This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced Tuesday that 22 mRNA vaccine-development contracts have been canceled.
The total amount of the research grants totals roughly $500 million, according to a report at Fox News.
The mRNA contracts were part of the government's Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA), a division of HHS responsible for the development of vaccines, drugs and other tools to fight national health threats. The termination of the 22 contracts follows a several-weeks-long internal review.
"We reviewed the science, listened to the experts, and acted," Kennedy said. "BARDA is terminating 22 mRNA vaccine development investments because the data show these vaccines fail to protect effectively against upper respiratory infections like COVID and flu. We're shifting that funding toward safer, broader vaccine platforms that remain effective even as viruses mutate."
In a short video explaining the move, Kennedy said the benefits simply do not outweigh the risks associated with mRNA vaccines.
The mRNA technology was hailed as part of the quickly developed COVID-19 vaccine in 2020, yet it proved to be neither "safe" nor "effective" in warding off the virus.
"This dynamic drives a phenomena called anogenic shift, meaning that the vaccine paradoxically encourages new mutations and can actually prolong pandemics as the virus constantly mutates to escape the protective effects of the vaccine," Kennedy said in the video.
For example, the secretary pointed to the Omicron variant of the COVID-19 virus, which infected many millions, including those who had been vaccinated against COVID.
"A single mutation can make mRNA vaccines ineffective," Kennedy added, noting that the same risks also apply to the flu virus.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Officials demanded to confiscate property acquired by Chabad of the Beaches, secretly exchanged anti-Semitic tropes
A fight erupted a few years ago in Atlanta Beach, N.Y., because city officials, as soon as a Jewish organization purchased a long-vacant property to use for a worship center, decided to take title to the property through eminent domain.
The fight, which erupted in 2022, immediately went to the courts and in 2023 a settlement was reached that would allow the Chabad of the Beaches to keep the property and use it for its ministry purposes.
Then city officials refused to follow the agreement.
So back to court, and now a new settlement has been reached that allows the Chabad to keep the property, provides that the town officials will grant all its needed permits and variances, and also pay $950,000 to the Chabad.
In a statement released by town officials, they said, "The settlement clears the way for Chabad to keep and use the property as a center that will provide educational and outreach activities for the entire Jewish community. Among the terms of the settlement, Atlantic Beach will forego use of its eminent domain powers to acquire the property from Chabad, pay Chabad $950,000, and ensure that Chabad receives specified permits and variances…"
Rabbi Eli Goodman said, "This marks the beginning of a happy new chapter in the Chabad-Atlantic Beach relationship. We look forward to being a part of this community, and serving our friends and neighbors for years to come."
The fight had developed between Chabad Lubavitch of the Beaches and Atlantic Beach, its zoning board, Mayor George Pappas, and other officials.
The U.S. District Court in New York did maintain jurisdiction to enforce the consent decree it issued, based on the settlement agreement.
In addition to giving up its fight for the property, the city agreed to pay the Chabad $700,000 within 90 days, and another $250,000 on the first anniversary of entry of the consent decree.
And the town and its officials are "permanently enjoined from taking an action to acquire" the property.
The settlement from two years earlier had forced the Chabad back into court when officials refused to follow its terms.
Further, WND reported that it was revealed in private messages, Pappas responded, "Very true," when a fellow town official said, "Most people don't want the Chabad and just don't want to say it. Any secular Jew doesn't want them."
The private messaging deteriorated further, with comments like that Jews "procreate" too much, "don't tip" and "are "buying the world."
The town had claimed that it wanted to condemn the property, an old bank, and take it for municipal use, as soon as the Jewish group bought it.
The original lawsuit noted that the property had been for sale for years, and the town never made any effort to acquire it until after the Chabad purchased it.
The second legal fight focused on how, "In private communications produced in this case, Village officials freely and frequently engaged in open anti-Chabad and anti-Orthodox sentiment and trafficked in vile antisemitic tropes, including that Jews are 'buying the world,' 'procreate' too much, and 'don't tip.'"
It continued, "These messages reveal that the Village's proffered reason for seizing Chabad's property is and always has been pretextual."
The first case ruled the village was not allowed to take the property, the second was for punitive damages.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
At some point, as artificial intelligence expands across the world, there's going to be a point when AI turns into genuine stupidity. This might be that point:
A judge is suspected of refusing to do the job for which he is paid, and utilizing artificial intelligence instead of legal analysis, to write a court opinion.
According to a report and Law and Crime, the lawyers in the case were "bewildered" by the statements from Henry Wingate.
He's a federal judge in Mississippi.
His order, from just a week ago, granted a request for a temporary restraining order from education groups, such as the Mississippi Association of Educators, that stops the state government from using several pats of a new law to remove "diversity, equity and inclusion" ideologies.
But the ruling contained "apparent indisputable factual inaccuracies."
The report suggested the judge may have been using artificial intelligence to write the comments.
A report at Not the Bee explained that the order later was corrected because it had "multiple errors, which the defendants noted in an unopposed motion to clarify."
For example, the judge got the names of the plaintiffs wrong. And he got the names of the defendants wrong. And he recited "allegations" that do not appear in the complaint at issue. And they are not supported by evidence. And he inserted language in the disputed law that does not appear in the original. And he included testimony from four people whose statements were not in the record.
The defendants "respectfully request the court take appropriate steps to clarify or correct the following apparent and indisputable factual inaccuracies."
Not the Bee commented, "This isn't the first time this has happened, and it definitely won't be the last: To put this in plain English, a black federal judge (likely) had AI help write an order that temporarily stopped laws passed by the state legislature and governor that would get rid of DEI programs."
The report continued, "I know legalese is boring and nerdy, but think about the implications here. The residents of a state elected politicians to represent them in the legislature. Those politicians enacted the will of the people by writing a bill that defunds and removes race-based 'equity' programs meant to discriminate against residents with European heritage as payback for past injustices against non-Europeans. That bill was then signed and passed into law by the governor.
"Then, at the finish line, a federal judge (a Reagan appointee, no less!) temporarily stops the bill from being implemented. This could very well be in his constitutional authority, but he (or more likely his clerks) decided they can't be bothered to do their jobs and explain themselves. Instead, they (allegedly) had a computer language model make-up fake rulings out of thin air. Are you starting to see how damaging this could be?"
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
President Donald Trump on Wednesday said California Democrat Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi "should be investigated" for insider trading of stocks.
His remarks came as he was asked a question about legislation introduced by Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., that bans members of Congress from owning or trading individual stocks, with it extending to the president and vice president. It's dubbed the PELOSI Act, an acronym for Preventing Elected Leaders from Owning Securities and Investments.
"I like it conceptually," Trump began noting he would have to look into it more.
"You know, Nancy Pelosi became rich by having inside information," Trump continued. "She made a fortune with her husband and I think that's disgraceful."
"What I do think is Nancy Pelosi should be investigated. She has the highest return of anybody, practically, in the history of Wall Street, save a few. How did that happen?
"She knows exactly what's gonna happen, what's gonna be announced. She buys stock and then the stock goes up after the announcement's made. And she ought to be investigated."
Trump echoed sentiments expressed by popular podcaster Joe Rogan on Monday, who indicated: "Nancy Pelosi's the head witch."
"There's like a system and they all get funded, and they all make sure that there's this kind of crooked system that will allow someone like Nancy Pelosi who – what does she make like $200,000 a year? She's worth $150 million! How the f*** did that happen?" Rogan wondered.
"If insider trading is illegal, how the f*** is it legal for her husband to make all these purchases of stock right before these giant deals came out that she negotiated? And then he gets this windfall and they get insanely wealthy! Over and over and over again!
"And there's no investigation into it, there's no talking about it. It's f***ing wild, man, It's wild sh**. And they think Putin's a mobster. What are YOU?"
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Vice President JD Vance went "scorched earth" on the legacy news media Monday for refusing to pursue the Jeffrey Epstein story during years while George W. Bush and Barack Obama were presidents.
Now, he explained, since President Donald Trump has ordered the Department of Justice to go "full transparency," "that's a criticism" of Trump.
Trump has ordered the DOJ to release all "credible" information about the sex offender who was convicted but given a light sentence, then died when he was jailed awaiting further charges.
With his remote, private island and his "Lolita Express" airplane there long have been suspicions he actively provided underage girls to a long list of clients, including politicians and celebrities.
Prince Andrew, for example, was caught up in the scandal and ultimately reached a settlement with a woman who accused him of assaulting her when she was underage.
Vance has asked whether the Trump administration was shielding anyone in the investigation, and erupted.
"We're not shielding anything. The president has directed the attorney general to release all credible information and frankly to go and find additional credible information related to the Jeffrey Epstein case. For four years, under Joe Biden's Department of Justice, the media didn't give a damn about the Epstein files or about the Epstein case for literally 20 years. … 20 years, you had Obama and George W. Bush's Department of Justice go easy on this guy. They didn't fully investigate the case. … They didn't show any curiosity about the case. And now Donald J. Trump is asking his Department of Justice to show full transparency. And somehow that's a criticism of Donald J. Trump and not Barack Obama and George W. Bush."
The Daily Caller News Foundation said Vance, speaking in Canton, Ohio, noted the absence of any reporter interest in the case for years.
"If you want to criticize the people who aren't showing full transparency, you ought to go after the administrations that went easy on Jeffrey Epstein, the administrations that concealed this case for 20 years and the administrations that failed to show full transparency," the vice president said.
Trump has pointed out that if there was any information that would damage him, the administration of Joe Biden would have used it already. "Those files were run by these people, they were run by my enemy. If there was anything in there, they would've used them for the election."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
At least seven people have been arrested on charges related to what authorities have described as a huge Alabama child sex trafficking ring.
A report from WJTV explained the Bibb County Sheriff Jody Wade said, "I've been in law enforcement for 33 years, and this is absolutely the most horrible thing I've ever seen when it comes to the victimization of children.
"I know God's forgiveness is boundless. But if there was a limit to it, I think we reached it."
The suspects could have made up to $1,000 a night victimizing children, the report said, citing law enforcement documentation there were at least 10 victims from 3 years old to 15.
Arrested were William Chase McElroy, Dalton Terrell, Andres Trejo-Velazquez, Timothy St. John, Rebecca Brewer, Ricky Terrell and Sara Terrell, and pending charges allege rape, sodomy, sexual abuse, sexual torture, human trafficking and kidnapping, the report noted.
"No child deserves this. That's the most horrible thing you can do. The power and control of it, the stealing the innocence of a child and the horrible victimizations they went through with these monsters," Wade said.
The report said Wade believes the violence to have ties to the Sureños gang, which he said is mostly funded through child sex trafficking.
Wade explained in the report the investigation began in February when the Alabama Department of Human Resources got allegations of child abuse. Sheriff's officers eventually have the children in a bunker behind a home.
Wade described the confinement of the children. "It depends on what appointment time the offenders had. Sometimes, the children would be there, tied to a pole that was there, bound to a bed that was there, or a chair that was there. Sometimes, there would be multiple people that would come by and victimize these children on a nightly basis."
The sheriff said his hope was that the abuse would end up a "blurry memory" for the youngest victims, but he said for the older children, "They'll carry this vividly for the rest of their lives. … You can't heal from this, but you can move on as best as you can."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
The U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Committee has updated its gender policies to comply with President Trump's executive order barring men from competing in women's sports.
While the committee's 27-page updated "Athletic Safety Policy," does not mention "transgender" athletes, it includes language saying it will comply with Trump's order, EO 14201.
"The USOPC will continue to collaborate with various stakeholders with oversight responsibilities, e.g., IOC, IPC, NGBs, to ensure that women have a fair and safe competition environment consistent with Executive Order 14201 and the Ted Stevens Olympic & Amateur Sports Act," the document says.
According to NBC News, U.S. Olympic & Paralympic Committee CEO Sarah Hirshland and President Gene Sykes acknowledged the update in a letter to the Team USA community.
"As a federally chartered organization, we have an obligation to comply with federal expectations," they said. "The guidance we've received aligns with the Ted Stevens Act, reinforcing our mandated responsibility to promote athlete safety and competitive fairness."
The updated policy "emphasizes the importance of ensuring fair and safe competition environments for women," with all national governing bodies required to update their policies to align with the updated guidelines, they added.
The National Women's Law Center was quick to denounce the committee's move. "Without any process or clarity about its decision, the U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Committee has let Trump rewrite its rules in a cruel effort to deny transgender women the opportunity to participate," said a press release from the group.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A federal judge has concluded, apparently, that abortion industry giant Planned Parenthood has a constitutional right to have tax money.
A report at Fox News reveals a leftist judge chosen for her lifetime appointment by abortion-promoting Barack Obama has temporarily blocked the administration of President Donald Trump from stopping the flow of tax money, through Medicaid, to the abortionists.
Congress called for those funds to be stripped from Planned Parenthood's corporate coffers, and Trump signed the bill, making it the law of the land.
Judge Indira Talwani, whose leftist activism runs deep, has given the abortion industry a preliminary injunction claiming the bill "unconstitutionally" punishes Planned Parenthood groups that do not abort unborn children.
Talwani's order came in a lawsuit brought by Planned Parenthood, the nation's largest abortion business.
A commentary by Olivia Summers, senior litigation counsel with the American Center for Law and Justice, explained the partial injunction "twisted the First Amendment into a shield for abortion providers—protecting not just their speech, but their funding. Congress has every right to decide that taxpayer dollars should not flow to abortion providers or their affiliates."
Her warning was that, "This ruling effectively grants Planned Parenthood a constitutional entitlement to federal funds."
She continued, "This decision carves out a dangerous privilege—one that elevates abortion providers above every other grantee, creating a special class of government-sponsored speakers. It lays the groundwork for permanent entrenchment of abortion groups within the federal funding landscape, shielding them from the political accountability that applies to everyone else.
"Once again, the abortion distortion is at work—where normal rules of law are suspended simply because abortion is involved. A routine federal funding decision becomes a First Amendment violation. A restriction on one of the most powerful and politically connected lobbying networks in America somehow becomes an equal protection problem. The court treats Planned Parenthood not as the pro-abortion advocacy juggernaut that it is, but as a fragile association of speakers whose funding must be constitutionally guaranteed."
WND previously reported about the judge, who was determined by commentator Nathan Stone at the Federalist to be delivering "judicial terrorism."
"Indira Talwani, an Obama-appointed judge of the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts, ushered in the next chapter of judicial supremacy when she blocked the provisions of the 'big beautiful bill' which deprived Planned Parenthood and its affiliate organizations of Medicaid funds," Stone explained. "If Judge Talwani had 'found' those provisions 'unconstitutional,' or if she had found the whole reconciliation package 'illegal'" it would be another example of judicial usurpation. Business as usual. But she didn't do either. Talwani's temporary restraining order commands that the executive ignore the law and keep shoveling the Benjamins to feed abortions. As Dan McLaughlin said on X, 'You can't argue with the judge's reasoning because there isn't any.'"
The order from Talwani is just part of a campaign on the part of judges at the entry level courts to the federal judiciary of opposing President Donald Trump's plans and agendas, even if delivered through ordinary and accepted channels like a congressional bill and a signature by a president.
The agenda already has prompted the Supreme Court to say those judges are exercising powers they don't have by repeatedly demanding they have their way on policies and practices of the executive branch, instead of letting the president run that branch, as the Constitution provides.
"The surface irony of this would be comedy gold in a movie. For the last 10 years, the left's bread and butter has been to paint Trump, his allies, his voters, and the Republican Party as fascists intent on destroying 'our democracy.' But, when the sacrament of abortion is in jeopardy, it does a 180 and orders the president to completely ignore a law that was duly passed and signed — textbook fascist behavior," the commentary said.
Further, it said, Talwani's writing "does not even try to pretend to be anything other than naked power that commands lawlessness for the sake of killing babies. Separation of powers, the rule of law, the legislative power, and the very ability of the American people to enact change through their duly elected representatives — one of the fundamental markers of self-governance — are all done away with a flick of Talwani's pen."
"Make no mistake: Judge Talwani is a legal terrorist. Her TRO is the judicial equivalent of an IED, which was supposed to destroy the administration by either disobeying the law or disobeying the judiciary. It's not about the country or an alternate vision. Now, it is only about destruction — pure and sweet."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Hakeem Jeffries, a Democrat representing New York in Congress, has found himself facing accusations he's been interfering with a federal criminal case over his political agenda against a law-enforcement nominee picked by President Donald Trump.
It is Jeffries who is the target of requests by multiple legal activists to the Ethics Committee for an investigation.
The development came about because he actively lobbied federal judges in the district to remove acting U.S. Attorney Alina Habba from her post there.
Habba was appointed temporarily while her nomination as a permanent replacement moves through the approval process, but she is allowed to stay as an acting official for only a few months unless the judges in the district approve.
Jeffries was enraged at Habba because she charged Rep. LaMonica McIver, D-N.J., with obstructing Homeland Security agents during an altercation at an immigration facility in Newark on May 9.
McIver is heading for trial in November.
A report from Fox News explains Jeffries has made claims that Habba isn't qualified because she indicted McIver "for doing her job."
It was the Article III Project that wrote to the House Ethics committee with the explanation that Jeffries "improperly insert[ed] himself into a criminal proceeding."
"This is clear corruption by House Democrat Leader Hakeem Jeffries," the charge said.
Jeffries discounted his interference in the case.
The Ethics Committee may or may not choose to act on Article III Project's letter. The group did not file a formal complaint with the Office of Congressional Conduct (OCC), which would have been required to study the complaint before giving a formal recommendation to the Ethics Committee, the report explained.
Attorney General Pam Bondi appointed Habba to the position in an acting capacity and her nomination for the post permanently has been delayed by Democrats in the Senate who want to attack and delay the Trump agenda.
Fifteen of the 17 judges in the district owe their jobs to Democrats.
"A House member – particularly the House Democratic leader – who disagrees with the merits of a pending criminal case abuses his official position when he attempts to strong-arm federal judges to corruptly prejudice the ongoing criminal proceeding by firing the U.S. attorney for the purely political reason of protecting a partisan House colleague," charged the complaint.
McIver and two other members of Congress claimed to be doing "oversight" when they physically clashed with federal law enforcement officers.
WND reported McIver physically handled a federal agent at the time.
The situation is just a symptom, more or less, of a bigger agenda by the Democrats, according to constitutional expert Jonathan Turley, a professor at George Washington University who has not only testified before Congress as an expert on the nation's founding law, but has represented members in constitutional disputes in court.
He explained the "new defense" being used by Democrats, from city council to Congress, is that "their official duties include obstructing the official functions of the federal government."
"The latest claimant of this license is Rep. LaMonica McIver (D-NJ), who was charged with assaulting, resisting, and impeding law enforcement officers during a protest at Delaney Hall ICE detention facility in Newark, New Jersey. McIver is shown on video forcing her way into an ICE facility and striking and shoving agents in her path," he said.
He said officials were able to subdue the incursion quickly.
But the messaging from McIver was that she could do what for other citizens would be "trespass and assault" because of her "legislative oversight" privileges as a member of Congress.
Her comments were a reprise of what other Democrats already have demanded.
"Rep. Alexandria Ocacio-Cortez (D., N.Y.) declared 'You lay a finger on someone – on Bonnie Watson Coleman or any of the representatives that were there – you lay a finger on them, we're going to have a problem,'" the report noted.
Jeffries has "ominously warned the federal government that Democrats would bring down the house if it tried to charge McIver."
He said, "It's a red line. They know better than to go down that road."
The fault in making the "oversight" claim is that the law does not allow even members of Congress to have unauthorized access to secure federal facilities. Members of Congress can subpoena the executive branch, or get a court order, but they "do not have immunity from criminal laws in unilaterally forcing their way into any federal office or agency."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
On the six-month anniversary of his inauguration, President Donald Trump celebrated his success, noting his poll numbers have increased despite calls from both Republicans and Democrats to release the files of convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein.
"My Poll Numbers within the Republican Party, and MAGA, have gone up, significantly, since the Jeffrey Epstein Hoax was exposed by the Radical Left Democrats and, just plain 'troublemakers,'" Trump said on Truth Social.
"They have hit 90%, 92%, 93%, and 95%, in various polls, and are all Republican Party records.
"The General Election numbers are my highest, EVER! People like Strong Borders, and all of the many other things I have done. GOD BLESS AMERICA. MAGA!"
In a separate message, Trump indicated: "Wow, time flies! Today is that Sixth Month Anniversary of my Second Term. Importantly, it's being hailed as one of the most consequential periods of any President.
"In other words, we got a lot of good and great things done, including ending numerous wars of Countries not related to us other than through Trade and/or, in certain cases, friendship.
"Six months is not a long time to have totally revived a major Country. 'One year ago our Country was DEAD, with almost no hope of revival. Today the USA is the 'hottest' and most respected Country anywhere in the World.' Happy Anniversary!!!"
Regarding the Epstein case, Trump on Saturday said: "I have asked the Justice Department to release all Grand Jury testimony with respect to Jeffrey Epstein, subject only to Court Approval.
"With that being said, and even if the Court gave its full and unwavering approval, nothing will be good enough for the troublemakers and radical left lunatics making the request. It will always be more, more, more. MAGA!"