Category: Fraud O’ The Day

Your tax dollars at work….and play

Legal Trouble on the Boulevard of Broken Dreams
Has a for-profit film school been padding its job-placement stats?

The Los Angeles Film School is caught up in a scandal over its alleged efforts to trick students into believing that its graduates do extraordinarily well in the Hollywood job market. The accusation comes from two former executives of the school, wherein no doubt there is the plot outline for a noir-ish movie about double- and triple-crosses in the shadows of Sunset Boulevard. Happily the Los Angeles Film School sits at 6363 Sunset Boulevard, and it is a private, for-profit entity, just like a movie studio or a casino.

I admit that the troubles on the Boulevard of Broken Dreams are not my usual beat. I’m more accustomed to the smooth operators of the Ivy League and the grifters of the state universities. But since the dawn of Hollywood there has never been a shortage of young people to say, in the words of Green Day, “Sometimes I wish someone out there [would] find me.” And a fair number of those who harbor such wishes are lured by the Los Angeles Film School, where “Hollywood is your classroom.”

The pockets (allegedly) picked in this instance are not just those of the students. My news in this case comes from that key source for higher-ed intel, Variety. The pockets (allegedly) picked in this instance are not just those of the students. The federal government was (allegedly) fleeced, as well. Can I skip the “allegedly” from this point on? I stipulate that this is all about allegations, and, this being Los Angeles, those allegations could well disappear with the re-write.

“‘Nearly all’ of the tens of millions of dollars the school receives each year from federal student aid programs is the result of fraud.” Most of the school’s students qualified for federal student loans: money that can be spent only to pay tuition at educational institutions that meet certain criteria. This is to prevent students from being fleeced at degree mills. The government determines whether a school is a degree mill by the percentage of students who graduate and get a well-paying job in their field of study. The Los Angeles Film School has an abundance of attractive programs, from “Animation: Environment and Character Design” to “Audio Production” and “Film Cinematography.” A bachelor’s degree in one of these costs about $80,000.

A reasonably prudent student might have some doubts about the likelihood that such a degree would pay off.

Continue reading “”

Cynical Publius

Dear Democrats:

Hey. How’ve you been?

It’s been a rough 25 years. It feels like ever since that hanging chad election in 2000, we have been at each others’ throats. Mostly this is because we’ve let the hyperbole and the wild conspiracy theories control us on both sides. Now I say that is 80% you and 20% us (because you control the media), and we’ve done our fair share with Birthers and Big Mikers, but the bottom line is that neither side trusts what the other side says.

That’s a shame.

I get why you may not trust us. But you are going to have to on what we are about to tell you. Sometimes objective truths need to be said, and we’re about to say them.

Buckle up Buttercups. What you are about to read is 100%, verifiably true:

1. In the 2016 presidential election, the Hillary Clinton campaign fabricated out of the ether a wholly fictional “dossier” alleging that Donald Trump was an agent of the Russian Federation.

2. This “dossier” was shared with intelligence and law enforcement agencies in the friendly Obama Administration, and treated as reliable intelligence even though those agencies knew it was highly suspect.

3. This wholly-fabricated “dossier” was then used as a legal basis for surveillance and wiretaps on members of the Trump Team before and after the election, and the communications equipment in the Trump Transition Team HQ in New York was in fact wiretapped by the Obama Administration.

4. After the election was over and Trump had won, the intelligence community determined that there was no material Russian interference in the election. Barack Obama directed them to reverse that finding.

5. This new, false finding, coupled with the ongoing concerns regarding the dossier became the bases for a concerted effort by the Obama Administration to prevent Donald Trump from ever taking office, even though the American people had just elected him. The ongoing Potemkin Villages of the dossier and the IC report were the bases for numerous unlawful warrants on the Trump team, the creation of interview traps where Trump members might incriminate themselves by making a false statement to the FBI, and generally encircling the entire Trump transition team via subterfuge and placing them in a public aura of an illegal enterprise and not a validly-elected administration.

6. With the Obama plan unable to prevent Trump from taking office, his loyalists who remained in the new Trump Administration did their very best to work towards removing Trump via scandal, with James Comey being the chief bagman via the bogus dossier.

7. While everything described above was happening, it was all being leaked to the media in an effort to discredit and cripple the Trump Administration. Often bogus information would be fed to a media source, the source would report it, and then the fact that the media reported the bogus information was used by Democrat operatives as a basis for legitimizing it, i.e. “the wrap up smear.”

8. All of the above became such a burden on the new Trump Administration that a special prosecutor, Robert Mueller, was appointed to cut through to the truth. Unfortunately Mueller was relying on the same fake dossier and bogus IC reports, so bogus data led to a bogus investigation that served no other purpose than to cripple the Trump Administration for two years.

9. To summarize points #1 through #8 above, the Obama/Hillary plan had three steps: (i) spread Russia lies so Trump loses the election; (ii) if Trump wins the election, spread Russia lies so he is never inaugurated; and (iii) if he is inaugurated, spread Russia lies to cripple his ability to govern.

10. After Trump lost in 2020 and he started indicating that he would run again, the Obama team, now with Biden installed in the White House as a puppet, knew they could not let him win as he would unravel what they had done, make it public, and potentially cause a bunch of them to end up in prison. So they coordinated lawfare attacks on Trump across the nation using Democrat operatives, thinking that Trump would end up in prison or his reputation would be in such tatters that he could never be elected. That backfired.

11. Trump got elected in 2024.

12. On July 18, 2025, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard released a treasure trove of heretofore hidden information which, alongside already-public information about the fake dossier, shows that everything we say above is 100%, inarguably, reliably, factually, objectively accurate.

We repeat, everything written above is VERIFIABLY, OBJECTIVELY TRUE.

We know you love to say how much you “love democracy.”

Do you? Do you REALLY “love democracy”?

What is described above is the most undemocratic thing imaginable.

Forget any arguments about whether something was criminal or the statute of limitations or whatever other technicality distractor gets thrown out there, we have a very simple question for you:

HOW CAN YOU TOLERATE THIS?

Please consider this letter a peace offering. If you are willing to acknowledge what transpired and offer an apology, we might be able to begin to trust each just a teeny bit. We are all Americans, after all.

Sincerely,

The American Coalition of Non-Smoothbrained Conservatives

ALEX BERENSON: Why we need to humiliate Joe Biden
It may seem cruel, but we must prevent similarly addled men from clinging to power

Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr. was even more demented than we knew.
Last night, excerpts leaked from Biden’s October 2023 interview with Robert Hur, the federal prosecutor who investigated him for possessing classified documents.

They are awful. They show a man in severe cognitive decline. Biden couldn’t recall even basic facts, like when elections are held. Yes, Joe Biden — who had lusted for the presidency his entire life — thought Donald Trump had won in November 2017, not 2016. It wasn’t a verbal slip. He didn’t know. An aide had to correct him.

BIDEN REPEATEDLY SAYS ‘I DON’T REMEMBER’ REGARDING CLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS IN NEWLY RELEASED HUR INTERVIEW AUDIO

Even that summary doesn’t capture Biden’s struggles.

What he says is bad. How he says it is worse. His voice is weak and whispery. He goes silent for stretches, loses his train of thought, offers oddly emotional asides about his son Beau — though he could not remember when Beau died. He seems not to remember being vice president; he speaks of being a senator and then jumps to running for president.

In the end, the classified documents investigation went nowhere. (Like the similar case involving Donald Trump, it shouldn’t have). But along the way, Hur — a well-respected prosecutor who had been the U.S. Attorney for Maryland in Trump’s first term — discovered something far more important: proof of Biden’s incapacity.

The Hur interview is so crucial because Biden and his handlers went to such lengths to protect Biden from press or public scrutiny even before the 2020 election.

Biden used teleprompters for his speeches, of course. His press conferences were rare and closely scripted. He had been told what questions would be asked in advance. Biden’s few unscripted, live interactions visible to the public generally came when he left the White House to walk to Marine One. He would occasionally stumble over to the “gaggle” of reporters yelling questions at him and speak for a few seconds.

Hur’s interview with Biden was likely the only time during Biden’s entire presidency when he faced lengthy questioning he could not control. It shows why Biden and his handlers tried so hard to avoid similar situations.

Hur wrote in his report on the investigation last year that Biden was “a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory.” The audio suggests that description was kind.

You wouldn’t trust the guy in this interview to drive to the grocery store.
Biden had the nuclear codes.

Still worse, Hur interviewed Biden in 2023. If Biden and the people around him had had their way, he would have been president through January 2029. The interview suggests he’ll be nearly vegetative by then — if he lives that long.

When the Justice Department released Hur’s report on his investigation in February 2024, the legacy media immediately downplayed its importance and attacked Hur’s motives.

… the legacy media is only the second-most important villain here. It was Biden and the people around him, most notably his wife Jill and son Hunter, who insisted that he was fit to serve, and would continue to be until he was 86. 

“In what is supposedly a legal document, these inclusions certainly looked gratuitous—to say the least,” the New Yorker wrote in an article about Biden’s “righteous fury” over the report.

Two days later, the Washington Post would claim in a headline Hur had a “five-hour face-off” with Biden and write:

“Hur’s description of Biden’s demeanor as that of a “well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory” would infuriate Biden’s aides, who saw it as sharply at odds with what occurred as the president sat for voluntary questioning.”

Sharply at odds, huh?

I have written before about the media’s dereliction of duty in covering Biden’s decline, both before and after the Hur report, which continued until his disastrous June 27 debate in Atlanta made covering for him impossible. And I will come back to the media’s failure. Hur’s report made clear that Biden’s cognitive impairment was severe and the White House was covering it up. That scheme should have been the story of the 2024 campaign from the moment the report became public.

This is not 20/20 hindsight on my part. On Feb. 9, 2024, the day the report came out, I wrote that it actually might be WORSE for Biden than an actual indictment.

Most of the media looked the other way, even as Biden’s flubs and lapses visibly worsened in the spring of 2024 despite the protective cocoon around him. But the legacy media is only the second-most important villain here.
It was Biden and the people around him, most notably his wife Jill and son Hunter, who insisted that he was fit to serve, and would continue to be until he was 86. Both Jill and Hunt had their reasons. Jill’s lust for the trappings of power would be almost comic in its nakedness if it weren’t so dangerous; Hunter has champagne taste and a beer budget (or, more accurately in his case, cocaine taste and a meth budget).

But, of course, all of them, including Biden, knew the truth. If they hadn’t, they wouldn’t have gone to such great lengths to hide it.

Imagine if Biden had won. Imagine if he had somehow found his way through his debates with Trump and then gone back to the presidential cocoon. Imagine if the media had insisted through Election Day that the videos showing his decline were merely “cheap fakes” – as it did throughout the spring. We’d be approaching a Constitutional crisis. Our system is not parliamentary; it has no way to replace an unfit President quickly or easily. And in running for a second term when he did not have to, Biden showed that he would not give up power unless he was forced to do so.

Robert Hur spoke truth to power. He’s a hero.

Biden and the people around him lied about his basic ability to function as he tried to convince American voters to give him the world’s most important job for four more years. He shouldn’t be forgiven. His misdeeds belong in the first line in his obituary.

We need to remember what he did, even if he can’t.

NIH investigates Biden last-minute $89 billion grant to ‘seemingly dormant’ University of California nonprofit

Nonprofit founded in 2022, never raised nor spent a dime

The National Institutes of Health will look into an $89 billion, 25-year grant awarded to the Alliance for Advancing Biomedical Research in the last days of President Joe Biden’s administration.

The nonprofit “operate[s] exclusively for the benefit of” the University of California system, according to its tax filings. However, the nonprofit, formed in 2022, has never raised a dime nor spent a dime.

Furthermore, the California-based nonprofit would operate the lab at Maryland’s Fort Detrick, taking the contract away from Leidos Biomedical Research. As reported by The Washington Free Beacon, Leidos “held that role for about 30 years.”

The Washington Free Beacon reported the “seemingly dormant” Alliance for Advancing Biomedical Research now faces an investigation, after Iowa Republican Senator Chuck Grassley raised questions about the massive grant.

“It’s outrageous Biden’s NIH shoved a nearly $90 billion contract out the door just days before President Trump returned to office,” Grassley told the news outlet.

“Even worse, the money would have flowed to an organization that can’t clearly protect itself from adversaries like China,” Sen. Grassley said. “I’m very glad HHS heeded my calls to reverse course and is now re-evaluating its initial proposal. I urge the department to ensure efficient use of taxpayer dollars as it works to defeat cancer and save lives.”

The Free Beacon reported further:

Grassley also said he was concerned about the University of California’s well-documented failure to protect its labs from security breaches by China’s government.

“It has been reported that between 1987 and 2021, at least 162 scientists who had worked at Los Alamos [National Laboratory] returned to China to support a variety of domestic research and development programs, including at least 59 who were involved with China’s talent programs,” Grassley wrote [in a letter to the NIH]. “It appears that the University of California’s inability to keep China out of U.S. R&D is an issue that spans nearly four decades.”

Leidos previously expressed its disappointment in January, when it lost the contract.

“While we are disappointed that we may not continue this particular work and partnership, we expect to receive more information on our proposal in the coming days, which will help us better understand the evaluation process and next steps,” the Frederick News-Post reported on Jan. 23.

Since taking office, President Donald Trump and his administration have sought to root out waste and abuse, with a particular emphasis placed on the National Institutes of Health and its billions of dollars in research funding.

How Democrats used NGOs to end-run voters: A ‘parallel government.’

I’m often darkly amused by common examples of inherently false nomenclature: “Jumbo shrimp.” “Government ethics.” “Unbiased news media.”

And one of our society’s biggest falsehoods-in-a-name: “Non-governmental organizations.”

Until recently these groups have been widely seen as international, idealized versions of domestic non-profits.

We thought of them as do-good organizations set up by people who really care — about the environment, or poor people, or children, or freedom.

We imagined they raise money, help the downtrodden, send out press releases and engage in other private activities to promote the causes they favor.

Trump is deworming Washington — now to keep the parasites out for good
They’re not government entities, we thought — the very name says that — but a species of private charity whose good intentions deserve the benefit of any doubt.

Perhaps some NGOs do operate in that way.

But as we’ve learned recently, partly as the result of Department of Government Efficiency digging, many “non-governmental” entities are really just fronts for government activities that Americans would never stand for if Washington attempted them directly.

For example, America’s border crisis was funded in large part by Joe Biden’s government, which sent large sums of money in the form of grants to various NGOs that helped train migrants on how to get to the United States — and how to claim asylum when they arrived.

NGOs helped the illegal immigrants with expenses on their way, and then provided legal resources and more than $22 billion worth of assistance for them — including cash for cars, home loans and business start-ups — once they got in.

This was US taxpayer money, laundered through “independent” organizations that served to promote goals contrary to US law, but consistent with the policy preferences of the Biden administration.

Under President Donald Trump, this funding halted — and, unsurprisingly, the flow of illegal immigrants did, too.

Likewise, the weird wave of sudden global enthusiasm for “trans rights” and novel ideas about gender turns out to have been largely funded by the US government through USAID grants.

Federally funded NGOs spent millions on everything from a transgender opera in Colombia, to a campaign promoting “being LGBTQ in the Caribbean,” to an LGBTQ community center in Bratislava, Slovakia.

As data expert Jennica Pounds (“DataRepublican” on X) put it, “Over the last few months, we’ve come to a realization that should have landed much harder: NGOs weren’t just adjacent to government.”

They were tools of government, “the parallel government,” Pounds wrote, specifically doing things that Washington bureaucrats knew full well they couldn’t easily do themselves.

The big surprise is that we’re so surprised this has been going on.

The lack of accountability also made NGOs a perfect conduit for funneling money to Washington insiders.

It’s been a profitable cycle: Politicians fund agencies; agencies make grants to NGOs; NGOs hire politicians’ wives and offspring — and sometimes the politicians themselves, once they’ve left office.

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), for example, voted to award $14.2 million to Ocean Conservancy since 2008, Fox News reported — and the NGO, in turn, paid his wife Sandra Whitehouse and her firm $2.7 million for consulting work.

No wonder the Washington establishment went crazy when Trump and DOGE started cutting off such funds.

Continue reading “”

How Did an Honors Student Who Says She Can’t Read or Write Get Into College?

Aleysha Ortiz, 19, alleges she cannot read or write yet says she graduated with honors from Hartford Public High School in 2024. She has since filed a lawsuit against the Hartford Board of Education and city officials, accusing them of negligence in failing to provide adequate special education services throughout her schooling, per reporting from Connecticut’s News 8 WTNH.

Ortiz, who is now enrolled at the University of Connecticut (UConn), said she relied heavily on assistive technology such as speech-to-text and text-to-speech programs to complete schoolwork, according to CNN.

Why It Matters

Ortiz’s lawsuit underscores broader concerns about systemic failures in public education, particularly in providing adequate support for students with learning disabilities. The case has drawn attention to how academic achievement is measured and whether special education students are truly receiving the skills they need to succeed beyond high school.

Additionally, it raises questions about how colleges assess applicants, especially those facing severe academic challenges.

Ortiz told CNN she was promoted through school without acquiring fundamental literacy skills. In a May 2024 city council meeting, she testified that after 12 years in Hartford Public Schools, she was unable to read or write, despite being awarded an honors diploma.

Days before her graduation, school officials reportedly offered her the option to defer her diploma to receive additional support, but she declined, according to CNN.

How Did She Get Into College?

Her admission to UConn was possible due to the school’s holistic application process, which does not require SAT scores. According to UConn admissions, the university evaluates applications based on GPA, coursework, extracurricular activities and essays.

Ortiz, who told CNN she used voice-to-text software to complete her application, also received financial aid and scholarships to support her education.

Once in college, Ortiz faced academic difficulties. She shared with CNN that while UConn has provided support services, she took a leave of absence starting in February 2025 for mental health reasons. She has stated she intends to return to her studies but has faced challenges in adapting to the rigor of college coursework.

Experts have pointed out that Ortiz’s case is not unique. Literacy advocates argue that disparities in educational resources disproportionately affect students in underfunded districts, contributing to cases where students graduate without essential skills.

Continue reading “”

What’s that one about the road to Hell being paved with “good intentions”?

How a Novel and JFK’s Good Intentions Became This USAID Mess

Almost 70 years ago, the U.S. State Department dispatched a new ambassador to a Southeast Asian nation. As often seemed to happen, the new U.S. official was no expert on the nation, its economy, or its culture. He did not speak the language. And his concerns were more geopolitical and career-oriented.

To be honest, the ambassador’s most important job had nothing to do with representing the U.S. there or helping that nation. It was instead bolstering that country against the advancing threat of Communism.

At that time in the 1950s, the subversive threat of that evil ideology had gripped the American psyche throughout government and entertainment all the way down to elementary schools, where even kindergartners practiced air-raid drills.

Government reactions, over-reactions, and some stupidity caused a cascading array of official decisions over decades, each one seemingly reasonable at the time, that collectively led to the need for this overdue federal housecleaning.

Now, the results of those potent fears and shortsighted decisions are culminating in an explosive Washington scandal and unfolding crisis over USAID under the new aggressive Trump Administration. The impacts run through thousands of employees, likely millions of beneficiaries in 177 countries, and affect the U.S. image around the world.

This explains why the developing details of outrageous abuse of taxpayer money by Woke USAID officials are resonating so profoundly in this country and, indeed, globally. This crisis reckoning is far from over.

Continue reading “”

Reminds me of stories of snake oil salesmen

AI Gun Detection System Blows It In Nashville School Shooting

A school shooting in Nashville made a lot of headlines, but it wasn’t quite what a lot of people think of as school shootings these days. Yes, it was a shooting and two people died–one of which was the shooter, apparently–and one person was injured, but it also wasn’t quite Uvalde or Virginia Tech. It was, however, awful for everyone present that day and an innocent person lost their life.

It wasn’t the first school shooting in Nashville in recent years, either.

After a shooting at the Covenant School, a lot of places stepped up their efforts to fortify schools. This is something I’ve personally been an advocate for.

The problem is that we need to use proven strategies or, if we’re going to rely on new technology, we need proven backups as well. One of those unproven technologies we’ve talked a lot about here at Bearing Arms is AI gun detection systems, such as those deployed on the New York City subway.

I’m just not convinced they’re ready for primetime.

In Nashville, it seems that, once again, we know the skeptics were right.

The technology system meant to prevent school shootings failed to detect the Antioch High School shooter’s gun, an official confirms.

A Metro Nashville Public Schools’ spokesperson says based on the camera location and the shooter in relation to the camera, it did not detect the weapon.

MNPS adds the camera did activate an alarm trigger when law enforcement and school resource officers arrived with their weapons.

The technology, Omnialert, is an Artificial Intelligence (AI) gun detection used in all Metro Schools.

Look, I like being right as much as the next guy, but I hate seeing the proof that I was right unfold like this. I’m not alone in my skepticism, either, but I’m pretty sure everyone else who had concerns feels the same way.

Omnialert is, of course, just one company. However, Evolv was the company in the NYC subway system, and it also had major problems.

A third company called ZeroEyes has been engaging in state lobbying efforts to restrict tax dollars to only go to companies with certain credentials, which coincidentally only they have. I don’t like the practice they’re undertaking, but it’s possible theirs would work better.

What people call AI today isn’t really artificial intelligence. Most of it is just software with a bunch of if/then statements that winnows down the possibilities and does so very quickly. Yet, like any software, garbage in, garbage out. It’s only as good as the programmers themselves, and while large language models can learn from the inputs they receive, there’s no indication this software can.

Or maybe it does.

What we do know is that in a key moment, the very moment this system was designed to prevent, it failed spectacularly.

It also seems that guns had been found on campus previously, according to one parent who voiced security concerns regarding the school, and begging for metal detectors to be installed.

That’s right. It seems the schools decided AI was all that was needed and not something tried-and-true like metal detectors.

Technology is great, and while I may be skeptical of taxpayer dollars going toward experimental technology, there’s nothing inherently wrong with trying new things. However, relying on these unproven technologies almost exclusively, as seems to have happened here, isn’t the answer.

The only backup seems to have been two school resource officers who were in a completely different part of the school when the incident happened and who arrived after the killer took his own life.

But I can’t help but wonder how things would have gone if the Nashville schools respected teachers’ right to keep and bear arms and an armed staff member had been present. Sure, the shooter would have probably still died, but no one else would have.

Wildfire ActBlue ‘Donation’ Scandal Explodes, Elizabeth Warren Implicated While Obama Bros Go Berserk

Outrage is exploding over a push by numerous Democrats to get people to donate to wildfire “relief funds” facilitated through ActBlue, the party’s scandal-ridden fundraising apparatus.

As RedState reported on Saturday, California Gov. Gavin Newsom made the ill-advised move to go on “Pod Save America,” a far-left show run by former Barack Obama staffers, while large parts of Los Angeles County still burned. His attempt to pass the buck and paint himself as an innocent bystander amid a laundry list of government failures was bad enough, but then came the plea for donations.

Within hours, Sen. Elizabeth Warren put up a similar donation link, again directing people to ActBlue. At the top of the donation screen sits her campaign logo.

Why exactly are Democrats trying to get people to donate relief funds through a partisan fundraising operation? Especially since that operation skims off 3.95 percent, and that’s assuming every single other dime ends up passing through untouched. To put it lightly, that’s hardly a benefit of the doubt ActBlue and these Democrat politicians should be receiving.

But while many suspected these donation links, which require the entry of an email, are being used to build political contact lists, the manipulation may go much deeper than initially expected. According to the DC Reporter, one political laid out how this affects the Super PAC in question, calling it “the most evil **** I have ever seen.”

Continue reading “”

Study: COVID-Vaxxed Kids SIX TIMES Likelier to Die Than Unvaxxed Peers

The ostensible takeaway, per the authors, of a poorly-publicized study from June of this year was that children vaccinated for COVID had much higher rates of asthma — almost double, in fact — post-COVID infection than their unvaccinated peers.

That’s compelling enough of a headline, but what should really have been the lede in any sane world got buried deep in the weeds.

Via Infection (medical journal) (emphasis added):

Two cohorts of children aged 5 to 18 who underwent SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR testing were analyzed: unvaccinated children with and without COVID-19 infection, and vaccinated children with and without infection. Propensity score matching was used to mitigate selection bias, and hazard ratio (HR) and 95% CI were calculated to assess the risk of new-onset asthma.

Our study found a significantly higher incidence of new-onset asthma in COVID-19 infected children compared to uninfected children, regardless of vaccination status.

In Cohort 1, 4.7% of COVID-19 infected children without vaccination developed new-onset asthma, versus 2.0% in their non-COVID-19 counterparts within a year (HR = 2.26; 95% CI = 2.158–2.367).

For Cohort 2,COVID-19 infected children with vaccination showed an 8.3% incidence of new-onset asthma, higher than the 3.1% in those not infected (HR = 2.745; 95% CI = 2.521–2.99). Subgroup analyses further identified higher risks in males, children aged 5–12 years, and Black or African American children. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the reliability of these findings.

The study highlights a strong link between COVID-19 infection and an increased risk of new-onset asthma in children, which is even more marked in those vaccinated. This emphasizes the critical need for ongoing monitoring and customized healthcare strategies to mitigate the long-term respiratory impacts of COVID-19 in children, advocating for thorough strategies to manage and prevent asthma amidst the pandemic.

However, as Alex Berenson — vindicated “conspiracy theorist” who turned out to be right about all of the things he was censored for since the start of the pandemic — explains, the truly shocking statistical finding, which somehow never made it into the conclusion, is a six-fold increase in death among vaxxed kids in the study as compared to the unvaxxed.

Via Alex Berenson (emphasis added):

The study about Covid and asthma in American kids and teens has gone mostly unnoticed. It hasn’t been cited once since it was published in June.

Which may be why no one has raised an alarm over the stunning figures buried in its appendix about deaths among mRNA Covid-vaccinated kids.

They show that 354 of the 64,000 children and teenagers who received a Covid mRNA shot died within a year after vaccination – a death rate of almost six kids per 1,000.

In contrast, only 309 out of 320,000 unvaccinated kids died, fewer than one per 1,000.

One might assume, again, that finding a drug is implicated in a six-fold increase in childhood mortality might be the headline — but, if it were, these researchers might not get another grant their whole careers. In fact, they might be working at McDonald’s or collecting unemployment within a week.

Why the researchers refused to focus on this statistic, or even mention it in passing in the summary of their work, is obviously a matter of speculation.

But speculate I will.

Scientists rely on grant money, either directly from the pharmaceutical industry or indirectly from the pharmaceutical industry by way of the government, which is often in bed with said industry.

There are, as such, clear financial interests at play, which is why you will notice that, virtually universally, scientists will downplay even the mildest negative effects of pharmaceutical products they study— especially blockbuster ones like the COVID-19 shots — or else rig the research design to produce rosier results, or else never publish any negative research findings in the first place.

Indeed, it’s mildly surprising that the data Alex Berenson unearthed ever made it to publication at all, when it would have been so easy just to scrub it out of existence.

Harris-Walz campaign recruiting military veterans to influence social media
Veterans are being bribed to betray their oath.

The next time you see a social media post from a military veteran who claims to support banning certain firearms or any other infringement of our civil rights, realize they may be getting paid to violate their oath.

An email obtained last week by the Second Amendment Foundation’s Investigative Journalism Project revealed that the “precision micro-influencer” marketing firm People First is hiring veterans to serve as paid social media influencers for the Harris-Walz campaign.

It is not hard to understand why the progressive firm wants to hire former military members. Veterans have credibility — especially when the topic is guns. Whenever the gun-ban industry convinces a vet to call for an AR ban or violate their oath in some other way, they always tout it as a win. This is why Tim Walz is so celebrated by Giffords, Brady and Everytown. Before his stolen valor was revealed, Walz cultivated the false impression that he spent most of his military career knee-deep in grenade pins.

People First has a long history of supporting the war against guns and Second Amendment Rights. They know what they’re doing, and they’re very good, unfortunately. Now, the New York City-based firm wants to recruit veterans living in seven key battleground states, but then explains in its recruitment email that they are open to hire anyone with a “compelling story,” regardless of where they live.

Paid Social Media Opportunity for Veterans!

Phil McKnight

Hi there!

My name is Phil, and I am an Organizer at People First. I am reaching out to share an exciting partnership around veterans!

Veterans, you know better than anyone that our allegiance to this country is pledged toward the Constitution and the values that are enshrined within it – not to any particular man or woman.

We need your help explaining which values you believe our elected leaders should uphold as we approach the upcoming November election. This campaign is also open to family members of those currently or previously enlisted in any of the six US military branches.

Join this campaign now if you are located in any key battleground states:

Arizona
Georgia
Michigan
Pennsylvania
Wisconsin
Nevada
North Carolina

Not from one of these states? No problem. Anyone who has a compelling story to share should apply now too.

If you are interested in participating in this opportunity, please let me know as soon as possible so we can get you started on the next steps.

Looking forward to hearing from you!

Best,

Phil—

Phil McKnight

Digital Relationship Organizer

People First Marketing

CreatorNetwork.cc is a CRM (Customer Relationship Management) platform designed specifically for People First Marketing. Our platform helps businesses and marketers to connect and collaborate with content creators in a more efficient and effective way.

The process is relatively simple. The influencer submits draft content, which is then edited and approved.  The influencer then posts it on their social media platforms, and they’re paid 10-15 days later. As a result, People First has made oath breaking easy and, unfortunately, profitable.

McKnight did not respond to emails seeking his comments for this story.

Censorship, gun control

People First founder and CEO Curtis Hougland rose to prominence fighting against what he told Vanity Fair magazine in 2019 was “hate speech and online extremism.”

“Democrats want to focus on facts and figures. The other side plays into fears and taps into emotions, and they show it to you. It’s all about emotional resonance,” Hougland told the magazine.

Hougland was behind the passage of Nevada’s Question 1 in 2016, which expanded background checks and ended most private gun sales.

“Across the geographic footprint of Nevada, the company credentialed and recruited 287 influencers, many of them doctors and nurses, and told them to create their own version of a messaging brief, provided to them with a company dashboard,” Vanity Fair reported.

Today, People First is working dozens of campaigns and advocacy programs, Hougland says on his LinkedIn page.

“We can source online advocates by district, religion, party, ethnicity, age, and affinity,” he wrote. “We’re 82 days away from Election Day! Enough time to execute a local or national campaign and impact elections and ballot initiatives.”

Takeaways

When you raise your right hand and swear to support and defend the Constitution of the United States, you don’t get to pick and choose the amendments you’re willing to support and defend. The oath has no expiration date. It doesn’t end upon retirement or ETS. Walz forgot that, sadly. Same-same for any vet who responds to People First’s siren song.

If you really want to thank a veteran for their service, hire them. They will be the best employee on your payroll, but not this. What People First is doing to our veterans is reprehensible. They’re bribing them into betraying their oaths. Rather than direct deposit, People First should pay their influencers with 30 pieces of silver.

The Ignominy Of Master Sergeant Timothy Walz

If Tim Walz could not be trusted to fulfill the duties he had to his nation in 2005, how can he be trusted to be vice president in 2025?

The last couple of days have been a whirlwind of controversy regarding the military service record of Democrat vice presidential candidate Tim Walz. My X account has seen the most traffic it has ever known as I have discussed this issue at length, and I thought it would be a good idea now to take a deep breath and kind of recap where we are at in this controversy. I know for sure that the veteran community is fired up over this issue, but I sense that many from the non-veteran community do not know what to think given the competing arguments from both sides of the political aisle.

I would like to share my own personal experiences and thoughts as a retired Army colonel and veteran of both Iraq and Afghanistan. What I hope for civilians to understand is this: The issue is not the number of years Walz served, or when he submitted his retirement paperwork, or what his final rank was, or even — just as a stand-alone proposition — whether he ever went to combat. No, the issue is the unique and special position of trust he held when he decided to walk away from his soldiers, his unit, and his nation. I’ll explain.

But first, some facts. There are all sorts of facts and disinformation flying around on this matter, so I want to highlight the most basic and most important facts, ones that not even the most rabid Democrat can dispute:

Walz served for 24 years in the Minnesota Army National Guard, retiring at the rank of master sergeant (an “E-8” in the Army).
In the spring of 2005, Walz was serving as the command sergeant major (an “E-9”) of the 1st Battalion, 125th Field Artillery, a Minnesota Army National Guard battalion that is part of the 34th Infantry Division.
Also in the spring of 2005, Walz and his battalion received a warning order that the battalion would be deploying to Iraq. (We know this because Walz’s own congressional campaign told us at the time.)
Knowing that his unit was deploying, Walz nevertheless chose to retire from the National Guard in May of 2005 to pursue his congressional campaign.
Serving members of the National Guard and the Reserve routinely also serve in Congress, and always have. Tulsi Gabbard is an excellent recent example. Walz did not necessarily need to retire to run for Congress. However, an Iraq deployment he might have instead chosen to participate in would, in fact, have prevented him from campaigning.
Walz’s retirement meant he did not fulfill a contractual service commitment he willingly entered into when the Army selected him to attend the United States Army Sergeants Major Academy. As a result, the Army reduced his official retirement rank from E-9 to E-8.
These are facts. Now let’s explain what was so egregious in what Walz did.

So Walz retired when he was allowed to and ran for Congress instead — what’s the big deal, right? Well, had Walz been some slug E-8 holding down some clerical job in the 34th Infantry Division Headquarters, counting his days until retirement, and had he opted to take a lawful retirement rather than go to Iraq, no one would care. But that’s not what happened. Walz was a COMMAND SERGEANT MAJOR (“CSM”), and that makes all the difference in the world.

Continue reading “”