Categories
Arizona Biden administration Border crisis Border wall Drug Smuggling Human smuggling Illegal Immigration Intelwars Texas

Horowitz: Border state officials dealing with violent incursions deep into US territory

What would you call a situation where tens of thousands of young males pour over our border, orchestrated by the most violent cartels and smugglers in the world? How would you refer to high-speed car chases and bailouts across our border continuing on for at least 200 miles beyond the border? It sure looks like an invasion to ordinary Americans. But what do you call it when our own Department of Homeland Security is orchestrating such chaos, lawlessness, and trans-national travel during a pandemic at the same time officials are entreating Americans to obey COVID fascism? A sadistic undermining of the very foundation of this country, indeed.

“Illegal immigrants from 59 different countries have crossed the border illegally in our area – the Del Rio Sector,” warned Uvalde, Texas, Mayor Don McLaughlin in an exclusive interview with TheBlaze. “These illegal immigrants are from China, South America, Venezuela, Cuba, and the Middle East and Africa, just to name a few.”

Uvalde is a small town of 17,000 inhabitants, and it is now overrun by illegal immigrants and an international cartel smuggling operation. Uvalde is 40-60 miles from the border, but it might as well be right at the border given how the smuggling corridors come right up to this town.

“In our city and county, we are averaging 6-8 car chases a week,” said McLaughlin in describing how the border crisis strains the area’s small law enforcement operation, which is already stressed from the logistics of the pandemic and the recent weather-driven energy crisis.

“These human smugglers have no regard from human life – they have led our officers on chases through our town at speeds exceeding 100 mph. In two instances, our local law enforcement officers have been shot at. It’s not unusual to find weapons in these cars when they are caught. In Kinney County, which borders us, the chases are exceeding 20 a week. In these chases they are finding illegal immigrants that have previously been deported and have criminal records for sexual assault, murder, and drug trafficking.”

The Biden administration has ended Trump’s pandemic response policy, which, pursuant to Title 42, required Customs and Border Protection to immediately turn away illegal aliens who show up at the border. The new policy openly invites illegal aliens to come in, which has created an entire cottage industry for the smugglers and the drug cartels. While the smugglers can present illegal aliens who don’t have criminal records openly at the border, they still have to sneak in those with criminal records through gaps in the border wall, which leads to dangerous high-speed chases that result in what are known to border officials as “bailouts.” Often the smuggler will drive off the road and crash, with the occupants bailing out and running in every direction.

The more agents have to deal with those coming in directly, the less manpower they have to apprehend the dangerous “runners” who usually have criminal records. This is particularly a problem during the pandemic, when more personnel are now required to deal with the social distancing logistics of the mass flow across the border.

The fact that the border wall was stopped midway through construction has actually been a boon to the smugglers, because they are able to use the newly created access roads to gain entry into the interior but are not completely blocked because of the gaps, as reported by the Washington Times from Cochise County Sheriff Mark Dannels. This has enabled the high-speed chases and bailouts to penetrate deep into Texas, as far as Jackson County on the eastern coast, which is some 200 miles from the border.

“We’re on the travel corridor,” said Jackson County Sheriff A.J. Louderback in an interview with TheBlaze. “We’ve had an uptick in stolen three-ton pickups; we’re having the bailouts coming through.”

Louderback placed the blame squarely on the shoulders of the Biden administration. “This is a comprehensive, multi-pronged strategy to disable and dismantle every facet of our immigration system,” said the veteran rural sheriff. “This is a concerted effort to alter all of immigration laws through policy change. It’s an absolute nightmare. I don’t think there is a single place in the INA that has not been violated. It’s obvious to me that they’ve been working on this for quite some time. We went from a secure border to an unsecure border in a matter of days.”

Sheriff Dannels told me that in southeast Arizona, in some of the most rugged terrain at the border, the cartels now have roads they can use to navigate an area that was previously extremely hard to traverse. “By ending the wall construction with the roads exposed, they have become nothing but cartel roads,” said Dannels to me. Here is a picture of the access roads built behind the wall in Cochise County.

Cochise County Sheriff’s Department

According to Dannels, apprehensions in his remote county went from 300-500 a year ago to 2,500 in December. The suspension of the border wall mid-construction in his county has been a boon for the cartels. “We went 24 months without illicit drugs, and now we’re catching more than 500 pounds,” said Sheriff Dannels. “12 people were injured in car crashes, and there have been two deaths. Some of the coyotes [human smugglers] are now shooting at my deputies. It’s insane how nobody sat down with local law enforcement to discuss the ramifications of not completing the construction that was already under way.”

The bailouts are often risky for the migrants as well. In California earlier this week, 13 of them were killed when their car caught fire during a high-speed incursion at a breach in the border fence, which the Biden administration refuses to repair.

Mark Lamb, sheriff of Pinal County, Arizona, is seeing the same problem on the western side of the border. “We’re 60 miles off the border, and we’ve had 45 pursuits and have assisted in another 80 with other agencies,” the Arizona sheriff told TheBlaze. “We had one bailout where they had 11 people who bailed into the desert and left us with a 16-year-old Guatemalan girl in the car. ICE doesn’t even have space for these people, and they are let go right into our communities. Talk about a kick in the teeth. When you do this, it sends a message to criminals that they can do whatever they want because we are no longer for the rule of law.”

Not only is Lamb prohibited from holding these people, he wouldn’t even have the jail space anyway. “We get 20-30 a day right now. I could fill my entire jail within a week.”

The cartels are sending 2,000 children over the border each week this month, and there are now at least 8,000 minors in custody, approaching a record. The Biden administration is openly bragging about estimates of 117,000 minors on the way. With that comes a massive pipeline of transnational gang recruitments inside our country and in every major city.

It’s a lose-lose for everyone. Americans are stuck with the expenses and social effects, as well as the narcotics and increased gang activity. At a time when the lockdowns are tempting so many Americans to turn to drugs, the Biden border invitation is creating a lucrative market for the drug cartels in human smuggling as well as drug smuggling. And in the irony of all ironies, the COVID lockdown policies that are inducing the circuitous drug cycle exacerbated by the border policies are suddenly being relaxed when it comes to illegal aliens.

As for the illegal aliens themselves, Mayor McLaughlin observes that there is nothing humanitarian about chaotic open borders.

“We as a country act as though we are helping these illegal immigrants as we release them into our country. We talk about slave labor and sex trafficking all the time, but these illegal immigrants end up working day jobs where they are picked up in neighborhood street corners where they stand around waiting for work, are paid subpar wages, and if hurt, are dropped off back without getting taken care of. The women are forced into the sex trade to survive and take care of their families. We are not helping these people or our country. We are only setting them up to fail.”

Share
Categories
Coronavirus Coronavirus tyranny COVID-19 Covid-19 tyranny Intelwars stimulus

Horowitz: A COVID ‘stimulus’ bill that Republicans should push?

What if I told you we could essentially cure the virus with dirt-cheap drugs, end all the destructive tyranny that doesn’t work, and build up small businesses and personal health rather than lock people down? That is the stimulus Republicans should be pushing, but almost none of them are even promoting such a message. They continue agreeing to the false premise that the way to treat COVID is with masks, contact tracing, massive dependency-inducing handouts, and shutdowns. They just don’t like some extraneous provisions in the bill.

Let’s not forget that Republicans already passed two massive “stimulus” bills that flushed trillions of dollars into a lockdown by enabling governors and mayors to destroy people’s lives without having to pay for it. Which is why, if you listen carefully to their objections to this third bill, they are extremely tangential and are only aimed at some of the extraneous earmarks for construction projects in some states.

Well, as a conservative, I will tell you, I’d take 100 Cuomo tunnel earmarks any day over spending trillions subsidizing the education cartel and blue states and the tracing and spying on Americans. Yet Republicans have spent all their time fighting against transit and bridge funding, but agreeing to the fundamental premise that we need trillions of dollars to treat COVID and that the way to do so is with these ritualistic and tyrannical mandates.

For example, House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy railed against the “non-COVID waste in this bill.” But that waste, as insidious as it is, only represents a fraction of the price tag. It’s the “COVID” funding and the policies undergirding it that are the problem. Democrats are already agreeing to remove those minor expenditures anyway. Unfortunately, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell praised the fact that Congress “passed five COVID-19 rescue packages” as “the largest peacetime fiscal expansion in American history … because both parties had shaped the bills together and they met Americans’ urgent needs.” He only cared about the fact that this bill is more partisan.

How about we end the shutdown and fund the cheap, efficacious protocols for prophylaxis and early treatment — and actually solve the problem? To that end, a GOP that actually believes in freedom, health, science, prosperity, and the Constitution would create the following opposing legislative package:

  • End all COVID mandates: Using Section 5 of the 14th Amendment, Congress should declare that all COVID restrictions violate the privileges and immunities of citizens and are hereby suspended. They have not worked and have only brought pain to the country. That is the ultimate stimulus. Anything short of that would ensure that yet another $2 trillion goes towards stimulating shutdown and misery rather than freedom and growth.
  • Make ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine available over the counter: It’s time to dispel the lie that there is no cure to this virus, absent expensive vaccines and ineffective drugs like Remdesivir. There are several proven protocols for both early stage use and prophylaxis, where a regimen of hydroxychloroquine or ivermectin mixed with other cheap supplementals completely cures the virus without hospitalization. India is doing this for $2.65 a person, rather than $1,500 checks being spent on nothingness. A World Health Organization meta-analysis found that ivermectin reduced fatalities by 75%. All 42 studies conducted on ivermectin use in COVID patients, half of which have been peer-reviewed, have found positive effects, including an 89% reduction in disease severity as a prophylaxis and even a 51% improvement in late stage treatment. The average of 214 studies on hydroxychloroquine show 65% improvement in early stage use. Despite the ironclad evidence behind their efficacy, people cannot get these medicines without a prescription, and many doctors will not prescribe them early on, nor will hospitals use them as part of an intermediate stage protocol. Anyone who opposes right to try is condemning many people to needless death by having the virus trigger super infections and cytokine storm, in which the options for treatment are very limited.
  • Mail out packets of supplementals to every family: Rather than spending trillions of dollars locking down people (and then subsidizing the fallout) who will get the virus anyway and then offer no treatment, why not build people up to take control over their own health and freedom? This virus has brought forth a wealth of research showing that vitamin D, vitamin C, quercetin, and zinc work great against this and other viruses as prophylactics. A pair of randomized controlled trials in Spain found a reduction in ICU admission among patients receiving high doses of vitamin D by 96% and 80% respectively. A Spanish study of zinc in COVID patients also found a 130% higher death rate among those COVID patients hospitalized with low zinc levels. In addition, there is evidence behind the efficacy of melatonin and aspirin and several other cheap drugs being used at early stages. If everyone were given such a kit, we’d see a reduction in all sorts of viruses, again, for a fraction of the cost.
  • Cancel all taxation and major regulations on small businesses for five years: Government owes it to small businesses to rebuild them after the destruction they have wrought upon them. As many as 44% of all small businesses might close this year as a result of the fallout. Rather than throwing money at so many people who never lost a penny, why not target the relief to those businesses that the government forcibly shut down? The best way to do that is to zero out all taxation and major regulations for five years. But I’d only tailor it to small businesses, because big businesses benefited from the unconstitutional shutdowns at the expense of mom-and-pop shops.

Such a plan would build up the citizenry rather than lock them down. It would empower them to remain healthy and defeat this virus rather than make them victim to helplessness and a death trap of expensive and ineffective treatments out of their hands. It would save lives from lockdown and COVID. However, that would short-circuit both the tyrannical politicians and their crony allies in big business. With power to seize and money to make, who in Washington is interested in saving lives?

Share
Categories
covid Intelwars

Horowitz: The big lie behind the panic over COVID ‘variants’ exposed

It was the most unprecedentedly destructive decision in the history of human civilization. Officials decided to lock down a society and treat every human being like a leper until a vaccine was introduced, regardless of whether those interventions helped one iota in slowing the virus. Well, the vaccine is here, so it’s game over, right? Wrong. “Variants” are the new 15 days years to flatten the curve. Except the premise is built on a lie.

“The US is at risk of losing all its recent gains in the battle against Covid-19 as highly contagious variants take advantage of Americans getting lax with safety measures,” read the opening line of a fresh new piece of panic porn from CNN on Tuesday. Never mind the fact that the mask mandates have not been lifted one iota in states like California and have been intensified at the federal level, but of course, we already know masks don’t work.

It’s the perfect narrative. What more can they do to keep people under their control as roughly 35% of the country has already gotten the virus and pretty much any vulnerable person who wants a vaccine now has access to one? Well, watch out for the new variants that, of course, just magically appeared and were never there all along – they will make us start all over again!

We already know that T cells and B cells play the predominant role in stimulating immunity against coronavirus, at least against any serious illness. So how does T cell immunity work against the new strains? Researchers at the Center for Infectious Disease and Vaccine Research, La Jolla Institute for Immunology, tested both people who already had the original strain of the virus and those who had the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines to see if the T cell responses worked against the four new strains: B.1.1.7 (British), B.1.351 (South African), P.1 (Brazilian), and CAL.20C (Californian).

The results? “T cell responses are largely unaffected by the variants.”

“Overall, the results demonstrate that CD4+ and CD8+ T cell responses in convalescent COVID-19 subjects or COVID-19 mRNA vaccines are not substantially affected by mutations found in the SARS-CoV-2 variants,” concluded the authors of this complex T cell study.

This study should come as no surprise to those who have been following the research on T cell immunity over the past year. Researchers in Singapore found that those who recovered from SARS-1 in 2003 not only retained their SARS-specific memory T cells 17 years later, but that those T cells appeared to work against SARS-CoV-2 in lab simulations. It stands to reason that a variant of SARS-CoV-2 is unlikely to pose a greater challenge to the immune systems of convalescent COVID patients that it does to those who had a completely different form of coronavirus.

The media is trying to scare people by reporting each variant as if it’s something novel to this particular virus, when in fact, most viruses have endless numbers of variants that are generally not impervious to the immune system’s response triggered by the original variant. Forget about four or five variants; already, back in June 2020, a paper published last in the WHO Bulletin claimed that a variant analysis of SARS-CoV-2 genomes “detected in total 65776 variants with 5775 distinct variants.”

The media is focusing on these few variants as if they are somehow more deadly, but the reality is that cases and deaths have plummeted in all of the source countries, such as South Africa, Brazil, and England, over the past two months, coinciding with the same decline following the late fall spike in nearly every part of the world.

Additionally, according to a study by University of Arizona researchers, the British variant has been circulating in the U.S. since mid-November and does not appear to have altered the existing trajectory of the virus under the original strain. Clearly, these variants have not altered the natural progression – roughly two-month cycles of mechanical waxing and waning of this virus – that we have observed since the beginning.

A King’s College study of 37,000 people during the peak of the fall spread in England found no proof of higher mortality, hospitalization rates, or reinfection due to the new Kent B.1.1.7 variant among those who already recovered from the original virus. “A key question was whether immunity would be lost with the new strain,” observed Professor Tim Spector OBE from the School of Life Course Sciences. “Our analysis found that of every 1,000 people previously infected with the virus, only 7 got reinfected and this rate was not affected by the new Kent variant. It’s reassuring that reinfections are still really rare many months after previous infection, suggesting that both natural immunity and vaccines will be effective against this new strain.”

An even larger study of 184K from New and Emerging Respiratory Virus Threats Advisory Group (NERVTAG) for the British government concluded as of January that “we do not have evidence of an increased risk of hospitalization in individuals with variant B1.1.7.”

Finally, it’s important to remember that if those sowing panic about variants are correct, then it is a self-indictment of their own policies. Clearly, masks and lockdowns did not prevent their proliferation and never will in the future. Consequently, if somehow natural infection and vaccination do not protect against them, then there is no point in continuing any of these policies.

You know what does help and has not been proven any weaker against any variant – yet the government will not promote it? Cheap drugs and natural supplements – from hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin to doxycycline, vitamin D, zinc, quercetin and even aspirin and melatonin. Many of these treatments naturally boost the immune system and/or prevent viral RNA from replicating itself. They work for all sorts of RNA viruses, not just COVID, so the variants will not change this equation.

As such, it looks like the real answer to this problem – to the extent they believe it’s real – is to mail out cheap kits to every American to use as a prophylactic, as India has been doing for $2.65 a person.

Sadly, that would unleash freedom in America without lining anyone’s pocket. It would also alleviate the fear and panic of getting the virus. Given that tyranny and cronyism control our government and media, the contradictory panic porn will continue, forcing our public health officials to double down on failure to address their own supposed concerns.

Share
Categories
Coroavirus in schools Coronavirus tyranny COVID-19 Covid-19 tyranny Intelwars Mask mandates Mask tyranny Masking children schools

Horowitz: The satanic, evidence-free masking of children

While forcible masking of adults is immoral and illogical, the masking of children is downright satanic. Even if, in some alternate universe, cheap Chinese face burkas worked against transmission of particles much smaller than their pores, the virus poses no statistically meaningful danger to children. Together with the hiatus of the flu, children are actually better off than they’ve ever been in terms of viruses. So why, as a free people, are we forcibly masking babies often younger than two years old with no regard for the evidence of masking’s efficacy or the physical and psychological damage of such demonic measures?

By now, most of us have seen the outrageous video of a family being thrown off a Frontier Airlines flight in Miami, when the child caught not wearing a mask was reportedly a baby younger than 2 years old. As outrageous as the story is, we have become desensitized to the fact that children across the country are being masked for seven hours a day every day. How can this be tolerated for another day, especially when our “leaders” plan on doing this indefinitely? Where are the lawsuits? Where are the numerous GOP-controlled legislatures banning this draconian form of child abuse?

Evidently, Italy values freedom more than we do. Last week, il Giornale, a daily newspaper in Milan, reported that an Italian court ruled in favor of a parent who sought an exemption from the mask mandate for their child who suffers from breathing issues. Although the court ruling applied only to that particular plaintiff, the judge found that the government “has not provided proof of the scientific validity, for the purpose of containing the spread of the COVID virus, of the use of masks during school hours” and that therefore “[masking] is suspended immediately.”

What is so absurd is that even if masks worked, children are not threatened by this virus, nor are they vectors of spread. Children are actually being abused at a time when respiratory viruses are a lower threat to them than ever, even according to Biden’s top coronavirus adviser, Dr. Michael Osterholm.

“We are seeing almost no viral respiratory pathogens today in our pediatric population,” said Osterholm on a talk show last week (beginning at 16:40 mark). “If you go look at our hospitalization rates for kids, it is dramatically below what we’ve seen in recent years.”

So why did the flu disappear? Because of the masks? Not a chance.

“Now, you can’t say it’s just because of mitigation, because frankly we haven’t done all that well with mitigation with COVID-19,” continued the famed University of Minnesota scientist. “Look at all the cases we’ve had. So, if, in fact, it were just that, you’d expect to see at least some activity with flu and with the other viral repository pathogens. So, I think there is something going on here that mother nature is doing and across a diverse area of the world that we just don’t understand.”

Indeed, when the politicians and the “scientists” were still predicting a “twindemic” of the flu and COVID back in the early fall, I proved, with the help of Kyle Lamb, that the flu had disappeared in areas and during times when people were not wearing masks or locked down.

The point is that masks played no role in mitigating any of this, and children are better off than ever before. So why are we continuing the abuse of endless masking?

It’s simply an article of faith – a modern-day version of Moloch, whereby we sacrifice the physical and mental health of a generation of children to the gods of virtue-signaling.

Just how absurd is mask-wearing? We know that 87% of particles with influenza viral RNA are smaller than 1 micrometer, with many particles as small as less than one-tenth of a micrometer. One study that examined a sample of over 11,000 particles found that over 90% of SARS-CoV-2 particles were smaller than 0.3 microns, which clearly means this virus is primarily an airborne transmission virus. Most people who are together indoors for long periods of time, who are responsible for most of the transmission, wear cloth masks. Studies have shown most cloth masks have pores between 80 to 500 micrometers and that they expand with each washing. It is simply ludicrous to suggest that they can have any degree of efficacy, any more than using a screen door on a submarine.

The reality is that if you are indoors with someone who is predisposed to spread and you are pre-disposed to getting the virus (both factors still unclear and likely out of our hands), you will get infected regardless of masks or the ritualistic six-foot distance. While relatively large droplets, 100 micrometers for example, fall to the ground within a few seconds (even larger spittle falls immediately) and rarely wind up in someone else’s mouth, the microscopic aerosols can remain suspended for days.

How can we permanently mask our children, beginning with toddlers, based on such anti-scientific insanity?

European officials seem to be fighting harder for liberty than Americans. Yesterday, the U.K. Express published comments from experts and school officials decrying recommendations in England that children be masked in schools.

“The use of masks in classrooms will undoubtedly be detrimental to learning particularly for any children with learning impairments or any special educational needs,” wrote Ross Jones, former consultant pediatrician, in the British Medical Journal.

Jones noted that even the WHO’s recommendation of masking schoolchildren states that it should be “accompanied by monitoring not only of any effect in reducing SARSCoV-2 transmission but also of any harms to either mental or physical health, but this has not been done.”

States with GOP majorities need to pass some version of North Dakota’s HB 1323, which bars all local officials from denying entry into schools or businesses based on masks. They should also pass Tennessee’s Medical Non-Discrimination Business and Consumer Act (SB 0320/ HB 0794), which would apply anti-discrimination law to those without masks, at least to schoolchildren.

We must remember that as schools begin to reopen in critical numbers in the coming days, we will have just one shot at defining what that reopening looks like: Will it be the only normal of children interacting with each other, or will it be a satanic hell of shaming a human being for his or her own God-created face?

Share
Categories
Coronavirus Coronavirus tyranny COVID-19 Covid-19 tyranny Eric holcomb Indiana Intelwars Mask mandates State legislatures Tyrannical governors tyranny

Horowitz: Will state legislatures keep rolling over for tyrannical governors?

Even if one believes government has the legal right and the scientific backing to destroy our lives over a virus, shouldn’t such decisions be made by a legislative body? This is a simple proposition anyone who supports representative democracy should rally behind, yet 10 months into the greatest government display of control of our lives, we continue to have health departments making the most consequential decisions of all time without legislative input. Governors continue to tell legislatures to mind their own business, and the response from most GOP-dominated legislatures has been tepid at best.

There is no virus that can possibly prevent legislators from weighing in, at least not after a few days into the initial emergency. We should all agree that if the actions taken by the governors, mayors, and health departments are so compelling, then the legislature should easily be able to approve them — if not within hours or a day, certainly within a week. As such, any decision that is made against the life, liberty, or property of an American — from business and school closures to quarantining and masking — should only be made by an elected body within just a few days of the presumed emergency.

Are the 31 GOP-controlled legislatures passing these bills, even in the 19 states where they command veto-proof majorities? Very few of them are going far enough, although some are headed in the right direction. Idaho, Ohio, and North Dakota are examples of some states where one chamber has passed meaningful limitation on the governor’s orders. However, one to two months into the legislative sessions, not a single state has effectively checked the dictatorial powers yet with a categorical bill passed by both chambers.

Last week, the New Hampshire House passed a bill zeroing out all fines levied against businesses and individuals under emergency health orders. Shockingly, Gov. Chris Sununu (R) said, “We can’t claim to support law and order, then incentivize law-breaking and reward those who do not follow the rules.”

From following these efforts in numerous states, I get the sense that this is the belief held by nearly every governor in the nation. They believe they have the right to legislate against the most intimate parts of a citizen’s life, and in turn, the legislature has no businesses getting involved. Sununu believes that the legislature is being lawless by interfering with his private “laws.”

It’s not surprising that governors believe they should have as much power as possible. What is shocking, though, is that state legislatures are not more aggressively checking their power and appear content to allow governors to continue ruling as kings. For example, the GOP supermajorities in West Virginia failed to apply limitations to the current declared emergency. Indiana’s supermajorities refuse to fully check the power of the liberal RINO Gov. Eric Holcomb.

The scary thing is that the clock is ticking on state legislative schedules, and many of them will be out of session within a few weeks, which will enable governors to rule without any checks and balances for the next eight to nine months. At a minimum, states must pass bills forcing the governors to call the legislatures back into session as soon as governors declare an emergency or give the legislature itself the ability to call itself back in to session.

What I’m observing now in most state legislatures is an antiquated law designed to protect liberty being used to protect tyranny. Most states limit the legislature to just a few months of active lawmaking, and some states even limit the number of days during the session that legislators can introduce legislation. This was done to prevent the government from legislating away too many of our rights. However, what has happened in recent years is that most of the “legislation” is promulgated by the governor, the state agencies, or the courts. They have zero limitations on the time or scope of their “legislative” powers. Thus, limiting the ability of the legislature to convene actually prevents the people from using their only democratic avenue to redress their grievances against executive tyranny.

Take Utah, for example. There is an allegedly Republican governor, with the GOP controlling the House by 58-17 and the Senate by 23-6. Yet it as might as well be California when it comes to mask mandates. The state legislative session ends this coming Friday night, and legislators have yet to limit the power of the government or health department. With the legislature out of session until 2022, the health department extended the criminalization of human breathing without a Chinese face burka through March 25. Without any sort of legislation – and indeed, with the legislature slated to be out of session – these unelected bureaucrats are suggesting that the mandate will be in place until 1.6 million people have been vaccinated, and even then, citizens will be allowed to breathe freely only in “low transmission” counties. With masks already never having worked in Utah, the unelected bureaucrats have now set up a standard that will continue with no recourse for the citizenry until the legislature convenes next year.

James Madison, writing in Federalist #48, observed, “The legislative department is everywhere extending the sphere of its activity, and drawing all power into its impetuous vortex.” He further believed, “The legislative department derives a superiority in our governments from other circumstances.”

“Its constitutional powers being at once more extensive, and less susceptible of precise limits, it can, with the greater facility, mask, under complicated and indirect measures, the encroachments which it makes on the co-ordinate departments,” wrote Madison. “It is not unfrequently a question of real nicety in legislative bodies, whether the operation of a particular measure will, or will not, extend beyond the legislative sphere.”

It was in this vein that many state constitutions limited the powers of their legislative authorities. Little did their framers know that not only would the executive branch begin to legislate against fundamental rights all year round, but the legislature would be all too content to permanently cede that authority.

Share
Categories
Constitution constitutional republic Executive Orders Intelwars Oklahoma Oklahoma legislature State constitutional powers

Horowitz: Oklahoma House votes to enable legislature to block Biden’s executive orders

James Madison once asserted that “in a republican government, the legislative authority necessarily predominates.” Well, today, only executive power predominates, because federal and state executive agencies seem to be the only ones doing the legislating. As Joe Biden continues to pass sweeping “laws” unilaterally with no authority from Congress, the red states are the only even potential check on his abuse of power. It appears that the state of Oklahoma has now taken up the mantle as the second state to move to block these executive orders.

On Thursday, the Oklahoma House overwhelmingly passed a bill, HB 1236, that would grant the state’s attorney general and state legislature the authority to review the president’s executive orders to determine constitutionality. Specifically, the bill would authorize the legislature to recommend that the attorney general review any executive order, federal agency rule, or federal congressional action to determine whether the state should seek an exemption or declare it unconstitutional. If either the attorney general or the legislature, by concurrent resolution, declares the act unconstitutional, then all state and local officials and any publicly funded organization are prohibited from enforcing it.

The federal actions covered under this bill include any orders pertaining to health emergencies; the regulation of natural resources, agriculture, and land use; infringements upon the Second Amendment; the regulation of the financial sector as it relates to environmental, social, or governance standards, the regulation of education; the regulation of college or school sports; or any other powers reserved by the State of Oklahoma or the people of Oklahoma.

This bill is probably the single most direct and effective way of countering federal power-grabs. As written, it would potentially pave the way for the legislature to block Biden’s mask mandate, transgender agenda in school sports, and racially biased orders in finance and commerce, just to name a few.

Oklahoma’s House is now the second chamber to pass a state sovereignty bill against federal overreach. The North Dakota House passed a similar bill, HB 1282, earlier this month. However, that bill passed by a narrow margin, 51-43, with nearly 30 Republicans voting against it. The Oklahoma bill, on the other hand, was introduced by the speaker himself, Rep. Charles McCall, and passed 79-18 along party lines, which means it has a good chance of going to the governor’s desk.

A few minutes after passage of HB 1236, Rep. Jay Steagall introduced HR 1005, a resolution expressing the right of a state to defend the Constitution and intervene on behalf of the liberties of its citizens.

“Oklahoma hereby asserts sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all powers,” states the text of the resolution, which passed 80-14. “THAT this resolution shall serve notice to the federal government of our intent to maintain the balance of powers where the Constitution of the United States established it. THAT we intend to ensure that all federal government agencies and their agents and employees operating within the geographic boundaries of Oklahoma, or whose actions have an effect on the inhabitants, lands or waters of Oklahoma, shall operate within the confines of the original intent of the Constitution of the United States.”

In introducing the bill, Rep. Steagall, who is the chairman of the States Rights Committee, stated plainly the intent of the legislative effort this week. “I submit to you that it is the duty of the state to interpose between the central government’s abuse of power and the people in order to secure the authorities, rights, and liberties of the people, and that duty falls squarely on the shoulders of the state legislature.”

While so many conservatives are focused on Congress, many fail to see that the states are where the power resides. Republicans control both houses in 31 state legislatures, the majority of them with supermajorities. If every chamber were to mimic this legislation, there would be large swaths of the country free from the totalitarian edicts of the left, regardless of what happens in Washington.

Share
Categories
Crime Crime skyrocketing criminal justice criminal justice reform Intelwars Oklahoma Oklahoma governor stitt

Horowitz: Oklahoma career criminal accused of killing 3 and cooking a human heart had been released by Gov. Stitt

It’s not just in San Francisco and New York City that violent career criminals are being released en masse, only to commit more crimes. Republicans in Oklahoma and other states have bought into this “criminal justice reform” lie – that somehow our system is too tough on criminals, rather than too lenient by a mile. The deception of “low-level criminals” propelling last year’s mass prison release in Oklahoma has now been laid bare by the case of Lawrence Paul Anderson.

Anderson is accused of killing his neighbor, Andrea Lynn Blankenship, 41, on February 12 in Chickasha, cutting out her heart, and cooking it with potatoes at his uncle’s house. He then allegedly killed his uncle, injured his aunt, and killed the couple’s 4-year-old granddaughter.

As soon as I saw the story, I figured that a person like that either had to be a career criminal released early from prison, a known criminally insane person who should have been known to law enforcement, or both.

Well, remember that mass commutation by Gov. Kevin Stitt (R) a little more than a year ago? On Nov. 4, Gov. Stitt commuted the sentences of 527 criminals, in the largest single prison release in U.S. history. To a cheering crowd, he bragged about “second chances” being offered to “low-level” offenders. This was part of a broad effort that has infected even the most conservative states – convincing the public that we have an over-incarceration problem, rather than an under-incarceration problem.

I warned at the time that crime had begun to skyrocket in Oklahoma as a result of several of these measures being implemented in a similar fashion to what was observed in San Francisco.

The people of Oklahoma deserve blame because they ultimately voted for State Question 780 in 2016, which downgraded drug and theft crimes across the board. Proponents spent over $4 million dollars with almost no opposition. But lawmakers followed up in 2018 by making those changes retroactive. They also teed up the ballot intuitive and misled the public about the nature of these crimes.

As I observed in my Nov. 22, 2019, column, “We are not locking up people for minor crimes, and even those locked up for so-called minor crimes are usually not incarcerated for that long — and it’s usually because they had a longer rap sheet of violent crime and violated their parole with theft, drugs, or driving offenses.”

When criminals are locked up for a while, with few exceptions, there is a reason. As Jason Hicks, the president of the Oklahoma District Attorneys Council, warned, many criminals are barely serving time as it is. “A five-year sentence or even up to a 10-year sentence, those folks are serving a very, very small amount of time in DOC on a nonviolent crime,” Hicks said at a 2019 hearing in the House Judiciary Committee. “In fact, you’re going to serve roughly 90 days on a 10-year or less nonviolent crime and, if you haven’t done anything else, you’re getting an ankle bracelet and getting sent back home.”

Well, that brings us back to Anderson, who was released on Jan. 18 as part of this same parole program. As the AP reported: “Anderson had been sentenced in 2017 to 20 years in prison for probation violations on a drug case, the newspaper reported. Republican Gov. Kevin Stitt commuted the sentence last year to nine years in prison, and Anderson was released after serving a little more than three years.”

The public has been convinced that the sort of people who get those sentences are low-level. Drugs and probation violations don’t sound like a big deal. And they might not be for some people, most of whom will never serve time in jail anyway.

According to court records, he was charged in 2006 for attacking his girlfriend with a gun. In 2016, he was charged with felony possession of a firearm, and in 2017 with felony possession of a firearm during commission of a felony, bringing contraband into penal institution, molesting a motor vehicle, and possession of meth. When he was resentenced in 2017 for pointing a gun at a woman, he also told the judge he was taking medication for bipolar disorder. He fits the profile of someone who might be a career violent criminal or mentally ill. This was overlooked when he was released. He had a slew of other drug charges too. Those people tend not to be nonviolent.

Crime in Oklahoma and across the nation is skyrocketing precisely because we reversed the very policies that reduced crime. Since the bottom of the two-decade decline in homicide in 2014, the homicide rate was 34% higher in 2019, according to the FBI Uniform Crime statistics (table 6), and even higher in 2020. 2017, the year after the criminal justice “reforms” were passed, was the highest of all. The homicide rate in Oklahoma City rose 48% from 2014 to 2019.

The reality is that most people with multiple gun and drug charges are the most violent criminals in the country and will go on to commit other violent crimes if left undeterred. Kevin Stitt continued to push even more jailbreak because of coronavirus as well.

The governor, the legislature, and the people got this issue wrong five years ago. But now that we see the results of the jailbreak policies, it’s time to revisit the definition of “low-level offenses.” With Oklahoma experiencing an increase in theft and homelessness just like San Francisco, why will policymakers not re-examine their erroneous premises on criminal justice?

Kevin Stitt and other pro-criminal RINOs incessantly speak of “second chances.” But very few criminals get locked up without having had endless chances, like Anderson. Moreover, “parole violations” are often for gun crimes, as was the case with Anderson. Yet in their rush to brag about releasing as many criminals as possible, they failed to analyze the profile and criminal history that led to the final incarcerations on their respective records.

Grady County District Attorney Jason Hicks is right that the legislature needs to shift its focus to protecting citizens, not criminals. “This has to be addressed by the Legislature, sooner rather than later, because more people are going to get killed,” the prosecutor said. “We’re seeing this all over the state. Repeat offenders go to prison. They’re not there very long. And they come home and they’re committing crimes just like this.”‘

As Hicks noted, at the time, the parole board was considering hundreds of cases in order to release as many people as possible. It’s one thing to carefully comb through files to see if some people don’t need to be incarcerated. However, any honest reform would have to simultaneously focus on all those violent criminals who should be locked up who aren’t in prison, which are much more numerous. But this was never about proper reforms; this was always about de-incarceration at all costs.

Maybe someday, Republicans and the phony “conservative” special interest groups will go back to focusing on victims of crime instead of criminals. Until then, red-state governors will continue to pursue the same dangerous and radical policies as the Soros prosecutor in San Francisco.

Share
Categories
Coronavirus Coronavirus tyranny COVID-19 Covid-19 tyranny Intelwars Kids and covid-19 virus transmission

Horowitz: Large Wisconsin study shows almost zero virus transmission from youth sports

Shutting down schools is not the only way our politicians are destroying the lives of children. They also continue to ban or limit youth sports in many states or make kids play with masks, which is a greater health threat to children than the coronavirus. The entire sports and leisure life of children has been destroyed for a generation, all for a virus that does not pose a statistically significant threat to them, more than the daily risk of living. Now a new study from Wisconsin lays waste to the entire premise of shutting down youth sports in the first place.

Researchers from the University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health published a preprint study of coronavirus transmission among 30,704 high school athletes who played sports in Wisconsin during the fall. Wisconsin children were luckier than others because the state Supreme Court reversed the categorical ban on youth sports last May, so most were able to play sports. However, the majority of students were, shockingly, forced to play wearing masks. So, did it make a difference?

Overall, the study found that the infection rate among players was exactly in line with the infection rate in the given county at the time. Despite 30,074 student-athletes that had participated in 16,898 practices and 4,378 games during the peak of Wisconsin’s fall spread, the rate of incidence among those students was actually lower (32.6 cases per 100,000 person-days) than the rate of incidence among the general population of 14-17-year-olds (38.1 cases per 100,000 person-days) during the time.

Here’s the money quote:

Of the cases with a reported known source, 115 (55%) were attributed to 163 household contact followed by community contact outside sport or school (85, 41%), school 164 contact (5, 2.4%), sport contact (1, 0.5%) and other (3, 1.4%).

You read that right. Just 1 individual of 30,000 players contracted the virus through what was suspected to be transmission from the sporting event. And I’d bet my bottom dollar that this was not the worst thing that child had contracted in his lifetime. In fact, with flu season on hiatus, children are getting sick less often and less severely than they do during a typical winter.

The researchers further found no statistically significant difference in reported COVID-19 incidence between contact versus non-contact sports or individual versus team sports. They did find a slightly higher rate for indoor vs. outdoor sports, which is to be expected, although the overall rates for that age group were low across the board.

What about masks?

“After adjusting for local county COVID-19 incidence and school instructional delivery, face mask use was not associated with a decreased COVID-19 incidence in football, girls’ volleyball, boys’ soccer or cross country.” If anything, there was a greater incidence of cases among those who wore masks relative to those who didn’t for the football groups, which had the most cases out of the four sport groups studied. Either way, because 84% were wearing masks, it was hard to get a significant sample size of non-mask-wearers, which will always be used as an excuse to avoid drawing conclusions from this study.

However, with no affirmative evidence that masks ever work, why are we making kids play in such a dangerous environment for a virus that is simply not a problem for them? In an informal survey of 2,270 Minnesota high school athletes, 74% of students reported experiencing at least one “clinically significant symptom” from wearing a mask while playing, including loss of consciousness, dizziness, and vomiting. Almost 80% of respondents said it was hard to breathe, 52% said they experienced “increased or excessive fatigue,” and 48 players reported going to urgent care, with 18 of them being taken to the ER.

The broad results of the Wisconsin study harmonize with a recent study in the British Journal of Sports Medicine, which found “that the transmission risk during a rugby match is likely to be very low.” Well, if you’re not spreading it during rugby, then you’re likely not spreading it during any sport. Even if masks were to work in general, there is no reason children, who are not at risk in any meaningful way, should have to wear masks outdoors. The harm far outweighs even the contrived benefits of mask-wearing.

Incidentally, it was the University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health that published a mental health survey among high school athletes last July that found that approximately 68 percent of the 3,243 student-athletes surveyed reported feelings of anxiety and depression at levels that would typically require medical intervention.

In October, that same department published a survey comparing those in Wisconsin who participated in sports to those who did not and found that 80% of those who participated felt zero anxiety in their lives compared to just 26.4% who did not play a sport in the fall. Just 6.6% of those who played felt moderate or severe anxiety compared to 44.1% who did not! Also, nearly twice as many students who played sports reported experiencing no or minimal depression as among those who did not participate in youth sports.

Remember that according to the CDC’s current unscientific guidance, youth sports and extracurricular activities would be banned in all the red areas.

Source: https://cai.burbio.com/burbios-cdc-k-12-red-zone-t…

What our government is doing to us is a crime against humanity. A 2019 study published in Nature Neuroscience observed that social interaction was so important even for lab rats that when offered the option between a drug infusion (they were previously injected with methamphetamine) and interaction with other rats, the rats chose their peers 90% of the time.

The question going forward is not only whether we will follow the science, but whether we will treat our children with as much humanity as rats.

Share
Categories
Crime criminal justice criminal justice reform Intelwars Political Prisoners Trump Supporters Trump supporters riot at capitol

Horowitz: As criminals take advantage of hands-off justice system, feds clamp down on political prisoners

For the past decade, I’ve been trying to raise awareness about the harms of the weak-on-crime policies being advocated by both parties. As crime continues to surge, even the most violent career criminals are released on little or no bail, a growing phenomenon that is responsible for most of the violent crimes committed in the country. The insipid mantra of the de-incarceration crowd is that we shouldn’t lock people up for low-level offenses. I have long wondered what they consider to be high-level offenses. Now we have our answer. It is you and me.

We are now living in an America where accused murderers and rapists with long rap sheets are released without bail, while Trump supporters are being held without the opportunity to post even high bail for nebulous charges of trespassing on public property. All of us want violent criminals punished, but as Julie Kelly of American Greatness found after examining 200 indictments related to the Jan. 6 riot at the Capitol, nearly all of them were charged with trespassing for simply taking selfies in the Capitol.

Take the case of Jessica Watkins. She is being charged with disorderly conduct, entering a restricted building, and obstruction of an official proceeding. She has no prior record, and these are the quintessential “low-level” crimes I’ve been hearing the left lament for years in the context of the discussion of over-incarceration. Yet the Feds are asking that she be held without bail because she has spoken to friends about the need for a revolution.

By that standard, tens of millions of Trump-haters could have been held without bail for the comments they regularly spewed about him for years, especially when they were involved in Black Lives Matter riots. The fact that people are being charged, much less held without bond, for taking selfies in the Capitol, with no evidence that they engaged in assault or theft, is further disturbing because by the government’s own admission, some police officers let them in. Last week, the Capitol Hill police announced the suspension of six officers and an investigation into the actions of 29 others because they are suspected of letting in the crowd. Absent evidence of other criminal behavior, it is indefensible to charge civilians with trespassing before this investigation is complete.

It’s also disturbing that they continue to lie about the death of Officer Brian Sicknick to use it as a pretext for labeling any and all opposition to the Left as insurrection and sedition and treating the entry into the Capitol differently from any other commensurate crime.

Let’s be clear: The only political violence that has taken place since Jan. 6 fomented by a group that wants to overthrow the government is from Antifa. Antifa’s adherents have committed clear-cut violent crimes, yet few of them are arrested and none of them are held without bail. Thus, when attorney general nominee Merrick Garland compares Trump supporters to Timothy McVeigh and vows to focus on “domestic terrorism” but refuses to mention Antifa, you know this is not about justice, but about a sadistic persecution. In fact, he told the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing that Antifa’s attacks are not terrorism because they occur at night. It’s all about a two-tiered system. Which is why, when Garland promises to fight discrimination, he doesn’t mean the systemic anti-white bias at every level of the corporate culture.

The two-tiered justice system is even more appalling when you examine the number of rapists and murderers who have been set free on low or no bail in recent years in all of America’s major cities. While there is zero evidence of any of the Capitol Hill protesters committing crimes outside that day, most crime in this country is committed by repeat violent offenders released under “criminal justice reform measures.”

Just to pick a recent example from Chicago, America’s murder capital, Oscar Grissett was just bonded out of jail again by a liberal advocacy group despite a history of manslaughter, robbery, and committing crimes while on parole. Here is his timeline according to CWB Chicago:

  • In 1992, Grissett was paroled from a two-year sentence for aggravated battery causing great bodily harm.
  • Just four weeks later, he was charged with murder after driving a stolen car and killing a pedestrian with it while fleeing from police. He received a 25-year sentence, but despite 100 disciplinary actions while in prison, he still got out early, even though this was during the two decades of “tough on crime” sentencing.
  • In 2010, he was convicted of theft and robbery again and sentenced to two 15-year terms and a 9.5-year term, but of course wound up being paroled by 2018.
  • Shortly thereafter, he was convicted for another robbery of a store and sentenced to just four years, but was released after less than two years in March 2020.
  • While he was on parole, prosecutors charged him with two counts of felony possession of a stolen motor vehicle and felony burglary in September of last year. One would think that given his rap sheet and the fact that he was unrepentant from three decades of crime, he would be held without bail. But instead he was offered just $25,000 cash bail, which was paid for by “the Bail Project,” a left-wing group that is against pre-trial holding (but would never bail out Trump supporters for low-level charges of trespassing on public property).
  • So, what did Grissett do while out on bail again? Police arrested him on December 8 for stealing a car and then holding up a store clerk at a pet store and stealing money from the cash register.
  • Yet despite all this, last Friday, Judge Susana Ortiz set his bail at $100,000 for the pet store robbery and ordered Grissett to go onto electronic monitoring if he posts bond.

Rather than pushing reforms to stop this leaky justice system, Gov. J.B. Pritzker signed a bill nearly abolishing cash bail.

The case of Oscar Grissett is not an aberration. It represents the prototypical career criminal who is never properly deterred or stopped in our justice system. It’s in this world that Trump supporters are now being held without possibility of even posting bail on charges of trespassing in a public building, even if they didn’t engage in violence and did not have a prior record.

While the DOJ and the DHS focus on the nonexistent threat of ubiquitous violence from Trump supporters, nearly every major city is seeing a surge in crime thanks to the reduction in prison and jail incarcerations. Philadelphia is experiencing an even worse crime year than last year, which was the worst in a generation, when Philly had the second highest number of murders on record. Over the weekend, the violence spread to the suburb of Norristown, where one was killed and four were injured while children were enjoying a night of bowling with their families.

Perhaps it will take the violence spilling over into the suburbs, where some suburban voters have become woke, for them to realize that it is the career violent offenders who need to be locked up to ensure their family’s safety, not Trump voters.

Share
Categories
Coronavirus Coronavirus tyranny COVID-19 Covid-19 tyranny Intelwars Mask mandates north dakota

Horowitz: North Dakota House passes bill blocking localities, schools from mandating masks

Why did God give Republicans an 80-14 majority in the North Dakota House? Because with so many liberal Republicans, they need every last one just to get a majority behind the right to breathe freely without government criminalizing our breath with medieval superstitious rituals, such as mandated covering with a Chinese face burka.

The bad news is that 30 Republicans voted to allow localities to mandate mask-wearing. The good news is that Republicans still had a 50-44 majority to pass a new law barring local governments from criminalizing human breathing and appearance without a mask.

H.B. 1323, sponsored by Reps. Jeff Hoverson and Jeffrey Magrum, would prohibit a state or local elected official from forcing an individual to use a face covering or make such a covering a condition for entry, education, employment, or services. This bill would presumably bar local school boards from forcing children in school to wear masks.

This bill is very important, because even though 12 states currently don’t have a statewide mask mandate, many localities still require them, and it’s almost impossible to find a school district that doesn’t mandate them on children, despite the evidence against both the efficacy of masks and the threat of children spreading the virus.

The bill was given a “do not pass” recommendation by a 9-5 vote in the political subdivisions committee, but in North Dakota, every bill still gets a vote on the floor. It appears that some of those members understood that they were being watched. House Speaker Kim Koppelman, assistant majority leader Scott Louser, and caucus leader Glenn Bosch all voted for the bill.

The bill now moves on to the Senate, where it’s sponsored by Sen. Oley Larsen and will likely get a hearing next month. The chairman of the Senate Political Subdivisions Committee happens also to be the Senate president pro tempore, Randy Burckhard. Republicans have a 40-7 majority in that chamber, but many are known to be somewhat liberal, so conservatives will have to work this vote hard if they want it to pass it.

Gov. Doug Burgum has declined to comment on the mask bill. He implemented a mask mandate on Nov. 14, but allowed it to expire on Jan. 18. As in every other state, there was zero evidence of any efficacy of that mandate. North Dakota suffered from a sharp winter curve because the state had little prevalence of the virus and therefore weak immunity headed into the fall surge. The virus rose and fell with the collapse of the winter curve everywhere else, and the relaxation of the mandate has not stopped the decline.

Despite South Dakota never having a mask mandate and having fewer restrictions than North Dakota, South Dakota actually had slightly fewer cases.

The northern latitude states out West seemed to have the exact same curve, despite different responses and varying population densities.

Clearly, the mask-wearing is a charade and, as the FDA says on its website until this very day, does not work for airborne-transmitted viruses, only to “block large-particle droplets, splashes, sprays, or splatter,” which is not the primary transmission method of the virus. The FDA also says, “Surgical masks are not intended to be used more than once,” guidance rarely abided by as a result of the mask mandate.

Montana’s House of Representatives recently passed a similar bill, HB 257, which would block localities from implementing this inhumane mandate among other restrictions on businesses. That bill passed by a much larger margin, 66-34, because only one Republican voted against it.

Generally speaking, Republican legislators across the country have been shockingly tepid about repealing these mandates, despite the lack of evidence of their efficacy and the moving of the goal posts that are now threatening to continue this inhumane mandate indefinitely. Will the North Dakota bill serve as a turning point?

Share
Categories
Coronavirus Coronavirus tyranny COVID-19 Covid-19 tyranny Ebola Fauci Intelwars Mask mandates quarantine

Horowitz: Fauci flip: In 2014, Fauci opposed quarantine of Ebola health care workers

Of all Dr. Fauci’s insidious flip-flops, this is likely the most revealing of all. Before infectious diseases became a political weapon to destroy civilization and individual liberty, Fauci opposed mandatory quarantines even for a rare and deadly virus that, unlike COVID, is very quarantinable.

In many ways, Ebola is the antithesis of coronavirus. Given that it’s rare but deadly, it is the quintessential disease for which quarantine is both necessary and effective. The infection fatality rate is up to 50%, but it only transmits through bodily fluid, so during an initial outbreak, the case count will be measured in single digits, not in tens of thousands like a pandemic flu. The origin, scope, and duration of the quarantine are very limited but necessary. The exact opposite is true of coronavirus, which has a fatality rate of well under 1%, but is also bound to spread to the entire population until it reaches the herd immunity threshold.

Nonetheless, when America experienced an Ebola outbreak in 2014 from people traveling from West Africa, Fauci vehemently opposed state governors who were placing mandatory quarantines on the few and specific individuals who traveled directly from the source of the outbreak.

My former colleague, investigative journalist Jordan Schachtel, uncovered this gem from Dr. Fauci opposing policies by New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie forcing health care workers who came in contact with Ebola patients to quarantine for 21 days.

“We appreciate the fears of the American people, but you don’t want to have policy that would have negative unintended consequences. … The scientific evidence is what needs to drive us,” Fauci said on ABC News in October 2014. “If you put everyone in one basket, even people who are clearly no threat, then we have the problem of the disincentive of people that we need,” he added, while also referring to his colleagues who went overseas to treat Ebola patients as “heroes” who are “protecting America.”

He added: “And we know that people who are without symptoms are not a threat to transmitting it. You don’t get Ebola unless you come into direct contact with body fluid. So there are things that we have got to be careful.”

Ebola is the exact sort of virus for which our laws allow quarantine. These were specific people who came directly into contact with a very deadly virus that, all things equal, was not destined to spread to the U.S. unless people brought it in from overseas. Yet Fauci spoke of the dignity of the human being and the need not to quarantine the individual without any evidence of symptoms.

Now, this same man is essentially telling us that for the rest of our lifetimes, we can lock down and forcibly mask all Americans within America who never traveled outside the country and who present no symptoms – all for a virus that is like a pandemic flu and is unavoidable. Even with roughly 35% of the country already having been infected, he still continues to forcibly mask every human being indefinitely, regardless of whether they have symptoms, already had the virus, or had a vaccine.

I often find myself using Ebola as the paradigm of what quarantine laws were designed for. Governors erroneously believe that the police power to quarantine applies to locking down the healthy with the sick. That is simply not true. It was designed for a very limited number of people, like those who have Ebola, which can be easily quarantined. Fauci didn’t believe that those without symptoms, even if they directly traveled from a source country and actually treated a patient, should be quarantined. How can he now believe that quarantine should apply to the entire nation indefinitely for a flu-like virus whose transmission is unavoidable?

As Justice Alito said in a speech at the Federalist Society last November, the 1905 Jacobson v. Massachusetts opinion, which upheld the police powers of a state to combat an epidemic, was rooted in “a local measure that targeted a problem of limited scope.” That was essentially what occurred in 2014 when a handful of people traveling back from West Africa landed at a few airports and there were no more than 11 cases in the United States.

What is happening now is not quarantine but a blockade on our rights until the end of time. As Alito said of the Jacobson decision, “It did not involve sweeping restrictions imposed across the country for an extended period. And it does not mean that whenever there is an emergency, executive officials have unlimited, unreviewable discretion.”

Fauci opposed the effort to even temporarily suspend flights and travel from West Africa, noting that isolating those countries would cause “unrest.” Remember, there is no right for foreigners or even Americans to travel back and forth from a particular country. Yet, to this very day, Fauci believes Americans can be placed under curfew, masks, and every restriction under the sun within their own communities.

Fauci’s opinion in 2014 served the medical and “scientific” elite, just like his view today. In that sense, he is somewhat consistent, at least in his stubborn adherence to the two-tiered justice system of the elites.

Consider the physical, economic, emotional, psychological, and behavioral harms of lockdowns and mask-wearing in California for almost a full year. The governor did this to avoid the spread of a virus that the Los Angeles Times now admits is finally slowing down in L.A. because 35% of the people have likely gotten the virus.

Yet Fauci is still acting as if this is a quarantinable virus!

Even a broken clock is right twice a day. Fauci is never correct.

Share
Categories
Coronavirus tyranny Covid-19 tyranny Eric holcomb Indiana Intelwars Mask mandate Mask mandates Masks

Horowitz: Hoosier hubris: Republican legislators keep crowning governors kings over humanity

Nearly every governor has set up a dictatorship crushing every aspect of our lives, including regulating our breathing. After eight to 10 months of silence, state legislatures are finally convening and dealing with the scope of executive emergency powers. But rather than holding hearings exposing all the lies about the efficacy of lockdowns and masks and publicizing the harms of those policies, most GOP-controlled legislatures are simply rearranging the deck chairs for future emergency declarations while tacitly agreeing with the premise of this tyranny. The American people need to wake up before these legislatures are out of session and the governors have another eight months of free reign.

It’s understandable to give governors emergency powers for a handful of days. But when they promulgate edicts that affect every aspect of our lives and properties, there is no reason why, within a week, a legislative body should not be in session holding hearings with expert witnesses on both sides of the debate to see whether those measures are constitutional, necessary, efficacious, or more harmful than helpful. Had this been done in state legislatures last March and April, they would have discovered that these unconstitutional policies are all pain and no gain.

Yet here we are, 10 months into “15 days to flatten the curve,” and most GOP-dominated legislatures are still not asking questions about the underlying premise of these policies, categorically banning their implementation, and properly reining in abuses of executive power.

Nowhere is this more evident than in Indiana. Gov. Eric Holcomb has accepted the entire false premise of the likes of Joe Biden and Andrew Cuomo that lockdowns and masks mitigate a viral spread. As such, he has implemented unconstitutional infringements upon liberty almost to the degree of the hard-core blue states. He began categorically shutting down restaurants on March 16, the day after the legislature adjourned its 2020 session. Thanks to the weak leadership in these GOP supermajority-controlled chambers, there was no successful push to force the legislature to reconvene for almost an entire year. Now that legislators are back in session and 15 days of lockdown have turned into infinity, they are stripping him of all this power, right?

More like rearranging the deck chairs.

Last week, the Indiana House passed HB 1123, sponsored by House floor leader Rep. Matt Lehman. The bill was touted as limiting the governor’s power to issue an emergency order beyond 30 days, but in fact it does little to change current policy. Rather than categorically ending an emergency declaration after 30 days absent an affirmative vote by the legislature to extend it, this bill keeps the default position in place — that the governor can extend the order for as long as he wants unless the legislature passes a concurrent resolution to block it. It’s a seemingly slight nuance that makes all the difference.

Proponents of the bill might argue that under current policy, the legislature doesn’t even have the ability to convene in a special session to block the governor absent the governor’s permission, and this bill enables the legislature to convene in an emergency session. That is true, but this bill will not enable rank-and-file members to call for that session, only a “council” made up of leadership members — the same leaders who sat idly all last year while the governor tore up the Bill of Rights, the Hoosier economy, and education for a generation of children. It’s the same leadership that still agrees with the underlying premise of Holcomb, Biden, and Cuomo — that indefinite masking and quarantining of healthy people are legally sound and scientifically sane.

Rep. Jim Lucas (R) has a bill that would stop these orders dead in their tracks after 28 days, but leadership is opposing it. “We’re just moving things around and we’re not really doing anything to protect the individual against government overreach,” complained Lucas.

As the Center Square reports, “The great majority of Republicans also showed no interest Monday night in amendments that would have strengthened the Lehman bill, HB 1123, and restored to the legislature its sole lawmaking authority.”

Rep. Curt Nisly introduced amendments to categorically ban the governor from using emergencies to legislate and regulate the people directly rather than simply issuing guidance to executive officials. They were all voted down. Nisly aptly captured the sentiments among Republicans that I have noticed in most state legislatures across the country. “All summer a lot of Republicans bloviated about, you know, ‘We can’t do anything, because we’re not in session.’ And, now we are, and we’re doing about the same thing we did this summer, which was nothing.”

There is no desire whatsoever from these legislators to deal with the current abuse of power, which is the greatest in American history. No desire to use the wealth of evidence against lockdowns and masks to oppose the underlying premise of these particular orders in addition to properly reforming future emergency powers. We saw this in West Virginia, where the GOP leaders in the legislature only want to apply the limitations to future orders. The Senate bill in Indiana is even weaker and also only applies to orders issued after March 1.

It would be one thing if this is the best they can do with divided government. But Republicans enjoy a 71-29 majority in the House and a 39-11 majority in the Senate! What’s more, in Indiana, as in West Virginia, it only takes 51% of the legislative vote to override a governor’s veto, which means they could even afford to lose 13 RINOs in the Senate and 20 in the House and still override Holcomb’s veto. Sadly, there are more RINOs than that.

Just how radical is Eric Holcolmb? Last year, the Indiana State Teachers Association (ISTA) stayed out of the gubernatorial election in deference to him. It’s the only time in recent memory the union declined to endorse the Democrat candidate.

In October, conservative Rep. Curt Nisly speculated that the reason was because the teachers’ union already had their Democrat man in the governor’s mansion, embodied in Holcomb. As the Center Square reported last year, Holcomb met with ISTA on July 14 (virtually, of course!). Just eight days later, Holcomb announced a statewide mask mandate, originally making all violators guilty of a Class B misdemeanor, punishable by up to six months in jail or a $1,000 fine, something we have not seen in most Republican-controlled states. He predicted mask-wearing would become “the fashion of the day.”

The same day, ISTA President Keith Gambill sent out a statement crediting the union’s meeting with Holcomb for securing the mask mandate. Four weeks later, ISTA announced the unprecedented move to remain neutral in the gubernatorial race between Holcomb and the official Democrat opponent, Woody Myers. In other words, Holcomb was such a leftist that he was indistinguishable, in the eyes of the teachers’ union, from a Democrat.

The legislature appears to be going along with this Republican in name only. Several weeks ago, House Speaker Todd Huston encouraged people to wear masks, claiming that “the vast, vast, vast majority of the scientific and medical community agree that wearing masks are important and I will stand by those.”

Well, Speaker Huston, show us any evidence that masks have worked. Missouri is the closest state that doesn’t have a mask mandate, and given that it is in the same NOAA climate zone, it had the exact same seasonal curve, as we have seen across the country and across the globe. In fact, Missouri seemed to do better.

The curves are so regional and seasonal in nature that Illinois, Indiana, and Missouri all had the same curves, despite Illinois having the earliest mandate and Missouri having no statewide mandate. Yet Missouri had the fewest cases of the three. In fact, even within Missouri, one suburban St. Louis County, Jefferson, which instituted its own local mask mandate, did worse than neighboring St. Charles County, which had no mandate, even though Jefferson County has a lower population density than St. Charles.

How much longer will we tolerate this in supermajority Republican states that Trump carried by a large margin? Why are we even focused on taking back Congress with a bunch of leftist Republicans when we can’t even secure basic liberties against the most radical and destructive Democrat policies in states with 3-1 GOP majorities in the legislature?

Well, until Republican legislators are forced to answer tough questions from their constituents, they will continue to skate by every primary without any competition. That’s why it’s time for conservatives to focus like laser beams on Republican-controlled legislatures.

There are several billboards on I-69 just south of the Michigan-Indiana border, essentially inviting Michiganders to flee lockdowns and live freely in Indiana. Unfortunately, things are not that much better in Indiana. Conservatives must work to make this red state red again so that it really can make things better for refugees from blue America.

Share
Categories
Coronavirus tyranny Covid fascism COVID-19 Covid-19 tyranny Intelwars Mask mandate Mask mandates Mask tyranny Masks

Horowitz: When Australia fined mask companies for misleading about their effectiveness against a virus

Once upon a time, sanity and science reigned supreme during responses to pandemics. There was a period of time between the Dark Ages and today when we actually followed logic, science, and learned experience and understood that masks do not stop viruses. You might be wrestled to the ground by police in Australia today for not wearing a mask, but 17 years ago it was the mask proponents who were on the hook for lying about mask efficacy in Australia.

We’ve all seen the warning labels from mask manufacturers that masks don’t work against viruses, which used to be common knowledge among all government agencies as well as laymen. But during the SARS outbreak of 2003, the Australian government warned companies not to mislead the public about their effectiveness in mitigating the spread of SARS 1.

In an article titled, “Farce mask: It’s safe for only 20 minutes,” the Sydney Morning Herald reported on April 27, 2003, “Retailers who cash in on community fears about SARS by exaggerating the health benefits of surgical masks could face fines of up to $110,000.” Then-NSW Fair Trading Minister Reba Meagher threatened prosecution of those mask manufacturers who exaggerated the level of protection afforded by medical masks. “I’m sure everyone would agree that it is un-Australian to profiteer from people’s fears and anxieties,” Ms. Meagher said.

How times have changed!

The irony is that, if anything, the science against mask-wearing is even clearer today than in 2003. It has now become clear that SARS-like viruses spread through microscopic aerosols, not primarily via large droplets. Those virions are often 30 times smaller than the pores in surgical masks, let alone the larger pores of the cloth masks most commonly worn. Also, the loose seal around the face for the overwhelming majority of people who don’t properly clamp the mask is a source of all sorts of virion emissions. However, the Sidney Morning Herald noted at the time that masks were ineffective even against larger droplets.

“Those masks are only effective so long as they are dry,” said Professor Yvonne Cossart of the Department of Infectious Diseases at the University of Sydney.

“As soon as they become saturated with the moisture in your breath they stop doing their job and pass on the droplets.”

Professor Cossart said that could take as little as 15 or 20 minutes, after which the mask would need to be changed. But those warnings haven’t stopped people snapping up the masks, with retailers reporting they are having trouble keeping up with demand.

Now consider the fact that people are wearing this mask (or even more ineffective cloth masks) for hours on end, often reusing them for multiple days! And yet, nobody in government is questioning the consequential assumptions they have made forcing young children, seniors, and people with disabilities to continue wearing these absurd cloths, despite 10 months of evidence showing that shockingly high levels of mask-wearing fail to alter the natural trajectory of the epidemiological curve.

This video is a good demonstration of how worthless masks are in stopping aerosols.

On April 3, already several weeks into the unprecedented lockdown over coronavirus, but before the big media push for universal masking, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration issued guidance for respiratory protection for workers exposed to people with the virus. It stated clearly what governments had said all along about other forms of airborne contamination, such as smoke inhalation — “Surgical masks and eye protection (e.g., face shields, goggles) were provided as an interim measure to protect against splashes and large droplets (note: surgical masks are not respirators and do not provide protection against aerosol-generating procedures).”

It wasn’t until October that the CDC finally admitted to the aerosol threat indoors, but even then declined to acknowledge that it was the primary method of transmission and that therefore masks are useless. This is a point that Biden’s top epidemiologist, Michael Osterholm, made last June. Now, Osterholm has joined a group of scientists criticizing the CDC for continuing to downplay aerosol transmission and not updating its indoor guidance based on this fact. But the irony is that Osterholm still won’t acknowledge that he was right to assert that surgical and cloth masks don’t work against the spread of this virus. Instead, they are now pushing for even tougher mandates to prevent indoor gathering or requiring N95 masks that are form-fitted.

It is unsustainable for large swaths of the public to wear masks that really cut off the aerosols for hours because, absent state-of-the-art oxygenation, wearing these devices for long periods of time will reduce oxygen flow. Moreover, their view on aerosols is an admission that this virus cannot be avoided in any realistic manner. Given that at least a third of the country has gotten the virus and many more vulnerable people have been vaccinated, it is simply insane to continue this charade.

What’s worse about the mask mandate is that it’s very likely that improper masking actually aerosolizes the droplets that would otherwise fall to the ground. As Megan Mansell, a PPE expert for OSHA and ADA compliance, writes at Rational Ground, “The worst part of all is the ability of commonly-used face coverings to aerosolize respiratory droplets that would otherwise have fallen in a predictable arc of approximately 6 feet.”

Instead, these aerosolized particulates remain aloft for extended periods after passing through the mask, responding to airflow patterns (like HVAC systems and breathing), effectively evading the 6-feet-over or 6-feet-under rhetoric, as the aerosol range is 18-20 feet.

Plosive force, which is caused by respiratory activities such as sneezing, blowing raspberries, coughing, screaming, and snorting, among others, pushes larger droplets forcefully through woven fibers like flour through a sieve, and droplets that would have otherwise just fallen in that neat, predictable arc are now sent aloft within respiratory range, where they can remain for hours, effectively increasing atmospheric viral load in contained spaces.

The “experts” are implicitly yielding this point by now, moving on to requiring double masking (a counterproductive absurdity in itself, which weakens the seal on the first mask) and by recognizing the thin evidence behind universal masking months into this sadistic and shameful ritual. Just this week, the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control conceded that “there are still significant uncertainties about the size” of the effect of surgical masks and that the evidence in support of homemade cloth masks (which is what most people wear when indoors for long periods of time due to comfort) “is scarce and of very low certainty.” Yet they still double down on using them!

But 10 months into the failure of the masks to change the trajectory of the virus one iota, why do we continue to treat this as a harmless intervention, especially as it relates to children, who aren’t even in danger of the virus? Aside from the psychological or physical effects, has anyone considered the future damage to the speech and social development of children? A recent analysis in Scientific American showed that babies begin lip-reading at eight months and that obscuring their ability to mimic the facial expressions of adults impedes their language development. Of course, the author still declines to actually attack the mask mandate despite making the case for how harmful it is.

Criminalizing human breathing is the most officious, inhumane, unconstitutional, and immoral thing our government has ever done to us. Given the wealth of data and information that has come to light over the past 10 months, which incidentally, coincides with decades of research prior to this virus as well, it is shocking how few GOP-controlled legislatures have stood against this travesty. After all, before politics took over, even the Australians understood the fraud of masks.

Share
Categories
Coronavirus tyranny Intelwars Jim justice Mask mandates West Virginia

Horowitz: West Virginia Republicans have become as fascist as San Francisco Democrats

Thomas Jefferson regarded urban areas as “as pestilential to the morals, the health and the liberties of man” and looked to rural America for “more health, virtue and freedom.” Under his vision, one would expect no greater beacon of freedom than the official Mountain State of West Virginia, but the perfidious Republican Party has managed to turn one of the most rural parts of the country into the tyranny of San Francisco — with masks, child abuse in school, and closure of struggling businesses.

Living in Maryland during this period of totalitarian COVID fascism, just a short drive from West Virginia’s panhandle, I found myself longingly casting my gaze westward to settle in what appeared to be a nice red state. “West Virginia, mountain mama, take me home, country roads.” After all, every elected state official is a Republican, no Democrat has carried a single county in a presidential election since 2008, and Republicans control the Senate 23-11 and the House 77-23.

Then, my bubble was burst last September when a listener of my podcast informed me that West Virginia has the same diabolical mask mandate, criminalization of businesses, and abuse of children at school as Maryland does. In fact, Gov. Jim Justice even used Cuomo’s line about “if a mask just saves one life …” He believes one human being breathing normally is risking another person’s life. That is perhaps the most diabolical thing a politician can say.

Well, Governor, Cuomo quite literally has not saved even one life!

Just how out of touch are elected Republicans with their voters? The listener, who just recently moved to Putnam County, West Virginia, from Virginia for freedom, told me that her children in this Trump+43 county are forced to wear masks for 7 hours straight, including during PE and recess. Another listener from Boone County, which Trump carried by 53 points, informed me that businesses are being forced to inform on each other and are eventually charged with misdemeanors by the health department. The health department of this Trump+53 county has put into place a “three strikes and you’re out” system for businesses caught not enforcing the mask mandate. A number of counties in the northern part of the state still don’t have full in-person instruction.

One of the first acts of Speaker Roger Hanshaw in the first legislative session since Justice’s tyranny, rather than countermanding the governor’s inhumane, illogical, and illegal orders, was to order mask-wearing (HR 5) on the floor of the West Virginia legislature, just like in California.

A bipartisan group of legislators are pushing a bill (HB 2003) to limit emergency declarations to 60 days, a very generous period of time without legislative input. Yet Jim Justice still thinks that is infringing upon his monarchical powers. “I’m going to go back to something my dad taught me a long, long time ago, and said, ‘If it’s working, don’t fix it.’ The bottom line is, it’s worked,” said Justice. “And it’s not only worked, it’s worked unbelievable.”

Take a look at the curve, which shows that the masks did nothing, and the state had the same late fall/early winter curve as every other place on the face of the planet.

He did such a good job with his lockdown policies that … they coincidentally happened to follow the same natural curve as neighboring states with a similar climate.

This man is taking the starting point and the end point of the virus, all the while forgetting that the cases went up 1,800% long after all of his insanity was in place and only went down afterwards once the seasonal spread was over, as was the case in every single state and every country around the world! Some maskers suggest that mask mandates only work if they were in place early when cases were low. Well, that is exactly what happened in West Virginia!

The West Virginia legislature is in its second week in session. Conservatives are asleep at the wheel. Republicans have a 2-1 majority in the Senate and a 3.5-1 majority in the House, and incidentally, they only need 51% to override the governor’s veto. This should be an easy time to either force these Republicans to become Republicans or expose them in front of their voters as the closet Democrats they really are. The governor himself only switched parties once he realized how much his state loved Trump.

On Saturday, the House Judiciary Committee originally accepted an amendment to HB 2003 by Delegate Pat McGeehan, R-Hancock, to clarify that the 60-day limitation the legislature wants to place on emergency declarations applies “to any state of emergency or state of preparedness currently in effect.” But then on Monday, the committee reversed course and stripped it out! Ironically, it was Democrat lawmakers who cried foul about this former Democrat-turned-RINO governor becoming a king. “[The bill] made somebody upset in the executive office, the old king himself,” said House Minority Whip Shawn Fluharty in response to the second vote. “So we came back in here, and we’re reneging on promises made to our constituents.”

How is it that in a state Trump carried by a margin of 68%-29%, conservatives can’t even pressure 51% of a 3.5-1 majority to oppose this governor who is indistinguishable from Gavin Newsom in California? Well, because the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee is none other than Moore Capito, the son of the very liberal U.S. Senator Shelly Moore Capito. He used the fact that the committee room needed to be cleaned for the virus to host the next committee as a means of moving on from debate. “We’re in the middle of an unforeseen and very, very novel and dangerous pandemic right now,” said Del. Moore Capito in defending his rush to pass the bill without teeth. “I think it’s important that we move forward with the bill the way it’s drafted.”

Again, who needs Democrats when we have Republican leaders just as passionately promoting the illogical premises behind their most destructive and unconstitutional policies?

This is why conservatives need to shift their focus from national politics to state and local politics while building a patriot infrastructure at the county level to hold phony Republicans accountable. Unless we get organized in red states to make them red again, Jefferson will roll over in the grave watching rural states adopt the same pestilence to the morals, the health, and the liberties of man as the large cities.

Share
Categories
Coronavirus tyranny COVID-19 Covid-19 deaths Florida Intelwars Lockdown lies Lockdown tyranny lockdowns Ron DeSantis

Horowitz: With no mask mandate and schools open, Florida ranks 11th lowest in excess deaths among seniors

There’s a reason why the Biden regime is trying to attack Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and create an illusion of a disproportionate viral crisis in the state. With no declared emergency restrictions in place at the state level since last September, the fact that Florida is doing better than the national average completely exposes the lie of lockdown and masks having any effect whatsoever on the fixed natural progression of the virus.

Dr. Fauci is suggesting a novel scientific principle – that schools can’t reopen until Congress passes yet another “stimulus” bill. Yet in Florida, schools have been open all year, and the state’s excess deaths for 2020 rank the 16th lowest in the nation, according to a new analysis. What’s more, the Sunshine State, which is regarded as God’s waiting room for seniors, experienced the 11th lowest per capita rate of excess death increase for seniors in 2020.

A new analysis conducted by RationalGround.com and exclusively obtained by TheBlaze collated CDC excess death data for 49 states (excluding North Carolina, which has incomplete data) and ranked the states from smallest to largest increase in excess deaths from 2019 to 2020. As we have seen in study after study, there is absolutely zero correlation between non-pharmaceutical interventions, such as business and school closures or mask mandates, and a lower rate of excess deaths.

According to the CDC’s excess death table, there was a 16.9% national average increase in all-cause mortality in 2020 over 2019. Given the loose way we count COVID deaths, it will take quite some time to sort out how many of those deaths are due to COVID and how many are due to the panic, anxiety, lockdowns, and missed care, but what is clear is that there is no correlation between the political measures taken by a state and fewer all-cause deaths.

Florida, which is the third largest state, has the 16th lowest increase in all-cause deaths, and all of the states that had fewer excess deaths than Florida are much smaller and are mostly states with lower population density. California, on the other hand, ranked No. 40.

What is most striking is that if you rank the number of COVID-19 deaths among seniors by state per 100,000, Florida ranks the 11th lowest in the nation! Florida suffered 474 COVID deaths per 100,000, while California suffered 573 per 100,000. Florida beat even some smaller lockdown states as well:

Remember, California did everything “right.” The state implemented the most severe and earliest lockdowns and mask mandates. Just 5% of school children have returned to school. In contrast, Florida has had no statewide restrictions for months, and nearly all children were back in school in September. What’s more, Florida has become the top destination both for people permanently moving and also vacationing during the great winter spread of the virus. According to those who believe human input is what determines the trajectory of the virus, Florida, especially with its senior population, should have been toward the bottom, with much higher all-cause mortality.

Yes, some of the lowest all-cause mortality states are blue states, such as Hawaii and Vermont. But so are red states, such as West Virginia and Alaska. Generally, the states with lower population density and those most isolated had fewer deaths. Hawaii is the most isolated state of all. Florida, being the third most populous state, beat numbers 4-12 with a lower percentage increase in excess deaths among seniors. Also, with the highest unemployment rate in the nation, Hawaii will be dealing with excess deaths of misery for years to come.

The Rational Ground analysis used CDC excess death data (predicted/weighted for 2019 and provisional for 2020) to rank the states by all-cause mortality increases and used the CDC’s provisional COVID-19 deaths by sex, age, and state to rank the per-capita COVID-19 deaths by state for the senior population. If anything, as California’s numbers continue to be updated, they will get worse because most of their deaths were at the end of the year.

When the lockdowns and school closures began last March, the totalitarians predicted the nightmare scenario of children killing their grandparents, despite the existing evidence that children did not contribute much to community spread. Well, this chart created by Rational Ground contributor Kyle Lamb, comparing Florida to other states in terms of school reopenings, is worth 1,000 words.

This chart uses Burbio’s school opening tracker, which tabulates the percentage of public school students in all the school districts in each state that have in-person instruction available to them. As you can see, nearly 100% of Florida students have access to in-person instruction, per the governor’s order early last year. Yet the state has fewer pediatric cases per 100,000 total since the beginning of the pandemic than other states with very few children in school, including California, where just 5.4% of public-school students have access to in-person classes.

Let’s not forget that states like California and Illinois will be suffering from excess deaths for years to come as a result of these illogical and inhumane decisions. The University of California published a study in JAMA estimating a cumulative loss of 5.53 million life years from this generation of children due to lost educational attainment.

Thus, there is literally zero benefit to shutting schools, shutting businesses, or wearing masks. It is all pain and zero gain. California has nothing to show for its year-long lockdown but more deaths per capita and 30% higher unemployment than Florida, as well as all the long-term excess deaths induced by hopelessness that we will tragically be counting for years to come. As for Florida, it doesn’t need a stimulus to reopen schools; opening schools and society is the stimulus.

Share
Categories
George Washington Intelwars liberty Presidents' day tyranny Washington's birthday

Horowitz: The difference between Washington’s birthday and ‘Presidents’ Day’ is the difference between liberty and tyranny

No, we are not celebrating Joe Biden, Barack Obama, Woodrow Wilson, or Millard Fillmore this week. We are supposed to be celebrating George Washington. In other words, we are not celebrating the majestic power of the chief executive of the United States government in the abstract, but the humble leadership of one man who, until recently, successfully set the precedent of the presidency being wielded as an office of limited power rather than the power of a king.

Before George Washington’s birthday was hijacked and replaced with a generic “Presidents’ Day,” Feb. 22 was a day to celebrate the father of our country. According to the Congressional Research Service, George Washington’s birthday, to be celebrated on Feb. 22, was first conceived as a federal holiday on Jan. 31, 1879. It wasn’t until 1968, when Congress passed the Uniform Monday Holiday Act in order to give government workers even more time off, that the holiday was moved to the third Monday in February. Although the name was never officially changed, having the date of celebration disconnected from Washington’s actual birthday has allowed the original purpose of the holiday to become nearly obsolete, like every other meaningful American tradition.

Because Washington refused to become king when he had the opportunity on two occasions, and instead opted to humbly serve his country as its first elected president, the observance of his birthday is really a celebration of our Constitution and the entire republican system of governance upon which our nation depends. In that sense, “Presidents’ Day,” aka George Washington’s birthday, is truly a day to recognize that we are a republic, not a monarchy, when the president can now literally rule over our bodies and criminalize our breathing of free air.

In a revolutionary break from the rest of the 18th-century political world, the newly crafted Constitution vested the president with executive authority to faithfully execute the laws, not craft the laws. When contrasting the power of a king with that of a president, Alexander Hamilton wrote in Federalist #69 that “the one [a president] can confer no privileges whatever; the other [a king] can make denizens of aliens, noblemen of commoners; can erect corporations with all the rights incident to corporate bodies.”

How far we have fallen that we now have a president who confers all sorts of privileges, including “making denizens of aliens,” the very example of legislative authority Hamilton promised the people of New York would not be vested in the office of chief executive. We now have a president who can use a virus to muzzle the mouths of the citizens, while releasing thousands of foreign invaders into our country with no care for spreading the virus.

Although the power of the presidency was not to have any semblance of the power of the king, our Founders still felt that the faithful execution of the laws was a grave task that should only be vested in one man and in a man of faith. In defending the decision by the Constitutional Convention to vest the executive authority in one man instead of a tribunal, the great James Wilson said the following during debate at the Pennsylvania Ratification Convention:

He cannot act improperly, and hide either his negligence or inattention; he cannot roll upon any other person the weight of his criminality; no appointment can take place without his nomination; and he is responsible for every nomination he makes.

Hamilton in Federalist #70 explained the need for a one-man executive as such:

It is evident from these considerations, that the plurality of the Executive tends to deprive the people of the two greatest securities they can have for the faithful exercise of any delegated power, first, the restraints of public opinion, which lose their efficacy, as well on account of the division of the censure attendant on bad measures among a number, as on account of the uncertainty on whom it ought to fall; and, second, the opportunity of discovering with facility and clearness the misconduct of the persons they trust, in order either to their removal from office or to their actual punishment in cases which admit of it.

However, the Founders never envisioned two problems: the creation of political parties and the decline of religion and virtue among our civil society, two issues Washington ominously warned about in his farewell address.

Political parties have rendered our separation of powers and checks and balances moot. The legislature can no longer properly check a lawless executive because it is most often composed of enough party loyalists who will operate in tandem with the president instead of as a separate body of government. Also, one of the parties, the GOP, refuses to effectively check the ruling class in all bodies of government.

Moreover, we have lost a sense of how important religious virtue is for both the president and the people as a whole. The man we celebrate at this time of year, our very first president, devoted the largest share of his farewell address to the importance of religion and virtue:

Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked: Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.

When the president no longer believes religion is needed to maintain morality and when much of the society agrees with that view, there is nothing keeping the most powerful man in the country from acting despotically. But thankfully, for all of us, the one president who could have been a king was guided by the religious virtues to place the interests of the republic over his own power or ambition. Nobody expressed the importance of George Washington better than Calvin Coolidge during a 1927 speech honoring our first president:

His was the directing spirit without which there would have been no independence, no Union, no Constitution, and no Republic. His ways were the ways of truth. He built for eternity. His influence grows. His stature increases with the increasing years. In wisdom of action, in purity of character, he stands alone. We cannot yet estimate him. We can only indicate our reverence for him and thank the Divine Providence which sent him to serve and inspire his fellow men.

What shocked the world more than Washington’s defeat of the British was that he voluntarily resigned his commission as commander in chief of the Continental Army on Dec. 23, 1783. Rather than become the king of the new country, as had been the custom since the dawn of time upon leading the defeat of one regime, Washington humbly told the Congress, “I retire from the great theatre of action, and bidding an affectionate farewell to this august body, under whose orders I have so long acted, I here offer my commission, and take my leave of all the employments of public life.”

King George III, upon hearing about this astonishing act of humility, reportedly told the American-born artist Benjamin West: “If [Washington] does that, he will be the greatest man in the world.”

Indeed, he had become the greatest man in the world because he personally ensured that America would become a country of great men where each man would be the king of his own castle and all would work together to create the great experiment of self-government for the greater society.

When Washington was eventually called back for service to chair the Constitutional Convention and become the nation’s first president, he could also have become a dictator but declined to do so. His greatness was most evident in his ability to strike the perfect balance in humbly devolving power to the people, while concurrently maintaining a steady hand as the first president, so that the nations of the world, as well as the reluctant states, would respect the power of the newly created government.

Washington perfectly expressed this balance and struck this tone in his state of the union address of 1795. In referring to his firm but merciful quelling of the Whiskey Rebellion the year before (he ultimately pardoned the leaders), Washington wrote to Congress:

For though I shall always think it a sacred duty to exercise with firmness and energy the constitutional powers with which I am vested, yet it appears to me no less consistent with the public good than it is with my personal feelings to mingle in the operations of Government every degree of moderation and tenderness which the national justice, dignity, and safety may permit.

Over 200 years later, we have deviated from self-government in every way imaginable, culminating with the ultimate display of tyrannical executive power this past year with COVID fascism and now with the assault on the First Amendment rights of conservatives. As George Washington said, “If freedom of speech is taken away, then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep, to the slaughter.”

Many of us have wondered how the American people so quickly forgot the importance of their own power and the limitations of executive power in this country. Perhaps the answer is rooted in the fact that we have forgotten the origin of the holiday celebrating the very man who bequeathed us all this power of self-governance.

Share
Categories
Constitution constitutional republic Intelwars Mask mandates Tennessee

Horowitz: Tennessee lawmakers introduce bill to prevent businesses from discriminating against customers without masks

In our society, businesses are sued for not looking at customers the right way or for not taking expensive actions to accommodate the needs of employees and customers through OSHA, ADA regulations, and anti-discrimination laws. Since when did it become OK, then, for businesses to force customers and employees to take very definite actions against their bodily integrity, such as wearing face masks, no matter their personal conditions? A group of conservatives are pushing a bill in the Tennessee legislature to address this problem, and it just might become a model for other states.

Tennessee is one of 12 states that currently does not criminalize breathing without a Chinese face burka, but the damage done by the local and federal mandates has made businesses feel as if they need to enforce it to cover their backs. Despite no statewide mask mandate and overall fewer restrictions than other states, RINO Gov. Bill Lee he has still declared going to church in person dangerous and tried to dictate to Tennesseans how many people with whom they could gather. He has also enabled and empowered localized health board tyranny instead of individual liberty, and even put out a video promoting face masks. Thus, like in every other state, Tennessee businesses are enforcing this mask tyranny on the citizenry.

A group of Tennessee lawmakers have introduced the Medical Non-Discrimination Business and Consumer Act (SB 0320/ HB 0794) to ensure that businesses are not enforcing what government is clearly incapable of doing. It is also designed to place anti-discrimination and disability laws vis-à-vis mask-wearing in line with every other practice of business regulation that prevents even private businesses from wholesale discrimination, invasion of medical privacy, and violation of the ADA.

Specifically, this bill would prohibit a person from denying an individual the full and equal enjoyment of goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations of a place of public accommodation, resort, or amusement on the grounds of the wearing or use of a medical device, or whether the individual has received medical treatment, such as a vaccine.

On a practical level, this bill would prevent grocery stores, restaurants, movie theaters, and gyms from requiring masks or proof of vaccination in order to receive services. This is in line with current anti-discrimination law as it relates to every other facet of society. Just a year ago businesses would have been shut down for the rampant and cruel discrimination they are engaging in today.

Pursuant to the ADA (36.201), no individual shall be discriminated against on the basis of disability in the full and equal enjoyment of goods and services, without retaliation or coercion (36.206) covering any condition whether a physical or mental impairment (36.302.1) wherein mere presence does not constitute direct threat, even if contagious or noncontagious with transmissible diseases (36.302.b.2, 36.208).

Universal masking within businesses is unattainable because it does not address the chaos variable of the many who have an ADA right to reasonable accommodation to receive full access to goods and services, and you do not get to know what is wrong with them. Exemptions include PSTD from trauma, rape, and bound torture, autism, cancer, COPD, asthma, lung disease, pregnancy, and exposure/illness. Yet masking is the one thing that can violate anti-discrimination and disability laws, despite the fact that masks are worthless in combatting a respiratory virus.

Thus, this bill would merely place mask policies in line with every other ADA and anti-discrimination regulation we enforce on businesses today. It takes away the liability that businesses would potentially incur for allowing people to come in without a mask. It further prohibits local governments within the state of Tennessee from enforcing such mandates, a step Gov. Lee has failed to take until now.

The Senate bill is sponsored by Sen. Joey Hensley, and the House bill is sponsored by Rep. Susan Lynn. The bill is being promoted statewide by Tennessee Stands, a grassroots organization promoting a more rational approach to the virus.

Are you sick of the left regulating businesses into oblivion, then suddenly empowering them to enforce the ultimate form of discrimination when it comes to their sacred masks? If a mom-and-pop bakery must bake a cake for a gay wedding when the couple can find one hundred other businesses willing to service their event, then certainly businesses can’t shut off all vital goods and services to a human being for merely breathing, especially when there is no evidence they even have the virus. Moreover, if “businesses can do whatever they want,” then businesses can open without capacity restrictions or other lockdown policies. It’s time to apply anti-discrimination law and business regulations as a two-way street.

Let’s be clear, unless this legislation is passed in all the 31 states with GOP-controlled legislatures, the mask cult will never end. It’s time to even up the score and push back against government tyranny with equal and opposing force. The Medical Non-Discrimination Business and Consumer Act is that opposing force we’ve been waiting for.

Share
Categories
Constitution constitutional republic Constitutional sanctuary Intelwars north dakota

Horowitz: North Dakota House votes to block all existing and future unconstitutional federal policies

On Wednesday, North Dakota took another step toward becoming a constitutional sanctuary to protect individual rights from federal encroachments. The question now is whether Governor Doug Burgum will put the bill over the top.

By a vote of 51-43, the North Dakota House passed HB 1282, which would create a joint committee on nullification to review all federal laws or executive orders that are suspected of violating the Constitution. The committee, which is to be composed of the House and Senate leadership and six members from each body who would serve for two years, would recommend to the legislative body whether to nullify the federal policies based on constitutional violations. Upon the committee’s recommendation, the legislative assembly, by concurrent resolution, shall consider whether to nullify the federal action.

The consequence of this bill is that if the legislative assembly approves the concurrent resolution by a simple majority, all state agencies or political subdivisions of the state and all individuals employed by a state agency or political subdivision of the state are prohibited from enforcing the said federal law, regulation, or executive order.

Under the proposed legislation, the committee may review all existing federal statutes, regulations, and executive orders enacted before the effective date of this proposed law for the purpose of determining constitutionality and shall recommend whether to nullify in its entirety a specific federal statute, regulation, or executive order.

As I mentioned last week, this bill is probably the most important piece of legislation a state can pass given today’s political climate. It’s exactly what our Founders had in mind in the nightmare scenario where the federal government becomes tyrannical and inexorably hostile to the Bill of Rights. For example, if this bill passes, it would likely force a vote in the legislature on the implementation of the CDC’s unconstitutional and inhumane mask mandate on travelers.

You might notice that this bill only passed 51-43, despite Republicans enjoying an 80-14 majority in the House. More than a third of the Republicans voted against it. These were the 43 no votes: Adams; Anderson, B.; Anderson, D.; Anderson, P.; Beltz; Boe; Boschee; Brandenburg; Buffalo; Devlin; Dobervich; Guggisberg; Hager; Hanson; Hatlestad; Ista; Johnson, D.; Karls; Keiser; Klemin; Longmuir; Martinson; Mitskog; Mock; Nathe; Nelson, J.; Nelson, M.; O’Brien; Ostlie; Owens; Pollert; Porter; Richter; Roers Jones; Sanford; Schneider; Schreiber-Beck; Strinden; Thomas; Trottier; Vigesaa; Westlind; and Zubke.

The bill now heads to the Senate, where Republicans enjoy a 40-7 majority. However, there are many liberal Republicans in the Senate, and the governor has yet to endorse the bill. A number of liberal Republicans have bought into the erroneous notion that only courts can decide the constitutionality of issues. House Judiciary Committee Chairman Larry Klemin opposed the bill on the floor, claiming that it isn’t the legislature’s job to determine the constitutionality of a law.

As chairman, Klemin already watered down another similar bill, HB 1164, which I referred to last week. On Thursday, the new “modified” version of HB 1164 passed 79-13 – with all the fake Republicans pretending to support the Constitution. That bill, as modified, would only allow courts to determine the constitutionality of a presidential executive order, rather than the attorney general, as originally drafted.

Here’s the subterfuge we need to watch out for in other states only pretending to pass constitutional sanctuary legislation. What this effectively does is make the bill do the exact same thing as current practice, effectively gutting the entire effort. Thus, the chairman of the committee gets to brag about fighting for the 10th Amendment and standing up to tyranny, while doing absolutely nothing.

Worse, this bill continues to legitimize the myth that, somehow, only the judicial branch can interpret the Constitution. Indeed, each branch of government – both at the state and federal levels – has an obligation to use its respective powers to protect constitutional rights. For example, with Biden’s illegal and unscientific COVID mandates, it is the executive branch of the state that must defend the Constitution and refuse to implement them and the legislative branch that must prohibit and defund them from being implemented.

The judicial branch of government, with very few exceptions, has ignored flagrant violations of the Bill of Rights for 10 months. Fighting Washington at the local level will become a popular campaign issue for state and local politicians in the coming months and years. Perfidious Republicans understand this and plan to misdirect the grassroots energy away from bills that actually have teeth in them and send that force into a black hole.

If states are going to finally fight back against tyranny, it needs to come from the legislature. It’s time for legislators to stop running away from their constitutional obligations to represent the people and to protect their rights.

In a 2017 report, the Congressional Research Service observed that “early history of the United States is replete with examples of all three branches of the federal government playing a role in constitutional interpretation.” Members of Congress weren’t so complacent in their duties and, as the CRS observed, never sat idly allowing the courts to wield “a final or even exclusive role in defining the basic powers and limits of the federal government.” They subscribed to Madison’s view in Federalist #49 that “the several departments being perfectly co-ordinate by the terms of their common commission, neither of them, it is evident, can pretend to an exclusive or superior right of settling the boundaries between their respective powers.” He emphatically believed that “each [department] must in the exercise of its functions be guided by the text of the Constitution according to its own interpretation of it.”

Thankfully, the stronger bill, HB 1282, wound up passing over Chairman Klemin’s objections, but this demonstrates the struggle conservatives have even in red states in getting GOP supermajorities in both houses, not to mention the Republican governors, to work for the constitutional sanctuary movement.

As the legislative sessions reach their peak work weeks, conservatives should make HB 1282 the model bill. Rather than empowering the judiciary or even the executive to have exclusive authority over nullifying unconstitutional federal powers, it places the authority in the hands of the democratically elected legislature. This will force red-state Republicans to either finally stand up and fulfill their campaign promises or reveal to their voters that they are a false opposition to the Left, as over 25 Republicans in North Dakota did this week.

In order to make red states red again, we will have to make state legislatures great again.

Share
Categories
Constitution constitutional republic Intelwars Sanctuary counties Second Amendment

Horowitz: Missouri county authorizes arrest of feds who violate Second Amendment

What is our recourse when our own government criminalizes our most basic rights while it allows Black Lives Matter and Antifa to rampage through our streets with impunity? Is there no Plan B when the federal or state governments treat all conservatives like terrorists, business owners like pariahs, and those who yearn to breathe unmasked air like murderers? Well, one Missouri county is demonstrating the importance of sheriffs and county officials returning to self-government and interposing between the governmental usurpers and the most sacred rights of the people.

On Feb. 3, the Newton County, Missouri, Commission passed a bill that will not only block federal enforcement of unconstitutional gun policies, but criminalize their implantation thereof within the jurisdiction of the county. The “Second Amendment Preservation Act of Newton County Missouri” declares that “all federal acts, laws, orders, rules, and regulations passed by the federal government and specifically any Presidential Administration whether past, present, or future, which infringe on the people’s right to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution and Article I, Section 23 of the Missouri Constitution shall be invalid in the county.”

That section of the Missouri constitution reads as follows:

That the right of every citizen to keep and bear arms, ammunition, and accessories typical to the normal function of such arms, in defense of his home, person, family and property, or when lawfully summoned in aid of the civil power, shall not be questioned. The rights guaranteed by this section shall be unalienable. Any restriction on these rights shall be subject to strict scrutiny and the state of Missouri shall be obligated to uphold these rights and shall under no circumstances decline to protect against their infringement.

Specifically, the ordinance targets federal policies that order the tracking or registering of firearms of ammunition, an idea that Democrats have been floating recently. It also bars the enforcement of any effort to confiscate guns except from those who are “suspected criminals.”

The Second Amendment sanctuary movement has been growing throughout the country, with hundreds of counties passing some form of a declaration protecting gun rights from encroachments perpetrated by higher levels of government. The sanctuary movement has only recently come to the state of Missouri, with several counties recently declaring themselves Second Amendment sanctuaries and the state legislature pushing similar bills. But Newton County might have adopted the strongest language in the entire country – going so far as to criminalize enforcement or cooperation with federal law enforcement who seek to enforce such policies.

This is a takeoff of what states like New York did when they criminalized the cooperation between state and county government officials and Immigration and Customs Enforcement with regard to enforcement of federal immigration laws, even against illegal aliens with criminal records. The difference, of course, is that the Second Amendment sanctuary movement seeks to protect legitimate constitutional rights for Americans and, unlike the illegal alien sanctuary movement, does not harbor suspected criminals.

Specifically, section 4a of the Newton County ordinance grants the sheriff’s department “full authority to make an arrest of any and all federal agents that violate state laws and enforce regulations” that violate the Second Amendment. Finally, the ordinance bars anyone “who enforces or attempts to enforce any of the infringements identified in this ordinance” from “being hired as a law enforcement officer or to supervise law enforcement officers in the county.”

It is to be hoped that this will spawn a debate in the country over what citizens should do when the higher levels of government violate the very essence of the social compact by wielding one executive power after another to confiscate the most foundational of natural rights, including self-defense, free speech, property rights, and the right to breathe free air unrestrained, which absolutely is a natural right that predated any government.

The Newton ordinance was signed by commissioners Bill Reiboldt, Alan Cook, and David Osborn on Feb. 3 and is effective immediately.

While most sanctuary ordinances have thus far targeted Second Amendment violations, some counties have begun to pass sanctuary resolutions protecting local business owners and citizens from COVID restrictions that violate the First, Fourth, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments of the Constitution. SanctuaryCounties.com is a website that tracks the growing list of these sanctuary counties. Also, a group of listeners of my podcast have organized a network (Constitution Action Network) for people of the same state and county to meet, collaborate, and raise awareness of the power of state and local government to interpose against the growing list of blatant constitutional violations and extra-lawful lawmaking at the stroke of Biden’s executive pen.

The left-wing sanctuary city politicians, while wrong on the policy and legal merits of their arguments, will likely rue the day they created this monster that will now serve as the only remaining beacon for patriots to protect legitimate rights of American citizens.

Share
Categories
Committee assignments constitutional republic Intelwars Us congress us house of representatives

Horowitz: House Republicans should all resign their committee assignments and create their own

Congress doesn’t govern any more. The executive and judicial branches control every aspect of our lives, and Congress only exists to virtue-signal and sign off on the president’s insane budget without holding him accounting for power-grabs. This is true of both parties when they have control of either Congress or the White House. Yet with Democrats violating basic constitutional and even human rights of the GOP minority, why not actually break off and form a much more powerful messaging operation, given that the existing Congress is all about talk?

While Congress gets to determine the rules and proceedings of its body with majority support, Democrats have now run the chamber in such a way that it violates at least the spirit of democratic representation of individual members of Congress. Representatives cannot speak without muzzles on their mouths; they are prevented from uttering a number of things thanks to new rules; and they are now frisked on their way into the chamber, which are all in violation of the prohibition in Article I Section 6 against detaining a congressman on the way to work.

Representatives have the right to talk, debate freely, and offer amendments. Article I Sec. 6 not only prevents them from being detained on the way to and from work, it also guarantees them the right to speak and debate freely. Some might find their speech repugnant, but that is what elections are for.

This principle has been completely abrogated by the new rules of this Congress. Now, they are picking members they don’t like and throwing them off committees, even though they were duly elected by the people. Well, committees don’t do any work anyway. Nor can they offer amendments on the floor. All the important legislation that actually affects our future is crafted behind closed doors by lobbyists and executive branch officials and is either ensconced in a budget bill or an emergency bill, which is then voted on within hours of being introduced.

So, what is the point of the GOP members remaining in the House as a minority only to suffer abuse and humiliation without even being able to investigate, propose amendments, and use their voices?

There is nothing in the Constitution prohibiting them from simply breaking off and refusing to show up, opting instead to form their own shadow Congress. No, they will not conduct votes, and obviously will wield no constitutional authority, but as mentioned, this is essentially what the real Congress does anyway. It’s all about social media virtue-signaling. Their voices matter so much more than their votes, given our broken structure of government. So why not use their voices when and where they can actually talk freely?

They should divide members into shadow committees and hold fact-finding field hearings with guests to educate the public on the threat to civil liberties posed by COVID fascism, the two-tiered justice system, illegal immigration, and rampant crime, just to name a few issues. Rather than the same boring C-SPAN video, people would be able to view on a platform like Rumble an array of exciting guests and witnesses. Again, it would have no legal grounding, but everything that goes on in Congress anyway is nothing but showboating. So why not do a better job of it?

Nothing is stopping Republicans from putting out reports, broadcasting hearings, posting speeches, and giving voice to the concerns of their constituents. Democrats, with their majority, will do what they want anyway and always have the votes to pass anything. If they want to run the House like a dictatorship, why not let them have their fiefdom and show the American people their unvarnished radicalism without the Republicans as a distraction?

This is not cutting and running. Democrats have declared war on Republicans by kicking Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene off committees, a precedent that will not end with her. They are openly discussing banning members outright. So why play in their rigged system and get humiliated? Republican members should use their voices as private citizens, with the notoriety of elected officials, to augment the voices of their constituents more effectively.

A sane Republican Party would resign all committee posts in protest, regardless of what they think of Taylor Greene personally. This is a body that hosts members with ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. This is a body that hosts Rep. Alcee Hastings, who was one of the only federal judges in history to be removed through impeachment. In 1989, he was removed for a charge of taking a bribe in exchange for a lenient sentence. He was originally impeached by the House, which was then controlled by Democrats, by 413-3. Why isn’t he thrown off committees?

Ilhan Omar made anti-Semitic insinuations and downplayed 9/11 — the exact same conspiracy theories Green is accused of parroting. Where is the censure vote or effort to strip her committee assignments? And speaking of committee assignments, Rep. Eric Swalwell is accused of being in bed – literally – with a Chinese spy, yet he not only sits on the Homeland Security and Intel committees, but is one of the Democrat impeachment managers!

Jerry Nadler, the current Judiciary Committee chair, secured a clemency for Susan Rosenberg, the woman who planted a bomb in this very Capitol in 1983. He is in charge of the law-and-order committee of this chamber that was bombed.

Some might suggest that in the case of Hastings, his Florida constituents knew about his history and still voted to elect him to Congress years later, and he therefore has a right to serve. I actually agree with that sentiment. But that should apply to Taylor Greene, too. We are not talking about new behavior in office. These comments she has made about conspiracy theories were well known. Either her constituents don’t care, or they are so sick of fake Republicans going along with much more harmful conspiracy theories being peddled by clowns like Dr. Fauci that they would rather elect someone who believes in bizarre conspiracy theories but gives voice to them on the core issue than members who don’t believe in those theories but give voice to bizarre conspiracy theories like lockdowns and masks stopping a virus. Either way, that is their constitutional right to vote for her as it is for Alcee Hasting, Ilhan Omar, and a number of other repugnant Democrats who are either corrupt, anti-Semitic, or racist.

Black Lives Matter and Antifa are rioting and promoting insurrection to this very day. They have destroyed more public and private property in one hour of rioting than right-wing criminals on January 6 and have killed many more people. Should every Democrat (and RINO) who has promoted BLM and Antifa be removed from Congress?

Either two must play the same game, or it’s time to play our own game, and for once, make the Left react and play follow the leader. The sadistic double standard and two-tiered system is unsustainable.

Share
Categories
constitutional republic Coronavirus Coronavirus tyranny COVID-19 Fascism Fauci Intelwars Mask mandates Osterholm

Horowitz: Ruling class openly saying fascism and masks will NEVER end. Will we FINALLY wake up?

You can’t blame people for not believing last March that “15 days to flatten the curve” would transmogrify into “restrict your breathing with a mask and lock you down until there is a vaccine.” Nobody could have imagined such an absurd conspiracy theory, especially after months of those measures failing to achieve the goal.

Yet now that the vaccine is being administered swiftly and the fascists are doubling down on the masking – literally – if you still think this will end on its own, you are willfully blind. Either we make it end, or we will be masking our humanity for the rest of our lives.

Consider the following:

  • Despite the fact that we appear close to hitting the de facto herd immunity threshold with so many people already having had the virus, the government now has the perfect pretext to continue the fascism and move the goalposts. Dr. Fauci recently said that we are all at a very high risk of getting the new strains of the virus, particularly the South African variant, even if we already had the virus. Never mind the fact that cases dropped nearly 88% in South Africa over the past three weeks.
  • OK, so this is what the vaccine is for, right? Well, indeed, this is why Fauci is telling us to get the vaccine even if we had the virus. But have you ever heard of a virus whose slight mutation is somehow not covered by natural immunity but is covered by the vaccine?
  • Which brings us to the next step. Yes, they absolutely are pushing the vaccine because the cronies must get rich off it. But will they let you out of mask jail after receiving a dose? Not a chance. They are all openly saying you will need to keep the sacred rituals alive even after having gotten the vaccine and natural immunity.
  • Thus, we have lockdowns and masks, which are so effective … that they can’t work and require a vaccine to do their jobs, but even with a vaccine and natural immunity, they still don’t work, so this charade of mask-wearing must go on! Also, they are so effective that if you don’t wear one, you are almost murdering someone. Never mind the fact that the curve rises and falls at the same time by region, regardless of non-pharmaceutical interventions.
  • Not only haven’t they eased off on the mask religion, even as so many people have gotten the virus and have gotten the vaccine, they are doubling down and tripling down, which in itself is a tacit concession that one mask has failed miserably, as they themselves predicted before the issue became political. What started out as an insane conspiracy theory is now mainstream, with Fauci now floating the idea of the CDC recommending the absurdity of double and triple masking. Never mind that Biden’s own adviser, Dr. Michael Osterholm, explained the obvious fact that this will further weaken the already improperly worn seal on the first mask and further push the aerosols out the sides – all the while magnifying all the physical problems caused by long-term masking.
  • Then again, is wearing two masks outside a clinical setting any more absurd than wearing one? Osterholm himself ridiculed the idea – not in March, but as late as June, after it had already become a religion. He has consistently described in great detail how the cloth and surgical masks are nowhere near effective in blocking an aerosol of microscopic viral particles. So why are we supposed to believe him now that he became Biden’s adviser when he says they do work? And why should we believe Fauci, who says that two masks work when one didn’t work, if Osterholm is saying that two don’t work just like he used to say one doesn’t work, before he became a politician? Are you confused yet?

Here is a transcript of what Osterholm said on June 12 in a video interview with the Midway Chamber of Commerce (beginning at the 39:23 mark):

So all the data we would have say at this point that just masking of itself with a cloth mask, or a surgical mask, surely may reduce the number of particles you put out, big particles, or the big particles you get in, but it’s the little particles that are coming along the sides that are the real problem. And so I’m telling you, I would throw the kitchen sink at this thing if I thought that it would make a difference. Masks are not a major issue, and by the way, in 1918, there were actually some very exhaustive studies done on masks after that, and John Barry, the historian who we work with closely, will tell you not one of them found that they made any difference.

Number two is, just think about this, common sense, this is a group of commonsense people here. The area of the world where geographically we had the most, the highest frequency of mask-wearing as just a social/cultural event was in China, Hubei Province, China, in November and December of last year. Did that mask-wearing have any impact on that emergence of that horrible, horrible city-on-fire situation? I mean, that was one where we had virtually everyone wearing a mask publicly. It didn’t make a difference, and so I only say this because if you want to wear masks, go ahead, feel free. I worry, though, that people who are at risk of having severe disease will take that mask and have now assumed a level of protection that they don’t really have and then put themselves in harm’s way, in a way that they wouldn’t have otherwise. And so there’s a downside to that. Finally, I just find the social/political pressure, you know, today, if you don’t wear a mask, oh my God what a bad person you are, so you know, and unfortunately we’ve now come to make judgments, not on science, but on basically emotions, and I worry about that, because this one’s not kind of a big one. But what if we start saying, okay, all heavy people, we’re going to do this to you because you’re at risk of getting this disease more, or all people who are of this age, we’re going to do this to you because you’re at higher risk? And they can say well, you know, I’m using the same basis for making those recommendations that I made for the masks; maybe it will help. And at some point you just, I’m just a scientist, a poor lowly scientist, I’m just sitting here telling you, you know, the data, you make a decision, how you decide, and I’m telling you right now that I, the masking is not an issue.

Look at those profound concerns he expressed! Every one of them has been proven right today, as the virus spread out of control months after the mandates were in place with a more religious degree of adherence and public shaming than anyone ever thought possible. Why are we to trust him now, when the science behind what he said has actually been proven by every epidemiological curve? How can he go from ridiculing mask-wearing to making it so sacred that we should violate every law of human rights and dignity, including for children, the elderly, and disabled, in order to enforce it?

  • The more information that comes out showing children are in less danger of getting sick from or spreading COVID than the flu, the more they double down on masking children, even during recess and sports. A survey of over 2,000 high school athletes in Minnesota who had to play with masks showed that 80% had a hard time breathing, 52% experienced excessive fatigue, and 48 players report going to an urgent care. Thus, no amount of science or evidence is able to stop this sadistic obsession with masks.
  • Some of you might be wondering what happened to OSHA? Don’t they have standards on PPE wearing in the workplace and safety guidelines dictating the parameters, types, and exemptions of those wearing masks? Well, they have changed their standards. It has long been the policy of OSHA that respirators, such as an N-95s, are the minimum standard for personal protective equipment, as Dr. Osterholm said in June. Now OSHA is requiring employers to force upon their workers unsafe practices that just a year ago would have gotten those employers prosecuted, with OSHA leading the charge.

Where does this leave us? The more the science shows the endless hypocrisy and absurdity of mask-wearing to stop a virus, the more the ruling elites violate the science and their own prior standards and warnings with even greater absurdities. Miraculously, a new pretext always materializes just at the moment they have milked dry the original excuse for mask-wearing. Those goalposts will never remain in place.

The time to stand up and say NO is now. The time to fight back in state legislatures and with ADA lawsuits is now. The time to pull out of public and private schools that engage in this abuse is now. The time to support those businesses that stand up to this evil and boycott Karen businesses is now. As they say, “Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.”

Share
Categories
Biden administration Constitution constitutional republic Coronavirus tyranny Executive Orders Intelwars north dakota

Horowitz: North Dakota legislators introduce bill to block Biden’s illegal executive edicts

“All political power is inherent in the people. Government is instituted for the protection, security and benefit of the people, and they have a right to alter or reform the same whenever the public good may require. ~Sec. 2, North Dakota Declaration of Rights

A group of North Dakota legislators have taken up the call for states to reassert control over the Constitution, as the Biden regime continues to rule by executive fiat, often promulgating unconstitutional orders infringing upon civil rights. This is the key to thwarting a wholesale slide into national despotism and ensuring that there are some places for Americans to go and enjoy the blessings of liberty. The question is whether leaders in those legislative chambers as well as Gov. Doug Burgum will pick up the mantle, not to mention Republicans in other states.

Recently, Rep. Tom Kading and eight other Republicans in the North Dakota House introduced HB 1164, which would task the attorney general with reviewing the constitutionality of the president’s executive orders. If any of his orders are deemed to be unlawful, this bill would prohibit any state or county agency or publicly funded organization from enforcing the edict.

The list of issues covered under the bill are:

  1. Pandemics or other health emergencies.
  2. The regulation of natural resources, including coal and oil.
  3. The regulation of the agriculture industry.
  4. The use of land.
  5. The regulation of the financial sector as it relates to environmental, social, or governance standards.
  6. The regulation of the constitutional right to keep and bear arms.

Thus, an easy first candidate for such legislation is Biden’s recent mask mandate, which unconstitutionally prohibits humans breathing without cloths on their mouths and noses inside any public transportation, including in-state ride-shares and taxis. The CDC created an entire criminal offense for something that never passed Congress.

What if Congress decides to pass a bill that is unconstitutional? HB 1282, introduced by Rep. Sebastian Ertelt, would take this a step farther by proposing a “Committee on Neutralization of Federal Laws” to recommend whether a given law or regulation is unconstitutional. Upon the recommendation of this committee, consisting of state legislative leadership and their appointees, the legislature would pass a concurrent resolution on whether to nullify the law or edict. Until the resolution is passed, state and county agencies would be prohibited from enforcing the law or regulation at issue.

These bills should serve as a model for all 31 GOP-controlled legislatures, especially in the 23 states where there are also Republican governors. I hear so many conservatives acting despondent and either resigned to tyranny or calling for secession or even a civil war. But the solution implied in these bills would keep the union loosely intact while peacefully maintaining a constitutional sanctuary for those who still value constitutional freedoms. This is the best way to peacefully and gradually separate blue and red America into their respective cultural, economic, and governing choices so we can live together more agreeably as a federal union.

North Dakota Republicans control the Senate 40-7 and the House 80-14. If this were a Democrat state passing a sanctuary bill for illegal aliens, the bill would pass in a day. Given that the rights of American citizens are on the line, Senate leaders Randy Burckhard and Rich Wardner should bring this bill to the Senate floor, and Speaker Kim Koppelman should bring the bill to the House floor immediately. North Dakota has an opportunity to lead the nation in liberty, if only all the Republicans in the state would govern the way they campaign.

Madison predicted in Federalist #46 that a federal encroachment would easily be mitigated by state action, because “the means of opposition to it are powerful and at hand.” What is the winning formula?

The disquietude of the people; their repugnance and, perhaps, refusal to co-operate with the officers of the Union; the frowns of the executive magistracy of the State; the embarrassments created by legislative devices, which would often be added on such occasions, would oppose, in any State, difficulties not to be despised; would form, in a large State, very serious impediments; and where the sentiments of several adjoining States happened to be in unison, would present obstructions which the federal government would hardly be willing to encounter.

In other words, public outrage, state and local officials refusing to enforce it, and correspondence with counterparts in other states together in unison would prevail over federal tyranny.

South Dakota already has a similar bill to HB 1164 targeting Biden’s executive lawmaking. Rep. Aaron Aylward of Harrisburg, South Dakota, introduced HB 1194, which would set up an executive board to review the constitutionality of executive orders pertaining to the six issues laid out in the North Dakota legislation. With a 32-3 majority in the Senate and a 62-8 majority in the House, South Dakota Republicans have the strongest majorities since the Eisenhower era. The Dakotas, as well as many other parts of the country, can easily become constitutional sanctuaries.

Additionally, county commissions, prosecutors, and sheriffs should also seek to criminalize enforcement of unconstitutional edicts at the county level.

Let’s be very clear: The Supremacy Clause of the Constitution subordinates states to follow only laws that are pursuant to the Constitution on issues that were given over to the federal government to determine. However, if the federal government blatantly violates the Constitution, especially in a way that harms individual liberty, even Alexander Hamilton, the great supporter of a powerful national government, said that states should ignore it. “It will not follow from this doctrine that acts of the large society which are NOT PURSUANT to its constitutional powers, but which are invasions of the residuary authorities of the smaller societies, will become the supreme law of the land,” wrote Hamilton in Federalist #33. “These will be merely acts of usurpation, and will deserve to be treated as such.”

Well, if it was good enough for Hamilton, it should be good enough for states with strong Republican majorities in the legislature.

There is no doubt that Biden’s presidency will take a bite out of our economy, especially with his cancelation of the international pipeline going through North Dakota. But if tyranny itself takes root and grows within the boundaries of these solid red states, then we as conservatives have nobody to blame but ourselves and our own complacency.

Share
Categories
CDC Coronavirus tyranny Covid-19 vaccine Intelwars Rep thomas massie Thomas Massie

Horowitz: Congressman accuses CDC of misleading the public about need for vaccine for those already recovered from COVID-19

Just how much does our government want to promote the false premise that natural infection with COVID-19 does not convey long-term immunity? Officials appear to want the public to believe that those already infected should get the vaccine just as quickly as those who haven’t gotten the infection, which would likely lead to people who don’t need it using up scarce doses of the vaccine.

Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), having had the virus himself, was perturbed when he noticed a startlingly false statement in the CDC’s “Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices’ Interim Recommendation for Use of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine” published in December with regard to those who have already had the virus. “Consistent high efficacy (?92%) was observed across age, sex, race, and ethnicity categories and among persons with underlying medical conditions, as well as among participants with evidence of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection,” stated the original version of the report, co-authored by over a dozen authors and scientists.

Massie told me he jumped out of his seat upon reading that line, because the CDC was in fact saying that the clinical trial on the Pfizer vaccine proved the vaccine to further advance immunity among those naturally infected just like it does for those without infection. Having already contracted the virus, Massie was appalled that the CDC, in this report and through other campaigns, would be suggesting that he take just as high a priority for the vaccine as someone who doesn’t have any natural immunity.

The congressman was interviewed by Sharyl Attkisson, who reported on Massie’s correspondence with the CDC in his attempt to correct the record. Indeed, no clinical trial has shown that the vaccine furthers one’s immunity after already having had the virus. In fact, among approximately 1,300 people who had prior infections in the Pfizer study (650 in the vaccine group and 650 in the placebo group) there were 10 reinfections in the vaccine group and 9 in the placebo group after the first dose and one in each group after the second dose. Thus, their own trial actually showed zero evidence of the vaccine advancing the degree of immunity beyond that which is conveyed naturally. Some recent studies have already shown that natural infection offers at least as much protection from future infection, especially from serious symptoms, as the vaccine.

This false claim by the CDC cannot be viewed in a vacuum. Attkisson released a transcript of a conversation Massie had with CDC official Dr. Amanda Cohn in which she thanks him profusely for catching the mistake. “I think we read that thing so many times that when, you know, we just skipped right over it,” said Dr. Cohn in the conversation that Massie recorded. “We know we can’t be perfect, we know we’re gonna miss things. You will forever after be known in our office as ‘Eagle-Eyed Man.'”

However, just two days later, Dr. Cohn moderated a panel discussion with medical professionals from the CDC to answer questions about the vaccine. Dr. Sara Oliver of the CDC, the lead author of the guidance with the original mistake about vaccine efficacy for those with prior infection, said clearly during the video conference, “Data from both clinical trials suggests that people with prior infection are still likely to benefit from vaccination.”

The CDC refuses to convey the truth to the public that natural immunity is at least as effective as the vaccine and that no study has ever shown at this point that the vaccine furthers natural immunity. Attkisson reports that for at least a month after Massie’s phone calls with the CDC, the agency refused to change the document. Finally, they corrected the sentence about effectiveness in those with prior infections, but basically restated the false premise that evidence shows effectiveness among those with prior infection.

The updated version from January 29 separated the original sentence into two sentences and reads as follows: “Consistent high efficacy (?92%) was observed across age, sex, race, and ethnicity categories and among persons with underlying medical conditions. Efficacy was similarly high in a secondary analysis including participants both with or without evidence of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection.”

If you are scratching your head wondering how this is a correction, you are not missing anything. Rep. Massie told me in an interview that “these words ‘with or without evidence of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection’ imply that regardless of whether you had COVID or not, this vaccine is proven to be effective.” According to Massie, “this is absolutely not borne out in either the Pfizer or Moderna trials.”

“They are still misleading people, and this time it’s intentional,” said the irate congressman. “This is just a restatement of their mistake; this is not a correction.”

The Moderna vaccine showed similar results to the Pfizer one, with no further efficacy of the vaccine vs. natural infection. For the CDC’s interim recommendation on Moderna, which was written a week later, the CDC indeed made sure to properly and accurately explain the results. “High efficacy (?86%) was observed across age, sex, race, and ethnicity categories and among persons with underlying medical conditions.” The report does not mention those with prior infection, and in fact, in the sentence before, it says explicitly that the effectiveness was “among persons without evidence of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, which was the primary study endpoint” (emphasis added).

So why does the CDC still refuse to accurately publish the Pfizer recommendation in accordance with the results from the clinical trial, and why are officials still refusing to publicize the benefits of natural immunity and caution against prioritizing those who were already infected? Either the powers that be in Big Pharma don’t want to lose their customer base, given that over 100 million people likely contracted the virus already, or our government wants to continue peddling panic and fear forever with no expiration date by misleading people to think they will always be at risk for serious illness from a relapse of COVID. Which is perhaps why officials are demanding that the human rights violations continue even after we receive the vaccine itsself – a vaccine that they claim is more effective than natural immunity.

Share
Categories
Coronavirus tyranny COVID-19 Intelwars Mask mandates Masks School lockdown Schools coronavirus

Horowitz: Norwegian study shows very little transmission in school without masks, as suicide crisis intensifies

Shutting down schools or forcing kids to wear masks – either one is likely the greatest crime ever committed against children under the most false pretenses imaginable. New research continues to show that schools are not drivers of spread, not to mention the fact that the virus is not dangerous to children. Meanwhile, children continue to commit suicide in record numbers. This is the evil cost of adult virtue-signaling.

A brand-new study of transmission in Norwegian primary schools from August through November published by the Norwegian Public Institute of Health showed minimal child-to-child and child-to-adult transmission. “This prospective study shows that transmission of SARS-CoV-2 from children under 14 years of age was minimal in primary schools in Oslo and Viken, the two Norwegian counties with the highest COVID-19 incidence and in which 35% of the Norwegian population resides,” concluded the researchers.

Despite systematic testing of all the 234 child contacts twice during quarantine of those children infected, just two primary cases and no secondary cases were identified. Also, among the 58 adult contacts of the infected children, just one primary case and no secondary cases were detected. All the children involved in the study were ages 5-13.

Here’s the kicker: While the reopening of the schools included measures such as “strengthened hygiene measures, physical distancing and a clear message to stay home if symptomatic, even with mild symptoms,” there was one major element missing. “Use of face masks is not recommended in schools in Norway,” according to this study.

The study further contradicted the notion that somehow teachers are more at risk than people from other professions, a false premise that has led to some states prioritizing the vaccination of young teachers over elderly non-teachers. “This supports findings in Sweden, the Netherlands and Norway that teachers are not at higher risk of COVID-19 compared with other professions,” wrote the Norwegian researchers.

It is truly shocking how consistent the data have been for months that children are not a threat of spreading the virus, yet the politicians have continued to keep children out of school. Well, at least until now – that Trump is out of office. Suddenly, most Democrat politicians, who now have an incentive not to saddle the Biden regime with a bad economy, are pushing for children to return to school. However, conservatives need to be vigilant about the left co-opting what it means to open schools. Opening schools while needlessly masking children for seven hours a day and constantly living in a state of fear might not be much better than keeping schools closed.

Now that Trump is out of office, it’s kosher for outlets like CNN and the NYT to begin reporting on the child suicide crisis. CNN reported last week that in Texas, 37 students were admitted to a Fort Worth hospital following suicide attempts in September alone and that 19 students in Las Vegas actually committed suicide. The Anchorage Daily News is reporting that one Alaska clinic saw a 173% increase in admission of children with severe injuries due to suspected child abuse last year. Suicides are now the leading cause of death in England. You no longer need to go to conservative websites to discover the truth about the mental health crisis triggered by lockdowns.

The gratuitous panic and fear embodied by masking and other draconian measures are destroying the mental health of an entire generation. Even in Florida, where people are freer than in most parts of the country, a recent report shows that suicide was more deadly to the under-55 population in Tallahassee than the virus itself.

The masking, aside from the long-term harms to child development and communications, is the single biggest reminder for kids to live in fear. Opening schools with masking is not proper schooling; it’s a concentration camp. Teachers would have been sent to jail a year ago for suggesting such an idea. We should not jump on the first opportunity just to open schools at all costs and forget about the conditions to which they are subjecting the children.

The same data that show there is no meaningful viral threat from schoolchildren demonstrate that they need not be masked. Not only is the virus not a threat to children, nor are they a threat of spreading it in school, but this year’s flu cases are down 99.5%. As such, there has never been a safer time for children to be in school, even relative to every other year in recent history. Republican governors shouldn’t let Democrats insidiously co-opt the talking point of reopening schools now that Trump is gone. It’s time to force them to reopen schools without the child abuse. The mask religion should not be exempt from following the science.

Share