Damning study of over a million kids finds myocarditis only in the vaccinated

Biden administration officials and so-called experts characterized COVID-19 vaccines as “safe and effective” during the pandemic. In the face of an avalanche of tragic evidence to the contrary, the powers that be waged costly and unsuccessful propaganda and censorship campaigns to cure Americans’ skepticism.

Although the Trump administration has alternatively acknowledged the risks and fallout associated with the vaccines — the Food and Drug Administration admitting, for instance, that the vaccines killed numerous children — a coalition of medical organizations is fighting to legally force the government to keep recommending the COVID jabs to healthy kids and pregnant women.

That legal effort appears especially questionable given the finding in a recent study that children spared from the vaccine also appear to have been spared from an unfortunate health complication.

The peer-reviewed study — conducted by researchers at the University of Oxford, the University of Bristol, and the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, and published in January in the scientific journal Epidemiology — looked at the safety and effectiveness of the Pfizer-BioNTech BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine in healthy children ages 5-15 following the rollout that began in late 2021.

Keep reading

Iran War Is Putting Israel First

Reagan Carney, a really fine young man with whom we go to church, told me a few days ago that the University of Tennessee Young Republicans had a board on which members could express their opinions about the war in Iran.

The board had only one question: “Is the Iran war putting America first?” At that point, 10 had signed under the Yes; 70 had signed under the  No.

This confirmed a story which ABC News ran on March 7 quoting Jack Posobiec of Turning Point  USA and the conservative publication, Human Events.

Posobiec said: “For the younger end of the spectrum inside MAGA, foreign intervention is just off the radar….They see it as prioritizing foreign interests….” He said MAGA is split by age with more support for the Iran war among older conservatives.

The ABC story led this way: “President Donald Trump’s decision to carry out strikes on Iran has further exposed a fracture among some of the President’s fiercest supporters inside MAGA world—one that many supporters say will only widen with every week the conflict continues.”

Like the Tennessee students, the great majority realize this war is being fought at the insistence of Israel at tremendous expense for U.S. taxpayers. This is Israel’s war. Iran’s total military budget is only a little over one percent of ours. Iran was no threat to us at all.

In 1999, Charley Reese was voted as the most popular columnist in a vote by thousands of C-Span viewers. Unfortunately, he passed away in 2013, but many things he wrote are just as true today.

In 2002, he said in a column: “The truth is this: The terrorist attacks against the United States are a direct result of our one-sided support of Israel’s oppression of the Palestinians.”

He added: “The big pushers for war with Iraq are the usual suspects—Americans with a long record of pretending to speak about America’s interests when in fact they are pushing an Israeli agenda.” Today, switch the word Iran for Iraq.

In 2005, Reese wrote: “Propaganda aside, our actions have created the almost universal hostility toward the United States in the Arab world. Our actions have been to support Israel 100 percent while it kills and brutalizes the Palestinians….” Think Gaza where many thousands of little children were starved and killed.

Keep reading

Why Is a Democratic Governor Undermining a Conservative Conservation Success Story?

Controversy is again raging over the fate of the Salt River wild horses, protected under state law as a natural treasure, after the Arizona Department of Agriculture awarded a new management contract requiring the removal of more than half the herd — despite a state law that authorizes removals only for humane reasons related to the health and safety of individual horses.

It didn’t have to be this way. In 2016, Arizona Republicans did something Washington rarely manages to do. They solved a problem. 

When the U.S. Forest Service moved to round up and remove every one of the Salt River wild horses from the Tonto National Forest, Arizonans responded with overwhelming opposition that stunned federal officials. More than 300,000 petition signatures flooded in. Members of Congress from both parties objected, including Sens. John McCain and Jeff Flake. Tonto National Forest spokeswoman Carrie Templin told reporters she had never seen anything like it: “We expected public outcry. I don’t think anybody comprehended the magnitude.”

The Republican-led Arizona Legislature acted. In 2016, lawmakers passed the Salt River Wild Horse Act by a 53-3 vote. It was signed into law by then-Gov. Doug Ducey, who counted it among his top accomplishments of the year. The law’s intent was unambiguous: to protect the herd from harassment, killing, and slaughter and limit removals to humane reasons only related to the safety or health of individual horses or public safety. Nothing in the bill authorized mass removals for population reduction. Then-State Senator Katie Hobbs was among those who voted for it.

What followed was a model of conservative governance. The Arizona Department of Agriculture, led by then director Mark Killian — a prominent Republican and former state senator,  partnered with the nonprofit Salt River Wild Horse Management Group. This unique public-private partnership evolved into a unique and highly successful humane management program to protect the cherished herd. 

Over the last seven years, the group implemented a fertility control program that has reduced annual births from more than 100 foals to just one or two. Over seven years, the herd declined from 450 horses to 274 — a 40% reduction — without removing a single horse except those injured or ailing animals in need of special care. 

This program is privately funded at no cost to taxpayers, volunteer-powered, and state-overseen. A shining example of conservative principles: Limited government,  local control, fiscal responsibility, and a private initiative solving a public problem.

And it’s working.  

Keep reading

Dem Senate Candidate Talarico Says He’d Oppose Mullin for DHS, Calls Illegal Alien Students ‘Most Patriotic’

During an interview in Dallas, Texas, Democratic Senate candidate James Talarico said he would vote against Sen. Markwayne Mullin’s nomination to lead the Department of Homeland Security, saying he would oppose any nominee unwilling to dismantle Immigration and Customs Enforcement, which he called a “secret police force.”

Appearing on The Bulwark Podcast with host Tim Miller, Talarico was asked directly, “Would you vote against Markwayne Mullin for a cabinet position?” He responded, “I would be a no on any potential secretary who is not willing to tear down this secret police force and replace it with an agency that’s actually focused on public safety.”

Talarico elaborated on his position by referencing his background, stating, “Before I was a politician, I was a public school teacher in San Antonio, Texas, on the west side of the city, and I taught a lot of undocumented students, and those students tended to be my most patriotic students.” He continued, “They understood something about this country that a lot of us who are native born forget: that this is supposed to be the land of opportunity, that this is supposed to be the place where dreams come true.”

He characterized those students as having “believed in this country, even when this country didn’t believe in them,” and argued that current enforcement actions are harmful, saying, “The fact that we have the most powerful politicians in the country terrorizing my former students and their families—people who work hard every day to contribute to this economy and to this country—to me, is immoral. It’s unconscionable. It’s unacceptable, and it has to end.”

Talarico also outlined what he described as an alternative approach to immigration enforcement, stating, “We should be cracking down on the cartels, not our communities. We should be deporting gang members, not small business owners. We should be hunting down human traffickers, not moms and babies.” He added that “Both parties have failed us on this issue over the last 30 years,” including “the failures of my party” and “the failures of the Biden administration.” He said those failures “opened the door to this extremism” and led to “masked men and unmarked vehicles kidnapping people off our street.”

He concluded: “Texans and Americans are just looking for leaders who are going to hold two things in their mind at once, being pro immigrant and pro security. We’ve been told those are mutually exclusive, and they’re not.”

Keep reading

Rewriting Revolutionary History: Is Jamie Raskin Even Capable of Honesty?

The late Scott Adams had a way of describing a certain group of Democratic operatives and lawmakers that seemed fitting as I watched and rewatched an exchange between Representatives Jim Jordan and Jamie Raskin.

Adams said that while all Democrats lie, there is a small group of them who seem to assume the mantle of tier-one fibbers. These are the ones who are capable of saying the most verifiably dishonest things, and do so with a straight face that makes it look like even they believe what they are saying. 

I believe Jamie Raskin may have been among them (I’m not 100% sure), along with Eric Swalwell, Ilhan Omar, James Clapper, and John Brennan, and perhaps others. 

The reason such a group exists, Adams theorized, was that, in order for Democrats and the legacy media to make some of their most outlandish hoaxes stick, they needed a special group of people who can convincingly say something that is completely untrue and just keep repeating it until the public starts to think it is true.

Adams observed that you never hear from these people all at once, but when it’s their turn, they step in like a designated hitter and slug away with their fabrications. 

I thought of Adams’ comments when I saw Raskin in action at a hearing conducted by the House’s Subcommittee on Constitution and Limited Government on March 18. That’s when he claimed that Thomas Paine, the founding father and author of “Common Sense,” was an “undocumented immigrant.” 

Keep reading

Analysis: Nearly Half of Immigrant Households in U.S. Are on Welfare

Nearly half of households headed by immigrants, those legally and illegally living in the United States, are on one or more forms of welfare, a Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) analysis of Census Bureau data reveals.

The CIS analysis looked at the Current Population Survey Annual Social and Economic Supplement to learn which countries have the most immigrant welfare-users in the U.S.

Overall, about 47 percent of households headed by immigrants are on one or more forms of welfare. When the Earned Income Tax Credit or the Additional Child Tax Credit is included as welfare, that percentage rises to 54 percent.

Meanwhile, just 28 percent of households headed by native-born Americans are on welfare, and just 31 percent are on welfare that includes both tax credits.

Countries with the highest welfare-users in the U.S. include Afghanistan, 87 percent, the Dominican Republic, 78 percent, Guatemala, 77 percent, Honduras, 75 percent, and Mexico, 67 percent.

Meanwhile, immigrant households from Korea, the United Kingdom, Canada, and India have the lowest welfare usage among the nation’s immigrant population.

Keep reading

Orban Announces Will Block All EU Measures For Ukraine Until Oil Transit Restored

Hungary remains one of the lone Ukraine-skeptic EU/NATO members which actually has a lot of leverage, resulting in bolder and bolder pronouncements being issued by Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán of late.

He has newly made clear this week that Hungary will block all EU summit decisions in Ukraine’s favor until oil Russian flows resume. There’s ongoing controversy centered on the contested Druzhba pipeline and the central European nation’s vital flows from Russia.

“We would like to get the oil, which is ours, from the Ukrainians, which is now blocked by the Ukrainians, I did not support any kind of decision here, which is in favor of Ukraine … [as long as] the Hungarians are not able to get the oil which belong to us,” Orbán stated.

Obran has already blocked a proposed €90 billion ($103 billion) loan for Ukraine as well as efforts to slap new sanctions on Moscow, despite the pleadings, pressure, and interventions from other EU leaders.

“I will never support any kind of decision here which is in favor of Ukraine,” Orbán made clear at an EU meeting Thursday. “The Hungarian position is very simple. We are ready to support Ukraine when we get our oil, which is blocked by them,” Orbán underscored further.

Budapest has accused Ukraine of intentionally leaving the pipeline in a state of disrepair after Kiev alleged that Russia struck it. Ukraine has been charged with seeking to indirectly punish Hungary and squeeze its energy supplies.

Keep reading

United Kingdom, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Japan, and Canada Will Now Join US to Keep the Strait of Hormuz Open

The leaders of the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Japan, and Canada have now signaled they will join the United States in a coalition to secure and keep open the critical Strait of Hormuz, the vital oil chokepoint the bloodthirsty Iranian regime has turned into a terrorist kill zone.

As The Gateway Pundit previously reported, the radical Islamic mullahs in Tehran launched a desperate campaign of economic terrorism after U.S. and Israeli strikes hammered their nuclear sites and terror infrastructure.

Iran mined the strait, attacked unarmed commercial vessels, targeted oil facilities, and effectively closed the waterway that carries nearly 20-25% of the world’s oil supply.

President Trump refused to let America shoulder the entire burden alone. He blasted the freeloading “allies,” took to Truth Social, and demanded that nations dependent on Middle Eastern oil step up and send warships.

“Hopefully China, France, Japan, South Korea, the UK, and others, that are affected by this artificial constraint, will send Ships to the area so that the Hormuz Strait will no longer be a threat by a Nation that has been totally decapitated,” Trump said.

He even threatened to “finish off” Iran and let NATO and Asia handle the mess if they wouldn’t get in gear. As we reported, the initial responses from Europe were weak and uninspiring, classic globalist foot-dragging.

Now, with Iran’s attacks growing more brazen and the Strait’s security directly tied to global oil flows, those same allies are signaling that they are prepared to stand with the United States.

That does not yet mean all seven countries have announced warship deployments.

The joint statement so far supports that they have formally backed efforts to keep passage open and are ready to contribute, while some governments are still working through what their exact role will be.

Britain, for example, has been publicly discussing possible deployments, including ships and mine-countermeasure assets, but final national commitments appear to remain in motion.

Keep reading

Air Force Special Operations Wants Backpack-Sized Kamikaze Drones

The U.S. Air Force is seeking small, backpack-portable one-way attack drones for its special operations forces, according to a request for information (RFI) posted this week.

“Air Force Special Operations Command (AFSOC) and Special Tactics units currently lack a purpose-built First-Person View (FPV) unmanned capability,” the RFI notes. “This deficit restricts the force’s ability to employ FPV systems in specialized mission sets and limits the development of standardized Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures essential for modern, high-intensity conflict.”

According to the RFI, AFSOC wants the drones to be capable of striking targets up to 12 miles away with a fragmentation warhead weighing 3 to 6.5 pounds. The system must be launch-ready in under three minutes and able to operate in GPS-denied environments.

“This system needs to integrate Global Positioning System (GPS), 4G/LTE/5G cellular connectivity, true frequency hopping between bands, and an optional repeater to extend operational range to over 20 kilometers,” the RFI said.

The systems are expected to integrate with handheld controllers and the Android Team Awareness Kit, or ATAK, used by small military units for battlefield awareness and targeting.

Companies have until April 17 to respond to the RFI. 

The Pentagon plans to spend $1.1 billion over the next 18 months on its Drone Dominance program, an initiative launched in December aimed at testing and purchasing more than 200,000 drones of various sizes by January 2028, Owen West, the Pentagon’s senior adviser on the program, said during a March 5 congressional hearing.

The program is intended in part to build a domestic industry around small drones to enable higher production volumes at lower costs.

In its initial phase, the Pentagon is paying about $5,000 for each “Group 1” drone, Drone Dominance program manager Travis Metz said during the hearing. He added that by the end of the program the goal is to “get down to less than $2,000 for a one-way kamikaze attack drone.”

Keep reading

Is “Taxation Without Representation” Occurring in 2026? Massive School District Bond Fraud Uncovered Across the US

Perhaps no phrase is used more to describe the grievances of the colonists in the lead-up to the American Revolution than “No taxation without representation!

Mark Maloy, a historian wrote “While the exact phrase did not appear until 1768, the principle of having consent from the people on issues of taxation can be traced all the way back to the Magna Carta in 1215.

The Magna Carta was one of the first steps in limiting the power of the king and transferring that power to the legislative body in England, the Parliament. Parliament had the power to levy taxes. When King Charles I attempted to impose taxes on the English people by himself in 1627, the Parliament passed the Petition of Right the following year, which stated that the subjects of the king “should not be compelled to contribute to any tax, tallage, aid, or other like charge not set by common consent, in parliament.”

The Magna Carta, the Petition of Right and the English Bill of Rights from 1689 helped to form the basis of the British constitution (which is not a single document, but a combination of written and unwritten agreements). The British constitution protected the rights of Englishmen. English colonists in North America believed that they had the same rights as Englishmen. In North America, colonists formed their own colonial governments under charters from the king and regulated their own forms of taxation through their colonial legislatures. For many decades, these colonies enjoyed an extended period of benign neglect as the English parliament let them handle taxation on their own.

In Great Britain in the eighteenth century, there were no income taxes because it was viewed as too much of a government intrusion into the lives of the people. Instead, taxes were placed on property and on imported and exported goods. Money from these taxes helped to pay for public goods and services and supported the government’s military for defense.

In North America, the British colonies regulated their own tax system in each individual colony. These taxes, though, were exceedingly low, and the colonies did not have a professional military to support. Instead, they used a volunteer militia system to defend their towns and homes from attacks along the frontier.

In 1754, the French and Indian War broke out in North America. During the war, the British sent their military to help defend the colonies. The war spread across the globe and became known as the Seven Years’ War. Following Britain’s victory in 1763, the British national debt greatly increased. They now had a larger empire that needed to be defended. In light of this tenuous situation, and since the North American colonists benefited directly from the British military during the war, Great Britain looked to levy taxes on the colonists to raise revenue for the Crown.

In Massachusetts in 1764, James Otis published a pamphlet titled “The Rights of the British Colonies Asserted and Proved,” which argued that man’s rights come from God and that governments should only exist to protect those natural rights. He believed that any attempt to tax the colonists without their consent violated the British constitution. Here, Otis made a compelling argument for the need for representation in any taxation on the colonies: “no parts of His Majesty’s dominions can be taxed without their consent; that every part has a right to be represented in the supreme or some subordinate legislature; that the refusal of this would seem to be a contradiction in practice to the theory of the constitution.”

Colonists wrote pamphlets protesting taxes and explaining their views. Daniel Dulaney the Younger from Maryland wrote this one in 1765.

Keep reading