Tag: safety

Ex-FBI agent turned podcaster ‘intentionally’ and ‘unsafely’ fired gun before he was ousted: memos

An ex-FBI agent turned provocative podcaster was kicked out of the bureau after he “intentionally” discharged his weapon in an “unsafe manner” on a training range while his instructor was in the line of fire, according to the bureau’s incident report obtained by Just the News and congressional testimony that challenges his self-portrayal as a whistleblower who faced retaliation.

The records, obtained under the Freedom of Information Act and from court files, show Kyle Matthew Seraphin was “permanently suspended” from the FBI on June 1,2022, just eight weeks after the alleged incident at a New Mexico gun range on April 1, 2022. The incident was deemed so reckless that he was referred to FBI internal affairs, the documents show.

Seraphin acknowledged to Just the News in an interview last year that he was “dicking around” when he fired his weapon at his supervisor’s target at the range in 2022, but he insisted the incident should not have led to his suspension and termination and that he believes he was a victim of whistleblower retaliation.

He has leveraged his story as an alleged whistleblower who exposed anti-Catholic bias and resisted the FBI’s vaccine mandate under former Director Christopher Wray to a popular anti-bureau podcast where he fashions himself as one of the bureau’s “suspendables,” a group of agents whose security clearances were suspended.

His notoriety has also landed him in a defamation lawsuit brought by current FBI Director Kash Patel’s girlfriend, whom he accused on his podcast of being an Israeli Mossad “honeypot.” His portrayal as a whistleblower is front and center in his defense motion to dismiss that litigation.

“Between late 2021 and late 2022, Mr. Seraphin gained national notoriety as a ‘whistleblower’ for refusing to participate in the FBI’s mandatory vaccine policy and what he alleged to be potential perjury by Attorney General Merrick Garland,” his motion to dismiss declares.

You can read that motion, here: 

gov.uscourts.txwd_.1172861464.10.0.pdf

Remarkably, his own lawyers put the word whistleblower in quote marks in that court document. 

Keep reading

Brutal Seattle Crime Exposes the Cost of Socialist Mayor’s Hostility to Public Safety

Seattle’s new socialist mayor, Katie Wilson, has been going viral quite a bit in the last few weeks and for all the wrong reasons.

I know violent crime videos proliferate on social media these days, but this one is especially hard to watch.

In a clip captured by a closed-circuit television camera in Seattle, two young men can be seen senselessly beating a 77-year-old man and leaving him face down in the street.

Fortunately, the man survived his injuries, but he had to be hospitalized for a week.

One of the alleged attackers, 29-year-old Ahmed Abdullahi Osman, was quickly detained by police after he tried to evade them. In the police body camera video of his arrest, Osman said that he worked for the “state,” for “Katie, the mayor.”

According to David Rose at FOX 13, Osman was released “on $5,000 bail for a separate fire alarm tampering charge two days after the attack,” as Seattle police conducted their investigation. They are now unable to find him after they put out a warrant for his arrest.

The whole thing is infuriating to say the least, as Heritage Foundation President Kevin Roberts indicated on X.

Keep reading

Dutch Court Orders Bill Gates to Stand Trial Over COVID-19 Vaccine Allegations

Gates, along with Pfizer CEO and Dutch officials, accused of knowingly promoting unsafe vaccines; attempts to evade trial rejected as November 27th hearing approaches.

Dutch courts have officially ordered Bill Gates to stand trial over allegations related to COVID-19 vaccines. Seven plaintiffs who suffered vaccine-related injuries claim that Gates, along with other high-profile figures, deliberately misled the public into receiving injections that they ‘knew or should have known’ were neither safe nor effective.

The lawsuit also names former Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte, Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla, and several key figures from the Dutch COVID response team, accusing them of complicity in the deception.

Gates attempted to evade the lawsuit, arguing that his status as a U.S. citizen should shield him from Dutch legal proceedings. However, the court ruled otherwise, stating that Gates’ close involvement with other defendants who are under Dutch jurisdiction made him subject to trial in the Netherlands.

Now, Gates and his legal team are facing mounting pressure as they prepare to confront these serious accusations in court, with the next hearing scheduled for November 27th.

Keep reading

‘Major Win’: House Strips Pesticide Liability Shield From Farm Bill in Bipartisan Vote

The U.S. House of Representatives voted today to strip controversial pro-pesticide provisions from the Farm Bill and adopt a bipartisan amendment that removes liability protections for chemical manufacturers, The Hill reported.

Reps. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) and Elijah Crane (R-Ariz.) co-authored the amendment that removed language that would have shielded companies like Monsanto from certain state-level failure-to-warn lawsuits. The amendment, which passed in a 280-142 vote, preserves states’ authority over pesticide labeling and safety standards.

“I do not support giving blanket immunity to corporations at the expense of American families,” Luna wrote on X.

“Today we secured a major win,” said Children’s Health Defense Senior Advocacy Manager Stephanie Locricchio. “It proves that when people unite around a common goal, change is possible. But the fight isn’t over. We must stay vigilant, push our government to prioritize public health — especially our children — over corporate profits, and continue to hold industry accountable.”

Support for the amendment crossed party lines. Rep. Chellie Pingree (D-Maine), who has long opposed similar provisions, emphasized the breadth of that coalition.

“Democrats, Republicans, and citizens across this country agree: Keep the pesticide liability shield language OUT of the Farm Bill!” Pingree posted on X.

Keep reading

Seattle’s socialist Mayor Katie Wilson slammed for cutting short interview over basic public safety question

Seattle socialist Mayor Katie Wilson is facing renewed backlash after abruptly cutting short an interview when pressed on a basic public safety question.

The two-minute video has amassed nearly 1 million views on X and sparked fierce criticism of the newly installed mayor.

Wilson awkwardly exited the interview with Seattle’s TV station KOMO after being asked about the role of surveillance cameras amid rising gun violence in the city.

“That’s obviously been an issue that you weighed in on. Does that change it? Does that change your perspective at all?” a reporter asked.

As the question was posed, the mayor began to break eye contact and glance at what appeared to be her press staffers off camera, who could be heard telling the reporter to “keep it on topic.”

Keep reading

Psychiatry Won’t Pull Paper on Misleading Safety of PAXIL, Despite Massive Drug Settlement, Consumers Get “Expression of Concern”

A D.C. judge just sided with a long‑discredited Paxil study instead of the kids it was used to sell drugs to. GlaxoSmithKline has already paid $3 billion for fraud that included how it pushed Paxil for children and supported this very study, yet the article still stands in the medical record.  Those who rush to always defend psychiatry as “experts” of the human condition should really look at the bigger picture.

According to the lawsuit, that study falsely claimed Paxil was safe and effective for depressed teens, even though the company’s own trial data did not show real benefit and did show serious safety concerns, including suicidal thoughts and behavior. The case explains why lawyer George Murgatroyd went after the journal and its publisher for continuing to publish and sell the article, how the court’s ruling let psychiatry’s publishing system avoid full accountability once again, and how consumers were left with only a small warning label on the paper instead of the clear retraction many believe is needed.

At the center of this case is attorney George W. Murgatroyd III, a product‑liability lawyer who has represented families whose children died by suicide after taking Paxil. Murgatroyd sued the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and the publisher Elsevier, arguing they were still “publishing, distributing, and selling a fraudulent scientific article” that misleads the public and endangers adolescent mental health, while charging readers to access it. He asked the D.C. Superior Court to treat that article as a deceptive practice under the District’s consumer‑protection law and to order a full retraction.

In March 2026, Judge Robert Okun dismissed his case. The judge did not say Study 329 was honest or reliable. Instead, he ruled that Murgatroyd lacked legal standing and that a journal article is not a “consumer good or service” under that particular law, so the court could not use that statute to force a retraction. In practical terms, the decision shields the journal and publisher: they keep the article online, charging for access, under the protection of free‑speech arguments rather than being treated like sellers of a defective product. For an industry already tied to a historic fraud settlement over this very drug and trial, it is another escape.

Murgatroyd’s work still produced one real gain for the public. After he filed his complaint, JAACAP finally attached an “expression of concern” to Study 329 in 2025, warning readers that serious issues have been raised about the article and that further review is underway. That warning label stays with the paper and marks it as disputed rather than trustworthy, a change that likely would not have happened without Murgatroyd pushing. In a landscape where a flawed study helped justify giving a risky drug to teens, naming him and his effort matters: he forced at least a small, visible sign of truth into the official record, even as the larger fight for justice and a full retraction continues.

Keep reading

She Refused A Smart Meter For Health Reasons — So New Jersey Water Company Shut Off Her Water

A New Jersey water company shut off a woman’s water for six days after she refused a smart meter due to health concerns, even though the state has no regulation requiring residents to accept smart meters.

In an exclusive interview with The Defender, Alla Goldman described how New Jersey American Water (NJAW) employees “harassed” her and her husband for over a year, threatening to shut off her water if she refused to let them install a smart water meter.

On March 5, the water company made good on its threats by sending a technician — escorted by two police officers — to her home to shut off her water.

For six days, Goldman, who was sick with the flu, and her husband went without water at their home. Goldman took shelter in a hotel and bought gallons of drinking water.

“I want to sue them for their literal threats,” Goldman said.

While staying at a hotel, Goldman filed a complaint with the state’s Board of Public Utilities (BPU) about the water company’s action.

The BPU informed her that the water company had no legal basis for shutting off her water because there is no BPU regulation requiring people to accept smart meter upgrades.

Goldman said, “A BPU supervisor told me that if we do not want a smart meter, we do not have to have one.”

When the BPU informed the water company of Goldman’s complaint, the company changed its tune by offering to restore services and install an analog meter that would not emit wireless radiation.

‘Few people know that water companies do the same thing’

Keep reading

The Vaccine Safety Signal the Media Still Won’t Read

The serious-adverse-event signal found in the Pfizer and Moderna mRNA Covid-19 vaccine trials has been in the peer-reviewed literature for nearly four years. Mainstream media outlets, on the rare occasions they address it, have treated it not as evidence to be weighed but as misinformation to be managed — dismissed on the authority of experts without relevant expertise, or simply ignored. A recent BBC Radio 4 broadcast is a near-textbook example.

The broadcast aired on Everything Is Fake and Nobody Cares, a BBC Radio 4 series hosted by Jamie Bartlett, whose stated purpose is to ask why, in so much of modern life, fakery is no longer punished but rewarded. It is a reasonable question. The most direct answer the series has produced to date appears inside one of its own episodes.

In the episode in question, Bartlett devoted his broadcast to Dr. Aseem Malhotra and Covid-19 vaccine safety. As part of that segment, he aired a specific claim about a peer-reviewed paper I led, published in the journal Vaccine in September 2022. To evaluate Dr. Malhotra’s on-air statements, Bartlett brought in Dr. Vicky Male, a reproductive immunologist at Imperial College London. Dr. Male told listeners that the authors of the paper had been “specifically told to make it clear this paper should not be used” to support the kinds of claims Dr. Malhotra was making.

That statement is not true. No one told us that. The paper does not contain such an instruction. I am one of its authors; I have the peer review correspondence; I know what the journal asked of us and what it did not. Anyone could have checked this in five minutes by reading the paper, which runs eight pages and is open-access online. Jamie Bartlett did not check.

On the basis of an unchecked false claim about a scientific paper, Bartlett told his audience that Dr. Malhotra was spreading false information — on a podcast whose central premise is that modern life now rewards exactly this kind of thing.

Whether that reflected willful dishonesty or plain incompetence, I cannot say. The case that follows lays out what happened in enough detail for readers to decide for themselves. Both possibilities reflect poorly on a national broadcaster. Only one of them would be excusable.

Keep reading

Bio-Engineered Venom in our Food, Veggie Seeds, Common Drugs

The Shocking Truth About Venom Genetically-Engineered Vegetable Seeds

Imagine biting into a fresh tomato or serving up a bowl of rice, unaware that deep within the plant’s DNA lies a venom protein borrowed from a snake, scorpion, or spider. It sounds like science fiction, but it’s not.

According to a peer-reviewed study published in the journal Venoms (November 2021), scientists have been exploring ways to incorporate venom proteins into vegetable seeds as a new line of defense against insects… and those developments may already be far more widespread than the public has been told.

Venom for Dinner? The Study That Started the Alarm

The journal article, titled Applications of Venom Biodiversity in Agriculture, outlines a growing body of research in which venom peptides… proteins derived from creatures like snakes, spiders, and scorpions… are used to engineer pest-resistant plants.

The rationale?

According to the study’s authors, venom-based biotechnology holds promise for creating what they call “bioinsecticides.” The idea is that plants, through genetic-engineering, can internally produce venom proteins that repel or kill attacking pests. It’s been offered by marketers as a more “natural” solution than synthetic pesticides.

But some researchers aren’t convinced… and the backlash is growing.

Keep reading

US presidential security deliberately weak – anti-terrorism expert

The latest assassination attempt on US President Donald Trump was not only a complete security failure but a product of systemic weakness that may even be deliberate, a special forces veteran of the Russian Federal Security Service (FSB) has told RT. 

Cole Tomas Allen, a 31‑year‑old teacher from California, has been charged with trying to assassinate the US president during a dinner event at the Washington Hilton on Saturday. Allen had reportedly checked into the hotel the day before. On the day of the attack, he used an internal stairwell to get to the hotel’s terrace level where the event was held. Armed with a pump-action shotgun, a semi-automatic handgun, and three knives, Allen rushed through the metal detector frame and engaged in a gunfight with Secret Service agents. He was apprehended just a few meters from the ballroom.

Reserve Lieutenant Colonel Andrey Popov, a veteran of the FSB’s elite Alpha Group anti‑terrorism unit, has argued that the Secret Service made a number of blatant “organizational mistakes” and suggested that its repeated failures to prevent attacks on the American leader are “part of the system.”

According to Popov, such an incident would have never happened if the Security Service had followed standard security and anti-terrorism procedures and had done its due diligence ahead of the event, such as properly vetting all the hotel guests, reviewing building plans, sealing doors and ventilation, setting up proper metal detectors, and stationing additional security forces. “In a decent hotel, a person from the budget zone simply cannot physically get into the VIP zone,” he said.

Keep reading