Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on Monday said he is removing every member of a government panel that makes vaccine recommendations.  Kennedy said he is "retiring" all 17 members of the Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices, asserting that it "has become little more than a rubber stamp for any vaccine."  "A clean sweep is needed to re-establish public confidence in vaccine science," Kennedy wrote in an opinion piece published by the...

Vaccines have become a divisive issue in American politics, but there is one thing all parties can agree on: The U.S. faces a crisis of public trust. Whether toward health agencies, pharmaceutical companies or vaccines themselves, public confidence is waning. Some would try to explain this away by blaming misinformation or antiscience attitudes. To do so, however, ignores a history of conflicts of interest, persecution of dissidents, a lack of curiosity, and skewed science that has plagued...

The Department of Health and Human Services dismissed all the members of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) on Monday. The committee’s job was to decide and "make recommendations" related to the necessity and use of vaccines, according to an HHS news release. All the current members of the committee were brought in under the Biden administration, and 13 of them were put on the committee last year. HHS said it would take until 2028 for most of the members to be...

A one-of-a-kind frontman.

On Friday, as Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents circulated in the Los Angeles area executing a law enforcement mission to nab criminal illegal aliens as part of an investigation into drug-cartel money laundering, one of the more pointless and unwise activities of recent vintage came courtesy of a union leader. His name is David Huerta, and he’s the president of the Service Employees International Union in Los Angeles. And Huerta thought he’d participate in a group that was attempting to prevent ICE officers from accessing a Department of Homeland Security headquarters. That interesting bit of FA led to a quite obvious FO — namely, that Huerta was arrested and remains in custody. What has followed has been as familiar as it is ridiculous. Again, remember — what kicked off Huerta’s antics wasn’t an operation to deport illegals. It was an effort to disrupt the money laundering activities of Mexican drug cartels. Donald Trump’s border czar, Tom Homan, revealed that the raids that sparked the violent LA riots were not for immigration purposes. Homan explained that the raids that took place in downtown Los Angeles on Friday were part of a criminal investigation into a money laundering… — Peter Schweizer (@peterschweizer) June 9, 2025 Los Angeles has been the scene of rioting and violence ever since — with public art defacements, rock-throwing thugs attacking police, attacks on federal law enforcement, burning cars, and lots of other “mostly peaceful” activities meant to get the public’s attention and convey a narrative. But rioting in Los Angeles is no longer a particular crisis event. Not after the Rodney King and George Floyd chaos. At this point, civil unrest by have-nots is basically expected if some upsetting event might fall afoul of the Hard Left elements in that metropolis. And were it not for some of the more glaring optics — perhaps best exemplified by the images of masked aliens on motorcycles wheeling past burning vehicles with Mexican flags in tow — not that many people would care that some union boss got the legal trouble he asked for and a ginned-up mob acted the fool in response. But when Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, a real live Castroite communist who — natch — was up for the job of vice president on Joe Biden’s 2020 ticket before ol’ non compos mentis Joe went with Kamala Harris instead, and California Governor Gavin Newsom decided to side with the rioters against ICE, things got a little interesting. Even more so when President Trump, recognizing that urban riots are a thing which must be nipped in the bud if an American revival and golden age is to be had, federalized the National Guard and sent them to Los Angeles to protect federal buildings. Newsom’s response to that was bizarre in the extreme, making the entirely false claim that everything was fine until Trump escalated the situation by sending in the troops. Los Angeles: don’t take Trump’s bait. Trump wants chaos and he’s instigated violence. Those who assault law enforcement or cause property damage will risk arrest. Stay peaceful. Stay focused. Don’t give him the excuse he’s looking for. — Governor Gavin Newsom (@CAgovernor) June 9, 2025 That was a bit off the narrative track, as the previous claim was that everything was fine until ICE began conducting raids in the Los Angeles area. Which makes Newsom seem almost sane by comparison. The conceit here is, apparently, that Los Angeles isn’t really part of the United States, because somehow it’s inappropriate for ICE to enforce immigration law there. Newsom might certainly agree with that, but it isn’t where he placed his emphasis. And while Ellie Gardey Holmes, who wrote the definitive work on California’s governor Newsom Unleashed: The Progressive Lust for Unbridled Power last year, can give a better recitation of the man’s character and motivation than can I, what’s obvious is that Newsom is playing this version of the L.A. riots with a specific goal in mind. That being, making himself the face of the Democrat Party. And what Newsom has decided this means is he has to stand against Trump in such a way that both satisfies the Hard Left that he can’t win the 2028 Democrat presidential primary without, and doesn’t alienate the fairly strong majority of Americans who want to deport every single illegal alien across the fruited plain. (RELATED: The Democrats Have Normalized Political Violence) In other words, to lie. Or to be Kevin Bacon in Animal House… …while downtown Los Angeles emits billows of smoke from burning cars. And it seems to be working. The Hard Left is eating all of this up. BREAKING: Governor Newsom responds to threats from the Trump Administration by DARING Trump’s border czar Tom Homan to arrest him. Newsom has done nothing wrong. The Trump Administration has gone mad with power. pic.twitter.com/WAYTE6UnQT — Trump Lie Tracker (Commentary) (@MAGALieTracker) June 9, 2025 My friend Kurt Schlichter noted Monday at Townhall.com that this is a highly overrated event, at least so far… Remember, it’s an information operation. None of what you see on the regime media is real. Oh, they are burning a few cars and screaming and yelling and running around waving flags of garbage countries, but what does any of that actually do? Nothing. They can’t make anyone do anything. They are not eliminating any federal law-enforcement capabilities. They are not significantly hindering federal law enforcement operations. They are not holding significant territory over time. They’re simply acting out in front of the cameras to try to convince you that Trump is powerless. To some extent, this works. As a Southern Californian, I’ve been bombarded by people around the country asking me if I’m okay. Of course, I’m okay. I live among rich people who like their Chardonnay oaky and their illegal alien domestic help cheap and compliant. They won’t let that nonsense happen in my neighborhood. Hell, my liberal neighbors would call the local SWAT team in if poor people knocked over one of their “Hate Has No Home Here” signs. The violence is happening downtown, where practically nobody lives except bums and a few urban pioneers, as well as in some scruffy suburban cities on the east side of the metropolis. The impact on the daily life of 99% of people in Los Angeles is exactly zero. There are approximately 20 million people here. Maybe 5,000 have anything to do with this nonsense. He’s right about this, of course, and Schlichter is also right that Trump’s response so far has been vigorous enough to (1) cram down much of the mob activity on the streets of L.A. and (2) show up the idiots in charge of that city and state for the ineffectual dunces they are — without tipping over into Kent State territory. And Trump has called their bluff. They were counting on what usually happens when the professional agitators in blue cities start getting frisky — they get catered to by the Democrats who run these urban areas. The Democrats react like a mommy while Trump reacts like a daddy. He’s not taking any of their guff, but what is important is that he understands that this is an information operation. He escalated by activating the California Army National Guard — I was a deputy commander of the brigade Trump called out and on the streets with the Army during the Los Angeles riots — but not so he could go kinetic. He’s not calling in the Guard or the Marines to bust heads or quell disorder, like we did in 1992. The guardsmen are basically providing point security around federal facilities to free up federal cops to go out and do cop things like arrest scumbags. What Trump is doing is messaging to the country that he’s not taking their crap. He’s not going to be intimidated. He’s not going to let this get out of control. The ones who are letting it get out of control are the Democrats who run California, like slack-jawed moron Mayor Karen Bass and Governor Gavin Hairstyle. Let’s understand the relationship between the riots and the Democrat establishment. The rioters are catspaws, cut-outs whose act of violence and intimidation support Democrat policies even as the Democrat establishment pretends to be upset about the chaos. However, the Democrats must at least appear to be trying to maintain order. Trump knows that is one of their weaknesses. He is sticking them with the consequences of their own disorder. Have you noticed how the Los Angeles Police Department, Los Angeles sheriffs, and the California Highway Patrol are the ones dealing with riots? They are the ones who look powerless in the face of the rioters. This, in turn, makes Gavin Newsom and his pals look powerless – an image compounded when they whine and complain impotently about Trump calling up the Guard and Trump ignores them. The question is what’s next. We know that Newsom and California’s bumbling attorney general, Rob Bonta, are threatening to sue the president for intervening… So you’re aware: Some district court judge is going to issue an injunction and order troops be forcibly removed from Dept. of Defense command. This is Gov. Newsom overtly attempting to create chaos, the side effects of which will put Guardsmen in danger. https://t.co/NZjOWMSTd3 — Tony Kinnett (@TheTonus) June 9, 2025 …and when they do, we’ll have the potential for a real constitutional crisis — because it isn’t in Newsom’s interest for the riots to calm down as a result of federal action, and it might not be in his power to stop them if ICE is going to continue conducting raids. And ICE is going to continue conducting raids in Los Angeles. Not just to deport people. Again, the raids that spun up David Huerta and then the entire structure of the Democrat Party were in pursuit of law enforcement activity against the Mexican drug cartels. Which makes you wonder who is actually in charge of the Democrat Party, both in California and the rest of the country. So they poked the cartels, and the entire Democrat party started squalling and rioting. Interesting. — Interesting Times (@FreeTheBee22) June 9, 2025 This certainly isn’t going to end well for them. Let’s hope it ends well for the country. It’s beginning to look like those are mutually exclusive outcomes. READ MORE from Scott McKay: Five Quick Things: Is Katie Hobbs a Traitor? Get Rid of Habiba Soliman The Lamest Opposition in American History The post Los Angeles Isn’t What’s Burning. The Democrat Party Might Well Be. appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

Israeli forces recently boarded a yacht — but not just any yacht. This one carried none other than Greta Thunberg and her flotilla of activists, armed with cameras and a cause. Israel intercepted the vessel as part of its naval blockade, a blockade the country deems essential to stop weapons from reaching Hamas. Within minutes, slick pre-recorded videos surfaced online. “If you see this, we’ve been intercepted and kidnapped,” the activists intoned, as if starring in their own Netflix docudrama. But they weren’t kidnapped. They were stopped — and for good reason. You see, Greta needed a new mission. The climate scare has gone stale. Climate strikes now feel like performance art without a crowd. Greta milked that movement for all it was worth. She scolded world leaders, graced magazine covers, and scowled from yachts — but the act wore thin. The public lost interest. And so did she. So Greta found a new crisis. A hotter one. Messier, bloodier, morally juicier. Because when climate fatigue sets in and your brand starts slipping, you don’t go quiet. You go bigger. You get on a boat. You sail into a war zone. Greta: Narcissist, Not Saint Greta isn’t an aid worker. She’s not a diplomat. She’s not a logistics expert, a regional scholar, or a wartime negotiator. She is, however, extremely good at one thing: turning tragedy into a backdrop for personal branding. Her latest performance wasn’t about delivering aid. It was about delivering Greta. Into the headlines. Into the hashtags. Onto the podium at the next U.N. summit. Greta claimed she and her colleagues were carrying humanitarian supplies — diapers, medical kits, water purification tools. And maybe they were. But humanitarian convoys don’t usually livestream their location, invite celebrity guests, or make pit stops in Italian ports for media opportunities. Real aid workers go quietly. Greta doesn’t do quiet. She’s clickbait. She offers moral insulation and instant media payoff. Her involvement guaranteed that any Israeli move to block the boat, even if done peacefully, even if no one was harmed (which they weren’t), would be splashed across the front pages and spun into a tale of cruelty and overreach. “Look at what they’re doing to Greta,” the headlines will scream. But the real headline should be this: Gaza was only ever the set. Geta was always the story. This isn’t the first time she has turned chaos into content. She has a history of parachuting into complex global crises and reducing them to black-and-white narratives that flatter her moral posture. Whether it’s the climate, the pandemic, or now Palestine, the message is always the same: Greta knows best. Greta is pure. Greta is brave. Follow Greta. But Gaza isn’t a photo op. It’s a powder keg. Hamas uses aid tunnels to smuggle weapons. Israel faces existential threats from its borders and beyond. Every action in this region has consequences. Every breach of the blockade, no matter how symbolic, is an invitation for escalation. Greta doesn’t understand that. Or worse — she does, and simply doesn’t care. Because again, this isn’t about Gaza. It’s about Greta, who climbed aboard a boat wrapped in righteousness, flanked by activists with GoPros and martyr complexes, and headed straight into one of the most sensitive military zones on Earth — hoping, perhaps even praying, that Israel would do exactly what it just did: stop her. That, I argue, was always the goal. Force the Israeli hand. Get footage of the IDF intercepting a boat with a Scandinavian saint on it. Frame it as David versus Goliath, even though this David has a publishing deal, a global PR team, and a devoted army of online acolytes ready to scream “war crime” at the click of a button. This is the new activism. Less about resolution, more about performance. Less about humanitarian logistics, more about optics and outrage. And in this strange new world, Greta plays the lead. But it’s not courageous to insert yourself into a live conflict for attention. It’s reckless. It’s exploitative. It’s narcissism wrapped in a Palestinian keffiyeh. Israel had every right to block the flotilla. Not because of who’s on it, but because of what it represented — a deliberate provocation designed to undermine a legal blockade while disguising itself as a milk run. If the 22-year-old truly cared about the people of Gaza, she’d stay off the boats and out of the cameras. She’d advocate for regional ceasefires and real diplomacy. But that’s not what gets applause. Or followers. Or glowing write-ups in the Guardian. So she staged a charity stunt with a built-in press tour. The glorified influencer chose to chase relevance across the Mediterranean. Gaza deserves aid, but it also deserves honesty. The truth is, Greta isn’t going to save Gaza. She’s just making sure Gaza keeps the spotlight on her. READ MORE from John Mac Ghlionn: Why Gen Z Is Giving Up on Sex, Love, and Each Other Joe Rogan, Bono, and the Church of the Self From Boston to Berlin: How Dogs Are Replacing Babies The post Gaza Doesn’t Need Greta. Greta Needs Gaza. appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

The past weekend saw one of America’s best-known and, for a long time, best-loved cities erupt in violent riots. Fires raged across Los Angeles as rioters waving foreign flags hurled everything from rocks and concrete slabs to fireworks and Molotov cocktails at federal law enforcement agents. Why? Those agents were tasked with carrying out the mass deportation agenda that played a key role in getting President Donald Trump elected a second time in a historic landslide victory. In other words, illegal immigrants waved Mexican flags, burned American flags, terrorized an American city, and assaulted officers of American law in order to… stay in America and not be sent back to the country whose flag they were waving. These are not rioters fighting to stay in the adopted nation they now call home, but foreign invaders who have claimed our nation as their own. It doesn’t make sense. At first glance, it even seems comically illogical and cognitively dissonant. But a second or maybe even a third glance quickly reveals the far less comical truth: These are not rioters fighting to stay in the adopted nation they now call home, but foreign invaders who have claimed our nation as their own. They are not throwing a tantrum because they don’t want to be sent home — as far as they’re concerned, they are home, and federal forces are trying to reclaim the land that they so easily conquered. (RELATED: The Party of Anarchy) U.S.–Mexico: National Migration Policy What is today called California was once part of Mexico, following the 1821 Mexican War of Independence, but was a full-fledged American state by 1850. Over the next half-century, the U.S. was still determining and formalizing its immigration, but the creation of the U.S. Border Patrol (USBP) in 1924 denoted a more serious approach to securing the nation’s borders. In the 1930s, in the face of the economic brutalities of the Great Depression, President Herbert Hoover moved to severely curtail immigration, including effecting the voluntary and forced repatriation of millions of immigrants who had come into the country relatively recently. From then until the mid-1960s, the U.S. and Mexico had an agreement allowing Mexican workers to temporarily visit and work in the U.S. to meet certain low-skill labor demands. Especially in California and Los Angeles, this meant working on orchards, harvesting oranges and other produce. When the program was terminated in 1964, however, the travel networks used by Mexican laborers largely remained in place, enabling many Mexicans to illegally enter the U.S. and approach their old employers. The 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act and the aggressive 1954 Operation Wetback did little to address the issue of continuing illegal immigration, although the former allowed for the deportation of those in the U.S. illegally and the latter specifically targeted Mexican laborers in southern California. But with migration networks still in operation, it was only a matter of time before at least one million who were deported returned. The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 placed more severe limits on legal entry into the U.S., but still failed to break the migration networks so many were using to enter the U.S. illegally. L.A. adopted certain “sanctuary” policies in the 1970s, becoming a sort of haven for illegal immigrants. (RELATED: Sanctuary Cities: The Dangerous Illusion of Virtue) By the time Ronald Reagan was in the White House, there were millions of illegal immigrants in the U.S. Most of the Mexican nationals were centered in Los Angeles, due partly to the city’s proximity to the border, partly to its labor market, and partly due to networks established there by Mexicans in the days when immigration law was much less clearly defined and vigorously enforced. The “invasion” witnessed even today, polluting the streets of L.A. with violence and mayhem, may have been initiated a century ago or a half-century ago, but its insurgent nature became clear about 30 years ago. In 1994, California voters approved Prop. 187, which ensured that taxpayer-funded services such as public education and healthcare were not provided to illegal immigrants. A federal judge struck down the measure, somehow arguing that immigration was the purview of the federal government and that the state, therefore, had to incentivize illegal immigration on the taxpayers’ dime. In cities like Los Angeles, the immigrant population overwhelmingly began voting for candidates and politicians who supported immigrants — legal or otherwise. As immigration enforcement ramped up in the late 1990s and 2000s, L.A. became an illegal immigration destination, a safe harbor for those who otherwise faced arrest and deportation. The most recent L.A. riots are, in part, the result of noncomprehensive immigration policy and enforcement, but, far more significantly, of a foreign people effectively taking over the second-largest U.S. city and remaking it in their own image. This is no simple matter of a handful of rowdy thugs trying their luck at taking on the city’s police force. This is a matter of an extraordinarily high volume of generations of insurgents being told that they have to leave the city they captured decades ago. These riots pose a crucial and fundamental question for Americans: Do we have a nation? We ought to. We have a Constitution and thousands of legal documents and court rulings — not to mention hundreds of years of our ancestors’ blood, sweat, tears, and toils — that all say we have a nation. But whether or not we have a nation de jure, the response to L.A. will decide whether or not we have a nation de facto. If American cities can be systematically taken over and turned into satellites of foreign nations, if American authorities are not allowed to expel the invaders, then we do not have a nation, simply a constellation of satellites-in-making for foreign entities to take over and claim as their own. Do we have a nation? Or are we ripe for the third world’s pillaging? READ MORE from S.A. McCarthy: Christopher Wray Lied: The FBI Was Targeting American Catholics Germany Models How to Starve the Catholic Church Catholic Decline and Christian Revival in Ireland The post Do We Have a Nation? appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

On June 9, the U.S. reinstated a travel ban on 12 countries — not for ideological flash, but for measurable risks: failed vetting, terrorism links, and biometric failure called out for a new policy. Countries like Iran, Afghanistan, Syria, and Somalia are now blocked — but not without cause. Iran and Syria have repeatedly failed to share real-time intelligence on known extremists. Afghanistan’s collapsed governance makes identity verification nearly impossible, while Somalia was cited in DHS reports for issuing thousands of untraceable passports. Beyond politics, there’s the human cost. Over 8,500 migrants died globally in 2023 — many via smuggling or unsafe crossings. These aren’t policy preferences — they’re security gaps with fatal potential. This isn’t arbitrary. It’s driven by data: DHS recorded 565,155 visa overstays in FY 2023 — more than the population of Reno — with 510,000 still unaccounted for. These overstays have now quietly outnumbered southern-border illegal crossings every year since 2016. (RELATED: Unseen, Unchecked, Unsafe — America’s Visa Overstay Problem) The trigger was the Boulder firebombing on June 1, 2025, when 26-year-old Mohamed Sabry Soliman, an Egyptian national on an expired B1/B2 tourist visa, threw two Molotov cocktails at a Colorado event supporting the hostages held by Hamas, injuring 12. Soliman had overstayed by over three years. DHS records indicate that despite multiple flagged entries in DHS’s Arrival and Departure Information System (ADIS), no removal proceedings were initiated. It wasn’t merely a policy failure — it was a breakdown in enforcement, tracking, and political will. (RELATED: Get Rid of Habiba Soliman) Today’s enforcement is tech-driven. AI scans passports and behavioral patterns, flagging anomalies in real time. Risk scores determine tiered bans. Passports aren’t manually checked — they’re algorithmically vetted. (RELATED: How Student Visas Became the New Trojan Horse for Immigration Fraud) The 2017 travel ban was chaotic but effective. Visa overstays from targeted countries dropped by 38 percent. In response, Somalia digitized passports, and Ethiopia adopted Interpol biometric protocols. Trump v. Hawaii (2018) affirmed presidential power under INA § 212(f) to restrict entry when deemed in the national interest. Under Biden, border enforcement buckled: 2.4 million illegal crossings occurred in 2023 — the highest in U.S. history. In 2024, 736 individuals on the FBI’s terror watchlist were intercepted at U.S. borders. The fiscal fallout is no less urgent. New York City spent $4.3 billion on migrant services in 2024. California’s costs neared $31 billion, and Illinois topped $3 billion. The national cost of illegal immigration — $151 billion annually, a 30 percent rise since 2017. A Sound, Fair Travel Ban This isn’t racism — it’s arithmetic. Nations unable to verify citizen identities — Iran, Syria, North Korea — face full bans. Others, including Pakistan and Nigeria, face conditional restrictions pending compliance. This isn’t just domestic policy — it’s foreign policy. The African Union condemned the ban for undermining academic and diplomatic ties. Chad suspended visas for U.S. citizens, citing “national dignity.” Iran’s Supreme Leader called the policy “supremacist,” while Venezuela accused the U.S. of “weaponizing border policy.” Somalia, meanwhile, pledged biometric reform to align with U.S. standards. (RELATED: Trump’s Populist Immigration Stance Is Emboldening Countries Worldwide) Beyond politics, there’s a human cost. Over 8,500 migrants died globally in 2023 — many via smuggling or unsafe crossings. Mariam from Chad was one: abandoned in Libya by traffickers, rescued by Italians, and denied asylum due to document failure. Policies that prioritize order over desperation aim to prevent fates like hers. And unlike prior versions, this ban includes key exemptions: green card holders, Afghan SIV recipients, persecuted minorities, and dual nationals. This is not a wall — it’s a filter. The legal foundation remains clear. Trump v. Hawaii remains precedent. The DHS algorithm is operational. And the international backlash-however loud — is evidence that this doctrine matters. The firewall is up. It’s a strategic threshold-powered by code, backed by law, and already reverberating from Chad to Caracas. READ MORE from Kevin Cohen: Unseen, Unchecked, Unsafe — America’s Visa Overstay Problem How China Is Quietly Outsmarting the West The post The Travel Ban Policy Overhaul appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

“Insurance Fraud,” editorial cartoon by Yogi Love for The American Spectator on June 9, 2025. The post Insurance Fraud appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.