Category: Goobermint

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.

wretchardthecat

The key to renewal is repentance, the acknowledgement of error. Yet that acceptance is almost impossible to those who grew up on the belief they are better than everyone else, who have justified their power over others upon that undoubted superiority.

The normal person learns more from failure than success. But the already perfect man lacks the capacity to learn anything from defeat other than to conclude that someone failed him.

Usually it is we the public who have failed them. Taxes will increase and regulations redoubled until everyone is doing his fair share. Notice that the concept that they actually work for us has completely disappeared in the shuffle.

The trope that Communists make subordinates report while standing on a trap door over a shark tank is a joke, but only just.

“You know the penalty for failure. Comrade”

Biden’s agency bosses say Americans have ‘too much freedom’
The ‘swamp’ thinks you have it too good.

In an unusual look at federal agency managers, most believe Americans have too much freedom, and they back President Joe Biden‘s efforts to impose 

The bosses of federal agencies were asked in a new Napolitan Institute survey about the “individual freedom” Americans have, and 51% said they have “somewhat” to “far too much freedom.”

But just 16% of voters agreed and 57% believe the government has too much control over their lives.

Democratic “swamp” managers felt the country has too much freedom at the highest levels in the survey, at 68%. Among Republican federal agency chiefs, just 33% agreed.

But the partisan bureaucrats were more in agreement when it came to choosing who is best at deciding if new regulations are needed, found the polling outfit headed by Scott Rasmussen.

Said the analysis shared with Secrets on Friday, “Fifty-four percent (54%) of government managers say that if, after carefully researching an important issue, they determine that a regulation is needed, yet voters overwhelmingly oppose it, they should follow their research and issue the regulation anyway. This includes 49% of Republican government managers and 60% of Democrats,” it said.

Unlike Democrats and Republicans in America, and even on Capitol Hill, partisans that work in the swamp generally think like the other, according to Napolitan’s latest poll of America’s 1% elitists.

“On many topics, there is a disturbing level of bi-partisan agreement among federal government managers. Fifty-three percent (53%) of Republican government managers and 48% of Democrats believe the federal government should be allowed to censor speech that is posted on social media platforms. Forty-three percent (43%) of ‘Elites’ and just 16% of voters share this view. Seventy-four percent of Republican government managers and 79% of Democrats favor banning private ownership of guns. This view is shared by 77% of ‘Elites,’ but just 36% of voters,” said the analysis.

In his polling of elites, Rasmussen has found a stunning gap with Middle Americans, which could be a danger sign considering the outsize effect of elites, especially in the media.

Rasmussen said, “The ‘Elite’ 1% wield a tremendous amount of institutional power but are wildly out of touch with the nation they want to rule. Over the years they have built institutions and mechanisms of regulatory power that are immune to the checks and balances of elections. Worse still, these same ‘Elites’ own, operate, and control a large majority of media outlets, blocking out the true voice of the American people and broadcasting their own out of touch viewpoints.”

BLUF
Source
Many are pointing out that the regime seems to care a lot more about providing aid to the Ukraine than it does about providing aid to Appalachia.

Hurricane Helene and the Lost Mandate of Heaven
“We’re from the government, and we’re here to make sure no one helps.”

As of the time of this writing, over two hundred people are confirmed to have been killed by Hurricane Helene. No one knows the true death toll yet. There are rumours of over 900 unidentified bodies, with some saying that a couple of zeroes need to be added to the death toll. Who knows what the real number is. We may never know. A lot of the bodies may simply never be found.

This is the last image of a husband and wife trying to escape from the flood by climbing onto the roof of the their home in Asheville, NC. The roof collapsed, killing them and their six-year-old grandchild; the child’s mother took the photograph.

Source

There are multiple reports of bodies stuck up in trees (link has video). There don’t seem to be any pictures confirming this yet, but one can understand why people would be reluctant to take such pictures, or to share them.

Continue reading “”

That’s because the Chief was in violation of State Law.

Florida police chief learns hard lesson, un-bans guns and ammo
Okeechobee police chief receiving criticism from across the country.

by Lee Williams

Donald C. Hagan, the Chief of the Okeechobee, Florida Police Department, doesn’t appear to be enjoying his time on the national stage.

Hagan had to take some time off, his spokesman said Monday, because he is receiving personal attacks from across the country. As reported Monday, Hagan rocketed to infamy for signing an illegal city ordinance that banned firearm and ammunition sales as well as firearm possession just days before Hurricane Helene made landfall.

“The chief is not in,” a police receptionist said Tuesday morning. She directed calls to Okeechobee Police Major Bettye Taylor, who issued a statement Monday trying to clarify and explain her boss’ actions. Instead, it only muddied the waters.

“The Emergency Ordinance commenced immediately upon the declaration by the Police Chief and was thereafter terminated by the Police Chief on or about 9:51 pm on the same date it was issued.

The Emergency Ordinance was terminated for two primary reasons. One is that, fortunately, Hurricane Helene did not have a substantial impact on the City and its residents.

Secondly, a provision prohibiting the sale of firearms and ammunition was inadvertently included in the Emergency Ordinance. Upon discovering this, the City and Police Chief acted expeditiously to terminate the Emergency Ordinance,” Major Taylor wrote.

In other words, the part of the ordinance that banned the sale of guns and ammunition and prohibited firearm possession in public by anyone other than law enforcement or members of the military, was “inadvertently included” in the ordinance.

As you can imagine, neither Major Taylor nor her boss returned calls or emails Tuesday seeking to clarify how or why they banned guns and ammo sales inadvertently.

In her statement, Taylor also sought to reassure the town’s residents — as well as the legions of law-abiding gun owners who are following the story across the country — that the ban caused no harm.

“At no time did the City, or the Police Chief, contemplate, nor take any action, to prohibit, confiscate or otherwise regulate firearms or ammunition,” she wrote.

This, however, is not exactly true. The ordinance the chief signed clearly prohibited the “sale of, or offer to sell, with or without compensation, any ammunition or gun or other firearm of any size or description. The intentional display, by or in any store or shop, of any ammunition or gun or other firearm of any size or description. The intentional possession in a public place of a firearm by any person, except a duly authorized law enforcement official or any person in military service acing in the official performance of their duty.”

Continue reading “”

House Oversight Committee Subpoenas White House, ATF Over Chicago’s Glock Lawsuit

House Oversight Committee chair James Comer (R-OH) has issued congressional subpoenas to White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention Director Stefanie Feldman and ATF Director Steve Dettelbach seeking information about any role the office and agency had in Chicago’s lawsuit against gunmaker Glock.

Comer initially requested Dettelbach and Feldman provide the committee with any pertinent communication between the White House/ATF and Glock back in June, but according to the congressman the Biden administration hasn’t turned over a single document. In fact, in his letter informing Feldman of the subpoena, Comer says Deputy Counsel to the President Rachel F. Cotton responded to the Oversight Committee in early July with a letter that “did not even reference the Committee’s request for documents.” Instead, Comer says Cotton “impugned the motives of the Committee,” stating “[t]he House Majority . . . [is] doing the gun lobby’s bidding by launching a baseless political attack on the Biden Administration under the guise of an ‘investigation.’”

If that were the case, it would be easy enough for the White House and ATF to disprove the claims of collusion by whistleblowers. So why is the White House stonewalling the inquiry into communications between the White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention, ATF, and Glock officials? As Comer reminded Dettelbach in his subpoena request:

The Committee has learned that on December 20, 2023, the White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention met privately with representatives from Glock, during which the Administration requested that Glock change their pistol designs so that it would be harder to illegally modify Glock pistols to shoot continuously with a single trigger pull.

On March 19, 2024, the City of Chicago filed suit in state court against Glock. Everytown Law, the litigation arm of Everytown for Gun Safety, is listed as counsel for the plaintiff. The day the suit was filed, John Feinblatt, President of Everytown for Gun Safety, posted on his X account “Today Everytown Law + the City of Chicago announced a historic lawsuit against Glock Inc. to hold them accountable for the unconscionable decision to continue selling its easily modified pistols even though it could fix the problem.”

Later in the post, Mr. Feinblatt said “[f]ederal Officials recently contacted Glock to discuss implementing new ways to modify Glock pistols to make it harder for Glock switches to be installed. Rather than help, Glock falsely insisted there is nothing they can do.”

Because the White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention’s meeting with Glock was private, Mr. Feinblatt appears to have had insider information regarding your office’s meeting with Glock, which raises questions about whether your office colluded with Everytown for Gun Safety to initiate their lawsuit against Glock.

Chicago is seeking a court-ordered ban on the sale of Glock pistols to city residents “and Illinois gun stores that serve the Chicago market”, while Joe Biden recently used an executive order to set up an Emerging Firearms Threats Task Force that’s supposed to issue a report and an interagency plan to deal with machine gun conversion devices, which are already illegal under federal law.

Retired ATF Deputy Assistant Director Pete Forcelli previously told Bearing Arms that the White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention had pushed Dettelbach to have the ATF reclassify Glocks as machine guns under the NFA, but Dettelbach has so far resisted the move. Chicago’s lawsuit, along with the task force established by Biden, seem designed to give the ATF another push towards reclassifying some of the most popular handguns on the market as machine guns after the November elections have taken place.

My guess is that the White House and ATF will stonewall Comer’s subpoena just as they ignored his initial request for information. But if Kamala Harris wins election next month, don’t be surprised if the candidate who says she’s not taking anyone’s guns away suddenly decides that its time to make the sale of Glocks (and perhaps all other striker-fired pistols as well) off-limits to the civilian market; essentially imposing a ban on the sale of commonly-owned semi-automatic handguns through ATF regulation.

NSSF Praises SCOTUS Decision to Review Mexico’s Baseless $10 Billion Lawsuit Against Firearm Manufacturers

WASHINGTON, D.C. — NSSF®, The Firearm Industry Trade Association, praised the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to grant Smith & Wesson’s petition to hear Estados Unidos Mexicanos v. Smith & Wesson Brands, Inc., et al., Mexico’s frivolous $10 billion lawsuit against American firearm manufacturers seeking to blame them for the harm caused by lawless narco-terrorist drug cartels in Mexico. Mexico’s lawsuit also seeks to dictate how firearms are made and sold throughout the United States through a federal court injunction, in effect usurping the role of Congress and 50 state legislatures.

NSSF filed an amicus brief earlier this year in support of the Supreme Court granting the case, arguing that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit’s flawed decision, “blows a gaping hole in the PLCAA and rolls out the red carpet for a foreign government intent on vitiating the Second Amendment.” The U.S. Supreme Court will now set a briefing schedule and hold argument, likely early in the new year.

“Today’s announcement by the U.S. Supreme Court that they are granting Smith & Wesson’s petition to hear Mexico’s frivolous $10 billion lawsuit against lawful American firearm manufacturers is welcomed news to the entire firearm industry. Mexico’s lawsuit seeks to blame lawful American firearm businesses for violence in Mexico perpetrated by Mexican narco-terrorist drug cartels and impacting innocent Mexican lives.

It is not the fault of American firearm businesses that follow strict laws and regulations to lawfully manufacture and sell legal products,” said Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF Senior Vice President and General Counsel. “This case represents exactly why Congress passed, and President George W. Bush enacted, the bipartisan Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA).

The case was rightly dismissed by a federal judge before the First Circuit Court of Appeals’ erroneous ruling earlier this year that reversed the district court order and reinstated the case. Lawful American firearm manufacturers follow American laws to make and sell lawful and Constitutionally-protected products. The Mexican government should instead focus on bringing Mexican criminals to justice in Mexican courtrooms.”

Mexico alleges U.S. firearm manufacturers are liable for the criminal violence perpetuated by narco-terrorist drug cartels by refusing to adopt gun control restrictions that exceed what the law requires for the strictly-regulated production and sale of firearms. A U.S. District court in Massachusetts dismissed the case, finding the claims were barred by the PLCAA. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, however, revived the case on Mexico’s appeal earlier this year.

The First Circuit held that Mexico’s claims alleging that the defendants know their regular business practices contribute to illegal firearm trafficking fit within a narrow exception to the PLCAA. Smith & Wesson Brands, Inc., et al, the petitioners, argue the First Circuit erred when it reversed the lower court’s decision to dismiss the case.

The petitioners also noted the First Circuit’s decision to allow for an exception to PLCAA fails because there is no evidence U.S. firearm manufacturers violated federal laws against aiding and abetting firearm trafficking. The petitioners explained to the Supreme Court that Mexico’s complaint “fails to identify any product, policy, or action by the American firearms industry that is deliberately designed to facilitate the unlawful activities of Mexican drug cartels.”

NSSF’s amicus brief concluded by urging Supreme Court action and pointing out that the First Circuit’s decision to reinstate the case was incorrect because it is “… emblematic of a recent trend of anti-gun governments (and courts) mendaciously skirting the PLCAA and using the resulting threat of bankruptcy-inducing tort liability to destroy a lawful industry that is vital to the exercise of a fundamental constitutional right. This Court’s intervention is imperative.”

BLUF
Over the last 4 years, the Biden-Harris admin has steadily transformed FEMA — the agency responsible for responding to natural disasters like Hurricane Helene — into an illegal alien resettlement agency that emphasizes DEI over public safety.

Biden-Kamala Regime Burns $1 BILLION in FEMA Funds to Resettle Illegal Immigrants — FEMA Now Lacks Resources for Disaster Response!

As Hurricane Helene tears through the eastern seaboard, leaving devastation in its wake, the mismanagement of FEMA under the Biden-Harris regime is hitting home with deadly consequences.

The storm’s ferocious winds and torrential rains have claimed at least 190 lives, left millions without power, and trapped countless families in floodwaters across North Carolina and beyond. Entire communities have been cut off from vital resources, with citizens scrambling for help.

Yet, in the face of this national disaster, the Biden-Harris administration’s FEMA appears woefully unprepared.

Why? Because over the past two years, they have funneled more than $1 billion in taxpayer dollars away from American disaster relief efforts — and into the pockets of illegal immigrants.

Continue reading “”

Hawkins: The Government Has No Rights, but the People Do
Although Democrat and other leftist politicians will, from time to time, speak of the government’s ‘rights,’ we must never forget the government has no rights. Only the people have rights and the government, on the other hand, has powers.

Moreover, the government’s powers are delegatory rather than original. In other words, the powers possessed by the government are those which the people delegated to it via the framework of the U.S. Constitution, and those powers are neither ambiguous nor infinite.

This is most easily understood if you think about the U.S. Constitution as establishing a compact between the people and the government, a compact best explained by Thomas Jefferson in the 1798 Kentucky Resolutions.

Jefferson wrote:

Resolved, That the several States composing the United States of America, are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their General Government; but that, by a compact under the style and title of a Constitution for the United States, and of amendments thereto, they constituted a general Government for special purposes,—delegated to that government certain definite powers, reserving, each State to itself, the residuary mass of right to their own self-government…

Jefferson was strongly impacted by John Locke, who had written, “The liberty of man, in society, is to be under no other legislative power, but that established, by consent, in the commonwealth.”

Jefferson and Locke are saying the same thing, just in a slightly different way. The lesson to be drawn is that the people enter into a “compact” (Jefferson) wherein they “consent” (Locke) to certain a degree of legislative power over their persons as they move about in society.

However, the people retain authority because they possess rights.  Thus Madison, in Federalist 46, observed that “ultimate authority…resides in the people alone.”

It is under this authority the people loan or delegate certain powers to the government via the U.S. Constitution and, with that same authority, the people added the Bill of Rights to hedge in certain, inalienable rights as being outside the government’s purview. Among these inalienable rights is the right to keep and bear arms.

As I highlighted last week, the right to keep and bear arms is not something we as Americans possess because of government benevolence, but something with which our Creator endowed us. It is one of the rights specifically enumerated by our Founding Fathers and hedged in by the Second Amendment. Nowhere in the U.S. Constitution is the government given powers to regulate the ability of the American people to be armed.

Regulation of this natural right is not part of the compact; rather, the complete opposite is true: The government is told in plain English that the rights protected by the Second Amendment “shall not be infringed.”

In summation: The people have rights and the government merely possesses powers. The people’s rights are theirs at birth while the government’s powers belong to it only as long, and in such a fashion, as the people decide they should.

Perfect Biden-HARRIS Metaphor: Only Navy Oiler in ME Runs Aground, Springs Leaks.

If there ever was a need for a poster child for the neglect and indifference that characterizes the Biden-HARRIS administration’s attitude towards governance, someone now could easily slap up a picture of the USNS Big Horn.

The ship’s sad story has all the elements that are now bedeviling the Americans it serves thanks to the malevolent, arrogant, indifferent clowns who currently rule over us.

Almost a year ago, I wrote something I headlined, “US Maritime Woes: God Forbid We Go to War.” I was trying to shine a light on the utterly shameful, almost downright criminal neglect with which the Biden-HARRIS administration had treated our US Merchant Marine Fleet. It operates under the auspices of the US Maritime Administration (MARAD), which belongs to the Department of Transportation (aka Mayor Pete) – perhaps you’re already beginning to sense part of the problem if you don’t remember or haven’t read the column.

The administration has an “admiral” named as head of MARAD, one RADM Ann Phillips, who has performed exactly as damn near any other Biden cabinet secretary, particularly Mayor Pete – they haven’t seen her.

…Maritime matters were a priority during the GHW Bush years, but really got revved up during Trump’s term.

…During President Trump’s administration, Maritime Administrator Commandant Mark Buzby instigated a tidal wave of change. He allocated hundreds of millions of dollars for training ships, activated the entire ready reserve fleet in significant naval Turbo Activations, personally handled media inquiries, engaged with sailors nationwide, and attended major events as a headline speaker.

Biden’s current administrator, in contrast, has been so little engaged, she’s earned her own call-sign, and it’s not a compliment – “…who some call the Ghost Admiral.”

She’s still in the post.

Continue reading “”