Get the ICE trucks ready for the terrorist protesters. Many shouldn’t be here. It would be a great time to look for terrorists. A protest is standing around, holding a sign and chanting. It’s not screaming at, threatening, and physically assaulting the police, blocking roads illegally, and promoting terrorism. This isn’t New York City or […] The post The Radicals Are Gearing Up – This Is Where You Send ICE Trucks appeared first on www.independentsentinel.com.

As we prepare to enter the new year, we’re taking you back to some of The Daily Wire’s best reporting from 2024. This article was originally published on February 5.  Major scientific studies on the potential harm of abortion pills were retracted by their publisher, just weeks before the Supreme Court heard arguments on the availability of such drugs. Three studies, including two on the potential harms of the abortion pill just, were retracted by Sage Publishing, an independent academic publishing company. The retraction notice states that an independent review of the studies was conducted due to a single reader’s complaint that the studies included misleading data and that the authors were affiliated with a pro-life organization, the Charlotte Lozier Institute, presenting a conflict of interest. The authors of the studies say the retractions are a politically motivated effort to discredit research that was cited in U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk’s April 2023 decision to suspend approval of mifepristone, the drug used in roughly half of all abortions in the United States. The Supreme Court is set to hear arguments in March on the legality of restricting the abortion pill based on Kacsmaryk’s ruling, proceedings that will certainly be impacted by the retractions. Dr. James Studnicki, a listed author on all three studies in question, told The Daily Wire that the retractions were “completely unjustified” and that the retractions were meant to discredit scientific research that challenged the pro-abortion bias engrained in academia. Studnicki, who trained at Johns Hopkins University and has spent decades conducting scientific research, said that he and his fellow researchers were targeted “because of the visibility of our work, because of the fact that our work was having such an influence on the discussion about abortion that was occurring in the states and in the courts at the highest levels.” One of the now-retracted studies, published November 9, 2021, found that the rate of emergency room visits following chemical abortions had spiked 500% from 2002-2015, according to Medicaid claims data. Another one of the studies, published May 20, 2022, analyzed the likelihood of recurring emergency room visits for women who did not disclose to doctors that they had a chemical abortion. These two studies were cited in Kacsmaryk’s decision to suspend FDA approval of mifepristone. Additionally, the testimony of Dr. Ingrid Skop, who was an author on all three of the articles, was cited multiple times in an August decision from the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals where the court said that chemical abortion drug mifepristone should not be distributed through the mail or prescribed via telemedicine. Studnicki added that the retractions were emblematic of the politicization of science, pointing to stances on transgender and climate issues widely held by the academic establishment. He said that proponents of abortion were deeply threatened by the overturning of Roe v. Wade and were now pushing to banish any research suggesting dangers with abortion out of the academy. “I think Dobbs really accelerated this, I think there’s a sense of desperation among those in the abortion industry,” he told The Daily Wire ahead of the retraction, which was expected. “They’ve always had the literature to themselves. All of the major health associations are pro-abortion, most of the journals are pro-abortion, all the academic departments in the universities are pro-abortion.” In previous correspondence with the authors, Sage pushed back against allegations of political bias, saying that issues identified in the articles were based on independent review by “subject experts” and methodological issues with the articles. Sage declined to comment on the retraction, but directed The Daily Wire to an explanation of its decision. No issues were raised with any of the studies until April 2023, the same month of Kacsmaryk’s decision, when pharmaceutical sciences professor and abortion supporter Chris Adkins complained to Sage about the article claiming that the study showing an increase in rate of emergency room visits was full of “dishonest science” and “grossly misleading.” The researchers were not informed of any issues with the articles until June 28, 2023, when they were informed of the complaint from the reader. They responded to the concerns on July 13, and an expression of concern was placed on the article dated July 25. After months of back and forth with the journal, on November 13, Sage told the researchers that they would be retracting the three studies. The next day, Studnicki was kicked off the editorial board of the Health Services Research and Managerial Epidemiology journal, months before the retractions actually took place. “In light of the decision to retract three research articles where you are an author, I believe that your term as an editorial board member must now come to an end. As the Editor, I appreciated your contributions to the journal,” Dr. Gregory Garrison wrote to Studnicki in an email viewed by The Daily Wire. This message came after Garrison had previously highlighted Studnicki’s research in question in an editorial for Sage in March 2022. On November 16, the researchers sent a letter to Sage requesting more time to respond to the retraction notice, saying that the retractions were “procedurally improper” and suggesting that the real reason for the retractions was to undermine their research ahead of the Supreme Court’s consideration of mifepristone. “Your decision also reflects a regrettable pattern of using scientific publications as a sword against unpopular findings—regardless of their objectivity. This further undermines the public’s confidence in scientific bodies and does a disservice to your mission to ‘advance knowledge,’” the letter from the authors said. Days after missing the initial retraction deadline, Sage responded on November 21 to the researchers giving them until November 29 to respond and denying any suggestion that the retractions were politically motivated. “Sage rejects as spurious your insinuation that the timing of the Retraction Notice was in anyway related to a Supreme Court case,” Sage wrote in a letter viewed by The Daily Wire. “The retraction of the three articles is solely based on the results of the investigation, which was completed in good faith and which Sage had a responsibility to undertake as a COPE [Committee on Publication Ethics] member and to fulfill its responsibility as publisher of the journal. Sage’s primary goal and obligation is, as it has been for over 50 years, to maintain the highest integrity of the academic publishing process. Any suggestion that politics enters into this mission is without basis and is highly insulting.” Sage claimed that one of the reasons for the retractions was that the researchers did not disclose conflicts of interests. The journal claimed that they were deceived by the CLI researchers and that they did not disclose “blatant conflicts.” Studnicki, however, said that they had made clear that their work was funded by the Charlotte Lozier Institute and that they had detailed numerous times their affiliations. The institute is the research arm of the Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America group. Both articles cited by Kacsmaryk state at the bottom, “This work was supported by the Charlotte Lozier Institute.” Tessa Longbons, another author on the studies, said that Sage was demonstrating a double-standard with the conflict of interests claim, pointing to numerous studies published with Sage Journals where authors affiliated with pro-abortion groups did not disclose conflicts of interests. For example, in one article published by Sage advocating for mifepristone access, no competing interests were declared despite the fact that the lead author is an abortion proponent and the other authors were members of an academic center that promotes abortion. No conflict of interests were declared in another article from Sage Journals written by a researcher with the openly pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute. In its letter to the researchers, Sage said that the assertion that they hold pro-life and pro-abortion authors to a different standard was “baseless and needlessly provocative.” The researchers responded by again pointing out the apparent double standard. “[If] Sage now purports to have always required ideological disclosures, Sage itself has not maintained that standard it seeks now to impose on us,” the authors said. “Despite Sage’s dismissal of this point as ‘unsupported,’ a cursory search clearly demonstrates that Sage journals have published dozens of articles on abortion access and safety by researchers affiliated with organizations with very public and open positions on abortion.” Another issue that Sage took with the studies, according to its correspondence with the authors, was that a reviewer on the article was affiliated with the Charlotte Lozier Institute. Studnicki, however, said that SAGE selects reviewers and the articles went through a double -blind process, meaning that the authors did not know who was reviewing the article and the reviewers did not know whose work they were reviewing. “We did not select the reviewer at issue, and the reviewer’s identity is still unknown to us. In fact, this reviewer may not have been a CLI associate scholar at the time of his/her review. Likewise, because Sage practices double-blind peer review, the reviewer was equally unaware of our identities when evaluating our work,” the researchers told Sage. Sage took issue with some of the methodological decisions made by Studnicki and other researchers. It criticized the November 2021 study because it used emergency room visits to measure complications from abortions. Using Medicaid data, the researchers had tracked emergency room visits for women who had confirmed abortions within 30 days of the visit. The researchers broke down the visits into categories, including abortion-related visits. Some critics said an adverse reaction to an abortion should only be counted if the visit involves surgery or hospitalization, but Studnicki disagrees. “I think that if a woman has an abortion and she starts to bleed or she starts to have serious pain or she sees some sort of discharge that is indicative of an infection, she goes to an emergency room, I think that is a serious adverse event and a complication,” he said. Studnicki said that none of the issues raised by Sage invalidate the research. He said the concerns are just a matter of researchers deciding to measure things in different ways, and not a matter of faulty data. Despite the retractions, Studnicki said that he and his fellow researchers will continue to produce quality work, saying that it was a badge of honor to be targeted by pro-abortion advocates. “This is the greatest testimony to the strength of our science that one could possibly hope for. We are doing all the right things. We intend to continue to do the right things, but it’s probably going to be harder to get things published because they are trying to tarnish our reputation,” he said.

Alright, alright, alright, Matthew McConaughey fans, the Texas native has something cool in the works for the new year. No, he’s not quitting his day job, but he plans to engage with his fanbase in a new way. According to People, Matthew McConaughey will launch a weekly newsletter called Lyrics of Livin’. He describes the new adventure as “a collection of thought-provoking notes, tips, truths, and inspirations he’s gathered over decades of life.” Matthew plans to incorporate both a written newsletter and an audio version for followers to listen to. He shared in a statement obtained by People, “I’ve journaled and scribbled down good times, bad times, turn-offs and turn-ons for more than four decades now, and as you may know, many of those journal entries were what inspired my book Greenlights.” Matthew McConaughey added in the statement Friday was the perfect day to release the newsletter. “A true parlay day, the first half of Friday’s about responsibility and WORK, and the second half is about freedom and PLAY — and Friday also comes with a 48-hour runway — before we get back to Monday,” he wrote. View this post on Instagram A post shared by Matthew McConaughey (@officiallymcconaughey) Matthew McConaughey Teased His Newsletter on Instagram He posted a quick video of his creative process on December 27. He shared clips of him typing the newsletter on his laptop and a voiceover of the thought process. This particular newsletter seems to have taken its inspiration from a Kool & The Gang Song. Matthew smiled as he composed his newsletter, wearing a shirt with a “Lyrics of Livin'” patch. Fans quickly shared their excitement. One wrote, “How you’re gonna do it if you feel you don’t have a chance of getting off the wall? Get your Love to do the dance!” This is not for you but for ALL.” These fans are already signed up to receive Matthew McConaughey’s weekly newsletter. One shared, “Love this!!! Have signed up.” So did this one. “The speed at which I went to the site and signed up!!!!” To register for a weekly dose of Matthew, head over to lyricsoflivin.com to sign up. This story’s featured image is by Featureflash Photo Agency via Shutterstock. The post Matthew McConaughey Is Making A Career Move That May Help Fans appeared first on InspireMore.

'Political weaponization of our justice system'

Biden Spent A Quarter Of His Final Year Out Of The Office

'I don’t know who this lady is'

'Honor of a lifetime'

According to the Department of Defense’s Annual Report on Suicide in the military, which outlines suicide trends among service members and their families, 523 service members died by suicide in 2023. This harrowing statistic marks the highest number of deaths since 2020. The report, released Nov. 14, recorded a striking 1,373 men and women actively serving in the armed forces who attempted suicide in 2023. Since 2005, veteran suicide rates have risen by a startling 50%, and a baffling 150% for veterans of post-9/11 wars, a trend Robert Greenway, director of the Allison Center for National Security at the Heritage Foundation and combat veteran of the Army Special Forces deemed an “unprecedented crisis in the force” in a Congressional testimony before the House Armed Services Committee. The Department of Veterans Affairs also recently released its most recent Suicide Prevention Annual Report, disclosing that the average number of veteran suicides per day had increased from 16.4 in 2001 to 17.5 in 2021. Although the Defense Department started tracking the data a little over a decade ago, these numbers support a steady and rising trend in military-related suicides over the past two decades. Unfortunately, self-inflicted deaths are just one piece of a larger mental health crisis. The VA estimates that 41% of veterans require some level of mental health care, yet of the 18.1 million veterans in the U.S., only 11% of them obtained VA mental health services. The mental health crisis has been intensified as service members who deployed during the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars transition out of the military, with many lacking adequate mental health resources to guide the transition to civilian life. An estimated 30,000 War on Terror veterans have tragically died by suicide, a staggering statistic totaling over four times the number of deaths by war violence in post-9/11 conflicts. When asked about coping with civilian life after deploying twice in active combat roles, Shane Hudson, a veteran of Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom, explained, “The misnomer is that people think it is simple to just overcome or move on …  I don’t fully believe that you ever overcome. You just learn to manage …  Some days are very good; some days are not so good.” Certain failures by the VA compound incongruity between those who need and receive mental health care. In a nonpartisan effort to address concerns, Rep. Marilyn Strickland, Rep. Mike Waltz, and eleven other members of Congress addressed VA Secretary Denis McDonough concerning deficiencies within the VA, specifically the significant cancellations of mental health appointments, as well as unreliable communication between providers and patients. “Delayed access to therapy and support exacerbates existing conditions, reduces the effectiveness of treatment, and contributes to suicide,” the Congress members asserted. Beyond its human cost, the VA’s dismal record on mental health hinders struggling recruitment efforts. Family connections are a major avenue of military recruitment. Twenty-five percent of servicemembers reported at least one of their parents having served before them. However, as the military fails to address certain institutional issues like the ongoing mental health crisis, recruitment efforts slip. Military families are now only 32% likely to recommend the forces to a son or daughter, a drop from 55% in 2016. According to a different survey, 57% of young Americans feared that serving would damage their mental well-being. Current measures in place to mitigate military and veteran mental health concerns include the Suicide Prevention and Response Independent Review Committee, designed to improve the mental health state across the military. Additionally, officials, over the next four years, plan to hire over 2,000 new providers specialized in suicide prevention. The Hannon Act also plays a key role in the fight. Signed by President Donald Trump in October 2020, the act calls for more effective mental health care and suicide prevention programs in the VA, improving access and creating more precision in care for veterans. Though these measures are beneficial, the military should not discount the impact of non-medical efforts as well. In 2023, USS Gerald R. Ford deployed with a yellow labrador retriever in an effort to improve life at sea. This, along with an emphasis on intentional fellowship among service members to care for each other, can play an immense, and in some cases a more effective, role in overcoming the challenges facing mental wellness in the services. The significance of this fight is great, not just in how it affects military retention and readiness, but more importantly in how it impacts the individual for a lifetime. There is hope in the established measures to address the mental hurt that service members are going through, yet the fight is far from over. The time is now for more reliable care, stronger leadership, and intentional fellowship inside and outside the services. The 523 suicides are 523 too many to consider this fight resolved. The post Suicides in Military Continue to Rise, the Mental Health Fight Is Far from Over appeared first on The Daily Signal.

The 118th Congress is all but over. For the House, it ended in much the same way it began: With various factions within the Republican Party jostling for their priorities and for power. Is the 119th Congress in for a repeat of those dynamics as House Speaker Mike Johnson’s gavel could be in jeopardy and President-elect Donald Trump is preparing to act on his electoral mandate by vigorously pushing a broad agenda? The 118th Congress’ opening note was a grapple for the speaker’s gavel, which former Rep. Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., ultimately secured through a number of concessions to hard-line conservatives. It crescendoed with a vote by some of those conservatives to oust McCarthy in October 2023 after McCarthy repeatedly violated the deal. Johnson was eventually named McCarthy’s successor, but he has not ushered in the change, whether by the speaker’s own doing or by other limitations, that conservatives hoped for. Things were looking up for Johnson when Republicans kept the House in the November elections, but the 118th’s coda, a continuing resolution that kicked appropriations for the current fiscal year to March, could be setting the stage for another speakership fight to start the 119th Congress. Come January, Republicans will have control of the House, Senate, and White House. Trump’s victory, which led to Republican wins in the House and Senate, likely gives the once and future president 18 months to pass his sweeping agenda before the midterm election campaigns risk stalling the GOP’s forward march. For Republicans, there is no time to lose.  As Congress prepared to pass the Dec. 20 continuing resolution, Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., announced he would not be backing Johnson’s bid for speaker come January. “[Johnson] does not have my vote,” Massie told CNN’s Manu Raju.  This is not the first time Massie has hinted he’d like Johnson out as the House GOP’s frontman. Previously, Massie, with Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, has prepared to oust Johnson for continuing high government spending.  Massie told Raju it would take “a Christmas miracle” for him to change his mind. Christmas has come and gone, and Massie has not changed his tune. With only a two-vote majority for House Republicans, mostly due to resignations from House members tapped to be in the Trump administration, Johnson can’t afford the “never-Johnson” contingent to increase its ranks. Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, was another vociferous opponent of Johnson’s negotiating strategy on the December continuing resolution. “We get this negotiated crap, and we’re forced to eat this crap sandwich,” Roy said upon Johnson unveiling the first version of the continuing resolution.  An irate Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, is seen here speaking at a news conference with other members of the House Freedom Caucus outside the U.S. Capitol on Sept. 12, 2023. (Drew Angerer/Getty Images) “Why? Because freaking Christmas is right around the corner,” Roy added. “It’s the same dang thing every year. Legislate by crisis, legislate by calendar. Not legislate because it’s the right thing to do.” Now, Roy is reportedly working behind closed doors to see whether Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, or other Johnson alternatives are viable candidates for House speaker. Rather than circle the wagons among conservatives, however, Roy is reportedly lobbying the 20 or so Republican lawmakers who held out on Jordan when the Ohio Republican was nominated to replace McCarthy. If Roy can sense these members would bite on replacing Johnson, it will be quick and easy for Roy to activate conservative opposition to the current speaker. Roy’s efforts got much harder Monday morning when Trump endorsed Johnson’s bid for another term as speaker. “We are the Party of COMMON SENSE, a primary reason that we WON, in a landslide, the magnificent and historic Presidential Election of 2024,” Trump posted on Truth Social. “LET’S NOT BLOW THIS GREAT OPPORTUNITY WHICH WE HAVE BEEN GIVEN.” “The American people need IMMEDIATE relief from all of the destructive policies of the last Administration,” Trump added. “Speaker Mike Johnson is a good, hardworking, religious man. He will do the right thing, and we will continue to WIN. Mike has my Complete & Total Endorsement. MAGA!!!” Whether it’s Roy trying to get a read on moderates or rallying his fellow conservatives, few members want to risk being on Trump’s bad side right before the president-elect is sworn in. Roy, however, is an exception to that rule. For now, it’s a win-win for Roy, who is currently seeking to be chairman of the House Rules Committee. If Roy manages to organize Johnson’s ouster, Roy will have set in motion the ascendancy of the new speaker, whether it’s Jordan or another member. That would put Roy in a good position to be chairman of the Rules Committee under the new speakership. If Roy knows internally that he does not have the support to ultimately deny Johnson the speakership, he can use a prolonged fight over the gavel to gain the chairmanship of the Rules Committee as a concession. The House Speaker’s gavel (Win McNamee/Getty Images) Whether the House GOP sticks with Johnson or decides to go down a different path, they cannot dawdle. For Republicans to make good on their campaign promises, they’ll need all the time they can get. The post Will Mike Johnson Keep the Speaker’s Gavel? appeared first on The Daily Signal.

Child Influencers on Instagram Attract the Worst Kind of Attention