Skip to content

Adam Mossoff & Yaron Brook on Property Rights, Patents, Law & the U.S. Constitution

Issues covered with Adam Mossoff include the History of Property Rights, Attacks on Property Rights, Common Good Constitutionalism, Legal Positivism vs Natural Rights, Originalism, Textualism, Good Society, Protection of Property Rights in US Constitution, Debate among scholars, Administrative State, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, Clarence Thomas, Intellectual Property Rights, How did we get freedom and negation of property rights, Future of Intellectual Property Rights, China, and Chip War: The Fight for the World’s Most Critical Technology.

 

Peikoff & Chayes: Two Years Later, Parler Vindicated

Write Objectivists Amy Peikoff and Benjamin Chayes:

This week marks two years since Amazon Web Services, following closely behind Google and Apple, took burgeoning Twitter competitor Parler—which had been number one in Apple’s App Store—offline. The reason given was the platform’s alleged contribution to the January 6, 2021 riot on the Capitol, via a supposedly disproportionate prevalence of violent and inciting content. The facts that, for example, #HangMikePence was trending on Twitter at the time, and that Parler had been referring examples of violent and inciting content to law enforcement in the weeks leading up to the 6th, fell on deaf ears.

That Parler was unfairly scapegoated quickly became apparent to anyone who bothered to follow the story. But what has become incontrovertible only recently, thanks to Elon Musk’s release of the “Twitter Files,” is evidence pointing to the actual motivation behind Parler’s deplatforming: the desire to bury all the uncensored content that Parler allowed to be shared on the web. Remember Hunter Biden’s laptop? The Wuhan lab-leak? The Great Barrington Declaration? Or maybe you missed all of that back then, exactly as an amalgamation of not-yet-fully-identified crony tech “leaders” and government agents intended.

Read the rest.

 

DeSantis Public Health Integrity Committee & Petition for a Statewide Grand Jury Should Be Welcomed

There have been quite a few virulent attacks against Florida Governor Ron DeSantis for his establishing an independent committee to evaluate many of the claims by the Federal government and their partners in regard to the COVID-19 vaccine. Such an independent panel, court-administered proceeding under a rule of law should be welcomed by those who are concerned with the truth.

The petition can be found here. [Alt link: Vaccine-Grand-Jury-Petition]

Below is the news release:

Governor Ron DeSantis Petitions Florida Supreme Court for Statewide Grand Jury on COVID-19 Vaccines and Announces Creation of the Public Health Integrity Committee

WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. — Today, Governor Ron DeSantis held a roundtable discussion joined by Surgeon General Dr. Joseph Ladapo and world-renowned physicians, researchers, and public health experts to discuss adverse events of the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines and announce new, aggressive actions to hold the federal government and Big Pharma accountable, including:

  • Establishing the Public Health Integrity Committee. The Committee will be overseen by the Surgeon General to assess federal public health recommendations and guidance to ensure that Florida’s public health policies are tailored for Florida’s communities and priorities.
  • Filing a petition for a Statewide Grand Jury to investigate crimes and wrongdoing committed against Floridians related to the COVID-19 vaccine.
  • Leading further surveillance into sudden deaths of individuals that received the COVID-19 vaccine in Florida, based on autopsy results. The state will collaborate with the University of Florida to compare research with studies done in other countries.

For more information, click here.

The Biden Administration and pharmaceutical corporations continue to push widespread distribution of mRNA vaccines on the public, including children as young as 6 months old, through relentless propaganda while ignoring real-life adverse events. At today’s roundtable the Governor and health experts discussed data covering serious adverse events. These risks include coagulation disorders, acute cardiac injuries, Bell’s palsy, encephalitis, appendicitis, and shingles.

“Health care professionals should always communicate the risks of a medical intervention to their patients in a manner that is clinically appropriate and meets standards of ethical practice. President Biden and Big Pharma have completely prevented that from happening – it is wrong,” said Surgeon General Dr. Joseph Ladapo. “With these new actions, we will shed light on the forces that have obscured truthful communication about the COVID-19 vaccines.”

 

Public Health Integrity Committee

The Surgeon General will oversee the Public Health Integrity Committee, a committee of expert researchers charged with assessing federal decisions, recommendations, and guidance related to public health and health care. The Surgeon General would then receive input from the committee to ensure public health policies are tailored for Florida’s communities and aligned with state priorities. Members will include:

  • Jay Bhattacharya, MD, PhD
  • Martin Kuldorff, PhD
  • Tracy Beth Høeg, MD, PhD
  • Joseph Fraiman, MD
  • Christine Stabell Benn, MD, PhD
  • Bret Weinstein, PhD
  • Steven Templeton, PhD 

 

Grand Jury

The pharmaceutical industry and the FDA have refused to release patient-level data for independent researchers. Meanwhile, the COVID-19 vaccines produced by Pfizer and Moderna have received FDA approval for pediatric and adult patients and continue to be marketed as safe and effective, even though the vaccines do not prevent transmission and adverse events have been minimized and disregarded by the Biden Administration and Big Pharma. In response, Governor DeSantis has filed a petition to impanel a statewide grand jury to investigate crimes and wrongs in Florida related to the COVID-19 vaccines and further recommend enforcement methods.

The petition can be found here. [Alt link: Vaccine-Grand-Jury-Petition]

 

Autopsy Surveillance

Last month, researchers uncovered alarming facts surrounding the COVID-19 vaccine in Germany. Among autopsies performed on 25 people who died unexpectedly within 20 days after COVID-19 vaccination, four indicated deaths due to acute arrhythmogenic cardiac failure. This study concluded that “myocarditis can be a potentially lethal complication following mRNA-based anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination.”

To further investigate this phenomenon in Florida, Dr. Ladapo will conduct research through the University of Florida to assess sudden deaths of individuals in good health who received a COVID-19 vaccine. The Department of Health will also utilize disease surveillance and vital statistics to assess such deaths.

“This has been a tremendously difficult time for everybody, but we are near the tail end of it and it is time to start taking stock of what went wrong and make reforms so this doesn’t happen again,” Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, M.D., Ph.D., Professor of Health Policy, Stanford University Medical School. “I think the centrally important issue that caused the problems is that we silenced qualified people from expressing their thinking, and as a result the decision making at the top of the country was absolutely abysmal. When you have censorship, the kinds of suppression of voices that is essentially a social credit system demeaning people who disagree with the CDC, you’re going to get bad decisions that don’t get checked. I am looking forward to working in coming years to reform American public health so that when there is another pandemic we do a much better job than we did during this one.”

“Our group’s research has revealed that vaccines can affect the risk of non-targeted infections,” said Dr. Christine Benn, M.D., Ph.D., Chair of Health Sciences, Department of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark. “The new COVID-19 vaccines have not yet been investigated for their potential effects on the risk of other infections.”

“Our study took a magnifying glass to the original Pfizer and Moderna clinical trials that got the vaccines on the market in late 2020. In the original trials, mRNA vaccines increased serious adverse events at a rate considerably higher than initially realized,” said Dr. Joseph Fraiman, M.D., Emergency Medicine Physician, Thibodaux Regional Medical Center. “Our peer-reviewed study — which was published this August in one of the field’s leading journals — indicates that the mRNA COVID vaccines should be urgently re-evaluated. I believe unless further studies can clearly demonstrate a favorable harm benefit profile,  mRNA vaccine use should not be recommended in healthy adults and children. Independent of what our Federal agencies recommend it is their ethical duty to inform the public of these results to allow for informed consent from those who chose to take COVID vaccines.”

“It it clear we urgently need updated and fully transparent vaccines risk-benefit analyses for all age groups for physicians to make informed recommendations and patients to make informed decisions,” said Dr. Tracey Høeg , M.D., Ph.D., Physician Epidemiologist and Clinical Researcher at Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, University of California San Francisco, Acumen, LLC. “Blanket mandates or requirements for COVID-19 vaccines are both unscientific and unethical given the vaccines’ ineffectiveness at providing lasting protection from infection or transmission and the uncertainty surrounding the current vaccines’ benefits and risks.”

“It is always important to balance benefits and risks. For older high-risk people who have not vet had Covid, vaccine benefits outweigh potential risks for an adverse reaction,” said Dr. Martin Kulldorf, Ph.D., Scientific Director, Brownstone Institute; Fellow, Hillsdale College’s Academy for Science & Freedom. “For children, young adults and those who have had COVID, the risk of dying from COVID is miniscule, so even a small risk of a serious vaccine adverse reaction, such as myocarditis, will tip the balance against the vaccine.”

“There has been a tremendous loss of trust in public health and I think you can see that in decreased uptake of vaccines that have been traditionally used,” Steve Templeton, Ph.D., Associate Professor of Microbiology and Immunology, Indiana University School of Medicine-Terre Haute.This isn’t just anti-vaxx people; this is people who have really lost trust in the system, and I think you have to restore that trust to get people to believe in the efficacy of vaccines that have been used for decades without problem and have been very effective.”

“The decision making surrounding covid amounts to the largest blunder in human history,” Bret Weinstein, Ph.D., Former Professor of Evolutionary Biology, Evergreen State College. “The censorship is creating a phony sense that there is agreement amongst all of the responsible doctors about what to do and the few doctors who say otherwise are fringe cranks. And this couldn’t be farther from the truth. The message that was given to us from public health authorities was not just inept. It actually went well beyond that. It was really the inverse of everything we should have done. Because it was forced on us with this strong form of coercion, it was widely accepted because people didn’t have a choice. Because the vaccine was so targeted, we effectively drove this pathogen to diversify.”

“It’s a terrible crime that this vaccine has been pushed in the media as long as it has been and has prevented any news of horrible side effects in the main stream media from being communicated,” said Steven Ordonia, victim of adverse events from mRNA vaccines. “This vaccine has nearly ruined my life and severely altered it.”

“Before my vaccine I was active, I worked out and ran Spartan races,” said Michelle Utter, Healthcare Professional and victim of adverse events from mRNA vaccines. “Working in healthcare during the pandemic, we were sent emails telling us the importance of the vaccine and that they were safe and effective. After my first vaccine, an hour later I was experiencing flu like symptoms. Before I got my next shot, I asked if I should get it because I was afraid of having a reaction…I had the pharmacist and other employees coming over to reassure me that I wouldn’t have the same reaction again. Against my gut I took it…45 minutes later I was in the parking lot sick in my car, my hips hurt so bad I couldn’t move, and I had inflammation everywhere. Working in health care you would think that you would get the best care and the best resources available to you but I was ignored, gaslit and abandoned.”

 

Tucker: Fauci’s Chutzpah Matches That of Sam Bankman-Fried

Writes Jeffrey A. Tucker in “What Fauci’s Deposition Tells Us About the Man” (The Epoch Times) after reading through 446 pages of Fauci’s deposition:

[Fauci] uses the phrase “I don’t recall” 194 times. In various other formulations, the invocation of his amnesia is closer to 300 over a 7-hour deposition. He continually falls back on just how busy he is managing $6.2 billion in spending plus 6,000 employees. This is why he simply cannot pay attention to the crucial issue being adjudicated: whether he directed agencies under his influence to censor science and other COVID-related matters at social media companies.

To hear him tell it, he knows next to nothing about social media, never really pays attention to Reddit, has barely a passing familiarity with Twitter and Facebook, does not recall any real connection with Google, and condescends repeatedly to the attorneys with dismissive remarks about his own importance compared with their own petty concerns.

[…] Even when confronted with emails he wrote, and references to phone calls he made, his defense is that he reads and sends thousands of emails and cannot be held to any of them. Even on matters related to the Great Barrington Declaration, he pleads that he had no time for such matters.“I’m not 100 percent sure that the meeting of the epidemiologists, authors of the declaration with the Secretary, this was very likely the first time it was brought to my attention, although I can’t say for sure. I would imagine—again, getting back to context, this is not something that I would have been paying a lot of attention to. I was knee deep in trying to do things like develop a vaccine that wound up saving the lives of millions of people. That’s what I was doing at the time. So an email like this may not have necessarily risen to the top of my awareness and interest.”

This is fascinating because in other interviews and testimony, he equally claims that vaccine development is not his area and focus. He is for them but never approved them. That’s for others to do. Same with particular grants such as the many to EcoHealth Alliance that flipped the money over to the Wuhan virus lab that was deploying what any layperson would call gain-of-function research.

[…]There’s a reason why gaslighting is Merriam-Webster’s word of the year. What Fauci is doing here embodies it better than anything else, comparable only to Sam Bankman-Fried’s own interviews.

[…]Similarly, Fauci masquerades as an infectious disease doctor but actually ranks among the most feared of all health bureaucrats in the country. He was lord of billions in grants to scientists. He specialized in rewarding loyalists and punishing enemies. Thus was he surrounded by fake friends for many years, including among media sycophants who for sure knew the history so thoroughly documented in Robert Kennedy, Jr.’s book “The Real Anthony Fauci.” But they went along simply due to his awesome power.

We also know from Fauci’s own schedule what his real job for three years has been: he was a media star, morning until night, daily, and only for friendly outlets. He shilled for lockdowns, school closures, mandatory masking and mandatory vaccines, and trashed anyone and everyone who questioned whether this was really the right way to go about handling infectious disease. Of course when he is confronted about all this, he demures and says he was merely making recommendations.

Very subtly and carefully, however, what’s really happening with Fauci’s bout of amnesia is this: he is preparing a scenario in which he throws everyone else under the bus. All his associates are now aware of this. He is saving his skin and glad to sacrifice everyone else. I was among many thousands who read this transcript with awareness of precisely what he is up to. One can almost hear the screams of fury among the thousands who have dealt with him over the years.”

The Crimes of Sam Bankman-Fried and FTX

Writes David Z. Morris in “FTX’s Collapse Was a Crime, Not an Accident” at CoinDesk:

FTX Crash was a result of a “conscious and intentional fraud intended to steal money”

It is now clear that what happened at the FTX crypto exchange and the hedge fund Alameda Research [hedge fund] involved a variety of conscious and intentional fraud intended to steal money from both users and investors. That’s why a recent New York Times interview was widely derided for seeming to frame FTX’s collapse as the result of mismanagement rather than malfeasance. A Wall Street Journal article bemoaned the loss of charitable donations from FTX, arguably propping up Bankman-Fried’s strategic philanthropic pose. Vox co-founder Matthew Yglesias, court chronicler of the neoliberal status quo, seemed to whitewash his own entanglements by crediting Bankman-Fried’s money with helping Democrats in the 2020 elections – sidestepping the likelihood that the money was effectively embezzled.

FTX crash was not the result of a bank run, but a massive act of theft

Perhaps most perniciously, many outlets have described what happened to FTX as a “bank run” or a “run on deposits,” while Bankman-Fried has repeatedly insisted the company was simply overleveraged and disorganized. Both of these attempts to frame the fallout obfuscate the core issue: the misuse of customer funds.

[…]

FTX and other crypto exchanges are not banks. They do not (or should not) do bank-style lending, so even a very acute surge of withdrawals should not create a liquidity strain. FTX had specifically promised customers it would never lend out or otherwise use the crypto they entrusted to the exchange.

In reality, the funds were sent to the intimately linked trading firm Alameda Research, where they were, it seems, simply gambled away. This is, in the simplest terms, theft at a nearly unprecedented scale. While the total losses have yet to be quantified, up to one million customers could be impacted, according to a bankruptcy document.

Bankman-Fried stole FTX exchange customers’ funds to bankroll the Alameda hedge fund

The author goes into the gory details and the magnitude of the theft by Bankman-Fried and how he stole FTX exchange customers’ funds to bankroll the Alameda hedge fund, amongst other crimes:

“While an exchange [like FTX] ultimately makes money from transaction fees on assets that belong to users, a hedge fund like Alameda seeks to profit from actively trading or investing funds it controls….the [FTX] exchange had been funneling customer assets to Alameda for use in trading, lending and investing activities. On Nov. 12, Reuters made the stunning report that as much as $10 billion in user funds had been sent from FTX to Alameda.”

Bankman-Fried is the Bernie Madoff of the 2020s

“Bankman-Fried has continued to muddy the waters with carefully disingenuous letters, statements, interviews and tweets. He has attempted to portray himself as a well-intentioned but naïve kid who got in over his head and made a few miscalculations. This is a softer but more pernicious version of the crisis management approach Donald Trump learned from the black-hat mob lawyer Roy Cohn: Instead of “deny, deny, deny,” Bankman-Fried has decided to “confuse, evade, distort.”

Morris covers other criminal behaviors that resulted from this “cardinal sin” concluding:

“The scale and complexity of Bankman-Fried’s fraud and theft appear to rival those of Ponzi schemer Bernie Madoff and Malaysian embezzler Jho Low. Whether consciously or through malign ineptitude, the fraud also echoes much larger corporate scandals such as Worldcom and, particularly, Enron.

“The principals in all of those scandals wound up either sentenced to prison or on the run from the law. Sam Bankman-Fried clearly deserves to share their fate.”

Must read.

 

Bill Barr: Case Against Trump in 2024

Bill Barr has an excellent article that makes the case against Trump running in 2024, “Bill Barr: Trump Will Burn Down the GOP. Time for New Leadership.”

Why Barr supported Trump in 2016

Trump with his “frequently juvenile, bombastic, and petulant style” was not Barr’s “idea of a president”, but once he became the GOP’s nominee he supported him, as in Barr’s words:

Trump had accurately diagnosed, and given voice to, the deep frustration of many middle-class and working-class Americans who were fed up with the excesses of progressive Democrats; the shameless partisanship of the mainstream media; and the smug condescension of elites who had mismanaged the country, sold them out, and appeared content to preside over the decline of America.

Trump administration’s “substantive” achievements

[Trump administration’s] tax reform and deregulatory efforts generated the strongest and most resilient economy in American history—one that brought unprecedented progress to many marginalized Americans. He had begun to restore U.S. military strength by increasing spending on new-generation weapons, advanced technology, and force readiness. He correctly identified the economic, technological, and military threats to the United States posed by China’s aggressive policies. By brokering historic peace deals in the Mideast, he achieved what most thought impossible. He had the courage to pull us out of ill-advised and detrimental agreements with Iran and Russia. And he fulfilled America’s long-delayed promise to move its Israeli embassy to Jerusalem.

Trump lost in 2020 because energized those who wanted to vote against him

Trump succeeded in driving a record turnout of his own supporters. But he also generated a more massive turnout for Joe Biden. The millions of voters who flocked to the polls to pull the Democratic lever set historic records and swamped the Trump voters. They did not come to vote for Biden; they came to vote against Trump. Fraud did not prevent Trump’s second term. Trump himself was the reason.

Winning in 2024 for the GOP requires the “old Reagan coalition”

…I believe the defining feature of our political landscape continues to be the sharp leftward lurch of the Democratic party. That opens up a historic opportunity for the GOP—the opportunity to revive something like the old Reagan coalition: a combination of Republican-leaning, college-educated suburbanites; culturally conservative working-class voters; and even some classical liberals who are repulsed by the left’s authoritarianism.

Trump’s behavior since losing the 2020 election is detrimental to the GOP

[Trump] treacherously sabotaged GOP efforts to hold the Georgia Senate seats. The GOP’s poor performance in the recent midterms was due largely to Trump’s mischief. He fueled internal fights within state parties. He attacked popular Republican governors in Maryland, New Hampshire, and Arizona to dissuade them from running for Senate seats they could have won. He supported weak candidates for key Senate and House seats based solely on their agreeing with his “stolen election” claims…

The Trump threat based on his “supreme narcissism”

[Trump’s faction is] “probably no larger than a quarter of the GOP, but which allows Trump to use it as leverage to extort and bully the rest of the party into submission. The threat is simple: unless the rest of the party goes along with him, he will burn the whole house down by leading “his people” out of the GOP. Trump’s willingness to destroy the party if he does not get his way is not based on principle, but on his own supreme narcissism.

Read the full article at Common Sense News.

Niall Ferguson on Zelensky and Fatalism in History

Niall Ferguson on fatalism in history:

Contingency here means a relatively small event or decision. And it doesn’t need to be a decision. It can be something accidental, has very major consequences. And historical causations like that, something relatively small, can have tremendous ramifications. I’ll give you another illustration. This year, most people, including the US government, thought that if Russia invaded Ukraine, the Ukrainian government would quite quickly fold, and it was assumed that Volodymyr Zelenskyy, the Ukrainian president, would bail. He didn’t. He gave his famous response, “I don’t want an air ticket. I want ammunition.” And Zelenskyy’s courage when they were closing in on Kyiv with a high probability that they would assassinate, the Russians turned the course of history in a way that I think is now quite widely understood.

People know Zelenskyy is an important historical figure. He gets a lot of attention because he is a charismatic figure who understands how to use modern media to communicate with an audience. That’s the benefit of having a very seasoned entertainer as your president. But I think what’s really important there is that his courage, particularly the famous video selfie video where he says, “I’m here. The defense minister is here. We’re here.” They’re standing in the streets of Kyiv. The Russians are closing in at that point on the capital. That was a tremendous act of courage. But it emboldened ordinary Ukrainians not to fold, and it also intimidated the collaborators who were ready to help the Russians, not to act. So the contingency there is if Zelenskyy had gone according to our expectation and taken the plane, then Putin would’ve had Kyiv within a matter of days or weeks, and the war would be over.

So I think one of the things that’s exciting about the study of history is you are trying to remind yourself again and again that what happened, that what we know happened, might have gone the other way. That the Cuban Missile Crisis ended in both sides essentially backing down was not predetermined. There was a moment when a Soviet submarine commander gave the order to fire a nuclear torpedo at US naval surface ships. So we came within a hair’s breadth of World War III. These alternate worlds, these histories that didn’t happen, have to be alive in your mind when you are writing history.

The fatal mistake is to write history as if it was bound to happen the way it happened. And this, of course, is the mistake that a great majority of historians make. Forgetting that, we don’t know at the time, at the moment, we didn’t know the morning of the 24th of February that Zelenskyy would stand his ground. Nobody knew that. I wonder if even Zelenskyy at that moment knew what it was that he was going to do.

So I say all this because I think it’s really important to convey to your listeners and viewers how exciting history is and how studying it makes you understand the course of events in your own life better removes that passivity that sometimes people succumb to. If you think great historical forces are going to have inevitable outcomes, if you have a deterministic view of the historical process, it’s very easy to lapse into fatalism. There’s the other trap, which is the conspiracy theories. “Well, the truth of the matter is that actually, Soros and the Rothschilds are orchestrating all this.” Again, you throw up your hands and you abandon the attempt to understand how the historical process works.

Listen to the rest on the Tim Ferris Podcast.

Cancel Federal Backing of Student Loans

Before the midterm elections, in an attack on his critics President Biden writes that once one takes government money, they no longer can criticize him, implying hypocrisy of his critics.

Yet, the Payroll relief program was instituted because successful, prosperous businesses were put out of business by the government’s lockdown orders at the behest of the CDC.

So, Mr. Biden, you tax the hell out of productive people, shut down their jobs with mandates/lockdowns, loan them some of their money back, while taking a cut to pay off the people who got you elected, cry it’s a “democracy,” and then say people have no right to speak?

US college is expensive & wasteful because the govt subsidizes inefficiency with federally-backed student loans. Time to cancel that program too.

Film: Mr. Jones Now Free To Watch on Amazon Prime

Fantastic thriller.

“Gareth Jones, a British “stringer” journalist, traveled to the Soviet Union in 1933 and uncovered the appalling truth behind the Soviet “utopia” inspiring George Orwell’s Animal Farm.”

In Mr. Jones, Actor James Norton plays a heroic “stringer” (an independent journalist not affiliated with any news organization) who took on Pulitzer prize-winning journalist, Walter Duranty, at the New York Times to reveal how Stalin starved millions of Ukrainians to prop up his communist regime. Jones, is a real-life Clark Kent, whose “superpower” is his unwavering dedication to the truth, no matter the cost, even if it means his own life. His nemesis Walter Duranty is brilliantly portrayed by Peter Sarsgaard.

Based on real events during the Holodomor where over six million died in 1933-4 by planned starvation. The film has ominous parallels to today as the Russian dictator Putin wages his unjust war against the people of Ukraine, and how establishment journalism seeks to distort the truth to promote government narratives on the tyrannical COVID lockdowns and mandates as brave independent journalists work to uncover the truth.

History does repeat itself, if not in concrete form, in abstract principle, for good or bad, if we do not induct the lessons it gives us.

Happy Second Birthday Great Barrington Declaration!

Two years ago today, Dr. Martin Kulldorff (professor of medicine at Harvard University, a biostatistician, and epidemiologist with expertise in detecting and monitoring infectious disease outbreaks and vaccine safety evaluations), Dr. Sunetra Gupta (professor at Oxford University, an epidemiologist with expertise in immunology, vaccine development, and mathematical modeling of infectious diseases), and Dr. Jay Bhattacharya (professor at Stanford University Medical School, a physician, epidemiologist, health economist, and public health policy expert focusing on infectious diseases and vulnerable populations) authored the Great Barrington Declaration.

The Great Barrington Declaration argued for better protection of high-risk older people while keeping schools and society open to avoid the collateral damage now seen.

Focused protection instead of lockdowns to minimize both COVID-19 mortality and collateral damage on other health outcomes.

Over 930,000 people signed it. You can still co-sign.

Lawsuit To Stop Biden Administration’s Unlawful Student Loan Cancellation

From Pacific Legal Foundation:

[On September 7, 2022, the]…Pacific Legal Foundation filed suit against the U.S. Department of Education to block its illegal move to cancel more than $500 billion in student loan debt.

“Congress did not authorize the executive branch to unilaterally cancel student debt,” said Caleb Kruckenberg, an attorney at Pacific Legal Foundation. “It’s flagrantly illegal for the executive branch to create a $500 billion program by press release, and without statutory authority or even the basic notice and comment procedure for new regulations.”

In August 2022, President Biden announced his plan to cancel up to $20,000 in student loan debt per person for more than 40 million Americans. The Department of Education’s justification relies on an inapplicable, 20-year-old law: The HEROES Act, which was intended as aid to veterans and their families, allows government to modify student loans during times of war or national emergency.

Whatever the motives of the president for transferring massive amounts of student debt to taxpayers in a rushed, haphazard manner, it certainly seems like an election year ploy. That is one of the predictable effects of the president usurping Congress’ power to make law. Not since President Trump imposed a nationwide eviction moratorium before the 2020 elections has a president abused his power so profoundly.

“Cancelling student debt is unjust to those who have paid their loans or never took any. It will only lead to more calls for government intervention in education at taxpayers’ expense,” said Steve Simpson, senior attorney at Pacific Legal Foundation. “Loan cancellation will make Americans more divided, as those who paid their loans—or never went to college—will have good reason to think that we no longer have a government of, by, and for the people.”

Plaintiff Frank Garrison is a public interest attorney — now at Pacific Legal Foundation — who believes the rule of law and separation of powers are bulwarks for liberty and against centralized government power. As a part of an existing, congressionally authorized Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF) program, he will receive debt forgiveness after making 10 years of payments on his loans. The challenged program will stick him with a new state tax bill which he would not have under his existing PSLF program.

For decades, Pacific Legal Foundation has fought for the constitutional separation of powers, the main structural protections against abuses of power that undermine freedom. PLF has won five separation of powers cases at the U.S. Supreme Court.

The case is Garrison v. U.S. Department of Education, filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana. PLF has filed a temporary restraining order to prevent the loan cancellation from going into effect.

Reparations for Slavery…From Africans

Hilary Fordwich corrects CNN’s Don Lemon on British Empire over slavery during the Queen’s funeral:

Don Lemon: “Some people want to be paid back and members of the public are wondering, ‘Why are we suffering when you are, you have all this vast wealth?’ Those are legitimate concerns…”

Hilary Fordwich: “Well I think you’re right about reparations in terms of – if people want it though, what they need to do is, you always need to go back to the beginning of the supply chain. Where was the beginning of the supply chain? That was in Africa. Across the entire world, when slavery was taking place, which was the first nation in the world that abolished slavery? …the British”

“In Great Britain they abolished slavery. 2,000 naval men died on the high seas trying to stop slavery. Why? Because the African kings were rounding up their own people. They had them [in] cages, waiting in the beaches.”

“I think you’re totally right. If reparations need to be paid, we need to go right back to the beginning of that supply chain and say, ‘Who was rounding up their own people and having them handcuffed in cages. Absolutely, that’s where they should start.”

Woman Scares Off Intruder, No Shots Fired

Writes Jeff Jacoby in his newsletter Arguable on “Guns keep Americans safer”:

…Now comes a new survey of gun owners , one of the largest and most comprehensive ever conducted. Supervised by Georgetown University professor William English and published on the Social Science Research Network, it surveyed 16,708 gun owners, drawn from an overall population sample of 54,000. Among its findings: roughly 32 percent of American adults, 42 percent of them female, own guns. Handguns remain the most common type of firearm owned, with 171 million in private hands, but Americans also own 146 million rifles and 98 million shotguns.

…According to English, “approximately a third of gun owners have used a firearm to defend themselves or their property, often on more than one occasion, and guns are used defensively by firearms owners in approximately 1.67 million incidents per year. A majority of gun owners, 56.2 percent, indicate that they carry a handgun for self-defense in at least some circumstances.”

Using a gun in this context generally does not mean firing a gun. More than 80 percent of the time, respondents said that when they “used” their weapon to respond to a threat, it was sufficient to simply show their gun, or merely mention that they had one. It is not surprising that most defensive gun uses never rise to the level of a news story. “Woman Scares Off Intruder, No Shots Fired,” isn’t a very gripping headline.

See also Andrew Bernstein’s article, Defense of Innocent Lives Requires Gun Ownership By Honest Persons.

Big-Tech “Little Brothers”

“The FBI, I think, basically came to us – some folks on our team – and was like, ‘Hey, just so you know, like, you should be on high alert… We thought that there was a lot of Russian propaganda in the 2016 election. We have it on notice that, basically, there’s about to be some kind of dump of that’s similar to that. So just be vigilant.’” – Mark Zuckerberg, The Joe Rogan Experience

Writes Jonathan Turley in “Zuckerberg Reveals the FBI Told His Company to be Wary of ‘Russian Disinformation’“:

[Facebook’s parent company Meta] only recently allowed customers to discuss the lab theory of the origins of Covid after years of biased censorship. Facebook’s decision to allow people to discuss the theory followed the company’s Oversight Board upholding a ban on any postings of Trump, a move that even figures like Germany’s Angela Merkel and Sen. Bernie Sanders (I., Vt.) have criticized as a danger to free speech.  Even Trump’s voice has been banned by Facebook. Trump remains too harmful for Facebook users to hear . . . at least until the company decides that they are ready for such exposure. Facebook has tried to get customers to embrace censorship in a commercial campaign despite its long record of abusive and biased “content modification.”

Note such actions by private companies are not censorship – unless pressure, no matter how light, was imposed upon by the government.

From “Evolving With Big Tech: Facebook’s New Campaign Should Have Free Speech Advocates Nervous“:

Politicians know that the First Amendment only deals with government censorship, but who needs “Big Brother” when a slew of “Little Brothers” can do the work more efficiently and comprehensively?

When Twitter’s CEO Jack Dorsey came before the Senate to apologize for blocking the Hunter Biden story before the election, he was met by demands from Democratic leaders for more censorship. Senator Chris Coons (D., Md.) pressed Dorsey to expand the categories of censored material to prevent people from sharing any views that he considers “climate denialism.” Likewise, Senator Richard Blumenthal (D., Conn.) chastised the companies for shying away from censorship and told them that he was “concerned that both of your companies are, in fact, backsliding or retrenching, that you are failing to take action against dangerous disinformation.” Accordingly, he demanded that they “commit to the same kind of robust content modification playbook in this coming election.”

Republicans have been acting in the opposite direction, seeking to force companies to not block information (which is also censorship). Though in practice, the Democrat variant of banning speech at this time is a far greater danger, than bills that call for the equal promulgation of opposing viewpoints according to “free speech principles,” the proper response is to ban government interference in all speech that does not violate the rights of others.