The recent event in Paraguay‚ South America‚ has been termed by many as a miraculous resurrection. A newborn baby girl‚ initially declared dead by doctors‚ stunned everyone when she showed signs of life just before her funeral rites. The incident occurred last Friday at Ciudad del Este Regional Hospital‚ where a 32-week pregnant woman was admitted due to breathing difficulties. Concerned about the baby’s well-being amidst oxygen deprivation‚ doctors recommended an urgent cesarean section to give the premature child a fighting chance. Although the operation was successful‚ the newborn exhibited no signs of life—no breathing‚ movement‚ or pulse. Despite efforts to revive her‚ she was pronounced dead‚ and her body was handed over to her father‚ Ignacio Medina Vega‚ for burial. Preparations for the funeral were underway‚ with a small white coffin purchased and the baby placed inside for at least four hours before the service. As the priest arrived to sprinkle holy water over the body‚ an uncle approached the coffin and noticed the seemingly lifeless baby’s head move. Upon closer inspection‚ it became evident that she was breathing‚ with a faint heartbeat. This astonishing discovery led to her immediate return to the hospital for further evaluation. The baby‚ weighing only 600 grams‚ was placed in an incubator in the intensive care unit‚ where she continues to defy the odds. Her father‚ overwhelmed with gratitude‚ expressed the terrifying realization that they could have buried her alive. In tribute to this extraordinary event‚ her parents intend to name her Milagros de Jesus‚ meaning “Miracle of Jesus.” Doctors are still giving a “cautious prognosis” for her condition and are trying to understand under what circumstances the child was declared dead and whether all the standard procedures for her case were carried out. Hospital spokesman Federico Schrodel told reporters that they were not ruling out the possibility of catalepsy‚ a condition characterized by a lack of response to external stimuli‚ loss of consciousness and immobility of the body. “Due to prematurity‚ what could have happened to her is that she was left with practically no signs of life‚” he added. The post Newborn comes back from the dead after being sprinkled with holy water appeared first on Anomalien.com.

PBS took another bite out of the surprise decision that recently emerged out of Arizona’s Supreme Court‚ on the Saturday edition of PBS News Weekend‚ anchor John Yang really loaded the ideological dice in his introduction: “The near-total abortion ban that the Arizona Supreme Court revived this week dates back to when Arizona wasn’t a state yet‚ when slavery was legal‚ and when only white men had the vote. Many Republican officeholders and candidate scrambled to distance themselves from the law.” Yang introduced PBS’s version of a Republican guest: “Barrett Marson is a Republican strategist based in Arizona….it’s a swing state in the presidential election. You got a toss-up Senate race‚ and you got a couple of congressional contests that are going to be very close. How is this‚ what happened this week‚ the Supreme Court decision‚ going to affect those races&;#63;” Barrett Marson: ….I think last week‚ we were a lean-Trump state. And I think this week‚ we’re a lean-Biden state. I think Kari Lake is on the wrong end of this issue. And‚ in fact‚ you know‚ I think a lot of Republicans who have quite frankly championed this kind of thing for what two generations are finding themselves‚ at least in Arizona‚ on the wrong side of how voters feel about this issue. Yang: Have the Democrats picked up on this&;#63; Are they pressing this&;#63; Marson: I mean‚ that is what they are doing. 24/7. And rightly so‚ I mean‚ look‚ right now‚ you know‚ again‚ a week ago‚ I would have said the border and immigration and the economy and inflation‚ were absolutely not only the top two issues‚ but they were very much Republican issues. And now‚ I think abortion is the number one and prevailing issue. It is the issue that will take the oxygen out of the room for any other issue…. Yang likened the Republican Party’s current status on the abortion issue to being “sort of like the dog that caught the car&;#63; They don`t know what to do with it now&;#63;” Marson again flashed pro-choice credentials: &;quot;[Arizona] will have an initiative on the ballot most likely‚ and that would allow abortion up to 24 weeks. And I think that will pass maybe now with 60-plus percent of the vote if‚ especially if it is a choice between zero abortions‚ and maybe something a little bit too far to the left but better something that’s legal than nothing.&;quot; When asked about Florida’s upcoming ballot initiative to preserve the abortion option‚ Marson embraced the idea of young people voting for Democrats: Marson: Well Florida has been trending Republican‚ for sure. But again‚ this ballot initiative has the chance‚ both in Arizona and Florida‚ to bring out so many young people‚ so many first-time voters‚ and we don’t know whether they will stick around‚ you know‚ come out for the abortion initiative‚ but stick around for Joe Biden and Ruben Gallego and‚ you know‚ and Senate candidates and House candidates down the ballot. Certainly they’re going to come out for the abortion initiative‚ and it’ll be up to the Democratic candidates up and down the ballot to convince them to stick around and vote for them as well. Last month Marson appeared on the NewsHour also to suggest moderate voters like himself could vote for Biden‚ which makes him PBS’s ideal “Republican strategist.” This pro-abortion segment was brought to you in part by Certified Financial Planner. A transcript is available‚ click “Expand.” PBS NewsWeekend 4/13/24 7:05:51 p.m. (ET) JOHN YANG: The near total abortion ban that the Arizona Supreme Court revived this week dates back to when Arizona wasn`t a state yet‚ when slavery was legal‚ and when only white men had the vote‚ many Republican officeholders and candidate scrambled to distance themselves from the law. It underscores some of the political consequences of the U.S. Supreme Court`s decision to strike down the constitutional right to seek an abortion and leave it up to the states to decide whether to regulate it. Barrett Marson is a Republican strategist based in Arizona. And before we get going‚ Mr. Marson‚ something we should make clear to the viewers. You`re not working for any candidates on the ballot this fall. BARRETT MARSON‚ Republican strategist: No‚ I am not. And thanks a lot for having me on‚ John. JOHN YANG: Thanks. In Arizona‚ it`s a swing state in the presidential election. You got a toss-up Senate race‚ and you got a couple of congressional contests that are going to be very close. How is this what happened this week‚ the Supreme Court decision going to affect those races&;#63; BARRETT MARSON: Well‚ I think you said it all in that sentence there except for that was what was last week. This week now‚ I don`t know if the Senate race is a toss-up anymore. I don`t know. You know‚ I think last week‚ we were a lien Trumps state. And I think this week‚ we`re a lien Biden state. I think Kari Lake is on the wrong end of this issue. And‚ in fact‚ you know‚ I think a lot of Republicans who have quite frankly championed this kind of thing for what two generations are finding themselves‚ at least in Arizona‚ on the wrong side of how voters feel about this issue. JOHN YANG: Have the Democrats picked up on this&;#63; Are they pressing this&;#63; BARRETT MARSON: I mean‚ that is what they are doing. 24/7. And rightly so I mean‚ look‚ right now‚ you know‚ again‚ a week ago‚ I would have said the border and immigration and the economy and inflation‚ were absolutely not only the top two issues‚ but they were very much Republican issues. And now‚ I think abortion is the number one and prevailing issue. It is the issue that will take the oxygen out of the room for any other issue. So you will see abortion be front and center in every time Democrats open their mouths on the campaign stump‚ and Republicans right now just don`t have an answer for that. JOHN YANG: You mentioned Kari Lake‚ she`s running for Senate this time‚ two years ago‚ when she was running for governor‚ she called this a great law. And you`ve also mentioned other candidates and officeholders‚ who have been championing this law or this idea and now have to deal with it‚ how should they deal with it&;#63; How can they deal with it&;#63; BARRETT MARSON: Well‚ look‚ it`s been dogma in the Republican Party for‚ you know‚ again‚ two generations‚ three generations. So I think‚ frankly‚ just own it. You know‚ talk about why you are pro-life‚ talk about the benefits‚ talk about the need‚ maybe for more of a social safety net‚ but talk about the benefits of being pro-life‚ because there is no really running away. And they`re‚ you know‚ otherwise‚ just like Kari Lake‚ you look like a massive flip flopper. And you know‚ two years ago‚ she called this the model for other states. And now she`s talking about she`s pro-choice. So‚ you know‚ I think you should just a Republican candidate should just own this. They`ve been wanting to do this for a couple generations. They`ve done it‚ celebrate it and embrace it. JOHN YANG: To that point‚ you also mentioned this has been Republican dogma. They got it. They got what they wanted when they were when Roe was overturned. Is this sort of like the dog that caught the car&;#63; They don`t know what to do with it now&;#63; BARRETT MARSON: Well‚ it is certainly an Arizona where the electorate is at least willing to have some sort of legal abortion‚ whether it is we will have an initiative on the ballot most likely‚ and that would allow abortion up to 24 weeks. And I think that will pass maybe now with 60 plus percent of the vote if especially if it is a choice between zero abortions‚ and maybe something a little bit too far to the left but better something that`s legal than nothing. JOHN YANG: Florida‚ of course‚ finds itself in a similar situation their Supreme Court cleared the way for a six-week band to take effect at the beginning of May. They`ve got are likely to have a constitutional ballot initiative on their ballot as well. Is it going to have the same effect there&;#63; Or do you think it`s different&;#63; BARRETT MARSON: Well‚ you know‚ Florida is a‚ you know‚ has been trending Republican‚ for sure. But again‚ this ballot initiative has the chance‚ both in Arizona and Florida‚ to bring out so many young people‚ so many first time voters‚ and we don`t know whether they will stick around‚ you know‚ come out for the abortion initiative‚ but stick around for Joe Biden and Ruben Gallego and‚ you know‚ and Senate candidates and House candidates down the ballot. Certainly they`re going to come out for the abortion initiative‚ and it`ll be up to the Democratic candidates up and down the ballot to convince them to stick around and vote for them as well. JOHN YANG: Republican strategist Barrett Marson‚ thank you very much. BARRETT MARSON: Thank you.

Stand-up comedian Kyle Lucey has faced cancelations after other comedians hurled insults at angry protesters who were upset over a joke about Lucey's own childhood.The comedian was on an upward trajectory as a headlining comic when COVID-19 lockdowns hit‚ and with comedy clubs across the world being forced to close their doors‚ Lucey did what a select few comedians like Bert Kreischer and Ben Bankas did: He took his talents outdoors.During an outdoor comedy show‚ passersby took grave offense at one of his most personal jokes and decided to sabotage his set.&;quot;I was doing a show at a park‚ and people came up to me and pushed my amp down because I was doing a joke‚&;quot; Lucey quickly recalled.&;quot;A lot of my comedy comes from my own personal trauma. So‚ I was doing a joke about how my mom sexually assaulted me. That's a very true story‚ it's a very vulnerable story‚ and it's a story that took me years to be comfortable talking about‚&;quot; he explained. &;quot;But I guess people who weren't sitting at the show‚ they were like 50 yards away (it was at a park). They just saw a guy onstage saying the words 'sexual assault‚' and they weren't even paying attention‚ and then they came up to us‚ pushed our amp over‚ and said‚ 'You guys are promoting rape culture&;#33;'&;quot;Lucey recalled that while the angry pedestrians were voicing their opinion‚ a different comic he wasn't familiar with heckled back and called one of the activists a &;quot;queer.&;quot; The comedian stated that during the outdoor shows‚ any number of unknown people would take the stage.&;quot;You're rubbing elbows with everybody ... there's people who have schizophrenia and then people who have been headlining for 10 years.&;quot;It was from that point that Lucey started seeing content circulating online that accused him of making light of sexual assault and being involved in a nonexistent comedy &;quot;troupe&;quot; that yelled homophobic slurs at people. This was followed by venues receiving threats‚ causing them to cancel Lucey's shows.To make matters worse‚ not only was Lucey not professionally involved with the other alleged comedian‚ he said that same person has made threats to him in other instances.&;quot;Imagine I was anything other than a white man‚ imagine any other demographic was brave enough to talk about their sexual assault and then had venues pull away from them based off of no one wanting to do the research. Based off of the words of another person who literally has threatened me with death threats online‚&;quot; the comic opined.As venues were harassed about booking the comedian‚ Lucey noticed that progressive &;quot;Antifa&;quot; types were contradicting their own dogma in blaming him for talking about his experience.&;quot;If I was a female comedian talking about my experience being sexually assaulted‚ I would be brave‚ but as a man‚ people see that and it's like there's no possible way I could be telling the truth. I'm making fun of it‚&;quot; Lucey went on. &;quot;To then put any blowback on me ... that's victim blaming‚ that's what you guys like to call it&;#33;&;quot;Who decides to cancel a comedian&;#63;In terms of officially making the call to cancel a show‚ Lucey said most promoters and bookers typically don't have an opinion on any comedian's content. It is usually the owners who are looking to avoid revenue loss or damage to property as opposed to having an ideological issue with a comic's routine.For example‚ some of the threats venues faced ahead of Lucey's shows included having bricks thrown through their windows or having the locks on their doors jammed or clogged. Due to coming off of the heels of COVID-19 lockdowns‚ certain venues told him that they didn't want to take the chance of losing any more customers. Some clubs suggested moving his shows or changing the title in order for the outrage to subside.&;quot;They're in contact with us‚ the comedian‚ they're not in contact with the mob. So‚ it's easier for them just to say to the comedian‚ 'Look‚ come back in a month‚ we'll change the name for your show‚ I can't have my building set on fire right now‚' and it's just crazy that that happens‚&;quot; Lucey pointed out.The young comedian explained that in terms of online comedy videos and in-person sets‚ the dynamic is completely different. &;quot;Starting the clip one second into my set as opposed to like 15 seconds&;quot; completely changes the dynamic of a joke‚ he said. This can lead to vastly different interpretations of a joke‚ especially when lacking context.&;quot;Sometimes a clip is not framed right if there's no context in it ... it's a completely different medium online‚ and so reality could definitely be bent in a way that suits whoever's reposting the video.&;quot;&;quot;Comedians are not doing anything wrong‚&;quot; Lucey continued. &;quot;It's our job to make fun of stuff‚ but sometimes you could just wake up one day‚ and someone took a little snippet of what you said‚ and they changed the context of it to make it sound very bad‚ then it goes online.&;quot;&;quot;I know for several comedian friends of mine ... what worked in front of the crowd they were in front of that night ends up being taken out of context in a clip. Then‚ they wake up to 100 death threats in the midst of being canceled‚ then venues just don't want crazy people to come to their shows.&;quot; View this post on Instagram A post shared by Kyle Lucey (@kyleluceycomedy) Hate speech and Justin TrudeauGrowing up in Ajax‚ Ontario‚ Canada‚ the threat of reprisal from a government acting upon hate speech laws is a very real worry to Lucey.In 2016‚ this very thing happened to Canadian comedian Mike Ward. Ward was paraded in front of a human rights tribunal over a joke about a disabled singer. He eventually won a Supreme Court appeal to overturn a $42‚000 fine he received. The legal battle lasted nearly a decade.A 2007 open mic in Vancouver‚ Canada‚ also resulted in a human rights tribunal after a comedian insulted two lesbians in the audience who were interrupting his show. &;quot;It's certainly very‚ very‚ very concerning‚&;quot; Lucey said of hate speech laws. &;quot;It's very alarming that laws like this could even be considered. [They could] damage comedy‚&;quot; he added.Lucey remarked that online content in Canada is &;quot;basically already there‚&;quot; in terms of censorship. The comedian cited a video of himself calling his own family &;quot;white trash&;quot; that was censored on Instagram. &;quot;I just said in a video‚ 'I'm white trash‚' and it got taken down for hate speech ... it's just a stupid robot that's behind putting things through or not‚ and it's insane.&;quot;&;quot;If things were to get down to the nitty-gritty and go to a human rights tribunal‚ I mean nobody would be creating anything‚&;quot; he added.As for Prime Minister Justin Trudeau‚ Lucey described him as &;quot;one of the mean girls&;quot; from the movie of the same name and called the leader &;quot;exactly what's wrong with Liberals and Democrats.&;quot; &;quot;The hypocrisy‚ not following through on his promises‚ being all talk‚ no action‚ and f**king things up financially like Democrats.&;quot;&;quot;If he wants to run again‚ we should probably just do like a public pantsing‚&;quot; Lucey joked.The comedian doesn't think that the general public is radicalized or wants to stomp out free speech to cancel comedians. In fact‚ he called the idea of shaming comedians &;quot;radicalized&;quot; thinking in itself.&;quot;Most people you talk to don't prescribe to this radicalized thought of policing thought‚ of shaming thought. I think most people exist in the confines of the law ... nobody agrees with this.&;quot;In order to thrive‚ there can't be censorship of art‚ the comedian said. If everything is watered down to preapproved messaging‚ there will be no creativity.&;quot;What a weird‚ dull world would it be if you went to an art gallery and every painting was flowers. It would be too clean.&;quot;Without some off-color commentary‚ there would be &;quot;too much order‚ and it would just feel suffocating‚&;quot; Lucey concluded.Lucey has been touring as a headliner across Canada‚ and his tour dates can be found at KyleLucey.com. His first comedy special called &;quot;Damaged Goods&;quot; is on YouTube for free.Like Blaze News&;#63; Bypass the censors‚ sign up for our newsletters‚ and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here&;#33;

Just how pervasive is heart damage following even one dose of the COVID vaccine&;#63; A new study out of Saudi Arabia reveals that as many as 27% of a sample of 804 vaccine recipients reported being hospitalized for heart trouble at some point after receiving one of the COVID shots. We know the spike protein in the shots can cause a host of cardiovascular maladies. The media and medical professions have sought to downplay the prevalence and severity of the problem‚ but emerging data is confirming anecdotal evidence that the “died suddenly” phenomenon is real. Pfizer has already been fined by a European drug regulator for lying about the safety of the shots‚ yet they remain on the market. The Saudi study‚ which was published in Cureus and led by researchers at Ibn Sina National College for Medical Studies and King Faisal General Hospital‚ relied on self-reporting. Nevertheless‚ the study verified that 27% of those surveyed were‚ in fact‚ hospitalized within 12 months of receiving the vaccine. More than half of that cohort were admitted within a month of vaccination. So while not every case can be linked to the vaccine‚ given the numerous signals we already have‚ it’s a fair bet that the bulk of cases resulted from the jab. What is particularly jarring is that 58% of those hospitalized were admitted to a critical care unit‚ and about a third of the patients were hospitalized for four days or longer. More than 60% underwent at least 12 months of treatment‚ and some remained in continuous treatment through the time of the study. Just 31 of the 218 hospitalized for cardiac complications had their treatment completed in under six months. The study has some limitations. An inordinate number of the people surveyed also reported suffering from obesity‚ diabetes‚ and hypertension. If 27% seems impossibly high‚ the fact that the study cohort had so many comorbidities would help explain why. But that only raises an obvious question: Aren’t the very people who were most vulnerable to serious illness from the virus also most vulnerable to spike protein syndromes‚ particularly those affecting the heart‚ caused by the vaccine itself&;#63; The authors of the study‚ led by microbiologist and immunologist Muazzam M. Sheriff‚ tap-dance around the question by observing the study’s revelations provide “valuable insights into the safety profile of mRNA vaccines in the specific context‚ fostering informed public health strategies in Saudi Arabia.” Indeed‚ they do — especially when taken together with the wealth of research we already have linking the shots to cardiac damage. Let’s not forget that a confidential Pfizer document released by the European Medicines Agency showed that the manufacturer knew of extensive damage to nearly every organ system. The 393-page confidential Pfizer document‚ dated August 19‚ 2022‚ shows that Pfizer observed more than 10‚000 categories of diagnosis‚ many of them very severe and very rare‚ affecting 508‚351 individual case reports of adverse events containing 1‚597‚673 events. Among them were almost 127‚000 cardiac disorders‚ running the gamut of about 270 categories of heart damage‚ including many rare disorders‚ in addition to myocarditis. There were also 73‚542 cases of 264 categories of vascular disorders stemming from the shots. We could rehash three years of research‚ but let’s just focus on a few new revelations. Far from being “mild” and transient‚ a new Australian preprint found that 20 of 60 patients diagnosed with post-vaccine myocarditis still had persistent late gadolinium enhancement more than 12 months later‚ which often indicates heart scarring. Heart scarring doesn’t go away. The Epoch Times has a list of recent studies showing ominous signs of long-term heart damage from those diagnosed with myocarditis. The catastrophic fire we see from a steady stream of academic research was reflected in the “smoke” the U.S. Centers for Disease Control detected from the first day of the vaccines’ release in December 2020. Thanks to court-released documents from the secret V-Safe program‚ we are beginning to view the 780‚000 reports from some 523‚000 vaccinated Americans who reported dire injuries to the CDC in the first hours of the first days of its distribution.We already knew that 7.7% of this very large sample reported having to seek medical attention following vaccination. But the CDC did not establish a database to report‚ collate‚ and analyze injuries by category. Instead‚ they let people report back in 250 characters or less of text messages on how they felt post-jab. The Informed Consent Action Network‚ which obtained the V-Safe documents‚ learned that the very ailments that are showing up all over VAERS and in academic literature were being reported by desperate V-Safe users from day one. ICAN has received two batches of text messages so far‚ and they are remarkably consistent in reporting cardiac events‚ neurological complications‚ tinnitus‚ and miscarriages — all maladies for which we have growing evidence from academic literature and macro epidemiological data linking the explosion of these diagnoses to the shots. Oh‚ and remember when the FDA required Pfizer to conduct a study on subclinical myocarditis under the likely assumption that the diagnosed cases of heart damage were just the tip of the iceberg&;#63; Pfizer was supposed to have the study done by December 2022‚ but it still has not been produced. Pfizer has already been fined by a European drug regulator for lying about the safety of the shots‚ yet the shots remain on the market. In fact‚ the FDA rewarded Pfizer by approving its rushed‚ dangerous RSV shot for pregnant women and now seeks to expand approval to children. At this point‚ is there any amount of data or science that can stop the Pfizer juggernaut&;#63; If a generation of broken hearts is not enough to do it‚ we may be past the point of no return.

During his State of the Union Address in March‚ Joe Biden pledged never to cut a single Medicare benefit and‚ if anyone tried to do so‚ he vowed‚ “I will stop them.” That didn’t last long. Biden’s Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services cut Medicare for 33 million seniors on April 1. It wasn’t an April Fool’s joke‚ and it is definitely not funny for a majority of American seniors since they access their medical benefits through the Medicare Advantage program‚ the public-private partnership that gives seniors more choices. The cuts to this vital program are tragic for both American seniors and taxpayers. This Medicare cut is rank hypocrisy on Biden’s part — especially since he will undoubtedly‚ and erroneously‚ claim Republicans want to cut entitlements. But it could be a winning issue for Republicans. In the swing states that voted for Donald Trump in 2016 but switched to Biden in 2020 — Arizona‚ Georgia‚ Michigan‚ Pennsylvania‚ and Wisconsin — a majority of seniors get their Medicare benefits through Medicare Advantage. In Michigan‚ the state Biden is tying himself in knots to secure‚ it’s nearly 60% More and more‚ seniors are choosing MA. Every year enrollment increases. This year 33 million Americans have enrolled. That is nearly 10% of the population — an enormous pool of voters. The Congressional Budget Office predicts 62% of eligible Americans will enroll in MA in the next 10 years. And close to 90% of enrollees are satisfied with their coverage and would recommend MA to friends and family. Why&;#63; Because‚ as research shows‚ MA plans achieve better health outcomes for their beneficiaries than traditional Medicare‚ including “fewer hospital readmissions‚ fewer preventable hospitalizations‚ and lower rates of high-risk medication use.” Medicare Parts A and B cover hospital stays and doctors but‚ lacking catastrophic coverage‚ seniors need to buy Medigap in case of an emergency. There is no out-of-pocket cap for beneficiaries in traditional Medicare Fee for Service and it includes no prescription drug plan and no hearing‚ vision‚ or dental coverage. To get those benefits‚ most eligible seniors choose Medicare Advantage plans that may even include gym memberships‚ groceries‚ transportation to medical appointments‚ and other perks. All these benefits come at a lower or even zero out-of-pocket cost. Now‚ Biden’s cuts to this important program will drive up costs to enrollees by nearly $400 a year. For seniors on a fixed income‚ that’s catastrophic. This Medicare cut is rank hypocrisy on the Biden’s part — especially since he will undoubtedly‚ and erroneously‚ claim it is in fact Republicans who want to cut entitlements. Reversing Biden’s cuts to Medicare Advantage would be good policy. And making those cuts a campaign issue is good politics. Thirty-three million seniors who vote with a 72% turnout rate — the highest of any age category — is a voting bloc that can easily make the difference in hotly contested races in an essentially 50-50 America. Biden is doing better with senior voters than with younger voters‚ and that may be because of his long-standing positioning as a centrist Democrat and his Scranton Joe persona. But these cuts are radical. In attacking MA‚ Biden is aligning himself with Senators Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.)‚ Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.)‚ and Congressional Progressive Caucus Chairwoman Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) This presents Republicans with an opportunity to peel off voters who will certainly not be happy to hear that Biden is breaking his promise and cutting Medicare. And we must make sure they do hear about it. According to Pew Research‚ 37% of Republican voters are seniors. That’s our biggest age cohort. And given that most eligible seniors choose Medicare Advantage and about 90% of them are happy with it‚ we should ring the bell on this issue from now to November. Democrats constantly accuse Republicans of “pouncing” on this or that. Expect Republicans to‚ in fact‚ pounce on this issue. If I were advising my former congressional colleagues‚ I’d tell them that preserving Medicare Advantage is an issue that can make the difference in keeping the House come November.

When the U.S. House passed the Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act‚ which reauthorizes the FISA Section 702 surveillance authority‚ it overlooked something big — an amendment that would drive the greatest expansion of government surveillance authority in recent history. The Senate has time to correct this and restore balance between the needs of national security and the safeguarding of Americans’ civil liberties. Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act is a legal authority enacted by Congress to enable the surveillance of foreign threats located abroad. But it has increasingly become a means of monitoring Americans located within the United States whose communications are often caught up in the government’s global trawl of data. The new expanded definition of the Everyone’s a Spy provision is much broader than what many members of Congress thought. Section 702 authority has been used millions of times in recent years to query‚ or target‚ Americans’ communications. In the House‚ reformers proposed an amendment to add a warrant requirement before the government can query a U.S. person’s data. That amendment‚ which failed in a tie vote‚ was the primary focus of debate on the bill. As the RISAA comes to the Senate‚ attention is now being cast on another amendment — one from the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence that many have come to call the “Everyone’s a Spy” provision. This measure was portrayed as a “narrow” definitional change to the law concerning electronic communications service providers — big telecom and internet companies — which obligated them to cooperate with NSA surveillance. These big companies can be compelled to spy for the government‚ then be subject to gag orders‚ forbidding them to tell customers they have been surveilled. The new expanded definition of the Everyone’s a Spy provision is much broader than what many members of Congress thought. It would give the government the right to similarly compel millions of small businesses that provide Wi-Fi‚ or have access to routers or other ordinary communications equipment‚ to act as the government’s partners in surveillance. They‚ too‚ would be bound not to tell their customers about this surveillance. The HPSCI amendment achieves this by including any service provider who has access to equipment that transmits communications. After critics complained that digital loungers in hotel lobbies and coffeehouses would have their data hoovered up by the government‚ the authors of this amendment provided carve-outs for hotels‚ restaurants‚ dwellings‚ and community centers. This was a good PR move. But this measure still applies to most everyone — owners and operators of any facilities (other than the exempted categories) that house equipment used to store or carry data. If this became law‚ millions of American small business owners would have a legal obligation to hand over data that runs through their equipment. These small businesses could be forced to give the NSA direct access to their equipment‚ or else they might just copy messages en masse and turn them over. And when they’re done with doing their part in mass surveillance‚ these small businesses would then be placed under a gag order to hide their activities from their customers. Small businesses are just waking up to what is about to be done to them by the Everyone’s a Spy amendment. Customers are sure to be outraged when they learn that the businesses they patronize are potentially spying on them. All U.S. business might suffer‚ as this law is sure to also widen the wedge between the United States and European Union on the contentious issue of spying and data privacy. Meanwhile‚ U.S. consumers and businesses would have no legal way to resist these intrusions. It is easy to see why Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) calls this expansion of government surveillance “terrifying.” The intelligence community is pressing the Senate to act before this authority lapses on April 19. But the agencies have already secured permission from the FISA Court to continue conducting Section 702 surveillance in its current form until April 2025. So the Senate has plenty of time to act with deliberation. It can boldly strike this toxic Everyone’s a Spy amendment. And considering the popularity of adding a warrant requirement for searching for and accessing Americans’ communications caught up in Section 702 databases‚ it should do that as well. Editor’s note: This article was originally published by RealClearPolitics and made available via RealClearWire.

The No. 1 movie at the box office is a thinly veiled fantasy about assassinating Donald Trump. (Note: This column contains spoilers.)&;quot;Civil War‚&;quot; written and directed by Alex Garland‚ isn’t nearly as complicated‚ subtle‚ or apolitical as critics at the New York Times‚ Los Angeles Times‚ Variety‚ and the New Yorker suggest. The best art depicts and predicts life. Tupac made art that called for violence. Garland’s art calls for violence against Trump.The point of Garland’s movie is simple: Killing Trump is the most efficient and sensible way to end America’s political chaos. I’ve read the reviews. They all managed to avoid dealing with the obvious message of the movie. They wax on about how the movie reflects this nation’s seething political divide and a not-so-distant future when January 6-style “insurrectionists” trigger a bloody‚ chaotic civil war. The reviews waste a lot of time pretending that actress Kirsten Dunst’s portrayal of a war photographer is the equivalent of Marlon Brando’s portrait of a mafia don in “The Godfather.” Or the reviewers laud Garland for his masterful job of creating a narrative that avoids choosing a political side. The reviews all lie. Dunst’s character is uninteresting and lifeless. And Garland definitely chooses a side. To use a leftist term‚ &;quot;Civil War&;quot; is a dog whistle for Trump haters. The intent of the movie is to inspire someone or some force to kill Donald Trump. Spoiler alert: The movie ends with a black female soldier standing over a fictional U.S. president who refused to leave office. The female soldier shoots and kills the president. The soldier represented Fani Willis‚ Letitia James‚ Kamala Harris‚ and all the Democratic “woman kings” willing to take any necessary step to stop Trump. I sat inside the theater shocked. Shocked that this movie could be made. Shocked that it dominated the weekend box office‚ grossing $25 million‚ outdistancing America’s second-highest earner by $10 million. Shocked that alleged journalists could review the movie without acknowledging it’s a Trump derangement manifesto. Shocked that the movie hasn’t sparked intense outrage. Shocked that the script could be so stupid and disjointed. But then I remembered what has been done to art over the last four decades. Cinema has gone the way of rap music. A good beat and the right narrative conceal a lack of talent. Good camera work and the right narrative made “The Shape of Water” the 2017 Academy Award winner.At the time‚ I thought “The Shape of Water” was the dumbest movie I ever sat through from start to finish (my date wouldn’t let me leave). “Civil War” now tops my list. Critics are treating “Civil War” like a rap dis song. Garland is Tupac Shakur and “Civil War” is the director’s version of “Hit ’Em Up‚” the infamous dis track Tupac released attacking rivals Notorious B.I.G. and Puff Daddy. We know how that rap feud ended. Tupac and Biggie both died amid a hail of gunfire. For those of you unfamiliar with 1990s gangsta rap music‚ here’s the chorus to &;quot;Hit 'Em Up&;quot;:Grab your Glock when you see Tupac.Call the cops when you see Tupac. Who shot me&;#63; But you punks didn’t finish. Now you’re about to feel the wrath of a menace.I hit ’em up. The best art depicts and predicts life. Tupac made art that called for violence. Garland’s art calls for violence against Trump. Everything the media accuses Trump of doing on the afternoon of January 6‚ 2021 — when he allegedly encouraged his supporters to invade the Capitol — Garland’s film does over the course of 109 minutes.Trump supporters‚ of course‚ are depicted as savages and racists. An early scene captures the band of good-guy journalists engaging with three stereotypical rednecks at a gas station. The rednecks have two looters tied up‚ bleeding and hanging from a ceiling. One of the rednecks wears a cross around his neck. He’s a Christian. Later in the movie‚ another “Christian nationalist” shoots and kills two Asian journalists for the crime of being foreigners. The Christian nationalist is filling a large gravesite with dead bodies. It’s a Holocaust scene. The point is clear: The America First movement is racist and anti-Semitic. The movie is embarrassing. If it continues to do well at the box office‚ it will speak to how effective academia and corporate media have been at demonizing ordinary American citizens and Donald Trump. The fact that the movie was made‚ released‚ and not pulled from theaters speaks to how desperately the establishment wants to assassinate Trump.

The border won’t be secured this year‚ after House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) proposed a deal that breaks border security off from the little leverage Republicans had‚ leaving it to drift into the void. Republican leadership’s plan is to pass funding for Ukraine's and Israel’s wars‚ as well as a bill forcing TikTok to divest from its Chinese owner‚ a bill to seize Russian bank assets‚ and other foreign aid and sanctions‚ bundling them all together to send to the Democrat-controlled Senate. The War Party gets what it wants‚ the appropriators spend what they want‚ the latest tax bill always passes. Oh‚ and the Rules Committee‚ Johnson said in his Wednesday statement‚ will “also be posting text on a border security bill that includes the core components of HR 2‚ under a separate rule that will allow for amendments.” The process for the first vote maneuver‚ nicknamed “MIRV‚” is complex. But it comes down to combining Washington hawks’ and the administration’s national security wish list before sending it to the upper chamber as one package. The process for the second maneuver is less complex: It’s a simple betrayal of popular demands for a secure border‚ combined with what one senior GOP aide called “a pat on the head.” The problem is that Democrats don’t want to pass border security. While the White House knows the southern invasion is a serious political liability‚ the administration is more afraid of the left-wing activists in the party than of the regular voters. That means the only way for Republicans to protect the border was to attach it to other top concerns — a strategy that is dead‚ thanks to Johnson’s deal. Why Johnson ditched his promises This is not the way it was supposed to play out. We were told border security was the number-one priority for the new speaker. In a White House Situation Room meeting with administration officials‚ for example‚ Johnson presented “two essential prerequisites: security at our border‚ and critical answers regarding the funds requested.” We know this because he wrote it down in a December 5 letter reiterating Republicans’ position to one of the October meeting participants. Border security as a prerequisite for aid to foreign countries was among the speaker’s first promises and was repeated throughout his first few months in office. Border security is also among the Republican Party’s top pledges‚ repeated by candidates and politicians from the Rio Grande to Montana. More than that‚ in poll after poll‚ from New Mexico to Massachusetts‚ illegal immigration is voters’ top concern. In Washington‚ D.C.‚ however‚ it can get in the back of the line‚ behind Ukraine‚ Israel‚ Gaza‚ Sudan‚ and all the other places scheduled for the $95 billion in taxpayer funds Johnson is proposing to send abroad. So what changed&;#63; For one thing‚ Iran’s attack on Israel. Though part of a broader back-and-forth‚ and resulting in no deaths‚ the boldness of Iran itself responding (instead of using its many proxies) gave ammunition to Republican hawks eager to untie their war funds from U.S. security‚ while also giving cover to Democrat politicians targeted by anti-Israel and pro-Hamas activists. For another‚ continued Russian pressure on Ukraine frightened nervous members of both parties. “I think we’re already seeing things on the battlefield begin to shift a bit in terms of in Russia’s favor‚” Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin told the defense appropriations subcommittee on Wednesday. The Russians are beating the Ukrainians in terms of “munitions ... vehicles [and] ... platforms‚&;quot; Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Charles Q. Brown agreed. Panic in the SCIF And finally‚ there’s the SCIF‚ or “Sensitive Compartmentalized Intelligence Facility‚” where the American intel community shares secret information with lawmakers‚ who can neither confirm it nor repeat it outside the SCIF. On Tuesday‚ the Republican chairman of the House Intelligence Committee and his Democrat colleague issued a joint statement citing secret briefings that convinced them of the imminent need to send money to Ukraine‚ even at the cost of losing all leverage over the administration to secure the border. “Today‚ in a classified briefing‚” they wrote‚ “our committee was informed of the critical need to provide Ukraine military aid this week.&;quot; It wasn’t the first time a secret briefing had sent Intel Committee Chairman Mike Turner (R-Ohio) spinning. In February‚ he caused a brief panic about a new Russian secret weapon after leaving the SCIF in such a tizzy that it took statements from the White House and his Senate counterparts to calm everyone down. Johnson has been known to dabble in the SCIF as well. “When I became speaker‚” he told reporters April 10‚ “I went to the SCIF and got the confidential briefing from sort of the other perspective on that‚ to understand the necessity of Section 702 of FISA and how important it is for national security. And it gave me a different perspective.” Those sorts of meetings are almost certainly responsible for the speaker’s flip-flop on more taxpayer aid to Ukraine’s war. “Every person who's spent any time in D.C. knows the ... classified intel briefing in the SCIF is merely a leash‚” Tucker Carlson said in a post last week. “It’s a collar around your neck attached to a chain‚ and at the other hand is your handler ... telling you that if you don’t go along with the program‚ Americans will die.” Funny how the pressure works up so often for wars abroad and so rarely for deaths at home. But in Washington that pressure is relentless — and one-sided. And we see the results play out the same way‚ time and time again: The War Party gets what it wants‚ the appropriators spend what they want‚ the latest tax bill always passes. But the concerns of the American people&;#63; The invasion of our southern border&;#63; Take a number and get in line. Maybe next year. (But probably not.)

By now‚ it must be overwhelmingly apparent to every American that what candidate Barack Obama promised on the campaign trail in 2008 has come to pass. Obama touted a “fundamental transformation of America” if elected president‚ and‚ once elected‚ he proceeded to accomplish that one huge goal.It can certainly be argued that the country experienced a slow boiling of the frog during the eight years of Obama's presidency and that‚ during that period‚ the pot neither got to boil too long nor did the frog feel the heat intensely enough to hop out. Hillary Clinton was anointed by the Democrats to follow Obama to continue the unraveling of America's constitutional republic‚ replacing it with their own interpretation of “democracy.”Good men and women need to be ever vigilant. This year’s election may be our final wake-up call.But somehow out of nowhere‚ a wrecking ball named Donald J. Trump collided with the original fundamental-transformation plan. As we all experienced‚ however‚ that was only a temporary setback. Once the 2020 election was successfully rigged and stolen and a hand puppet-Biden government was installed‚ Obama and his global handlers continued stirring and reheating the pot to the required boiling point.As it turned out‚ this time around turning up the heat also necessitated putting a lid on the pot because there was a real chance that the frog might finally catch on and attempt to jump out.So‚ where are we now&;#63;The pot continues to frantically boil with the frog finally awakening to its fate — but trapped inside the pot. And the only one capable of removing the lid is that same old why-won’t-he-just-go-away-already Trump. Even with the onslaught of tactics straight out of the Jussie Smollett playbook (i.e.‚ if you can’t find a crime‚ make one up) resulting in New York- and D.C.-style “fair” trials and verdicts‚ Trump continues to generate his own heat resulting in the heads of Democrats boiling — and sometimes even exploding.What is it about Trump and‚ more importantly‚ the movement that he has inspired&;#63;One could say that the MAGA movement is the Tea Party supercharged. The Tea Party was pushback against Obama’s early years in office‚ a sizable portion of the country saying we see what “fundamental transformation&;quot; really means — pitting poor against rich‚ black against white‚ women against men‚ children against parents. We said these were not the ideals upon which our country was founded nor for which it fought.Can anyone stand in a cemetery and thoughtfully observe rows upon rows of simple‚ small‚ white crosses heading hundreds of graves that mark fallen soldiers and not reflect upon their noble sacrifices&;#63; Did these overwhelmingly young men and women not go off to war to fight tyranny overseas to preserve the God-given freedoms we peacefully enjoy here at home&;#63; What would any of them say today about their sacrifices&;#63; Would they really have gone off to fight to preserve the unraveled‚ fundamentally transformed country in which we now find ourselves&;#63; A country of:Wide-open borders allowing an overwhelming influx of unvetted foreigners‚ along with human traffickers‚ drug-pushers‚ killer gangs‚ dangerous diseases;Males claiming to be females to win swimming meets and track races against girls;Graphic sex literature being made available to kindergarteners and young elementary-age school children;Boys and girls being told they can medically and surgically change their sex if it “feels right‚” even without parental consent;Election Day becoming Election Month where one party can keep counting ballots until it has manufactured its desired outcome; andVilifying‚ even jailing‚ the opposition party with whom your party disagrees.Whenever Democrats and the left in general talk about Trump supporters‚ they always sneer when saying the name “MAGA.” But they never say the words for which the letters refer. Why not&;#63; They do not want people to hear that the opposition to their leftism comes from people who want to “make America great again.”If you love this country‚ why would you not want to see it great‚ now and in the future&;#63; And the opposite is also true. If you do not love this country‚ why would you not want to change it or progress in an entirely different direction‚ thus the need to manufacture a transformation&;#63;When you marry someone‚ after you say‚ “I do‚” you don’t then say‚ “Now that I have you‚ I want you to transform‚ to be a totally different person. I don't love you‚ per se‚ I love the person I can now turn you into.”If you don’t love this country‚ and you don’t want to leave it‚ you would stay and fundamentally transform it. And to do so‚ you would need to unravel the very foundations upon which the country was built. Unravel the unity of We the People; unravel the belief of Nature and Nature's God; unravel limited government — since these three principles alone are key to the true freedom made possible within self-government.This year’s election may be our final wakeup call.Good men and women need to be ever vigilant. We must ensure the Democrats‚ the deep state‚ the RINOs‚ and the globalists do not have even the slightest chance to solidify their scheme to fundamentally transform this great nation by completely unraveling its foundations.Editor’s note: A version of this article originally appeared at the American Thinker.