Category: government transparency

Categories
crime and punishment government transparency subsidy

Learing in Minnesota

Minnesota, quality learing center, meme

These days, we are apt to see the “meme” (joke) about the news before the news itself.

Take “Learing.” If you haven’t seen Nick Shirley’s YouTube video blowing the lid off what has quickly become the biggest fraud story of our time, you may not get the joke.

Some 30 days ago, my “Red-​Flagged Welfare Fraud” decried “the more than $1 billion in fraud” conducted mostly by Somalis in Minnesota, taking taxpayer money and siphoning it off for personal and perhaps even terrorist benefit. Two weeks later, a weekend update — “Walz Waltzes, Spins” — discussed the Governor of Minnesota’s lame attempts to seem “in charge.”

Now, the fraud total is estimated to be over nine billion!

A new element of the story is young Mr. Shirley’s reporting. He went to “day care centers” all over Minneapolis, confronting “workers” and noticing there were no children actually being fed or taught. These were sham programs. 

In a partly funny moment, he appeared in front of one alleged day care that had misspelled its own name on the building’s sign: “Quality Learing Center.” 

A whole lot of folks on X — but not on BlueSky — thought this was funny-haha. 

The rest of us shake our heads. It may not even be funny-peculiar, as inquiries into more states have begun, with Washington and Ohio receiving the most attention so far.

We’ll need more Nick Shirleys to cover it all, for the mainstream press has shown … some reluctance to put in much elbow grease.

Meanwhile, there is a silver lining, expressed last night on Hannity by Terry Schilling of the American Principles Project: “It actually kind of makes me relieved that there were no children in these obviously corrupt and probably dangerous daycare facilities.”

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with Nano Banana

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
government transparency ideological culture

That Non-​Science Stink

Avi Loeb, science, space

Not long ago we were screamed at: “Trust the Science!”

So those of us paying attention came to distrust the scientists.

Especially “scientists” in positions of political power.

Sadly, tragically, more than one scientific discipline has been perverted in shockingly non-​scientific ways. A hidebound denialism about new data has crept in. Sure, it is about the money, but often we catch a whiff of ideology.

This is apparently the case regarding astronomy — about which Harvard astrophysicist Abraham “Avi” Loeb offered testimony on a recent podcast. 

In 2014, a meteorite (CNEOS 2014-​01-​08) splashed into the Pacific Ocean — too fast to be solar-​system native, says the U.S. Space Command. Without investigating, a published paper dismissed the evidence, discouraging further inquiry; Avi Loeb, on the other hand, led a team to the site, producing evidence from the ocean floor as well as an actual research paper.

Loeb’s first paper on the current obsession, the third officially recognized interstellar object, 3I/​ATLAS, was published only on the condition he took out his killer final sentence — about the possibility that the object might be technological in nature (as its anomalies suggested). 

Loeb appeased the editor …  and then wrote a whole new article on that unspeakable (alien tech) possibility — for another journal.

NASA’s also infected. After watching a recent press conference by NASA on 3I/​ATLAS, Loeb argued it would have been better to have actual scientists field questions rather than feature NASA bigwigs dutifully reciting the currently acceptable (safe?) determination that the object is “just a comet.”

“The intellectual climate, right now in Academia, is such that any new knowledge is resisted by experts,” Dr. Loeb explains. 

That’s the opposite of science. 

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with Nano Banana

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
Accountability government transparency national politics & policies

One Day an Audit?

gold, audit, UFO

“As U.S. debt soars and foreign central banks stockpile gold,” asserts a new article, “a U.S. senator today introduced a bill to require the first comprehensive audit of America’s gold reserves in decades.”

Reading the Mises Institute piece, I got a sense of déjà vu.

“Sponsored by Sen. Mike Lee (R‑UT), the Gold Reserve Transparency Act would require a full assay, inventory, and audit of all United States gold holdings,” the author, Jp Cortez, explains, “along with an upgrade in the purity of the gold so that it meets global market standards.”

The “haven’t I read this before?” thought hit me hard. Talk of auditing the gold reserves is not new. Earlier this year, in the heady days of Elon Musk and DOGE, a lot of folks dared wonder: does the federal government even have any gold at all? 

I asked the question in February, in the context (I kid you not) of UFOs!

A “Gold Reserve Transparency Act” has been introduced four times in the House since 2011, always by Republican sponsors aligned with sound-​money advocates. But it has also never passed the House, let alone advanced to the Senate or become law. 

The House Committee on Financial Services received these bills but only the 2011 version got so much as a hearing. 

No Senate version existed until Sen. Mike Lee’s introduction (S. _​_​, 119th Congress) weeks ago, which mirrors the House bill and remains unnumbered and in committee as of yesterday.

A gold audit would be very interesting. But I get the feeling this will be treated like UFOs: full disclosure forever forthcoming.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with ChatGPT/​NanoBanana/​Firefly

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
crime and punishment government transparency privacy

Transparency, Weaponized

Jeffrey Epstein, law, transparency, privacy

Transparency is usually a good thing. But so is privacy. And so, too, are limits on government power. 

Which bring me to the Epstein files — or, more accurately, those files bring me here. 

“I don’t think we’ve had a scandal like this in this country,” Rep. Ro Khanna (D‑Calif.) offered yesterday on Meet the Press, “and what we’re asking for is justice for those survivors.” 

I want justice, too — that is, the prosecution of any crime grand juries honestly believe was likely committed. 

By anyone! No matter how powerful that suspect might be.

On the other hand, the Epstein File Transparency Act, which will be voted on this week in the U.S. House of Representatives and for which Khanna is a primary sponsor, “would require the Justice Department to declassify and release all files pertaining to the prosecution of the late sex trafficker, Jeffrey Epstein.”

The public has a right to know! 

But does it? 

And if so, does that ‘right’ mean we permit the federal Department of Justice to use prosecutorial power to grab incriminating evidence on “suspected criminals” and then weaponize and deploy that information not to prosecute a crime in a court of law, but rather to publicize the damaging dirt discovered in the court of public opinion?

From then-​FBI Director James Comey’s ridiculous public preening over the non-​prosecution of Hillary Clinton in 2016 to the demanded release of the Epstein files today, we must be careful the DOJ does not become an opposition research firm for the party in power, using badges and guns. Or the world’s most outrageous doxxing scheme.

Our criminal justice system should do one thing and only one thing: Prosecute crimes.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with Krea and Firefly

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
government transparency insider corruption national politics & policies

The Stick-​to-​it-​iveness of the Deep State

James Clapper, Amy Semple McPherson, Russia, Donald Trump

“It is essential that we (CIA/​NSA/​FBI/​ODNI) be on the same page and are all supportive of the report,” wrote former Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, “in the highest tradition of ‘that’s OUR story, and we’re sticking to it.’ ”

Clapper wrote that in a recently declassified email from late 2016. It’s about RussiaGate, which his inter-​departmental team had concocted out of Clinton oppo campaign research leading up to Donald Trump’s unexpected win that year.

“This is one project that has to be a team sport,” urged Clapper, expecting unity on his scheme to undermine Trump’s presidency.

While you and I may hope that saving the country isn’t mere sport to our leaders, we should learn from divulgations of this kind. They know what they’re doing, and are serious about it, even when “sticking to” an obviously nutty story.

Do you remember where that phrase came from?

On May 18, 1926, Aimee Semple McPherson vanished while swimming at Venice Beach, California. A massive search — involving divers, the Coast Guard, and a $25,000 reward — came up bupkis. But this media innovator and founder of the International Church of the Foursquare Gospel reemerged five weeks later near the Mexican border, saying she had been abducted by three strangers, held captive in a desert shack, tortured, and forced to write ransom notes before her escape, walking 40 miles through wilderness. Her wild story quickly fell apart as evidence of a torrid affair was made public. But in response to relentless questioning from prosecutors, journalists, and skeptics during the following grand jury hearings and trials, the Pentecostal evangelist repeatedly affirmed her account, often uttering variations on what became an infamous theme: “This is my story, and I am sticking to it.”

James Clapper channeled that while orchestrating his much more serious public fraud. And he expects to get away with it, too, like “Sister Aimee” did, through bluster. 

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with Krea and Firefly

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
First Amendment rights government transparency ideological culture social media

Google Confesses All

Google, Youtube, censorship, free speech, Covid, 2020 election, fraud

Google is no longer silent about whether the Biden administration pushed Google to censor customers for their viewpoints. 

Under Biden, Google censored YouTube content creators under federal pressure, specifically about COVID-​19. But Google did muzzle discourse on other matters, such as disputes about the legitimacy of the 2020 election, as a result of its own policies that it now says are “sunsetted” along with policies resulting from its submission to a rogue administration.

Its own role is important because we know that a tech giant can effectively resist federal pressure to censor on the basis of the principles of the company’s leaders.

The proof is how Twitter changed course while Biden or his autopen was still the president. Twitter revamped its policies after Elon Musk ascended to the helm, starting to welcome back those who had been censored under the previous owners.

Yes, Elon Musk found himself under assault from every direction from a variety of federal agencies; which, it seemed, were acting as if in concert with and at the behest of a foiled Biden administration. Musk’s opposition to censorship and documentation of administration pressure to censor was not risk-free.

Now Google is following suit. When restoring freedom of speech is lots less risky.

Let’s hope Google’s words now decrying censorship, and its still-​in-​progress efforts to make things right — inviting the return of former YouTubers whose channels it had censored, for example — will render the company less eager to cooperate when the next pro-​censorship administration takes power.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with Krea and Firefly

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
crime and punishment government transparency

The Case of the Phony Stats

Charlotte Djossou, Washington D.C. crime, crime stats, police

One theme of The Wire, a series about the war on drugs in Baltimore, is the willingness of police department leaders to fake crime statistics.

Despite a few flights of fancy, the drama prided itself on its realism. It turns out that in reality, too, police department bosses may be willing to rewrite crime statistics so things don’t seem as bad as they are.

In Washington DC, a police sergeant, Charlotte Djossou, accused higher-​up officers of repeatedly instructing lower-​down officers to re-​label everything from thefts to violent assaults as lesser offenses. All liberally confirmed by “[Metropolitan Police Department] emails, depositions, and phone call transcripts” seen by The Washington Free Beacon.

The MPD has now settled with Djossou, who sued the department in 2020 after it punished her for bringing the matter up.

One example that emerged in the legal proceedings is a 2022 deposition by Randy Griffen, an MPD commander. Griffen admits telling a police captain, Franklin Porter, to find “a solution for the theft problem, which was driving up the district’s statistics.” The solution was to recategorize instances of shoplifting and theft, now calling them “Taking Property Without Right” — “because TPWOR reports are not tracked in the DC Crime Report.”

The Free Beacon quotes extensively from court documents. Tweaking the crime stats was routine in DC for years.

The DC Police are not alone: other fictionalizers of crime statistics are known to have flourished in LA, NYC, New Orleans, and Columbus, Ohio.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with Grok and Firefly

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
Accountability government transparency insider corruption national politics & policies

RFKj’s Clean Sweep

Big Pharma, RFKj, corruption, healthcare

“All of the guardrails for this kind of a committee, which I served on many years ago, have simply disappeared,” says Sara Rosenbaum, Professor Emerita of Health, Law and Policy at George Washington University. 

She’s referring to Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy’s “retiring” of the entire 17-​member Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP).

You know, the group that did such a bang-​up job for the Centers for Disease Control during the pandemic.

“After the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approves vaccines based on whether the benefits of the shot outweigh the risks,” the BBC explains, “ACIP recommends which groups should be given the shots and when, which also determines insurance coverage of the shots.”

A lot of money rides on what this board determines, you see.

Which is a big element of Kennedy’s complaint against the whole of the Big Pharma/​Big Government complex. “The committee has been plagued with persistent conflicts of interest and has become little more than a rubber stamp for any vaccine,” he wrote in the Wall Street Journal prior to what he calls a “clean sweep.” “Most of ACIP’s members have received substantial funding from pharmaceutical companies, including those marketing vaccines.”

Various newspaper reports quote a lot of experts expressing their shock and worry, but — in the articles, mind you — avoid Kennedy’s key points.

After the corruption of “science” by Big Government during the pandemic, sweeping out the old board gets an enthusiastic thumbs up. 

Let’s hold the new board members fully accountable; perhaps they could break with tradition by not holding any meetings in secret.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with Krea and Firefly

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
government transparency international affairs media and media people national politics & policies

Lying About Killing for Votes

AOC, Gaza, Israel, war

Some foreign policy issues, such as regarding Israel and Palestine, are confusing enough that many of us tend to be wary of sharing our opinions. 

But no matter how reticent we may be, we can agree on this: there should be no outright lying about our positions. 

Mitchell Plitnick is a progressive who is willing to confront this prevarication problem forthrightly. Of the many “disheartening moments” during the last presidential campaign, “few,” he admits, “were quite as deflating as that moment when the ostensibly progressive, leading member of The Squad, Alexandria Ocasio-​Cortez stood at the podium at the Democratic National Convention and told the audience that then-​Vice President Kamala Harris was ‘working tirelessly to secure a ceasefire in Gaza and bring the hostages home.’

“We knew she was lying,” Plitnick confesses. “AOC herself knew she was lying. But it was just the message that the crowd — who were more than eager to show their support for the Democrats despite the party’s utter refusal to allow even the most conciliatory and moderate Palestinian voice to be heard — wanted to hear, and they ate it up.”

This willingness of the few to promote a blatant lie, and of the masses to believe it, might be the most disheartening thing about modern politics.

And as for the truth, how do we know Plitnick is right about the prevarications? “The utterly shameless nature of the lie has now been confirmed by no less than nine officials from Joe Biden’s administration and reported on by Israel’s own Channel 13 news program, Hamakor.…”

We, the people — pro-​Israel and pro-​Palestinian and otherwise — may all wish for a ceasefire.

But it’s clear that the last administration wanted nothing to do with it.

And lied about it. For votes.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with Krea and Firefly

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
Accountability government transparency international affairs

The Argentine Ratline

Hitler, Argentina, Nazi

In less than one month, the 80th anniversary of Adolf Hitler’s death may be celebrated — unless President Javier Milei’s formal disclosure of the Argentine “ratline” shows what a lot of people believe: that Hitler didn’t kill himself in that bunker.

Ratlines are what the human smuggling routes of Nazis out of falling Germany in 1945 were called.

And yes, Argentina was the chief receiver of Nazis. This is known. Confirmed. Not controversial.

But did the South American country accept Nazis higher up than Dr. Josef Mengele and Adolf Eichmann?

Well, the FBI was searching for Hitler in South America for decades, into the 1960s. And rumors of Hitler’s escape to Argentina have been bandied about for years and years.

But the official story, of Hitler’s suicide in the Berlin bunker on April 30, 1945, has been stuck to, its skeptics frequently “debunked,” and “experts” have been mocking “conspiracy theorists” on this matter for a very long time.

Now, however, Javier Milei — perhaps inspired by Donald Trump’s disclosure attempts regarding the JFK assassination and Jeffrey Epstein’s honeypot scheme — has set in motion the release of Argentina’s “ratline files.” 

The Argentine government has committed to declassifying and releasing all government-​sequestered information related to Nazi war criminals who sought refuge in the country after World War II. Formally announced by Cabinet Chief Guillermo Francos on March 24, the documents are said to include financial details and relevant records held by Argentina’s Defense Ministry.

What will we learn?

If we learn that Hitler lived long after 1945, what would be the repercussions?

Maybe it depends: who exactly — and in which government — arranged the escape?

Whatever the revelations, whatever the ultimate result, the Age of Deference is over; the Age of Disclosure has begun.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with Krea and Firefly

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts