
Ayn Rand on altruism…


As revealed in Part 1 of this series, Daniel Ivey-Soto is a New Mexico Senator who also runs a non-profit called Vandelay Solutions which advises county clerks on technical matters related to elections and other duties.
This article will focus on partisan activities pursued by Ivey-Soto and the fact that he has received at least $925,000 in taxpayer dollars for consultation and assistance in drafting, promoting, and voting on legislation that directly benefits his clients and friends, but hurts the public.
Vandelay Solutions was previously known as “NM Clerks,” but that company was dissolved and rebranded as Vandelay Solutions in 2019 after some clerks complained that the original name could mislead people into thinking Ivey-Soto’s company was a government agency. Ivey-Soto admitted as much in a recorded conversation that election workers were concerned that he was “running the clerks.” Instead of clearly communicating his company is not a government agency, Ivey-Soto still uses the “NM Clerks” brand for the email list serve he runs with all 33 county clerks, according to public documents obtained by Estancia News.
While not all of the 33 clerks are paying clients, it is unclear whether the clerks understand that Ivey-Soto has no authority over them and is not acting in an official governmental capacity, given Ivey-Soto’s regular directives and backroom meetings. For example, in June, Ivey-Soto met in a closed-door session with the Torrance County Commission directing them to certify the 2022 primary post-election results despite evidence that Dominion machines were not legally certified for use.
A senior employee at drug manufacturer Pfizer is allegedly concerned about the possible side effects of the COVID-19 vaccine as it relates to women’s menstrual cycles, according to a conversation that was filmed by the nonprofit journalism group, Project Veritas.
Video footage of the conversation with Dr. Jordon Walker, a senior Pfizer employee, with the undercover reporter for Project Veritas was published on Twitter on Feb. 2.
Walker is the director of research and development at the pharmaceuticals giant, according to a Pfizer receptionist. The company has not disputed that it employs Walker.
In the footage, the senior Pfizer employee can be seen and heard expressing concerns over potential negative side effects of the company’s vaccine on women’s reproductive health, pointing to irregular menstrual cycles in women.
“There is something irregular about the menstrual cycles. So, people will have to investigate that down the line because that is a little concerning,” Walker said in the video.
“The [COVID-19] vaccine shouldn’t be interfering with that [menstrual cycles]. So, we don’t really know,” he said, before pointing to “the science” which he said suggests that the vaccine shouldn’t be interacting with something known as the hypothalamic-pituitary-gonadal axis (HPG axis), which are “the hormones that regulate their menstrual cycle and things like that,” according to Walker.
Laith Abdallah Algaz, more commonly known as Leo Rex of the YouTube channel Leo and Longevity, was found dead in his apartment in Pattaya, Thailand.
The Colorado native and social media influencer promoted his unique blend of diet, exercise, mental conditioning, bodybuilding and nicotine to help people extend and live their best life.
His YouTube channel passed the 100,000 subscriber milestone last February and now boasts more than 123,000 subscribers. HITC news described the content on his channel as “typically…non-conventional” and focused on how people could “improve their mental and physical well-being.”
According to the Daily Mail, Charles Anthony alerted authorities on Jan 30 of a possible problem after multiple unsuccessful attempts to contact his friend Leo Rex.
As of Feb 1, authorities had not disclosed a cause of death, but officials have noted that Rex’s apartment was “unusually messy” and that the YouTuber appeared to have “multiple facial injuries.”
If you’re like me, and pretty much the rest of humanity, when you want to know something, you Google it. Invariably, at or near the top of the results, is a Wikipedia finding with your answer.
That is an astounding amount of power and influence for Wikipedia.
Wikipedia claims to be the place for us to understand… everything, quickly and simply.
Apparently we trust Wikipedia… why?
For one thing, Wikipedia is a nonprofit.
And it says that:
Wikipedia is a place to learn, free from bias or agenda… Show the world that access to independent and unbiased information matters to you.” — The Wikimedia Foundation
How does Wikipedia provide this “independent and unbiased” information?
Wikimedia, the foundation that hosts Wikipedia, allows anonymous individuals whose identity it does not know — and whose expertise or agenda it has not vetted — to create its content.
Some of these anonymous editors are relentless about creating negative perceptions of certain individuals and entities — and they are experts at it, rendering their subjects powerless to correct false or slanted information.
This is a serious issue that needs to be addressed and widely discussed. But is it? Not that I can see. I searched Google to see how much this has come out in major media.
I found a 2021 article in The Washington Post, written by Samuel Baltz, “a PhD candidate in political science and scientific computing and an MS student in applied mathematics at the University of Michigan.” He asserted:
Wikipedia is one of the few socially driven websites where, even though anyone can contribute information about breaking news, misinformation is largely suppressed. And Wikipedia’s coverage of current events often directs attention to its pages about ideas in political science, giving readers context for the news…
Wikipedia has developed an impressive record of political and ideological neutrality.
He then goes on to state that it “has serious biases in its coverage.” But what strikes me is that those biases are in the interests of the establishment media like The Washington Post. And, like the fox in the hen house, those media serve as the actual arbiters for whether information on Wikipedia should be trusted. Baltz writes:
From the gender gap in its biographies of scientists to its disproportionate focus on politicians from wealthy countries, Wikipedia’s coverage of people is particularly skewed. And these biases are rampant on the pages that people visit to understand political events.
But because anyone can become a Wikipedia editor, these biases can be corrected.
In other words, the problem with Wikipedia is that it is not politically correct enough, from a kind of establishment liberal perspective. This means women, minorities, and non-Americans are underrepresented — which, as we all know, is hardly a problem limited to Wikipedia alone. The Washington Post has its own problems around this issue.
A new bill in Massachusetts, if passed, would allow the potential for inmates to have their sentences reduced if they donate organs or bone marrow to help provide “life-saving treatment” for black and Latino people.
Democrat state Representatives Carlos Gonzalez and Judith Garcia introduced HD.3822, which would allow for a reduction in sentences by no less than 60 days and no more than 365 days.
“The Bone Marrow and Organ Donation Program shall allow eligible incarcerated individuals to gain not less than 60 and not more than 365 day reduction in the length of their committed sentence in Department of Corrections facilities, or House of Correction facilities if they are serving a Department of Correction sentence in a House of Corrections facility, on the condition that the incarcerated individual has donated bone marrow or organ(s),” the bill reads.
“In my view, there is no compelling reason to bar inmates from this,” Gonzalez said, according to AOL/The Miami Herald.
A bill introduced in the Oklahoma House would create a process to sue police officers and government officials in state court for the deprivation of individual rights without the possibility of “qualified immunity” as a defense.
Rep. Regina Goodwin (D) prefiled House Bill 1631 (HB1631) for introduction on Feb. 6. The legislation would create a cause of action in state courts to sue a police officer who “under color of law, subjects or causes to be subjected, including failing to intervene, any other person to the deprivation of any individual rights that create binding obligations on government actors secured by the Bill of Rights, Article II of the Oklahoma Constitution.”
The bill specifically prohibits “qualified immunity” as a defense.
Typically, people sue police for using excessive force or other types of misconduct through the federal court system under the U.S. Bill of Rights. But federal courts created a qualified immunity defense out of thin air, making it nearly impossible to hold law enforcement officers responsible for actions taken in the line of duty. In order to move ahead with a suit, the plaintiff must establish that it was “clearly established” that the officer’s action was unconstitutional. The “clearly established” test erects an almost insurmountable hurdle to those trying to prove excessive force or a violation of their rights.
In effect, the passage of HB1631 would create an alternative path to address violations of rights in state court with no qualified immunity hurdle to clear.
A similar law was passed in Colorado.
A bombshell piece of information was revealed at the September 14-15, 2021 virtual Zoom meeting of the federal government’s ICD-10 Coordination and Maintenance Committee (which includes representatives from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, known as CMS, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) National Center for Health Statistics). At the meeting, the Committee discussed new categories of “ICD-10” codes that the CDC’s National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) wanted to create to mark people as “Unvaccinated for COVID-19,” “Partially Vaccinated for COVID-19” and “Other underimmunization status.”
The Washington Post’s old school Moscow-based correspondent John Helmer has provided an important service, offering the full text of Blinken’s offer, of course extensively edited to include fantasist notions such as “US weapons help pulverize Putin’s invasion force” and a cringe-worthy explanation: “In other words, Russia should not be ready to rest, regroup and attack.”
The message from Washington may, at first glance, give the impression that the US would admit Russian control over Crimea, Donbass, Zaporozhye, and Kherson – “the land bridge that connects Crimea and Russia” – as a fait accompli.
Ukraine would have a demilitarized status, and the deployment of HIMARS missiles and Leopard and Abrams tanks would be confined to western Ukraine, kept as a “deterrent against further Russian attacks.”
What may have been offered, in quite hazy terms, is in fact a partition of Ukraine, demilitarized zone included, in exchange for the Russian General Staff cancelling its yet-unknown 2023 offensive, which may be as devastating as cutting off Kiev’s access to the Black Sea and/or cutting off the supply of NATO weapons across the Polish border.
The US offer defines itself as the path towards a “just and durable peace that upholds Ukraine’s territorial integrity.” Well, not really. It just won’t be a rump Ukraine, and Kiev might even retain those western lands that Poland is dying to gobble up.
The President’s Intelligence Advisory Board was created by President Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1956. The board counts among its alumni a Medal of Honor recipient, a steel magnate, a secretary of defense, a retired admiral, and a former state governor.
Joining the board Thursday per President Joe Biden’s apparent wishes: Kim Cobb, a climate alarmist who was admittedly left bedridden as a result of the American people’s election of former President Donald Trump in 2016.
Biden announced his intention to appoint Cobb to the PIAB on Jan. 26.
Cobb noted that she has “much to learn” but hopes “to contribute to the critical work of this esteemed Board.”
Cobb’s biography, lifted from her Brown page and included in the White House’s statement, is seeded with potential clues concerning the president’s decision.
Cobb is a climate scientist who has repeatedly appeared on CNN to discuss the specter of anthropogenic climate change. She co-authored an alarmist UN report in 2021 that simultaneously held that various allegedly man-made climate trends under way are now irreversible and it is still imperative that the world transition off fossil fuels.
You must be logged in to post a comment.