to 642,000 rural homes and businesses in 35 states. A subsidiary of SpaceX, Starlink is a satellite internet system delivering high-speed internet to anyone on the planet. The plan would work out to less than $1,400 per linkup, same-day delivery of the necessary hardware, and only a few hours to get up and running.
Some 19,552 households and businesses in North Carolina would have had access to Starlink if they desired. Of the 21 worst-hit counties in North Carolina, the FCC-funded Starlink program would have served all or part of 17 of them, according to multiple officials. The FCC suddenly canceled that grant in 2022, a few months before Joe Biden suggested that the federal government find ways to go after Musk, a former Democrat who began criticizing some of the Democrat Party’s support of censorship of and lawfare against political opponents. After a challenge from SpaceX, the FCC reaffirmed its decision to cancel the award in 2023. //
The National Labor Relations Board went after Tesla over its dress code. The Securities and Exchange Commission and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service are also investigating Musk and his companies. //
Joe Biden named Kamala Harris the Broadband Czar in April 2021 and placed her in charge of a $100 billion slush fund for broadband projects. At the Commerce Department, a $42.5 billion subset of that program was launched in 2021, with guidance written to limit the ability of Starlink to compete for contracts. The Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) Program was supposed to fund programs in all 50 states. It has been a complete failure.
More than three years later, not a single rural American family or business has been connected to broadband through the program. At best the groundwork will begin four years after the launch and won’t finish until 2030 at the earliest. For that much taxpayer money, Starlink could be provided to 140 million people, and without the wait, observers noted.
The FCC’s anti-Musk efforts come at the same time that the Democrat-run agency fast-tracked a shocking application by a group backed by the Democrat Soros family to purchase more than 200 radio stations across the country.
Poor, agenda-driven choices made by FEMA, the Commerce Department and the FCC may be contributing to the death toll from Helene, and needlessly delaying recovery operations. //
Libs of TikTok @libsoftiktok
·
In case you’re wondering why the response to Hurricane Helene has been a disaster… Fema’s goal 1 is to instill equity as a foundation of emergency management. This is real
2:19 AM · Sep 30, 2024. //
Paul A. Szypula 🇺🇸 @Bubblebathgirl
·
Biden’s FEMA just bent a knee to Elon Musk and is installing 30 Starlink received to help those affected by Hurricane Helene.
North Carolina would’ve had 19,522 Starlink kits installed now if the FCC hadn’t withdrawn the grant they had promised SpaceX.
4:05 PM · Sep 30, 2024 //
ALEX @ajtourville
·
FYI – North Carolina would have 19,522 working @Starlink kits available today after Hurricane Helene had the FCC not revoked in bad faith the grant that was awarded to SpaceX as the winning bidder.
10:21 PM · Sep 29, 2024
anon-89ic God family country
4 hours ago edited
I don't think many Americans appreciate this danger. In banana republics, politicians, judges and lawyers are often murdered with impunity. Politicians, judges and lawyers are, for better or worse, the foundation of our Republic. Mass illegal immigration is bringing not the best of foreign cultures to our shores, but the worst of abuses of civil society. That's what Harris is promising to give more of--a world in which lawyers, judges and politicians, or the doctor who misdiagnoses your cancer, or the priest who opposes abortion, or the store keeper who didn't give you your change fast enough, is a bona fide target. For all of us lawyers who came under threat during the covid hoax for challenging government policy, this is just plain unbelievable. Lawyers having to carry guns? Lawyers having to give instructions to their spouses about what to do if they disappear on the way home from work? this is America? And that's why this story is not funny and needs to be seriously considered.
Gretz anon-89ic
2 hours ago
The erosion of the rule of law was the goal of the Marxists. Thank all of your Soros-backed cohort for making the law as ugly and meaningless as possible.
The 2025 Presidential Transition Project, better known as Project 2025, is the effort of a broad coalition of more than 100 conservative organizations working together to ensure a successful new presidential administration begins Jan. 20.
Project 2025, spearheaded by The Heritage Foundation, seeks to restore democracy, to loosen it from the grip of the political elites in Washington, D.C.
But the fiercest attackers of Project 2025 are lining up to protect the deep state. In recent months, the project has faced outlandish, hyperbolic attacks. //
Myth 1: Project 2025 is part of Donald Trump’s campaign.
Project 2025 was launched in spring 2022, before any major presidential candidate, including Donald Trump, announced he or she was running for office. //
Project 2025 is about people and policy. It isn’t advocating any particular candidate, but rather conservative ideals. Democrats and independents are welcome to its reform proposals as much as Republicans are.
The commonsense ideas in “Mandate for Leadership” transcend any one individual. They represent the solutions that millions of conservative and independent-minded Americans need after years of failed liberal leadership and bureaucratic bloat.
Myth 2: Project 2025 calls for a nationwide ban on abortion, in vitro fertilization, and contraception.
This claim is an outright lie. There are no calls for a nationwide ban on abortion or contraception anywhere in “Mandate for Leadership” or any other Project 2025 materials. In vitro fertilization isn’t even mentioned. //
Myth 3: Project 2025 endorses the “authoritarian” unitary executive theory.
Project 2025 doesn’t mention the unitary executive theory. Although many Americans throughout our history have debated the constitutional extent of executive authority, the Constitution makes it clear that the executive branch should be under control of the executive.
The Constitution also makes clear that the administrative state is not a fourth, unaccountable branch that may undermine the president and ignore congressional and judicial oversight—the situation America now faces.
The “authoritarian” and “unconstitutional” fearmongering is simply a projection. Many on the left have ignored constitutional rights, including those enumerated in the Bill of Rights, to pursue their political goals. //
Project 2025 would rein in rogue and authoritarian elements within the Justice Department, the Department of Homeland Security, and other parts of the U.S. government.
Myth 4: Project 2025 is the effort of a small group of elites to subvert and control the American people.
Project 2025, while organized by The Heritage Foundation, is the effort of over 100 conservative American organizations from across the broad spectrum of the Right.
Organizations associated with Project 2025 are united in their efforts to ensure a competent, conservative administration. //
Myth 5: Project 2025’s proposals to shrink the bureaucracy would harm Americans and are contrary to American values.
The Left claims that Project 2025 proposes to vastly shrink and in some senses “weaken” the government. On this point, the Left is correct.
However, those on the left are incorrect that these efforts would harm Americans. In fact, the efforts would make life much better.
As Ronald Reagan once said, “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: I’m from the government, and I’m here to help.” Many Americans agree.
The federal government is bloated and inefficient and has not been reformed in nearly 50 years.
Making it easier to fire obstructive, lazy, or incompetent civil servants would save Americans money and make the government run better. Removing and reorganizing redundant and obsolete offices would do the same.
The United States has a federal system, but the role of the states in governance has been increasingly coopted by the U.S. government’s bureaucracy. Winding down and eventually abolishing the Department of Education would ultimately be in the interest of Americans, increasing the quality of education. Reforming the FBI would protect Americans from the politically corrupt leadership that runs the agency today.
These are just a few of the ways in which Project 2025’s implementation would serve Americans. //
Finally, there’s nothing sinister about Project 2025. It is an open book. It works out in the light and respectfully engages American citizens rather than gaslight them. It’s all available to the public at https://www.project2025.org
And while the Left fearmongers about the project, coalition partners have received feedback from many Americans, the great silent majority, that the solutions offered by Project 2025 are exactly what this country needs.
Government, as George Washington pointed out, is like fire — a dangerous servant and a fearful master. //
Seriously, could no one have sat down with the Maudes, informed them of however it was they were misusing land to which the family had held a grazing allotment for generations, and tried to work something out without immediately and capriciously resorting to criminal charges? The Maudes do, after all, have a long history with the land in question. They have grazed cattle and, apparently, made hay on the land, which doesn't seem unreasonable.
A member of the Maude family has held a U. S. Forest Service National Grasslands grazing allotment in good standing since the inception of that agency, he said. //
In summary: The Maudes had every reason to believe that there was some misunderstanding, that the use they had made of the land to which the family had held a grazing allotment for generations was still acceptable, and that, following the survey in question, some accommodation would be worked out. That is what any reasonable person would expect — but we are dealing with the government, that dangerous servant and fearful master. The Maudes certainly thought some accommodation possible — right up until they were hit with the summons.
And theft of government property? Seriously? One would think this would rate, at most, a trespassing charge. //
Catmother
13 hours ago
They are willing to get into a fight with an American farming /ranching family over 25 acres of grassland but the government isn't willing to do anything about the Chinese government buying up thousands of acres of farmland here in the US, especially if its near US Military facilities. Makes a lot of sense. ///
Bikeshedding in the Bureaucracy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_triviality
Now a House of Representatives inquiry into the conduct of the census reveals that miscounts in that tally may have been hiding that the loss in blue states may have been underestimated; the Census Bureau has apparently miscounted in many areas, and oddly enough, the miscounts always seem to favor Democrats.
A key House committee has begun an investigation into Census Bureau overcounts and undercounts that favor Democrats in awarding congressional apportionment and Electoral College votes.
“The 2020 PES identified statistically significant overcounts in New York, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Hawaii, Delaware, Minnesota, Utah, and Ohio, while finding undercounts in states like Texas, Florida, Mississippi, Arkansas, Tennessee, and Illinois,” he wrote. “Of the eight states overcounted in the 2020 census, six states have typically voted for electors for the Democratic Party candidate in presidential elections for the last three decades.” //
Of the six states undercounted in the 2020 census, all but one have tended to vote for electors for the Republican Party candidate in elections over the same time period. Because of the 2020 census’s failure to accurately count, Colorado gained a seat it did not deserve, Rhode Island and Minnesota kept seats they should have lost, and Texas and Florida were not awarded seats they should have gained.
It's important to note that no similar miscount is documented from the 2010 census.
Hawley said the pattern that was emerging from whistleblowers was that the rally that day was "undermanned, understaffed, they did not have people who had experience on it."
"The fact that the director will not level with the American people about what's going here is just totally unacceptable and unbelievable," Hawley declared. //
On top of what he said they were telling him from the internal Secret Service investigation, the DHS was telling them not to comply with document requests to Congress. That's incredibly problematic, and if that's true, anyone involved in that needs to be held accountable and further exposed. //
But it raises the question: What do they think those documents will reveal? And is that problem they don't want Congress to know about still continuing? Could it still expose Trump and other Secret Service protectees to further danger?
The Swiss are renowned for crafting the finest watches in the world, such as the Patek Philippe. The Swiss are now credited with inventing the most effective fiscal rules in the world, the Swiss debt brake.
The debt brake was enacted as a constitutional fiscal rule through referendum in 2001, with support from 85 percent of Swiss citizens. Like many countries, the Swiss have encountered recessions accompanied by unsustainable growth in debt. The debt brake was enacted to impose more effective constraints on federal spending and restore sustainable levels of debt. Over the past two decades, the Swiss cut debt as a share of national income roughly in half. //
Like a Swiss watch, the debt brake has several parts that are synchronized to constrain fiscal policies. The most important part is a rule that constrains the growth in federal spending to the rate of growth in potential output. This means that in the long term the federal government cannot grow more rapidly than the private sector.
Another rule is designed to stabilize spending over the business cycle. The federal government can incur deficits in periods of recession but must offset those deficits with surplus revenue in periods of economic growth. The rules cap deficit spending. If the deficits exceed 6 percent of expenditures, the excess must be eliminated within the next three annual budgets by lowering the expenditure ceiling. A compensation account is used to track deficits and surpluses over time. //
The debt brake has fostered fundamental reforms in the budget process in Switzerland. Before the debt brake was enacted, the Swiss relied on a bottom-up approach to budgeting. Each ministry proposed its own budget, and these were then aggregated into a total budget. Bottom-up budgeting is biased toward deficit spending, as each ministry lobbies for its own programs. The debt brake requires top-down budgeting. The finance minister is now required to draft a budget that conforms to debt brake rules, and that budget is then broken down into separate budgets for each ministry. //
The Swiss debt brake has proven to be the most effective of the new generation of fiscal rules enacted in developed countries. The reason is that it replaces discretionary fiscal policies with rules-based policies. ///
It only works for a moral people who have s conscience.
A new study has found that a vast majority of climate policies enacted since 1998 across 41 countries have been utterly ineffective. //
The study, published in the Journal of Science, evaluated about 1,500 climate policies implemented between 1998 and 2022 by 41 OECD countries (The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development). The study found only 63 policies (about 4 percent) that, combined, had successfully “reduced total emissions between 0.6 and 1.8 Gt CO2.” Due to the low success rate, researchers estimate the CO2 emissions from the 41 nations they studied will exceed the Paris Climate Agreement target by 23 billion metric tons by 2030.
More importantly, the study found that two popular tools most governments’ climate policies rely on — subsidies and regulations — rarely reduce emissions. Researchers found some form of carbon tax approach was more effective at reducing emissions. //
Following the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) that pledged over $110 billion in climate and energy funding, the administration introduced its Green New Deal with a grossly misleading label, the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), in 2022, with Vice President Kamala Harris casting the deciding vote in the Senate. The IRA purported to allocate $369 billion for climate change and energy over the next decade. However, the latest Congressional Budget Office’s projection of the IRA’s climate tax credit through year 2033 has already jumped to a staggering $428 billion, a rapid 16 percent increase than the IRA originally planned. //
The Harris-Walz campaign, as pointed out by The Wall Street Journal editorial board, has shamefully used the word “freedom” to “disguise that Democratic policies seek to restrict liberty across American society.” Voters who want to be free from the government’s wasteful spending and infringement on individual rights should not fall for the Democrat’s and Harris’ deception in the upcoming election.
Some ideas are like horror movie villains. They’re dangerous, and no matter how many times they’re defeated, they never seem to die.
The misguided idea of taxing unrealized capital gains is back on the scene. Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., floated a proposal to tax unrealized capital gains in 2021.
It was widely debated in 2022, when Congress was considering a multitrillion-dollar tax and spending package.
Opposition from Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., to taxing income before it’s earned helped defeat the idea then.
But the idea was far from dead. President Joe Biden included a version of the tax in his latest budget.
Vice President Kamala Harris also has endorsed the idea.
The first step in killing a bad idea is to recognize it for the scourge it is.
A realized capital gain—which we currently tax—is the difference between the price you sold an asset for and the price you paid for it. An unrealized gain, on the other hand, is an estimate of what that difference would be if you had sold an asset that you still hold.
The difference between taxing realized capital gains and unrealized gains is the difference between the government taxing people on income they’ve actually received versus the government taxing them on income they might receive later.
It would give the government the first claim on income, taking a big slice before the supposed owner of the asset ever sees a penny.
In effect, it would turn property owners into property renters, with Uncle Sam as their landlord. //
If you bought a house for $300,000, and the value rose to $500,000 a couple years later, you could be stuck paying tax on the $200,000 of gain even as you’re struggling to make mortgage payments. At a 25% tax rate, it would cost you $50,000 in federal taxes.
It would be like having a second mortgage, but in some ways worse.
At least mortgage payments end after 30 years. But you would never finish paying off your unrealized capital gains tax payments, as long as you owned the asset and its value was increasing—even if that increase was only from inflation.
And unlike mortgages, which give homeowners clearly defined payment terms, unrealized capital gains tax payments would be unpredictable, rising or falling depending on the housing market, inflation, and subjective assessments of a house’s value. //
Those in Washington who propose taxing unrealized capital gains generally include broad exemptions for certain asset classes and based on income or asset thresholds. These exceptions would give investors a path to escape from the tax, which is better than the alternative. The tax would have fewer direct victims as a result.
But the tax-induced capital flows still would wreak economic havoc—and without managing to raise much government revenue. So, the new tax would do little to satiate lawmakers’ appetite for more tax dollars.
And once a horror movie villain—or a bad idea—gets a foot in the door, it quickly can swing the door open wide and claim more victims. When the income tax was first implemented in 1913, it applied to less than 1% of the population, and most of those who paid it paid only a 1% rate. That small initial income tax spawned something far worse and more widespread over time.
Allowing the government to tax income that doesn’t exist sets an even more dangerous precedent.
When people ask me why I despise the government, stories like this come to mind.
A Falcon, Colorado, woman convicted for entering the United States Capitol building on Jan. 6, 2021 while the riot was occurring was sentenced on Monday to one year of probation.
Rebecca Lavrenz, known as “J6 Praying Grandma” on social media, is also being forced to fork over $103,500 in fines after being convicted of four misdemeanor counts, the Colorado Sun reported. //
federal prosecutors asked the judge to throw Lavrenz in a cage for ten months and put her on supervised release and 60 hours of community service. They argued that she has been “one of the loudest public voices calling the prosecution of January 6 riots a corrupt exercise.”
The prosecutors acknowledged Lavrenz’s First Amendment rights but insisted that “her unrepentant promotion of the riot is powerful evidence that she continues to pose a threat to future acts of political violence like that which engulfed the nation on January 6.” //
Even further, prosecutors argued in favor of the fine because the defendant – wait for it – participated in interviews and used online fundraising accounts to supposedly seek “celebrity status” for her supposed criminality. How dare she try to raise funds for her legal defense, right? //
Unfortunately, Lavrenz is not the only one. People get railroaded by government at the federal, state, and local levels on a daily basis. //
anon-fl4c
4 hours ago
Jeff, did you catch Glen Beck today? He featured a woman that survived Yugoslavian concentration camps and has now been sentenced to 10 years in prison for violating the FACE Act. She said she is fully prepared to die in prison. This government is not the United States. We’ve already been taken over.
For those of us who have criticized Facebook for years for its role in the massive censorship system, Zuckerberg's belated contrition was more insulting than inspiring. It had all of the genuine regret as a stalker found hiding under the bed of a victim.
Zuckerberg's sudden regret only came after his company fought for years to conceal the evidence of its work with the government to censor opposing views. Zuckerberg was finally compelled to release the documents by House Judiciary Committee... //
Zuckerberg stayed silent as Musk was viciously attacked by anti-free speech figures in Congress and the media. He was fully aware of his own company's similar conduct but stayed silent.
When the White House and President Joe Biden repeatedly claimed that the Hunter Biden laptop was Russian disinformation, Facebook continued to withhold evidence that they too were pressured to suppress the story before the election.
When the censorship system was recently put before the Supreme Court in Murthy v. Missouri and the justices asked about evidence of coordination and pressure from the government. In Murthy, states successfully showed lower courts that there was coercion from the government in securing an injunction.
The Biden administration denied such pressure and the Court rejected the standing of plaintiffs, blocked an order to stop the censorship, and sent the case back down to the lower court.
Zuckerberg still remained silent. //
Zuckerberg stayed silent as Musk was viciously attacked by anti-free speech figures in Congress and the media. He was fully aware of his own company's similar conduct but stayed silent.
When the White House and President Joe Biden repeatedly claimed that the Hunter Biden laptop was Russian disinformation, Facebook continued to withhold evidence that they too were pressured to suppress the story before the election.
When the censorship system was recently put before the Supreme Court in Murthy v. Missouri and the justices asked about evidence of coordination and pressure from the government. In Murthy, states successfully showed lower courts that there was coercion from the government in securing an injunction.
The Biden administration denied such pressure and the Court rejected the standing of plaintiffs, blocked an order to stop the censorship, and sent the case back down to the lower court.
Zuckerberg still remained silent. //
Facebook was not silent when it came to censorship, or "content moderation" as the company prefers to call it. While Zuckerberg now expresses "regret" at not speaking out sooner, his company previously sought to sell Americans on censorship. //
For years, young people have been taught that free speech is harmful and triggering. We are raising of generation of speech-phobics and Zuckerberg and Facebook wanted to tap into that generation to get people to stop fearing the censor and love "content modification." It was time, as Joshan and his friends told us, to "change" with our computers.
Now, Zuckerberg and Meta want people to know that they were "pressured" to censor and really regret their role in silencing opposing voices.
It is the feigned regret that comes with forced exposure.
The Facebook files now put the lie to past claims of the Biden administration and many Democrats in Congress. For years, members attacked some of us who testified that we had no evidence of coordination or pressure from the government. At the same time, they opposed any effort to investigate and release such evidence.
The evidence is now undeniable. //
Jen Easterly, who heads the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, is an example of the chilling scope of this effort. Her agency was created to work on our critical infrastructure but Easterly declared that the mandate would now include policing "our cognitive infrastructure." That includes combating "malinformation," or information "based on fact, but used out of context to mislead, harm, or manipulate."
Consider that for a second: true facts are censorable if the government views them as misleading.
As I write in my book, President Joe Biden is arguably the most anti-free speech president since John Adams. His administration helped create a censorship system that was described by one federal judge as "Orwellian." Vice President Kamala Harris has been entirely supportive of that effort.
In 1800, Thomas Jefferson defeated John Adams in the only election where free speech was one of the principal campaign issues. It should be so again. Harris should have to take ownership of the censorship system maintained by the administration.
The current political climate features two sides: Those who want the government to do more for the people and those who want the government to get out of people's way. It's not necessarily a partisan issue, mind you, as there is an alarming number of folks on the right who believe that Republicans should implement more government but just wield it in a conservative way.
Whatever that means. //
We need only look at government-run programs as they exist now, because they are the best arguments against themselves.
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. appeared on "Fox News Sunday" to talk about his plans to partner with Donald Trump to "Make America Healthy Again," and dropped some big truth bombs about the corruption and perverse incentives within the United States' public health agencies. //
"I wouldn't dismantle them. I would change the focus, and I would end the corruption. Right now, 75 percent of FDA’s budget is coming from pharmaceutical companies. That is a perverse incentive.
"In NIH, the - scientists and officials at NIH who work on drug development, incubate drugs for the pharmaceutical company, get to collect lifetime royalties from those products. These are regulators. They’re supposed to be looking for problems in those products.
"We have these agencies that have become sock puppets for the industries they’re supposed to regulate, so they're not really interested in public health.
"The most profitable thing today in America is a sick child. Everybody’s making money - the hospitals are making money, the pharmaceutical companies are making money; even the insurance companies make money.
"We need to end those perverse incentives, we need to get the corruption out of the FDA, out of NIH, out of the CDC, and make them function as they're supposed to function, which is to protect public health and to protect childrens' health.”
Well, let's check in with Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo who was asked about this at the DNC on ABC. She was asked if she thought these new numbers could be a "potential liability for this [the Harris-Walz] campaign."
Greg Price @greg_price11
·
Follow
Reporter: Nearly a million jobs "created" since Kamala took office do not exist.
Raimondo: “I don’t believe it because I’ve never heard Trump say anything truthful.”
Reporter: "It is from the Bureau of Labor."
Raimondo: "I'm not familiar with that."
5:57 PM · Aug 21, 2024
Jeff Carlson @themarketswork
·
Follow
Replying to @greg_price11
I mean, holy crap...
This is the current US Secretary of Commerce.
To be unaware of this report that rewrote very jobs report the Biden Administration has trumpeted over the last year... speechless
If she's lying in such a bald face manner... also speechless
6:27 PM · Aug 21, 2024
US Oil & Gas Association @US_OGA
·
We are basically being governed by a High School Student Council who think they are in charge....
Big government. Big spending. Big tax increases. //
IRS data showed that Minnesota loses “about ten households earning more than $200,000 for every six that it gains, which is the fifth worst ratio among the states.”
First, the DNA collection law at issue has been on the books since 2005, when it passed with bipartisan support. It requires the collection of DNA samples from "non-United States persons in detention for immigration violations." Per the whistleblowers, DHS is not enforcing that law — certainly not fully — and hasn't been under both Democrat and Republican administrations.
A December 2021 internal government memo from the U.S. Office of Special Counsel regarding its investigation of the charges levied by Jones, Taylor, and Wynn found that the agency had intentionally failed to implement the law — designed to protect public safety — for decades. //
Taylor, Wynn, and Jones all are confident that the continued, willful failure to enforce the law has resulted in American deaths — deaths that were preventable. //
The whistleblowers affirm that DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas has been notified of the failure to comply with the law, but no one at DHS has been disciplined for that failure.
The only ones who have been disciplined are the whistleblowers themselves. The internal OSC memo referenced above concluded that the agency retaliated against the whistleblowers, including denial of promotion, hostile work environment, and reputational harm. The OSC refused to disclose the memo, and the whistleblowers were only able to obtain it via discovery. They have had to spend their own money to pursue litigation to confirm that they were subject to that retaliation. //
Both Taylor and Jones have had their law enforcement credentials and firearms taken away from them. Taylor has had his law enforcement retirement stripped. Taylor notes, "In a law enforcement environment, publicly removing someone's firearm is the ultimate insult and degradation." Per Wynn, "I was basically iced — left to sit at my desk every day, do nothing but the most menial of tasks." States Jones, "I was demoted three levels. Like Mr. Taylor, my firearm was taken, my credentials were taken. And it was the final blow to a professional career. And what we did, was we came forward." This despite the fact that none of the men had ever received a written or verbal disciplinary action.
Jones sums it up thusly:
"One of the supervisors said, very matter of fact: 'The agency's goal is to bankrupt you, make you quit, die, kill yourselves, or basically, preferably, all of the above.'"
Clinical doctors smiled (actually, they grimaced) while reading two recent headlines. The first was “Wyden, Blackburn Introduce Bipartisan Legislation to Tackle Health Care Workforce Shortages.” This is one more demonstration of Ronald Reagan’s prescience when he said in his 1981 Inaugural Address, “Government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.”
Every direct care provider understands from painful daily experience that government regulations stemming from federal legislation are the real reason for shortages.