Update (1620ET): Having already seen Twitter’s leftists question the fact that the Federal judge who rejected the CDC’s 2-week mask mandate extensions is a) too Trump-appointed, b) too white, and c) too young (she’s 35); White House spokesperson Jen Psaki dropped the “s” word in explaining why the administration is “disappointed” with the judge’s decision and recommends you keep wearing your masks… all of them…
Why would they be disappointed? Unless medical tyranny is the goal?
* * *
Is this the beginning of the end of biomedical tyranny in the US?
As Forbes reports, a federal judge in Florida threw out the federal government’s mask mandate for airports, airplanes and other public transportation Monday, ruling the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention exceeded its authority by imposing the mask requirement days after the agency extended it another two weeks.
U.S. District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle, who was appointed by former President Donald Trump, issued a ruling that declared the mask mandate unlawful and blocked it by vacating the order and sending it back to the CDC “for further proceedings.”
And before the blue-checks erupt in uproar at this ‘dangerous’ act by a clearly biased Trump judge, there is nothing stopping you from continuing to wear you three masks…this ruling just means the rest of us are not mandated to do just to protect your feelings.
Just this morning, Delta CEO Ed Bastian told WaPo that:
“I think lifting the mask mandate will be one step towards reestablishing and normal behavioral patterns on board the aircraft as well as in the airports.”
Media Matters is a far-left organization that labels itself as a non-profit but works as a far-left hit machine. It has connections to George Soros and its purpose appears to be to harm conservative Americans and take them out of business. But there is much more to this sketchy entity.
The United States Internal Revenue Code (IRS) states that nonprofits are generally referred to as “501(c)” organizations. There are more than 30 types of nonprofits under that code that qualify for exemption of some form from federal income taxes. The two most basic types are 501(c)(3) charitable organizations and 501(c)(4) social welfare organizations. There are key distinctions between the two types of entities.
• The 501(c)(3) nonprofits (also known as “charitable organizations”) are what we often think of. They are the charities those in need reach out to for help, and the public supports them with tax-deductible donations.
These 501(c)(3) nonprofits are prohibited from “participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office.”
• The 501(c)(4) organizations account for social welfare, civic leagues and local associations. These organizations promote community welfare, education, charitable or recreational goals.
Since the Supreme Court’s Citizens United v. FEC decision, “social welfare” organizations have become a popular means for electoral involvement, often because of the privacy afforded to financial supporters.
Because “social welfare” groups may engage in limited political activity, contributions are not tax-deductible. And while (c)(4) organizations have become a popular method for campaign activity, politics cannot be the entity’s primary purpose.
Impermissible political activity by nonprofits carries risk on multiple levels. Not only could an entity’s tax-exempt status be jeopardized, but conduct that constitutes an impermissible campaign contribution may carry civil and criminal liability.
On the other hand, voter education or registration activities with evidence of bias that (a) would favor one candidate over another; (b) oppose a candidate in some manner; or (c) have the effect of favoring a candidate or group of candidates, will constitute prohibited participation or intervention.
The first obvious question mark about Media Matters is that according to Media Bias Fact Check Media Matters is a 501(c)(3) with a ‘high-rated far-left bias’. Aren’t these same biases non-compliant with the regulation for non-profit status?
In 2021 the IRS was notified of actions by Media Matters that were outside of the IRS code. The Federalist reported:
The Iowa-based conservative watchdog group Patriots Foundation filed a new complaint with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Monday against Media Matters for America (MMFA) arguing the tax-exempt group has violated its agency agreement with illegal electioneering.
Founded in 2004, the leftist non-profit was given 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status under IRS code which prohibits explicit campaign activity on behalf of any candidate or candidate’s party. In a supplemental complaint added to an existing referral over last year’s election, however, the Patriots Foundation argues the group’s interference in the California recall race violates IRS terms for tax exemption.
According to the article, Media Matters was also called out in 2016 with its bias toward the Hillary campaign. Check out MediaMatters.org any time at any day and look for non-biased reporting in any of the articles that it presents. You’ll be very lucky if you find any non-biased reports at all.
The second most obvious question about Media Matters is why is it that this firm that spends all day long monitoring and critically assessing conservative politicians and entities, can not timely file its tax returns with authorities. Media Matters is behind in filing its tax returns with many states.
The third item of contention with Media Matters is that it filed for and received COVID-19 funds through PPP loans.
Although COVID probably had no effect on its business and might have even helped it, Media Matters applied for and received $1.2 million from the US government. We learned from this that if there is money available, Media Matters – the nonprofit – is going for it.
Charitable, religious, or other non-profit or eleemosynary institutions, government-owned corporations, consumer and marketing cooperatives, and churches and organizations promoting religious objectives are not eligible.
There is much more to this obviously biased entity that claims to be a non-biased nonprofit and that benefits from tax benefits that only non-profits receive. Much more.
The Facts: An article written by astrophysicist Ethan Siegel Ph.D. in Forbes tells readers it is dangerous to do your own research on important topics of our time. He suggests we should only listen to experts.
Reflect On: Why do we hold on to ideas even when new evidence tells us it’s time to question? What state of being identifies so strongly with ideas of the mind that we think those ideas are our identity?
In a recent article out of Forbes, scientist Ethan Siegel suggests people should not “do their own research” on topics as they are not qualified to understand, and doing that research yourself could be dangerous. Throughout the article, Siegel cites the public health disaster that he believes ensued as a result of people questioning vaccines. He also points out that people doubt the validity of water fluoridation due to their dangerous research, and now there exists people who question water fluoridation when they shouldn’t.
To both vaccines and water fluoridation, Siegel believes there is scientific consensus on safety and effectiveness, and therefore anyone doing their own research must stop, and if they come to a different conclusion than the consensus, they must be unqualified.
This is where Siegel’s lack of digging and research is revealed. There is plenty of scientific evidence that would lead any functioning individual to question the safety of both vaccines and water fluoridation. In fact, the science is on the sides of both vaccines having inherent dangers we need to come to terms with, and water fluoridation having serious effects on brain function. Thousands of scientists see this. These are not rare, internet-driven realities, they are extremely well scientifically backed, and the only thing to points to them being untrue is unbacked mainstream scientific culture.
This is though, the natural progression of information. At first, it is ridiculed heavily, even when the evidence points to the fact that we are incorrect to ridicule. It’s odd because many scientists seem to throw the scientific method out when doing their work. “Once we know something, it cannot change, even when new research comes forth” This is the unscientific sentiment it appears many are operating from. But why? Why do we get so stuck in our ideas?
In a new episode of the Takeaway, our first segment explored this article as well as all the details Siegel seemed to miss when it comes to vaccination, water fluoridation and the fact that people truly do need to do their own research, otherwise, no one will hold scientists, corporations and governments accountable for their deception. We also discuss the human condition and state of being that gets us stuck in these ideas. By shifting this state of being, we can once again open up and free our minds.
Memberships are how we support our work at this time, due to the fact we have been demonetized for doing our own research 🙂
“As far as I'm concerned, it's a damned shame that a field as potentially dynamic and vital as journalism should be overrun with dullards, bums, and hacks, hag-ridden with myopia, apathy, and complacence, and generally stuck in a bog of stagnant mediocrity.” -Hunter Thompson