Authored by James E. Fanell and Bradley A. Thayer via American Greatness,

It has been decades in the making, but the country is now on the precipice between its traditional ideology of political liberalism and a path that will lead, far sooner than Americans might think, to totalitarianism. The historical bulwarks of Americanism and the American political system—government of the people, freedom, and liberty—have been deliberately eroded. A citizenry steeped in republican virtue, cognizant of the political ideas and principles that made America a lasting and strong constitutional republic, and knowledgeable about the duties and obligations of American citizenship have been under daily assault for years from the foreign ideology of communism. That odious ideology has operated under synonyms such as “progressivism,” “multiculturalism,” or DEI to make its poison more palatable to American audiences.

The media—the so-called “Fourth Estate”—has been another layer of protection that has been peeled away. Today, they are activists advancing the left’s agenda in all but name. Great newspapers that were lively to read and informative are no longer. One reads them now the same way Soviet citizens used to read Pravda—only by knowing the lies that are printed and surmising what is left out of the story can one come close to knowing the truth. Compare the front page of the New York Times from fifty, forty, or thirty years ago to one today, and the change is telling and sad to see. Rather than a robust culture of free speech, censorship is pervasive by the legacy and social media, Big Tech, and by a ubiquitous and devilish culture of self-censorship.

American universities were once the envy of the world, as lively academies of intellectual debate and devoted to the pursuit of knowledge are now factories of indoctrination. Their law, medical, engineering, and business schools have also been transformed into political instruments that advance the “Party Line.” Unbelievably, thought control in K-12 is even worse. Popular culture fell a long time ago, and most of it is simply a contemporary version of Soviet entertainment where the heroic worker and peasant defeat the evil capitalist and priest. Worse still is the promotion of degeneracy and decadence with gender reassignment led by a teacher’s union that more resembles a Clockwork Orange ensemble than as the protectors of the most vulnerable in our society—our children.

As alarming as these developments are, what is worse is the permanent weaponization of government against political opponents. The raids, indictments, trials, and gag orders for a former president and leading 2024 candidate demonstrate that the Constitutional rights of the most prominent political figure in American politics in this century can have his rights violated, so too can all Americans. The lawfare employed against President Trump has been specifically designed by the left to consume his time and other resources away from his campaign for President in this critically important election year.

Of course, it is not only Trump. The imprisonment of former Trump official Peter Navarro and perhaps of Trump advisor Steve Bannon is an attempt to decapitate the Make America Great Again Movement through their imprisonment and to send a message to others about what will happen to anyone who opposes the state. The persecution of Trump’s legal advisor, John Eastman, is a similar tactic. The result is that law firms will be reluctant to accept the movement’s legal challenges. These actions are the first strike in the left’s campaign of “lawfare” to disarm Trump and to deter any Republican challenge to the parameters of the election and its aftermath. It is also political muscle flexing in an attempt to intimidate anyone who would assist Trump’s campaign and an effort to demoralize his base. After the British executed Admiral John Byng in 1757, Voltaire wrote it was “to encourage the others,” and so it is today.

The irony of the many steps taken by the left to advance a totalitarian agenda is that it is they who falsely proclaim that it is Trump and the MAGA movement that are the fascists. It is the left that is actually implementing such vile and anti-American practices against their political enemies and the American people. Recently, former 2016 presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton was once again on the Sunday news shows talking about how Donald Trump would arrest his political enemies, while in reality it is only the Democratic Party and the Biden administration that have put Peter Navarro in prison, may imprison Bannon, and indicted the former President 92 times.

This cannot stand if America is to survive as a constitutional republic. If it does, then the country is on the path to totalitarianism. Totalitarianism does not just show up one day, springing forth fully formed like Athena from the head of Zeus. But it does come quickly, more so than most Americans realize, as the ideology, laws, norms, and culture are eroded by the new revolutionary regime. When they seized power in 1917, the Bolsheviks did not know how far they could push the Russian people, but that was not for lack of intent or for a lack trying. Their ambition was to remake everything—culture, politics, economics, the arts, science, diplomacy, education, values, and thought. Every year, they tightened their grip until they crushed the people in the horrors of Stalinism. It took only twenty years from the time the Bolsheviks came to power to the show trials of mature Stalinism.

Nothing is decided and there will be many ups and downs, twists and turns, and surprises between now and Election Day. The election of 2024 is critical and as important as any in its history. Assuming the election’s fidelity—that this assumption must be made is an indication of how close the country is flirting with totalitarianism—it will provide Americans with the clearest choice in our history since the Civil War. When that choice is understood to be one between the continuation of the American Republic or to enter the hell of totalitarianism, the election will spark a renaissance of America’s traditional political ideology, institutions, values and culture. This election provides the opportunity to drive a stake through the heart of totalitarianism “with an American face,” as Americans, having seen into the abyss, will reject the totalitarian path. A re-birth of the understanding of the value of American citizenship—that spirit of 1776—and of our inalienable and universal freedoms can come from the 2024 election.

To ensure that positive outcome will require not only support for President Trump but also extraordinary vigilance by the American people through the election and its aftermath.

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

A court has rejected a hospital system’s claim that its refusal to continue giving ivermectin to a dying woman was covered by federal law, stating that the law does not apply to the actions in question.

Mount Sinai South Nassau in New York City was twice forced to give COVID-19 patient Deborah Bucko, who was close to death after the system’s normal treatment failed, ivermectin under court order. Mrs. Bucko’s condition improved after she began taking ivermectin.

However, the system stopped the second round of treatment before the prescription ended, and Mrs. Bucko then died.

After being sued, Mount Sinai said the lawsuit should be thrown out because it’s immune under the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP Act), which covers health care workers administering drugs and vaccines during a health emergency, such as the COVID-19 pandemic.

“There is no refuting that the complaint is a frontal attack on the use of COVID-19 countermeasures as defined by the PREP Act,” lawyers for the hospital system said in a filing. “The complaint expressly implicates conduct encompassed by the PREP Act by alleging a claim for loss that has a causal relationship with the dispensing and administration of covered countermeasures to treat COVID-19. As such, the law requires its dismissal.”

The act has been successfully invoked in a range of COVID-19-related cases. Workers who injected a child with a COVID-19 vaccine without parental consent, for instance, recently won the dismissal of a lawsuit by citing the law.

The motion to dismiss by Mount Sinai, though, was rejected by New York Supreme Court Justice Randy Sue Marber.

Justice Marber wrote in a May 17 order that Mount Sinai, its workers, and ivermectin, fit under the definitions of “covered person” and “covered countermeasure” under the law. But the suit against the system does not bring a claim relating to the use of ivermectin to treat COVID-19, she said.

“Rather, in stunning contrast to South Nassau’s assertions, the complaint alleges, with particularity, that South Nassau ‘acted wrongfully and negligently, by repeatedly refusing to administer ivermectin to … [the decedent]’ notwithstanding it ‘having been prescribed” … and ’despite clear evidence in the medical records that … [the decedent’s] condition showed significant improvement once the ivermectin treatment was initiated,’” the justice said, quoting from the complaint.

That means the immunity conferred by PREP “is inapplicable,” she added later.

The ruling means the case will move forward. The next hearing is scheduled to take place on June 3.

“Scott and I are extremely pleased that the judge denied the hospital’s motion and has given us a fighting chance to obtain justice for Debbie,” Steven Warshawsky, a lawyer representing Scott Mantel, Mrs. Bucko’s husband, told The Epoch Times via email.

Mount Sinai did not respond to a request for comment.

Federal regulators say people should not take ivermectin against COVID-19, although a number of doctors have said patients who received the drug, approved by regulators for other uses, have recovered quickly. Some studies have found evidence of a benefit, while others have not.

Background

Mr. Mantel sued Mount Sinai in 2023, alleging the hospital system violated a law that enables representatives of decedents to sue over “wrongful act, neglect or default causing [the] death of [the] decedent.”

According to the suit, after being admitted to Mount Sinai with suspected COVID-19, Mrs. Bucko’s condition was not improved by the system’s standard treatment protocols, including supplemental oxygen. She was ultimately placed on a ventilator.

Mr. Mantel researched alternative treatments and read about how some patients recovered after being treated with ivermectin. He learned that the Front Line Covid-19 Critical Care Alliance features ivermectin in its COVID-19 treatment protocol.

Mr. Mantel presented what he had learned to doctors at Mount Sinai. Dr. Robert Clark, one of the doctors, said that he was “all out of bullets” and that ivermectin might be able to help Mrs. Bucko. He wrote a prescription on April 7, 2021, for five days. Mount Sinai’s pharmacy department, though, placed the prescription on hold and the system’s stewardship committee rescinded the prescription.

Mr. Mantel took the matter to court, resulting in an order to immediately start giving Mrs. Bucko ivermectin.

After being treated with ivermectin, Mrs. Bucko’s condition improved, according to the suit. The initial prescription ended, and her recovery stalled. Mr. Mantel went back to Dr. Clark, who was said to have acknowledged ivermectin helped Mrs. Bucko get better and could keep helping her improve. He wrote another prescription, this time for 35 days.

The hospital rescinded the prescription again, prompting the family to seek legal redress. The system was ordered again to enforce the prescription.

Mrs. Bucko improved further with the second round of ivermectin, but the system changed the prescription and stopped administering it after five days. Dr. Clark also informed Mr. Mantel he was being prevented from writing any additional ivermectin prescriptions.

Once Mrs. Bucko stopped receiving ivermectin, her condition deteriorated, her family says. She died on on May 16, 2021.

Mount Sinai “committed medical malpractice and/or otherwise acted wrongfully and negligently, by repeatedly refusing to administer ivermectin to Ms. Bucko, who was suffering from severe COVID-19 illness that was not responding to the hospital’s standard treatment protocols, despite the ivermectin having been prescribed by her treating infectious disease doctor … and despite clear evidence in the medical records that Ms. Bucko’s condition showed significant improvement once the ivermectin treatment was initiated,” the suit stated.

The family is seeking damages as determined by the court and a jury.

“This fight is not just about Deborah and our family, but also for ALL Americans that will one day need a hospital to treat them,” family members said in a fundraiser. “What happened to Deborah must never ever be allowed to happen again, and those responsible for her tragic death must be held accountable.

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,

Several Republicans are calling for Joe Biden to undergo drug testing before taking part in the presidential debates with Donald Trump scheduled for June and September.

South Carolina Senator Tom Scott was asked to comment on the issue on Fox News’ “Sunday Morning Futures” and responded “Why not?” when asked if substance tests should be carried out. 

“The truth of the matter is if you saw the State of the Union and you watched that performance, it was surreal,” Scott noted of Biden’s speech in March.

“There was something going on, and if we could find the truth of what it was, we’re all better off,” Scott added.

Tim Scott to Maria Bartiromo on Trump: “He doesn’t need a teleprompter!” (Complaining about his teleprompter is something Trump does almost every speech … ) pic.twitter.com/XPy7QgNDGI

— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) May 19, 2024

“If it takes artificial stimulation to make the President of the United States perform, how often can he do that?” The Senator further pondered.

Representative Anna Paulina Luna of Florida also called for Biden to be drug tested, noting “We’re talking about someone who has the ability to launch nukes.”

There should be required drugs tests before the debates.
pic.twitter.com/ugsi2nFfo7

— Anna Paulina Luna (@realannapaulina) May 19, 2024

Luna also referred to questions over Biden’s mental competence following the comments of former special counsel Robert Hur who described Biden as an “elderly man with a poor memory.”

North Carolina Representative Greg Murphy, who is also a trained surgeon, commented that Biden “must have been jacked up on something” during the SOTU speech.

“I absolutely believe that from a medical viewpoint, actually I have a little bit of good knowledge that that happened,” Murphy asserted, adding that Biden “can’t stand it. He can’t stand under the lights for that long. And I don’t think he can keep a concept in his brain that long.”

“What do you mean when you say he was jacked up?” Republican Rep. Greg Murphy, who is a practicing surgeon, claims President Biden was under the influence of some kind of performance enhancer during his State of the Union address…and Murphy has “evidence”. (Video: Fox Business) pic.twitter.com/zdQumaobJy

— Mike Sington (@MikeSington) May 16, 2024

Trump himself has called for Biden to take a drug test, noting “I don’t want him coming in like the State of the Union. He was high as a kite.”

🚨Trump says he is going to demand Biden take a drug test for the debate because Biden was “high as a kite” during the SOTU! 🪁 pic.twitter.com/dbnWB5pWFK

— Jenna Fredo (@LynkLuv) May 18, 2024

“I said is that Joe up there? … And by the end of the evening … he was exhausted, right? No, we’re going to demand a drug test,” Trump added.

The proposal has moved further into the spotlight spurred by a bizarre video that circulated Friday of Biden wide eyed and looking completely different to his usual squint while making a short recorded statement.

What is going on here? https://t.co/CXDJireFWe

— m o d e r n i t y (@ModernityNews) May 19, 2024

As we have highlighted, Biden has agreed to take part in only two debates, despite Trump accepting two more proposals from Fox News and NBC/Telemundo, and calling for further debates to be scheduled.

Vivek Ramaswamy believes that the Democrats are allowing Biden one last “Hail Mary” by allowing him to participate in a debate against Donald Trump, but that if he fails, as he inevitably will, they will swap him out for a new candidate.

*  *  *

Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews.

Authored by Jeff Louderback via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

An early campaign promise Robert F. Kennedy Jr. made when he was still running in the Democrat primary last year has seen a stern test in recent weeks amid his comment that he supported abortion up to full term.

Mr. Kennedy told The Epoch Times last August that he preferred to have advisers and team members who don’t fully share his views and, as a candidate and president, he would listen to differing opinions and even change his mind if presented with a convincing argument.

In May, a podcast interview with Sage Steele created a firestorm where Mr. Kennedy received a widespread backlash.

He said that women should be able to terminate their pregnancy “even if it’s full term.”

The comment drew criticism from pro-life groups and multiple people within his campaign.

Marjorie Dannenfelser, president of Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, said in a statement that Mr. Kennedy “has exposed himself as a true extremist” who “is no different from Joe Biden and Kamala Harris when it comes to supporting brutal abortions at any time for no reason, even when babies in the womb feel pain, with zero limits or exceptions.”

Angela Stanton King, a pro-life advocate and an adviser to Mr. Kennedy’s campaign, has contributed insight on black voter outreach, and criminal justice and abortion policies.

She denounced the candidate’s view on backing full-term abortion on social media.

Nicole Shanahan, Mr. Kennedy’s running mate, sat down for a talk with Ms. Steele that was released a week before Mr. Kennedy’s interview aired.

Ms. Shanahan said that she was unaware that the candidate did not support limits on abortion.

“My understanding with Bobby’s position is that, you know, every abortion is a tragedy, is a loss of life,” Ms. Shanahan said, adding that she thought that he believed in limits on abortion and, perhaps, there was a miscommunication in his interview.

A day after the interview with Sage Steele aired, Mr. Kennedy reiterated his early campaign promise that he would “always be willing to listen to people and change my position.”

“I support the emerging consensus that abortion should be unrestricted up until a certain point.

“I believe that point should be when the baby is viable outside the womb.

“Therefore, I would allow appropriate restrictions on abortion in the final months of pregnancy, just as Roe v. Wade did,” he wrote on X.

He noted that “even in the reddest of red states, voters reject total abortion bans.”

Mr. Kennedy has stressed that he does not like abortion, but he said he does not trust the government “to have jurisdiction over people’s bodies.”

That stance aligns with Mr. Kennedy’s longtime support for medical freedom and bodily autonomy.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, he attracted public attention with his vocal opposition to vaccine and mask mandates.

Mr. Kennedy finished his post by describing a proposed policy called “More Choices, More Life,” which he believes will reduce abortion by supporting women who want to give birth.

The platform features a plan for universally affordable childcare that will cap childcare expenses at 10 percent for most families.

Almost three-quarters of women cite economic reasons to explain why they chose to abort a pregnancy, Mr. Kennedy explained.

He vowed that his administration would “support women in need so that abortion isn’t their only choice.”

Ms. King praised Mr. Kennedy for the adjustment.

“After a bunch of going back and forth, and not only by me, but also people on the campaign, we’ve all come to the agreement that late-term abortion is not something that this campaign is going to support,” she said in a video posted on X.

“This is what you get when you begin to work in the independent space,” she added, noting that the campaign is composed of conservatives, Democrats, and Libertarians; and people who are for and against abortion.

Mr. Kennedy announced his candidacy to challenge President Joe Biden for the 2024 nomination in April 2023.

Claiming that the Democratic National Committee was “rigging the primary” to favor President Biden, he decided to run as an independent last October.

Ms. King remarked that the campaign team has members with varying views, but they work to find “the best solution.”

Mr. Kennedy and Ms. Shanahan do not fully agree on the abortion issue.

His position differs from Ms. Shanahan’s in that he believes the cutoff should be at fetal viability.

However, both are aligned with the emerging national consensus of no restrictions up until a certain point and restrictions thereafter, Stefanie Spear told The Epoch Times in a statement.

Many medical professionals believe fetal viability occurs at 23 to 24 weeks of gestation.

Ms. Shanahan said in a podcast interview last week that the preferred limits on abortion move “between 15 and 18 weeks.”

In previous conversations with The Epoch Times, Mr. Kennedy has acknowledged that his position on the issue could cost him conservative votes.

“If you’re a one-issue voter, and that’s something that you deeply care about, I might not be the right candidate for you.

“But I feel like there’s a lot of people now who want authenticity in their political leadership, and they want somebody who’s going to tell them the truth,” he told The Epoch Times last year.

Most Americans base their votes on a range of issues and are most concerned about the direction of the country, Mr. Kennedy believes.

“I will talk to people regardless of their views and will assure them that I will listen to them, even if they don’t vote for me,” he told The Epoch Times.

“I want to talk to media members and voters who share differing opinions than mine, because how else are you going to persuade?”

Abortion is not the first stance Mr. Kennedy has changed during his presidential campaign, which was launched as a Democrat in April 2023 before he opted to run as an independent last October.

Mr. Kennedy said that, initially, he wasn’t in favor of President Trump’s border wall.

But after seeing the border firsthand in Arizona last July, he changed his mind.

He said there’s a need for increased infrastructure and technology at the border, including more segments of a physical wall and sensors in areas where a wall isn’t feasible.

Theo Wilson, an adviser to Mr. Kennedy’s presidential bid, said at a voter rally in Colorado on May 19 that “it’s impossible” to see eye to eye on everything in an independent campaign.

Mr. Wilson remarked that he did not agree with the candidate on some issues, “but this is not like any other campaign when the people they’re in are expected to be just mouthpieces” of their candidate.

“In an independent campaign like the size of this one, you’re going to have to sit across the table and hammer out agreements.

“You got to sit there like adults and figure out a path forward, and the one who sets the tone for that is Robert F. Kennedy Jr.”

Shocking footage from Iowa this evening shows multiple tornadoes wreaking havoc on massive wind turbines. This is yet another reminder that wind is not a reliable power source. 

A tornado in Iowa just leveled a wind turbine. 🤯

These storms are heading to Illinois and Wisconsin next.

Be safe tonight, everyone. pic.twitter.com/KvH1cAq07f

— Art Candee 🍿🥤 (@ArtCandee) May 21, 2024

Here’s the aftermath.

Apocalyptic scenes between Carbon and Greenfield, Iowa. Multiple wind turbines completely shredded, one on fire, power pole stumps left behind with entire poles gone. Strong strong tornado. pic.twitter.com/POvHZf5QXL

— Andrew Pritchard (@skydrama) May 21, 2024

Aerial video shows wind turbines destroyed near Adams County, Iowa, after a tornado moved through the area.

We’re LIVE with aftermath: https://t.co/1pcOhXr9Jb @CharlesPeekWX pic.twitter.com/V9vYIxqK9k

— The Weather Channel (@weatherchannel) May 21, 2024

Tornado ripped down multiple wind turbines and left one in flames. Drone video captured by @JordanHallWX shows impact craters almost 6 feet deep north of Prescott, Iowa.#iawx #wxtwitter pic.twitter.com/GGPDSHzk59

— MyRadar Weather (@MyRadarWX) May 22, 2024

Two months ago, a solar farm in Texas with hundreds of acres of ground-based panels was destroyed by a hail storm.  

Despite the evident challenges and risks, radical leftists continue pouring billions of dollars of taxpayer funds into unreliable green energy. 

… and perfect timing! “Twisters,” a standalone sequel to the 1996 film “Twister,” is set to debut this summer. 

From coffee to cocoa, orange juice to gold, and silver to copper, commodity prices are spiking across the board (we outlined this on Monday). The latest surge occurred Tuesday when aluminum tagged 23-month highs due to ongoing production issues emerging from Australia. The broad-based commodity rally signals the inflation storm central bankers are battling is not over. 

Rio Tinto, one of the largest aluminum producers, declared force majeure on third-party contracts for exporting alumina from its refineries in Queensland, Australia. This is due to a broken natural gas pipeline operated by Queensland Gas Pipeline. 

A spokesperson for the company told Dow Jones that NatGas supplies will return to capacity at a much later date than previously anticipated: 

“The pipeline operator’s current estimate [is] for a return to normal levels in the second half of 2024. 

“Until then, Yarwun and QAL [Queensland Alumina Limited] will continue to operate at lower capacities.”

On the London Metal Exchange, aluminum contracts settled up 3.6% at $2,725.50 a metric ton, the highest level since early summer 2022. 

Colin Hamilton, managing director for commodities research at BMO Capital Markets, told Bloomberg that today’s price action in aluminum markets suggests mounting fears about “dwindling aluminum output” — a situation he views as “unlikely.”

Hamilton noted that industrial metal could be “part of the digital and electrical revolution we know is coming … is going to benefit.” We call this “The Next AI Trade.”

One base metal that has been on everyone’s radars is copper. Comex prices have squeezed to record highs and continue on Tuesday. 

Since February, industrial metals tracked by Bloomberg have soared 30%. 

Precious metals tracked by Bloomberg have also broken out. 

Commodities as a whole, tracked by Bloomberg, have soared. 

Bloomberg’s Cameron Crise pointed out that the number of commodities in the Bloomberg Commodity Index that are up by at least 25% over the three month period have risen to seven. 

Crise continues:

Currently, there are seven: cocoa, copper, nickel, orange juice, silver, tin, and zinc. Clearly industrial metals are a theme in that list, which itself raises the question of how valid some of the global growth concerns might be. Anyhow, the current total of seven is the highest since the middle of 2022; coincidentally (or not), the industrial metals subindex total return is also the highest since the same point in time.

He added:

Obviously, over long periods of time the link between the series above and inflation isn’t necessarily that great; the highest-ever reading came in 2009 with the correction of the GFC downside overshoot in commodity prices. Still, the relatively broad-based rise in industrial metals is noteworthy and raises another question about just how benign the inflation outlook might be moving forwards.

The hot commodity market is posing new challenges for Fed chair Jerome Powell and his friends in the White House… 

Authored by Amie Dahnke via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

Microplastics have been identified in human and canine testicles, lengthening the list of where the insidious particles have been found.

A new study published in Toxicological Sciences revealed the incredible prevalence of microplastics worldwide and their ability to penetrate nearly every part of the body.

Microplastics form when plastic is exposed to sunlight or other ultraviolet radiation and slowly degrades in landfills, the ocean, or other places. They are so small (measured in micro- or nanometers, or a billionth of a meter) that they can also be blown around by the wind and carried into waterways.

Human Samples Had Triple the Microplastics

A team of researchers at the University of New Mexico (UNM) examined testicular tissue samples from humans and dogs and found these microscopic pieces of plastic were present in every sample. The human samples were supplied by the New Mexico Office of the Medical Investigator, which collects tissues during autopsies, and the canine samples came from the City of Albuquerque animal shelters and private veterinary clinics that spay and neuter animals.

The researchers didn’t expect to find microplastics in the reproductive system—at least, not to this degree.

“When I first received the results for dogs I was surprised,” Dr. Xiaozhong “John” Yu, a professor at the UNM College of Nursing and lead researcher, said in a press release. “I was even more surprised when I received the results for humans.”

The research team found nearly three times the amount of microplastics in the human samples compared to the canine samples. There were 122.63 micrograms of microplastics per gram of tissue in the canine samples and 329.44 micrograms per gram in the human.

The team found 12 types of microplastics in 47 canine samples and 23 human samples. The most prevalent polymer, or plastic, in both types of tissue was polyethylene (PE), which is used to make plastic bags and bottles. The next most common polymer in dogs was PVC, which is often used in different kinds of plumbing.

Dr. Yu and his team believe that the level of microplastics could correlate with reproductive issues. The team determined the sperm count in the canine samples and found that the higher the level of PVC in the tissue, the lower the sperm count was. However, the correlation was not found with the concentration of PE in tissue.

“The plastic makes a difference—what type of plastic might be correlated with potential function,” Dr. Yu said. “PVC can release a lot of chemicals that interfere with spermatogenesis and it contains chemicals that cause endocrine disruption.”

Why Dogs?

The study compared dogs and humans because the two often share an environment, as well as some biological characteristics.

“Compared to rats and other animals, dogs are closer to humans,” Dr. Yu said.

He noted that dogs and humans produce sperm in very similar ways and that the sperm concentration is also comparable between the two species.

“We believe dogs and humans share common environmental factors that contribute to their decline,” he said.

One of those environmental factors is microplastics, which are found worldwide, including on the top of Mt. Everest.

“The impact on the younger generation might be more concerning,” Dr. Yu said, pointing to men 35 years old and younger. “We have a lot of unknowns. We need to really look at what the potential long-term effect [sic]. Are microplastics one of the factors contributing to this decline?”

Dr. Yu added that, while he doesn’t want to scare anyone, he thinks it is important to make people aware that their choices have consequences.

“We want to scientifically provide the data and make people aware there are a lot of microplastics. We can make our own choices to better avoid exposures, change our lifestyle and change our behavior,” he said.

Authored by Jack Cashill via AmericanThinker.com,

Jan 6 / COVID Stir The Fascist Soul of The Educated Liberal Female

In researching my new book, Ashli: The Untold Story of the Women of January 6, I discovered something unexpected: an alarming confirmation of my September 2022 article in which I argued that Educated Liberal Females (ELFs) are the single greatest threat to our enduring liberties.

My new book deals specifically with the ELF’s natural foes, the women of January 6.

Among the ten women I profile is Dr. Simone Gold. Even before getting caught up in the events of that memorable day, Dr. Gold had set the ELFs on edge through her work with America’s Frontline Doctors, a group she founded.

An M.D. as well as a lawyer, Dr. Gold, 55 at the time, went to Washington not to protest the election but to address the issue of medical freedom. She had secured a permit to speak at a venue on the east side of the Capitol, but when organizers cancelled the event, Gold decided to give the speech on the Capitol steps. The daughter of a Holocaust survivor, she did not readily surrender her right to speak freely.

Standing at the top of the steps on the Capitol’s east side, Gold got swept into the building when the doors opened from the inside, and the crowd surged forward. Finding her way to the rotunda, Dr. Gold stood on the base of a statue to speak. Someone passed her a bullhorn, and several people came over to listen. Following her five-minute speech, she took questions. After twenty or so uneventful minutes in the Capitol, Gold exited the building, having seen no violence or vandalism.

Along with 1200 or so other citizens, Dr. Gold was hunted down by the FBI in the most sweeping series of arrests on American soil since the notorious Palmer raids of a century ago.

Twelve days after January 6, roughly 20 agents came knocking at her Los Angeles door with a battering ram.

“They arrested me,” she told Tucker Carlson. 

“They [yell], ‘put your hands up, put your hands up, face the wall, face the wall,’ they’re screaming, ‘face the wall’ — handcuffed, shackled, take me downtown, orange suit, strip search, holding cell, fluorescent lights, — it was terrible — no phone call, no Miranda rights.”

Threatened with a 20-year sentence if she took her case to trial before a rubber-stamp D.C. jury, Gold reluctantly accepted a plea deal. For a single misdemeanor charge, she was sentenced to 60 days at the Miami Federal Detention Center, a maximum-security prison. This was an unusually severe punishment for a single misdemeanor, even by January 6 standards.  

On March 9, 2022 the New York Times celebrated Gold’s impending imprisonment in an article headlined, “A doctor prominent in fomenting opposition to Covid vaccines pleads guilty to riot charges.” The article’s subhead described America’s Front Line Doctors as “a group that spreads pandemic misinformation.” That same subhead claimed Gold “stood by as a Capitol Police officer was assaulted.” Video released after the fact would show that the officer fainted and was helped back up to his feet by the protestors. The prosecution knew this at the time of Gold’s plea deal — the officer had admitted as much to the FBI — but she did not.

When the Times posted the plea deal story on its Facebook page, America’s frontline Karens queued up to take a whack at the Gold piñata. For the researcher, Facebook is a useful and easily mined resource. All those who comment have a Facebook page in their own name, and on that page is enough personal information to assess, in general terms, the person’s background. The article elicited more than a thousand comments.

The first 19 people to post an original comment were female, all of them hostile. A supportive male broke the streak. Of the first 50 people, 42 were female. Of that 42, two more or less defended Gold, but the other 40 met the general definition of an ELF. These are New York Times readers after all. The comments of the 40 were uniformly negative. Of note, some expressed as much anger at Dr. Gold’s Covid skepticism as they did her designation as insurrectionist. Some samples:

Take her medical license… she should be held to a higher standard…. throw the book at her… she is a danger to others and the public health.

Apparently that “first do no harm” thing didn’t take. #quack

Glad to see she is no longer practicing, can’t imagine her taking care of people when she doesn’t trust science.

Honestly she should lose her medical license for intentionally spreading so much misinformation. In this kind of scenario she very likely could have caused lives to be lost.

Suspend her license — She is a threat to her patients. 

Given the number of people who have died from her COVID lies, she should be facing more serious charges.

She should be charged for the deaths of anyone who believed her. And she should lose her license for spreading lies about medical information. She totally violated her oath to do NO harm.

NYTIMES Stop referring to her as a doctor. She is not one of us.

Too bad she doesn’t live in Russia where she could get 15 years in jail for misinformation.

Thinking the Russia comment might have been made in jest, I reviewed the commenter’s home page. She wasn’t joking. Her past comments showed symptoms of an irony deficiency epidemic in the ELF community. Other ELFs saw Dr. Gold not only as a quack, but also as a traitor. They proved equally as ignorant about January 6 as they did about Covid and just as vengeful.

She should serve at lest 25 years for this insurrection and trying to destroy democracy! Why are we so lenient with this terrorists!!??

Go get them all !!!!!! Enough is enough and this has gone on too long. Just like the horrendous amount of time it is taking to make #45 pay for his crimes. #45, his family and his cult MUST be brought to justice for the damage they did to American democracy, citizens and place in the world.

Hope she sees time behind bars.

Sick & tired of misdemeanor charges for these people who tried to overthrow our government.

She should lose her medical license, not only for the misinformation she was spreading but especially for not attending to the fallen & injured officers of that despicable riot! 

I hope in future someone researching our odd and precarious times will be able to assess the harm that has been done to American citizens and others by conspiracy theory promoters.

The ELFs, it should be noted, left these unforgiving comments two years after the onset of the pandemic. By this time, they should have known they had been deceived about Covid’s origins, the efficacy of masks, the value of the vaccines, the effectiveness of lockdowns, the lasting harm to schoolchildren, and the dangers of the disease itself.

If proof were needed of this deception, a survey done by Franklin Templeton-Gallup in late 2020 provided it. In the survey of 35,000 Americans, the most revealing indicator came in response to the question: “What percentage of people who have been infected by the coronavirus needed to be hospitalized?”

The responding Democrats proved scarily clueless.

Some 41 percent believed that 50 percent or more of those who contracted Covid would end up in the hospital.

Another 28 percent said that 20-50 percent of Covid sufferers would be hospitalized.

The correct answer was 1-5 percent, an answer Republicans were nearly three times as likely to get right.

In sum, 69 percent of Democrats were deeply misinformed and 41 percent were grossly misinformed.

The ignorance infected even the most powerful ELFs.

At a January 2022 hearing on vaccine mandates, Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor observed, “We have over 100,000 children, which we’ve never had before, in serious condition, and many on ventilators.” As the CNN fact checker had to admit, the self-described “wise Latina” overstated the numbers by a factor of at least twenty.

“It was as if these communities were in the grip of a collective hallucination,” erstwhile feminist icon Naomi Wolf writes of her former allies in her book The Bodies of Others, “like the witch crazes of the sixteen and seventeenth century. Whole understandings and belief systems were abandoned overnight. Intelligent, informed people suddenly saw things that were not there and unable to see things that were incontrovertibly before their faces.”

Dr. Gold was punished for being right. To this day, she defies her critics to find anything that she said about COVID that has proved to be untrue. “The anger against me is so aggressive,” she believes, “because they think I betrayed my social class.” Like other religious zealots, ELFs have no tolerance for apostates.

*  *  *

Jack Cashill’s newest book, Ashli: The Untold Story of the Women of January 6, is now available for purchase. Ebook and audiobook versions to follow shortly.

Leaping headlong into 2024’s frenzy of Israel-catering legislative activity, two House Republicans have introduced a bill that would extend credit and employment privileges enjoyed by US military service members to American citizens serving in the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF). 

This latest affront to American patriotism is brought to you by Pennsylvania congressman and Chief Deputy Whip Guy Reschenthaler, along with Ohio Rep. Max Miller.

“Over 20,000 American citizens are currently defending Israel from Hamas terrorists, risking their lives for the betterment of our ally,” said Reschenthaler. “This legislation will ensure we do everything possible to support these heroes who are standing with Israel, fighting for freedom, and combating terrorism in the Middle East.”

HR 8445 would give American IDF soldiers (is that an oxymoron?) protections under two major programs for active duty US military service members: 

• The Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (SCRA): Among many other features, SCRA caps credit card and mortgage interest on debts taken out before starting active service, protects against foreclosures, allows penalty-free termination of residential and auto leases, and allows cancellation of consumer contracts such as cell phone service and gym memberships. 
• Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA): As the Department of Labor describes it, “USERRA mandates that returning service members must be promptly re-employed in the same position that they would have attained had they not been absent for military service, with the same seniority, status and pay.” 

Thus, if HR 8445 becomes law, a US bank may have to cap the interest rate it’s charging for an American citizen who spontaneously decides to go join the IDF rampage in Gaza. The same person could bail on their apartment lease. After they leave their employer in the lurch to fight for a foreign army, the employer would have to give them their job back — even if they hired someone else to fill the void. 

In classic Washington DC fashion, these laws impose costs on private actors — landlords, vehicle dealerships, mortgage lenders, cell phone companies, gyms, employers — without compensation. Those costs go beyond foregone revenue: Implementing these benefits for IDF soldiers would require businesses to train staff members how to sort out the eligibility of an American serving in the Israeli military.  

It’s one thing to do impose these costs for the benefit of American soldiers — it’s another altogether to use government coercion for the benefit of citizens who opt to take up arms for another country.  

Speaking of costs and benefits, over their short careers, the two cosponsors of this bill have raked in huge contributions from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). According to Track AIPAC, third-termer Reschenthaler has received $170,147 while first-termer Miller has already piled up $193,808.   

“No one should be entitled to any U.S. military service benefits unless they are fighting under U.S. command and control,” said non-interventionist former congressmen Dennis Kucinich, who is now running as an independent against Miller. “Mr. Miller has lost sight of who he was elected to Congress to represent.” 

US representatives and senators have been tripping over each other to signal their loyalty to Israel. Other measures that thankfully aren’t law…yet: 

• The House-passed Antisemitism Awareness Act would expose colleges to federal civil rights punishment if a student or professor argues that “the existence of the State of Israel is a racist endeavor” or makes comparisions between the Israeli government and that of Nazi Germany, among other forbidden ideas
• Another bill would bar college debt forgiveness for anyone convicted of a federal or state offense — but only those related to a campus protest 
• Yet another one would defund the State Department, DOD and National Security Council until Biden delivers more bombs to Israel 

While all this is going on, the national debt is now growing by a trillion dollars every 100 days. Talk about misplaced priorities. 

Via The Epoch Times,

In a recent episode of American Thought Leaders, host Jan Jekielek sat down with classicist and military historian Victor Davis Hanson. In his new book “The End of Everything: How Wars Descend into Annihilation,” Mr. Hanson looks at four civilizations that were utterly destroyed by their enemies, then draws comparisons between the United States and its enemies, both domestic and foreign.

Jan Jekielek: Victor, I’m going to start with something you wrote, “We see a recurring universally human theme across time and space. The doomed at the brink of civilizational destruction have an attitude partly born of hubris and partly born of naivete, perhaps best summed up as, ‘It cannot happen to us.’”

Victor Davis Hanson: When one side loses a war, the typical follow-up is that they surrender. They’re not annihilated. But every once in a while, that doesn’t happen.

I was curious to see why it didn’t happen in these few instances. I selected four of the maybe 20 that are known: classical Thebes that had been around for 1100 years, Carthage for 800-plus years, Constantinople for almost 1200 years, and Tenochtitlan we don’t quite know about.

They felt they were invulnerable. When these occasions arose, they felt they could finesse it, negotiate it, or win it.

Mr. Jekielek: It comes back to, “This can’t happen to us, these walls have never been penetrated.” In our society today, we forget about the lessons of history. What is the biggest lesson from Carthage?

Mr. Hanson: One is understanding the invader. They had no idea that the Romans had global aspirations and wanted to control the entire Mediterranean. They didn’t realize that they were the only obstacle, and no matter what they did, they would be interpreted as an obstacle. They thought they could reason with the Romans.

But the Romans were tired of them. Their attitude was, “They ran wild in Italy for 19 years and we’re sick of them. We’re going to land this huge force and we’ll give them an ultimatum.” Once they disarmed, the Romans thought, “Now what? As soon as we leave, they’ll rearm again.”

The Romans had a renewed demand, “You have to destroy your city so you won’t be able to have a Navy. You won’t be able to go into the Mediterranean if you’re way inland.” They couldn’t do that. At that point there was a riot, and they killed some of the leaders who had acquiesced to the initial Roman demand. They felt they had a good chance to survive. They had 500,000 people. They were larger than Rome at the time. They were probably as wealthy as Rome. They felt they were better at sea than Rome. They could rebuild their fleet. But they had no idea of what Rome’s intentions were. All of the power of the Roman Republic would be directed at Carthage.

Mr. Jekielek: You’re facing difficult odds, but you still think, “Nothing bad can happen to us.”

Mr. Hanson: Yes. Look at the United States as a declining power and China as an ascending power. We think, “We won two world wars, we created the post-war order, we spend the most money on defense of any country. When we want to win, we can, and therefore we should downplay China.”

If you were Carthage, you would think that way. If you were analytical today, you would say, “Wait a minute. We’re $36 trillion in debt. We’re borrowing $1 trillion every 100 days. We’re 45,000 people short in the military. Our cities are full of crime. China has an agenda to emasculate the United States. They’re building nuclear weapons and ships faster than we are. They have nearly five times the population of the United States.”

That would be a realistic assessment, but we don’t hear that.

We just hear, “We’re the United States, the cultural capital of the world and the wealthiest of anybody.”

This decline is self-inflicted.

Mr. Jekielek: We have Xi Jinping saying, “We are waging a people’s war against America.” It can’t be any clearer than that. But somehow we’re not aware.

Mr. Hanson: That’s exactly the same with the Aztecs. When Cortes set foot in that city, Montezuma’s brother said, “He’s not a god. He’s a killer. He bleeds, he eats, he defecates. These people will destroy us.” But he was not listened to.

We’re like these ancient societies who were paralyzed by fear and inaction.

Mr. Jekielek: Our producers have collected questions from the audience during this live Q&A. The next question is, “Who is the greatest threat to the Republic, foreign enemies or domestic enemies?

Mr. Hanson: Domestic. The greatest threat is somebody with an advanced graduate degree in the media, high tech, or government who has utopian impulses and feels morally or intellectually superior to the rest of us. Therefore, they think any methods are permissible in order to reach their dream. All of our institutions are under assault by messianic people who believe they have better education, and are wealthier and more virtuous.

Mr. Jekielek: Here’s another question, “What does Victor Davis Hanson tell his family to do? What practical solutions does he have?”

Mr. Hanson: I tell them to be proactive first, because I believe you have to work within the system. I tell them, “You have to vote. You have to speak up among your friends. You’ve got to be an active citizen in order to stop the madness.” I tell my children, “Monitor what they’re teaching your children.”

We’re in new territory, and our agencies and institutions have become so warped they’re plotting for short-term political gain. The irony is that the people who are doing this say, “Democracy dies in darkness.”

Everybody’s got to get active. Vote, help people get to the polls, speak up, write to your local paper, volunteer to observe the election. Do whatever you can to be engaged.

This interview has been edited for clarity and brevity.

Watch the full interview below: