He will lose his job over this

As a combat veteran who witnessed Sharia law firsthand in Afghanistan, it blows my mind that this is even a conversation in America. I’ve seen what it does to women. It’s brutal and oppressive. Any “influencer” or podcaster telling you to stay home or vote Democrat this November is rooting for this country to fail. Republicans aren’t perfect, but communism and Sharia law are a hell of a lot worse. I didn’t fight this crap overseas just to watch people welcome it here. America is worth protecting. Go out and vote this November.

This is absolutely incorrect. I have been the Washington Bureau Chief (or Washington Political Editor — previous title) of Breitbart since October 2015. I was a reporter at Breitbart from December 2012 until then. So I’ve been here 14 years basically. I know every in and out of this fight. We did NOT have pool access during Biden which was NOT a decision by the Biden White House but by the WHCA. So it’s actually WORSE than Vance is saying. The media themselves ganged up on us and in a totally underhanded way altered their rules to try to silence us. The WHCA is a corrupt organization and @JacquiHeinrich knows this all and yet does nothing to fix it. Here’s the truth of what happened: We actually got our first hard badge during the end of the Obama administration. The Obama White House was actually very nice to us, and while we had clear political disagreements they were fine to work with and we did great stories from there. We had hired our first White House correspondent then, and he covered the White House and regularly attended press briefings. He also occasionally did pool coverage. It was a huge moment for us. We had the hard badge credentialed White House correspondent up through the beginning of Biden and believe it or not, the Biden White House did allow us into some briefings. Whether they called on us was a different story. Happened occasionally. But we never had hard badge problems actually. To be clear, at some point during Biden Administration, we went separate ways with our then White House correspondent and didn’t refill the role until Trump term 2 so we didn’t have a hard badge correspondent during that time. But that was our decision not Biden White House — who to be clear and I’ve seen some of them talking about this never stripped us of that. But there is a MASSIVE difference between access to the briefing room and briefings and pool access and that’s where the legacy establishment media are so underhanded and dishonest. Up until THIS administration pool access had been solely determined by the WHCA. The WHCA when Trump won the first time colluded with the Senate Press Gallery to change its membership rules — this happened early 2017 — to strip us of our voting membership which we began under the Obama administration. The Senate Press Gallery stripped us of our Capitol credentials based on a lie — that has since been rectified and we have them on the Hill again — and the WHCA stripped us of voting membership, which we had, by changing its rules arbitrarily. The WHCA does NOT allow under these new arbitrary rules any member without voting rights to have POOL ACCESS. Pool is the key — it’s where the President and key members of the administration interact with a smaller group of press daily than the broader entire White House press corps. That’s like when you see the president taking questions in the Oval Office or something. So we were stripped from the pool BY THE REST OF THE MEDIA during TRUMP TERM 1. Biden did not fix this during his term; Trump term 2 HAS FIXED IT, they added new media to the pool and we regularly have our White House correspondent in the pool and he asks great newsworthy questions often of the President, Vice President, and cabinet officials. The WHCA still does not allow people like us to be voting members; it still does not allow people like us to be members of the pool. The ONLY reason we have that access is because the Trump White House has gone out of their way to add the new media components to press coverage and overrode the WHCA to add new media to the pool. So it’s actually way more complicated than what Vance is saying— in fact the truth makes the media look even worse because it was the MEDIA who censored us thereby making all these people whining about what Trump is doing massive hypocrites (as far as I’m concerned for what it’s worth I could care less whether they have press badges and what not but the idea they are crusaders for the First Amendment is ridiculous nonsense) — but what Sam is saying here is absolutely untrue. Because of the WHCA we didn’t have pool access then. So it’s technically not Biden’s fault or Trump fault in term one, but until Trump term 2 the White House didn’t lift a finger to help us when the rest of the media ganged up on us to try to silence us. Because of what @karolineleavitt and her team did in this administration, Trump term 2 is actually genuinely the most transparent administration I’ve covered and that dates back to Obama — I covered both of Obama’s terms, Trump’s first, Biden, and now Trump term 2. All that said, we should all be asking ourselves why a cartel of global corporations— the WHCA is exactly that — is so hellbent on silencing an outlet with approximately just under a hundred journalists with laptops. Why do they hate us so much? Maybe it’s because time and again we continually show them up and beat them to absolutely massive stories. Maybe just maybe these mega corporations like FOX, CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC, NYT, WAPO, AP, etc are using their collective corporate power through a corrupt institution to silence the one little guy who regularly kicks their asses in news. Just saying.

President Trump has called for the MMR vaccine to be split into three separate single-dose vaccines administered at separate visits. Merck's response: it could take up to ten years. The single-dose measles vaccine already exists. The Serum Institute of India is the world's largest supplier of monovalent measles vaccine. Japan produces a single-dose mumps vaccine. Merck is not being asked to invent anything. It is being asked to stop bundling vaccines that already exist in separate form and submit them for FDA approval individually. The ten-year timeline is a delay tactic designed to run out the clock on this administration. An antitrust lawsuit decided just a few years ago revealed that Merck had falsified efficacy data for its mumps vaccine in a study called Protocol 7007, adding animal antibodies to inflate apparent efficacy and defend its claimed 95% effectiveness rate. The judge noted on the record that Merck had sought to extend its monopoly by misrepresenting facts on FDA-approved drug labeling. Separating the MMR would require Merck to submit each component to independent placebo-controlled safety and efficacy trials. That is what they are trying to avoid.

I avoided commenting on the Lindsay Clancy trial because its nuanced and emotional but the implications are enormous so I am going to say something now. A lot of people are calling that one juror who wouldn't join the other eleven irrational. But, that juror is probably the only one asking the right questions imo: where is the evidence that she lacked the capacity to know it was wrong or to stop herself? And, maybe, where do we draw the line on what an ostensibly insane person is allowed to do when the doubt the defense manufactured rests on nothing in the record before the killings? It seems that the entirety of the defense position rests on improbable probabilities and that's a low bar for such a heinous act. 1. Postpartum psychosis is rare, and almost always happens in the first 4 weeks. The idea that some psychiatrists extend the postpartum window to a year is true, but for depression and anxiety. The evidence isn't strong for psychosis, and its latching on to improbability 2. The strongest risk factor for postpartum psychosis is preexisting bipolar disorder or a prior psychotic episode. She had neither before her third child. The real time evidence from her doctors/providers indicate this. The bipolar label that showed up was after significant polypharmacy, and any good psychiatrist will tell you that you cannot diagnose primary disease when multiple drugs could be offending agents. Drug-induced psychosis would show better temporal correlations with her medications and should be a mitigation argument at sentencing. Again, very improbable alignment 3. The proxy for intent is planning, and she clearly planned... she sent her husband to some restaurant they don't normally go to, checked the drive time, texted a specific order at 5:07 pm... she killed her children in sequence. That's demonstrating real time decision making. I don't understand how they circumvented this. Again, very improbable that she was able to make decisions up until it becomes a liability 4. This idea of a "voice" that commanded her is so post-hoc as a defense. The ltierature on command hallucinations show most people don't obey them and the compliance occurs when the voice is familiar. This was a first time voice she only ever reported 2 weeks after killing her kids. And this first time voice asked her to... kill all her children AND she listened to this unfamiliar voice? Again... very improbable The improbability is so stark that it's almost undeniably a sympathy verdict from the jurors conflated with a misunderstanding of postpartum disease. The easiest way to demonstrate this is to take a father with the same chart, months of documented depression, insomnia, suicidal ideation but no psychosis then strangles his kids after arranging for his wife to be away from the house. 100% guilty. Everyone knows postpartum disease is real and important. Everyone knows she's sick and needed help, possibly much better management. You can even argue she is insane. What I see to be the most important is where we draw the line of what we allow under the "insanity" rule. Massachusetts forces a binary verdict of guilty or not criminally responsible but this is a case for the third that other states have and which is guilty but mentally ill. We have a responsibility to speak for the unheard voices of these children and future children and say we draw the line at murdering children.