“I think that’s a fair statement. I think it also means, ‘Whatever I say, don’t take seriously because whatever I say, my values are your values, so what I say today and what I say tomorrow doesn’t really matter.’ It’s artful politics and frankly gives her the freedom to say and do anything she needs to do to get elected, which in the short term might be helpful, in the long term, I dare say is disastrous.”
And, in the end, don’t forget her statement – WHAT IS YOURS – WILL BE MINE.
The EPA’s duty is to protect consumers and the environment, not pander to industry interests. Policy makers can’t adequately regulate dioxins without the EPA’s assessment. We’ve already waited 27 years. Let’s not make it 28.
RFK, Jr. went on Fox News and dropped jaws with a shocking truth he revealed about killing Americans
September 4, 2024
4 minute read
Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. shook up the 2024 Presidential race when he endorsed Donald Trump.
He could play a vital role in a second Trump administration.
But now Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. just went on Fox News and dropped jaws with a shocking truth he revealed about killing Americans.
RFK, Jr. wants to go after Big Food
Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. had been a lifelong Democrat, but he was forced to run as an independent after the party rigged the primary process against him, as it did to Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) twice.
Although Kennedy is a liberal, he agrees with Donald Trump on several major issues, namely his mistrust of the Deep State.
Kennedy is also a big health and wellness advocate, which is why he wants to make America healthy again.
He appeared on Fox & Friends Weekend with co-host Rachel Campos-Duffy to discuss how processed foods are “poisoning” Americans.
Campos-Duffy asked, “Why should people be worried about these kind of products?”
Kennedy began, “Seed oils are one of the most unhealthy ingredients that we have in foods. And seed oils, the reason they’re in the foods is because they’re heavily subsidized. They’re very, very cheap, but they are associated with all kinds of very, very serious illnesses, including body-wide inflammation, which affects all of our health. It’s one of the worst things you can eat, and it’s almost impossible to avoid. If you eat any processed food, you’re going to be eating seed oil.”
Campos-Duffy pointed out that the government is subsidizing food products that are making Americans sicker.
She said, “And it’s interesting, the government subsidizes it. Why would the government want to subsidize something that’s going to make people sick, and then in the end, we all end up paying for that in terms of health care costs, which are skyrocketing?”
“That is a direct result of corruption,” Kennedy answered. “About 75% of FDA’s budget comes from regulated industry, and that means food processors and pharmaceutical industry, all of them profit from a sick population.”
Campos-Duffy next asked, “You know, a big item that—and by the way, it’s getting very expensive—are cereals. Why is the food coloring in particular bad?”
Kennedy told her, “You see your yellow food coloring. That is a petroleum product. It’s associated with. . .depression. It’s associated with autoimmune injuries and ADHD. These—and red dye, also—is, you know. . .very bad.”
He explained how other countries have either banned or dissuaded companies from using them.
Kennedy continued, “In Europe, the same companies are producing the same products, but they’re using natural coloring. But here, they can get away with it. We have about almost 1,000 chemicals that are in our food that are either outright banned in Europe or actively discouraged. So you wouldn’t be able to buy this kind of stuff in Europe. You ask about why it’s so cheap, why it’s so ubiquitous. It’s because we subsidize the worst foods. We subsidize it with—about 70% of our food stamp program is to process foods, which are all poison.”
The two next covered false labeling.
Buyer beware
Campos-Duffy commented, “One of the things that’s interesting is you’ll see on labels ‘natural flavors,’ which is this catch-all phrase that I guess was lobbied for, but the ingredients in ‘natural flavors’ are not really natural.”
Kennedy replied, “No. In our country, ‘natural flavors’ are chemical products. So you can’t trust what’s on the ingredient label. And the reason for that, again, is government corruption. It’s that the agency, the USDA, the FDA, have been captured by the industries they’re supposed to regulate, and they all have an interest in subsidies and then in mass poisoning the American public.”
She next asked him about the effects of pesticides on foods.
Kennedy responded, “I mean, the irony is like, for example, my wife loves kale, and she had the impression that kale is actually good for you. If it’s organic, it’s very good for you. But most kale and strawberries, for example, grapes, are contaminated with pesticides, and particularly the Environmental Working Group has found what they call the Dirty Dozen, some of the worst pesticides on these products.”
Healthy foods might not actually be healthy if they’re handled improperly.
He added, “So, you know. . .I look at a strawberry and I think, ‘Oh, this is a healthy food,’ but in most cases, unless it’s organic, certified organic, you are getting something that’s actually hurting you.”
Kennedy and Trump seem to have found common ground in wanting what’s best for the American people.
In 1985, “We are the World” won song of the year, The Goonies and Back to the Future lit up the silver screen, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced it would assess the health risks of dioxins. “We are the World” hasn’t hit the airwaves in years, and you’d be hard-pressed to find a child today who is familiar with beloved 1980s flicks. Yet 27 years later, Americans are still waiting for the EPA to fulfill its promise on examining dioxins.
The federal agency has missed [PDF] self-imposed deadline after deadline to release its study of dioxins, toxic chemicals that have been linked to cancer and other health problems. The agency seemed like it was going to come through this year, pinky-swearing that officials would release the long-awaited study by the end of January. Environmentalists, scientists, policy makers, parents, war veterans, and concerned citizens were hopeful that this would finally be the year for some clear, safe guidelines on dioxins.
It’s now February 7th, and there’s still no dioxin assessment. The EPA claims it will release its study “as expeditiously as possible.” Folks are beginning to wonder whether we’ll ever see it in this lifetime.
A federal agency dragging its heels is nothing new, but the stakes in this case are especially high. As famed nutritionist Marion Nestle recently summarized, dioxins are quite literally some of the most toxic chemicals on earth. Adequate regulations to protect consumers from their dangers can’t be put in place until the EPA completes its assessment. “EPA must issue a clear scientific report that dioxin is a highly toxic chemical so that state and federal regulators can use that to set health-protective limits on dioxin in our food, water, and environment,” says Jennifer Sass, a senior scientist with the Natural Resources Defense Council. “Current dioxin regulations are based on old and outdated science,” says Mike Schade, a campaign coordinator at the Center for Health and Environmental Justice. “Once EPA’s health report is finalized, agencies can develop new regulations that are responsive to dioxin’s toxicity.”
Meanwhile, the evidence highlighting the chemicals’ impacts continues to pile up. Studies link them to health maladies like endometriosis, fertility problems, birth defects, learning disabilities, immune system deficiencies, and diabetes, just to name a few. The World Health Organization (WHO) considers dioxins to be a human carcinogen. The chemicals served as a toxic contaminant in Agent Orange, a substance used during the Vietnam War as part of the U.S. military’s herbicidal warfare program.
The really scary part is that dioxins are also ubiquitous, particularly in the food supply. The noxious chemicals are an unintended byproduct of industrial processes that burn chlorine, especially chemical factories and garbage and medical waste incinerators. Dioxins get spewed into the air, where they eventually settle into soil, water, and plants. Animals ingest dioxins as they graze, and the chemicals build up in the creatures’ fatty tissues.
That’s bad news for animals—and for the people that eat them. People regularly consume a helping of dioxins whenever they eat eggs, fish, meat, and dairy products. According to the EPA, a whopping 96 percent of human exposure to dioxins occurs through the food supply. Studies suggest that virtually every single American contains measurable levels of dioxins the body—including babies, who are oftentimes born pre-polluted.
Given the fact that dioxins are about as common as salt on the American dinner table, you’d think the EPA—whose sole purpose is to protect public health and the environment—would prioritize studying dioxins’ safe limits. Why the years of delay? As Sass explains, “the delay has been political, not scientific.” The EPA faces major pressure from the chemical and food industries not to release its dioxin study—not now, and, if lobbyists get their way, not ever.
Dow Chemical and the American Chemistry Council (ACC), a chemical and plastics industry group, are leading the charge against the EPA’s dioxin study. In December, the ACC requested [PDF] that the EPA delay the release of its long-awaited study.
Major food producers are also pressuring the EPA to turn a blind eye to dioxins, citing concerns that consumers will unnecessarily fear their food. The Food Industry Dioxin Working Group [PDF]—which is made up of industry groups like the International Dairy Foods Association, American Frozen Food Institute, and the National Chicken Council—recently wrote to the White House, urging officials to block the EPA’s study. “Since the agency contends the primary route of human exposure to dioxin is through food, this could not only mislead and frighten consumers about the safety of their diets, but could have a significant negative economic impact on all U.S. food producers,” the group wrote.
“Dow and the chemical industry are following the tobacco industry’s strategies to keep information from the public and delay release of the report,” says Schade. “In recent months, the chemical industry and Big Ag have been working behind closed doors to hide and distort the truth about the dangers of dioxin. EPA shouldn’t cave in to chemical industry dollars and interests over public health.”
The EPA’s duty is to protect consumers and the environment, not pander to industry interests. Policy makers can’t adequately regulate dioxins without the EPA’s assessment. We’ve already waited 27 years. Let’s not make it 28.
****
The One World Order and our politicians keep telling us we have too many people in the world and the population keeps growing by leaps and bounds. As noticed they have down loaded the U.S. with millions of people and want us to take care of them.
The moral to this dilemma is to keep them in their country, set up foundations, teach them how to take care of themselves, teach them a skill to be productive, and teach them how to use birth control.
Biden/Obama/Pelosi placed Harris into Biden’s position as the next pawn, like Biden. It is so evident since she is not qualified. It is part of the One World Order/Soros/Schwab.
Would you ride in a car which has allowed a four-year old to be the designated driver of that car? That is what is happening to our country – Biden is not fit and the back up is not qualified. She was picked as vice president because she was a woman and black and they would be pawns for Pelosi/Obama. It is very obvious they knew in 2020 that Biden had dementia since they kept him in the basement.
We can stop this attack against our country by Pelosi/Obama/Biden by rejecting Harris.
Again, in order to keep our freedom – we must reject Harris and elect President Trump.
When he was President we had PEACE AND PROSPERTY in spite of Pelosi/Democrats constantly trying and still harassing President Trump. It is time for Pelosi to be rejected. She is 84 years old and has made a lot of mistakes trying to steer our government toward socialism (Jan6). The Democrats are not using the Constitution to govern the country – they are Marxists.
Kamala Harris doesn’t have the ‘minimum skill set necessary’ to be president: Hugh Hewitt/
(This is so true and the Democrats are split and some of them are backing Hamas [the terrorists] and Biden is working the end against the middle by giving money to both sides.
Vice President Kamala Harris lacks the minimum skills necessary to serve as president. That conclusion also means she lacks the skills to be Commander-in-Chief of the nation’s military. The absolute whiff that was her sit-down with CNN’s Dana Bash demonstrated Harris’s skills deficit. The upcoming debate—unless the moderators wholly avoid asking her even a moderately difficult question—will confirm this conclusion.
The Constitution’s requirements are simple: the president must be at least 35, be a natural born citizen, and must have lived in the United States for at least 14 years. Harris checks all three boxes. (The Qualifications Clause is set forth in Article II, Section 1, Clause 5.)
But what are the skills that are actually required to get most decisions right and to avoid catastrophically wrong decisions?
First, a president must be able to identify, hire and retain qualified senior staff to help him or her. Every president makes personnel mistakes but they must master this skill or at least hire people who can do so as Chief of Staff and Cabinet secretaries.
Next, the president must be able to absorb an enormous amount of incoming information and to make sense of it. He or she must be able to prioritize the crucial data provided them and understand the choices they confront as a result of that information. Then they have to be at least an average decision-maker. Again, every president makes mistakes. We cannot expect, because we will never get, a “perfect” president. But between the choices we are given, who makes the better decisions more often than the other candidate?
A president must also be able to communicate to his or her subordinates in the Executive Branch, which includes the military, what their decisions are and in what order they are to be implemented. They also need to be able to recall their decisions, follow-up on them, and change course when the results do not match the expectations.
Finally, a president must be willing and able to communicate that which needs to be communicated to a free people via a free press. He or she has to be ready, willing and able to explain and persuade what they and the country are about.
The record before us about Donald Trump and his ability to do the job is there. Controversial or not, Trump makes choices and explains them. He is never not available to the media. He can also assemble key appointees. When it came to picking nominees for the Supreme Court, for example, he selected three superb jurists. He had some big misses in his first year as president when it came to staff but he will be far better prepared this go ’round than after his election in 2016.
Trump also made some mistakes during the unprecedented crisis that was COVID but, critically, he got the most important thing done: Operation Warp Speed was a Trump initiative and the vaccines it produced have saved millions of lives. The mistakes of the COVID era, such as the shut down of schools, are, at most, only partially his responsibility. I think Trump did as well as most presidents could have done. Had Operation Warp Speed not been launched and successfully completed, the catastrophe that was COVID would have been far, far worse.
Trump also did not begin any new wars but was prepared to use and did use military force when necessary, as with the elimination of ISIS terrorists generally and its leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi specifically, and the killing of Quds Force commander Qasem Soleimani when he landed in Iraq with the intention of killing even more American troops stationed there. The Quds Force is the expeditionary arm of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps, and Soleimani was assassinated by the American military at the order of Trump on January 3, 2020. (An excellent question to pose of Harris on debate night: “Did President Trump make the correct decision when he ordered the military to eliminate Soleimani in January of 2020?”) Trump had also begun a process to withdraw from Afghanistan, but his agreement with the Taliban had red lines which he would have enforced and which President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris did not. The catastrophic collapse of the American mission in Afghanistan was the result.
There is no evidence from her time as Vice President or as a United States Senator to lead an objective observer to conclude she is at all prepared to be president and quite a lot to show she isn’t, including her single interview since being swapped in as nominee given President Biden’s manifest and very alarming incapacity. Harris’s one high profile job as Vice President was to stem the flow of migrants across our southern border, and she failed miserably at doing so. She is trying to redefine her job description on immigration now, but Biden was explicit at the time he put her in charge of the border: Stem the flow. She did not do that. In fact, there is no evidence she successfully completed any task at the border.
Kamala Harris is afraid of the media—even the extremely friendly media. She will not sit down for interviews because every interview she has given has been a disaster for her. She can’t communicate and her rate of staff turnover is deeply worrisome.
Those in the legacy media telling you otherwise about Harris’s skills are the same people who told you Biden was just fine up until he displayed in unmistakable fashion that he isn’t. Harris is not ready to be president, and there is zero indication that she can grow into the job or even has confidence in her own ability to do so.
Hugh Hewitt is host of “The Hugh Hewitt Show,” heard weekday mornings 6am to 9am ET on the Salem Radio Network, and simulcast on Salem News Channel. Hugh wakes up America on over 400 affiliates nationwide, and on all the streaming platforms where SNC can be seen. He is a frequent guest on the Fox News Channel’s news roundtable hosted by Bret Baier weekdays at 6pm ET. A son of Ohio and a graduate of Harvard College and the University of Michigan Law School, Hewitt has been a Professor of Law at Chapman University’s Fowler School of Law since 1996 where he teaches Constitutional Law. Hewitt launched his eponymous radio show from Los Angeles in 1990. Hewitt has frequently appeared on every major national news television network, hosted television shows for PBS and MSNBC, written for every major American paper, has authored a dozen books and moderated a score of Republican candidate debates, most recently the November 2023 Republican presidential debate in Miami and four Republican presidential debates in the 2015-16 cycle. Hewitt focuses his radio show and his column on the Constitution, national security, American politics and the Cleveland Browns and Guardians. Hewitt has interviewed tens of thousands of guests from Democrats Hillary Clinton and John Kerry to Republican Presidents George W. Bush and Donald Trump over his 40 years in broadcast, and this column previews the lead story that will drive his radio/ TV show today.
Whatever I say, don’t take seriously because whatever I say, my values are your values, so what I say today and what I say tomorrow doesn’t really matter.’ It’s artful politics and frankly gives her the freedom to say and do anything she needs to do to get elected, which in the short term might be helpful, in the long term, I dare say is disastrous.”
WHAT LAWS – she has open borders and NO LAWS AT THE BORDER?
That statement needs more defining from her since she hasn’t passed the GRAVY TEST which is she keeps adding more flour to the gravy and the consistency OF HER POLICIES ARE getting thicker.
She has her own laws not the CONSTITUTION.
She is a Marxists.
****
VP contender Mark Kelly dodges questions on Kamala Harris policy flip flops!
Over the long Labor Day weekend, Democratic officials defended Vice President Kamala Harris from criticisms that she has been flip-flopping on various policy positions.
“I think it’s a sign of a good leader, that they learn and evolve over time,” Colorado Gov. Jared Polis told ABC’s “This Week” on Sunday.
“Most voters recognize that as you get more information, as you get more experience, perhaps as you hold a different job… that there would be a natural evolution,” echoed Rep. Brendan Boyle, D-Penn., during a Labor Day appearance on CNN.
Meanwhile, Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., took a different approach when he appeared on NBC’s “Meet The Press” over the weekend, describing her as a “progressive who [is] pragmatic” and one who is “consistent” in her policy approach.
During her first interview as the Democratic nominee on Thursday, Harris insisted she would “enforce” the law against illegal border crossings, something Harris indicated she was against while running her 2019 campaign to become president.
Harris also argued that she made it clear as the vice presidential nominee in 2020 that she does not wish to ban fracking, despite indicating as a presidential nominee in 2019 that she was “in favor of banning fracking” on federal land.
“This idea that she hasn’t been consistent — I mean what about Donald Trump’s flip-flops? What about his flip-flops on abortion?” Khanna questioned Sunday. “I think the vice president is consistent on the position on fracking. It’s exactly how Joe Biden ran.”
On healthcare, campaign officials have said Harris does not support Medicare for All. However, Harris has yet to share publicly that she is not in favor of a single-payer health care system after indicating during a 2019 debate that she would “abolish” private healthcare in favor of a “government-run plan.” Fox News Digital reached out to the Harris campaign for clarity on Harris’ position when it comes to healthcare, but did not receive a response.
“I ran against her as a co-chair of Bernie Sanders’ campaign — she was not for Medicare for All in that 2020 primary,” Khanna said.
Polis and Boyle, meanwhile, acknowledged Harris’ changing positions but argued they were signs of good leadership.
“Whether it’s a move to the middle, the left, the right, it’s really about what works. Kamala Harris is a pragmatic leader who looks at data and science and makes the best decisions she can,” Polis said.
“I do not have 100% of the same positions today that I first had 15 years ago when I was first elected to office,” Boyle told CNN in reference to Harris’ stance on fracking. “That’s part of growing. I think that’s natural. The bottom line is, did you ultimately arrive at the position that is right on policy, and in the case of Kamala Harris, she did.”
Boyle also charged Trump with being far more inconsistent on his policy positions than Harris. “There just is no comparison between Kamala Harris and the constant, unending flip-flops, on most issues, of Donald Trump,” he said.
She is all that they have left after they dropped Biden which was the original plan by Pelosi/Obama – a black woman. They missed the black mark by a smigden.
FOX News
kommonsentsjane 