Tag: donald trump

President Trump Sets the Internet On Fire After Sharing a Wild and Provocative Theory About Joe Biden

President Trump has sent the country into an uproar after sharing what his haters are calling a “conspiracy theory” regarding Joe Biden.

Trump shared a post on his Truth Social from a user called llijh. In her post, she alleges Biden was executed in 2020 and has been replaced by a clone.

The president presented the post entirely without comment.

“There is no #JoeBiden – executed in 2020. #Biden clones doubles & robotic engineered soulless mindless entities are what you see. >#Democrats dont know the difference,” the post from llijh states.

While there is no evidence that any of this is true, Biden might as well be a zombie, considering his near-nonexistent mental state and dire cancer diagnosis.

Internet users had a wide variety of reactions to Trump’s repost. Many of his supporters claimed victory and said it proved their theory regarding Biden.

Keep reading

President Trump Pardons Former Governor Rowland – Did Big Pharma Target Him for His Psychiatric Drug Ban?

Recently Pardoned Former Governor John Rowland’s political downfall is often reduced to scandalous headlines about gifts and corruption, but the truth behind his resignation reveals a far more complex and troubling story—one that involves a fierce battle with Big Pharma, a controversial psychiatric drug ban for vulnerable children, and a corruption scandal that may not be as disconnected as it seems.

In the early 2000s, Governor Rowland took a rare and bold stand against the wrongful medication of children in state care by banning three powerful antipsychotic drugs from Connecticut’s drug formulary: Risperdal (risperidone), Zyprexa (olanzapine), and Seroquel (quetiapine). These medications were widely prescribed despite mounting evidence of severe side effects, including increased risks of suicide, diabetes, and violent behavior. The ban thrust Connecticut into the national spotlight when The New York Times ran a front-page article in 2004 exposing the widespread use—and potential dangers—of these psychiatric drugs in children under state supervision, sparking a nationwide conversation about the ethics and safety of medicating vulnerable youth.

That same year, National Public Radio (NPR) also covered Connecticut’s groundbreaking actions, highlighting the state’s efforts to protect children from inappropriate psychiatric drug use and the challenges faced in regulating these medications. The NPR coverage emphasized the growing concern over the off-label use of antipsychotics in children, the lack of adequate oversight, and the pushback from pharmaceutical companies.

Connecticut’s legislative and regulatory bodies responded with a six-month review of psychotropic medication use in children in state care, resulting in public acts aimed at establishing oversight mechanisms and protecting children from inappropriate drug use. This review was part of a broader effort to address systemic issues such as lack of informed consent and insufficient court approvals.

Across the country, states like New York, Florida, New Jersey, and Arkansas also made national news for confronting the rampant and often off-label use of antipsychotic medications in children in foster care. Investigations and lawsuits against pharmaceutical companies such as Johnson & Johnson and Eli Lilly highlighted illegal marketing practices promoting these drugs for unapproved uses in children. Connecticut emerged as one of the front lines in this battle, with state legislators and child welfare agencies scrutinizing psychotropic drug use and seeking greater oversight and protections for children in care.

Rowland’s ban challenged powerful pharmaceutical interests. According to advocacy groups like AbleChild, representatives from Canadian pharmaceutical companies met with the governor behind closed doors, pressing him to reverse the decision. Within six months, the banned drugs were reinstated on the state formulary, raising urgent questions about the influence of Big Pharma on public health policy and the safety of children in care.

Keep reading

An Attempt To Reset Science

An executive order on science slipped through last week with almost no comment from the media. Its central concern is to set science on a better path after so many years of egregious abuses in which the core principles of science have been set aside in favor of political messaging.

The title is “Restoring Gold Standard Science.” It is an ambitious attempt to reframe what science is and does, not to politicize it but exactly the opposite. Only better science with the highest standards, the order says, is capable of restoring trust.

You have surely heard that the Trump administration is waging war on science. Read this order: the opposite is true.

“Over the last 5 years, confidence that scientists act in the best interests of the public has fallen significantly. A majority of researchers in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics believe science is facing a reproducibility crisis. The falsification of data by leading researchers has led to high-profile retractions of federally funded research.”

To solve the problem, the order seeks to “restore the American people’s faith in the scientific enterprise and institutions that create and apply scientific knowledge in service of the public good. Reproducibility, rigor, and unbiased peer review must be maintained. This order restores the scientific integrity policies of my first Administration and ensures that agencies practice data transparency, acknowledge relevant scientific uncertainties, are transparent about the assumptions and likelihood of scenarios used, approach scientific findings objectively, and communicate scientific data accurately.”

Keep reading

Trump’s Pardon for Former Virginia Sheriff Who Exchanged Badges for Cash Makes a Mockery of ‘Law and Order’

“We must maintain law and order at the highest level, or we will cease to have a country, 100 percent,” said Donald Trump, then a candidate for president, at a 2016 rally in Virginia Beach. “We will cease to have a country. I am the law and order candidate.”

It’s a theme that would continue for nearly a decade, up to the present day. “We have to get law and order back,” he said in April 2024, during his third campaign for the presidency. “We have to bring law and order back to our cities, back to our country, and we’re doing it,” he told a crowd in August of that same year. “But when I get back into the Oval Office,” he said the following month, “the madness ends, and the law and order is going to return to our country.”

If the full, unconditional pardon now-President Trump recently gave to disgraced ex-Sheriff Scott Jenkins is any indication, then the madness unfortunately has not ended.

Jenkins, formerly of the Culpeper County Sheriff’s Office, was convicted last year of accepting over $75,000 in cash bribes from several businessmen in exchange for Jenkins appointing them as auxiliary deputy sheriffs, a sworn law enforcement position. He did not train or vet them; for their money, Jenkins gave the bribers badges and credentials, which recipients used in interesting ways, like to get out of traffic tickets and obtain other special privileges. 

“Sheriff Scott Jenkins, his wife Patricia, and their family have been dragged through HELL by a Corrupt and Weaponized Biden DOJ,” Trump posted on TruthSocial in announcing the pardon. He added that Jenkins allegedly wanted to offer additional evidence in his defense during trial, but the judge “refused to allow it, shut him down, and then went on a tirade.”

The Office of the Pardon Attorney did not respond to a request for comment clarifying what that was, but a judge improperly blocking exculpatory evidence is an issue for an appeal, not a pardon. In any case, the evidence against Jenkins was, by every measure, overwhelming. Rick Rahim, a convicted felon, testified that he bribed Jenkins with $25,000 in cash and an additional loan (which was never repaid) so he could be sworn in as an auxiliary deputy. One video shows Jenkins accepting a $5,000 check from a businessman and then adding, “I’m going to make it official with a badge.” Another photo presented at trial shows Jenkins holding a gift bag; a recording caught businessman Kevin Rychlik, an associate of Jenkins, saying, “You have cash from him in the bag.” Two undercover law enforcement officers also testified that Jenkins accepted bribes from them in exchange for being deputized.

A jury in December found Jenkins guilty on 12 counts: one count of conspiracy, four counts of honest services fraud, and seven counts of bribery. He was sentenced to 10 years in prison.

To argue that a pardon here is in service of “law and order”—as opposed to a rejection of it—is to pervert the meaning of that term at a fundamental level. Law and order is vital to a functioning society. If it stands for anything, it cannot exempt the very people who are charged with its application. If the rule of law only applies to the little guy, then it isn’t worth much. “With great power comes no responsibility” is not a phrase that has gained much traction throughout the ages for its wisdom.

So why pardon Jenkins, particularly when considering the stated justification—that he couldn’t offer a certain piece of evidence in his defense—strains credulity? “No MAGA left behind,” Pardon Attorney Ed Martin, whose nomination for U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia recently failed to attract enough support in the Senate, said Monday on X. “Thank you, @potus Trump, for pardoning Sheriff Jenkins!”

Keep reading

Trump’s Useful Idiots

The media, universities, the Democratic Party and liberals, by embracing the fiction of “rampant antisemitism,” laid the groundwork for their own demise.

Columbia and Princeton, where I have taught, and Harvard, which I attended, are not incubators of hatred towards Jews.

The New York Times, where I worked for 15 years and which Trump calls “an enemy of the people,” is slavishly subservient to the Zionist narrative. What these institutions have in common is not antisemitism, but liberalism. And liberalism, with its creed of pluralism and inclusiveness, is slated by our authoritarian regime for obliteration.

The conflation of outrage over the genocide with antisemitism is a sleazy tactic to silence protest and placate Zionist donors, the billionaire class and advertisers.

These liberal institutions, weaponizing antisemitism, aggressively silenced and expelled critics, banned student groups such as Jewish Voice for Peace and Students for Justice in Palestine, allowed police to make hundreds of arrests of peaceful protests on campuses, purged professors and groveled before Congress.

Use the words “apartheid”’ and “genocide”’ and you are fired or excoriated.

Zionist Jews, in this fictional narrative, are the oppressed. Jews who protest the genocide are slandered as Hamas stooges and punished. Good Jews. Bad Jews. One group deserves protection. The other deserves to be thrown to the wolves. This odious bifurcation exposes the charade.

In April 2024, Columbia University President Minouche Shafik, along with two board members and a law professor, testified before the U.S. House of Representatives’ education committee. They accepted the premise that antisemitism was a significant problem at Columbia and other higher education institutions.

When Co-Chair of the Board of Trustees of Columbia University David Greenwald and others told the committee that they believed  “from the river to the sea” and “long live the intifada” were antisemitic statements, Shafik agreed. She threw students and faculty under the bus, including long-time professor Joseph Massad.

The day after the hearings, Shafik suspended all the students at the Columbia protests and called in the New York City Police Department (NYPD), who arrested at least 108 students.

“I have determined that the encampment and related disruptions pose a clear and present danger to the substantial functioning of the University,” Shafik wrote in her letter to the police.

NYPD Chief John Chell, however, told the press, “the students that were arrested were peaceful, offered no resistance whatsoever, and were saying what they wanted to say in a peaceful manner.”

Keep reading

Trump Rightly Pardons 2 Florida Divers Who Became Federal Felons Because of an Honest Mistake

Here are some things you don’t do when you know you are committing a crime. You don’t do it in broad daylight in front of witnesses. You don’t enlist the help of those witnesses and invite them to record the event with their smartphones. You don’t report what happened to a law enforcement agency or leave evidence of the incident in plain view in a public place.

John Moore and Tanner Mansell, two Florida diving instructors, did all of those things on August 10, 2020, when they took Camryn Kuehl and her family on a snorkeling trip and came across a buoy-tethered fishing line that had caught 19 sharks. Moore and Mansell, who worked for a company that specializes in shark encounters, told the Kuehls the catch was “illegal.” Based on that assessment, they hauled in the line and freed the sharks, reported the incident to Florida Fish and Wildlife Officer Barry Partelow, and followed his instructions by leaving the fishing gear on the marina dock in Jupiter. But after it turned out that the shark catch had been authorized as part of a research project, both men were convicted of a federal felony, even though the evidence suggested they had made an honest mistake.

President Donald Trump reversed that injustice on Wednesday, when he granted pardons to Moore and Mansell. Unlike many of Trump’s clemency decisions, such as his pardons for violent Capitol rioters and corrupt public officials who abused their powers for personal gain, his intervention in this case epitomizes how “the benign prerogative of pardoning,” as Alexander Hamilton called it, should be used: to make “exceptions in favor of unfortunate guilt,” overriding “cruel” criminal penalties in circumstances that “plead for a mitigation of the rigor of the law.”

That certainly seems like an apt description of this case. Kuehl, who documented the shark release with photos that she posted on social media, testified that she “thought we were doing a great thing.” That was the impression she got from Moore and Mansell, whose conduct suggests they were sincere in that belief. Assistant U.S. Attorney Tom Watts-FitzGerald nevertheless obtained an indictment that charged them with violating 18 USC 661, which applies to someone who “takes and carries away, with intent to steal or purloin, any personal property of another” within “the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States.”

During their 2023 trial in the Southern District of Florida, Moore and Mansell asked Judge Donald Middlebrooks to instruct the jury that stealing property means wrongfully taking it “with intent to deprive the owner of the use or benefit permanently or temporarily and to convert it to one’s own use or the use of another.” After the prosecution objected to including a conversion element, Middlebrooks omitted it, although he did tell the jury that the defendants maintained they had “removed property without the bad purpose to disobey or disregard the law and therefore did not act with the intent to steal or purloin.”

The jurors, whose deliberations lasted longer than it took to present them with the evidence against Moore and Mansell, evidently were troubled by the facts of the case. They sent the judge several notes before telling him they were unable to reach a verdict. Middlebrooks then gave them an Allen charge, encouraging them to continue deliberating and saying they should be open to changing their positions, provided they could do so “without violating your individual judgment and conscience.”

Keep reading

Expect Trump’s Military Parade to Cost More Than the Army Says

President Donald Trump boasted on Monday that his hosting of a military parade in Washington, D.C., next month to honor the Army’s 250th anniversary — coincidentally the same date as his 79th birthday — was an act of divine intervention.

“We’re going to have a big, big celebration, as you know, 250 years,” he said during a Memorial Day speech at Arlington National Cemetery. “Can you imagine? I missed that four years, and now look what I have, I have everything. Amazing the way things work out. God did that.”

The massive military parade and related festivities planned for June 14 will cost an estimated $25 to $45 million, according to the Army. This is likely a significant underestimate due to many expenses that are unaccounted for – or will be billed later, such as damages to local infrastructure caused by armored vehicles. Members of Congress are already expressing outrage at what they see as a gross misuse of funds.

“Trump squandering $45 million in taxpayer dollars on a military parade for his birthday is the epitome of government waste,” said Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn. “If the Trump Administration truly cared about celebrating the 250th anniversary of the Army, they would honor past and present soldiers and reinstate the thousands of veterans who they fired from the federal workforce — not throw away millions on an extravagant parade.”

The purpose of the parade is also seemingly up for interpretation. The White House now says the parade is a celebration of the Army’s semiquincentennial after, last month, denying reports that a parade would be held on the president’s birthday. Trump, for his part, has offered shifting explanations, stating that the parade is a celebration of Flag Day, the military writ large, or tanks and other weaponry.

The current plan, nonetheless, involves a martial spectacle reminiscent of the Soviet Union or North Korea in the heart of America’s capital, with armored vehicles rolling down Constitution Avenue. It is slated to involve more than 100 vehicles, including 28 M1A1 Abrams tanks, 28 Stryker armored personnel carriers, 28 Bradley Fighting Vehicles, four M109 Paladin self-propelled howitzers, as well as military relics like World War II-era Sherman tanks, a B-25 bomber, and a P-51 Mustang single-seat fighter plane, according to Army spokesperson Cynthia Smith. She added that the parade will also feature 34 horses, two mules, one wagon, and one dog.

Keep reading

Trump Sent A ‘Free Speech Squad’ To The UK To Investigate Erosion Of Rights

President Trump has dispatched a cadre of State Department officials to the UK to monitor and investigate the growing attacks on freedom of speech by the British government.

The Telegraph reports that “A five-person team from the US State Department spent days in the country,” and among a host of other issues they looked into a crack down on pro-life activists voicing, or in many cases silently expressing opposition to abortion clinics.

The report notes that Trump’s free speech squad, specifically from the US Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor (DRL), “met with five activists who had been arrested for silently protesting outside abortion clinics across Britain.”

The visit demonstrates that Trump is acutely aware of the threat to freedom that is growing in the UK and is willing to intervene in British affairs as required.

The activists, Isabel Vaughan-Spruce, Rose Docherty, Adam Smith-Connor, Livia Tossici-Bolt and Father Sean Gough, a Catholic priest, were all arrested for standing outside abortion clinics on public roads and silently praying.

Keep reading

Trump Admin Refuses To Confirm Whether It’s Lifted Range Restrictions On Missiles To Ukraine

Press pool reporters were left frustrated Tuesday afternoon when during a State Department briefing the Trump admin spokesperson refused to comment on German Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s announcement that the United States and European allies had lifted “absolutely” all restrictions on the range of arms sent to Ukraine.

State Department Spokesperson Tammy Bruce said when pressed by reporters, “I’m not going to discuss that. I’m not going to confirm that.” The Kremlin has responded by saying the decision was potentially dangerous and runs counter to attempts at a settlement. Still, there’s been no confirmation from the governments named by Merz, especially the US. Here is how Russia’s RT presented the televised exchange:

German chancellor says US, UK and EU all gave Kiev permission to fire longer-range missiles at Russia Trump’s government sounding more and more like Biden’s…

Keep reading

The CFPB wanted medical debt to be left off credit reports. That’s changed under Trump

David Deeds is in financial trouble, and he’s hoping a federal court in Texas can help get him out of it.

Deeds, who is 62 and owes tens of thousands of dollars in medical debt from cancer treatment, is involved in a complicated lawsuit filed by credit industry groups over the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s medical debt rule.

The rule, finalized in January just weeks before the end of the Biden administration, would have banned the reporting of medical debt from credit reports. At the time, the agency reported 15 million Americans would benefit from the change, removing $49 billion in medical debt from records. It was set to go into effect in March.

But new leadership appointed by President Trump now runs the CFPB. And the agency hasn’t just reversed its position on the consumer protection rule — last month, it joined forces with the plaintiffs who filed the suit trying to block it. The agency has not returned a request for comment from NPR.

Over the last few months, Judge Sean Jordan from Texas’ Eastern District has twice ordered a stay, delaying the rule’s start date to July 28. He is likely to make a ruling on whether or not to vacate it by mid-June.

The outcome of the suit, filed on the same day the rule was issued, has important financial implications for Deeds, as well as the millions more whose medical debt has negatively impacted their credit scores.

“My credit was and is very important to me, because it is necessary to secure housing, transportation, and employment, and make sure that I’m never homeless again,” Deeds said in an affidavit filed on Feb. 24, by a consumer advocacy group intervening in the lawsuit.

Keep reading