By Gage Skidmore from Surprise, AZ, United States of America - Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., CC BY-SA 2.0,
For decades, Americans were told a story about their health that no longer matched reality. We were assured that food was safe, that regulators were vigilant, that medical advice was insulated from politics and profit, and that rising chronic disease was an unfortunate but unavoidable byproduct of modern life. Meanwhile, the health of the nation deteriorated in plain sight. Obesity climbed year after year. Childhood chronic disease became common rather than exceptional. Autism rates surged. Cancer diagnoses among children rose. By the time President Trump returned to office, 76.4% of Americans were living with at least one chronic disease. Eight out of 10 children could not qualify for military service. What should have been treated as a civilizational emergency was instead normalized, until that long-running failure of honesty and accountability culminated during the COVID-19 pandemic, when public health leaders abandoned transparency, misled the public, and, under Dr. Fauci’s direction, shattered trust in medical professionals and the institutions meant to serve them.
The collapse of trust that followed COVID did not occur in a vacuum. It was the culmination of years of regulatory capture, scientific arrogance, and a public health establishment that confused authority with truth. Americans were ordered, not persuaded. Dissent was pathologized. Data was selectively presented. Vaccine policy was enforced through mandate rather than transparency. Dr. Fauci became the symbol of an anti-science regime that claimed infallibility while revising its claims in real time. When institutions insist on obedience while refusing accountability, trust does not merely erode; it implodes.
MEASLES: Despite years of unprecedented legal and illegal migration, the US has measles under control compared to peer nations. Canada now has nearly 20X the US case rate, while the UK has roughly triple. Vaccine hesitancy driven by exposed Covid falsehoods is hitting countries… pic.twitter.com/dRfMJrf3J9
It is against this backdrop that the Make America Healthy Again initiative must be understood. MAHA is not a branding exercise or a partisan slogan. It is a course correction. President Trump’s decision to place Robert F. Kennedy Jr. at the helm of HHS was not an appeal to nostalgia or name recognition. It was an explicit rejection of the managerial consensus that presided over the chronic disease explosion. The mandate was simple and radical: identify root causes, dismantle regulatory capture, and tell the truth even when it disrupts powerful interests.
Skeptics ask whether one year can matter. The answer depends on what one expects a first year to do. MAHA was never going to reverse decades of metabolic, environmental, and institutional decay overnight. Its purpose was to reorient the system, establish credibility, and force long-delayed questions back into the open. By that standard, the first year has been historic.
Start with the scope of institutional change. President Trump signed an executive order establishing the MAHA Commission, chaired by Secretary Kennedy, with a singular focus on chronic disease. For the first time in generations, chronic illness was treated not as an actuarial inevitability but as a policy failure demanding investigation. This alone marked a break with orthodoxy. Under previous administrations, chronic disease spending rose to $1.3T annually while prevention remained an afterthought. When Kennedy notes that the federal government once spent essentially nothing on chronic disease, he is not making a rhetorical point. He is diagnosing a structural blind spot.
The results are already visible. Thirty-seven states have enacted legislation advancing MAHA-aligned reforms. Nearly 100 MAHA-related bills have passed nationwide. Eighteen states secured SNAP waivers to restrict taxpayer-funded junk food purchases that directly fuel obesity and diabetes. These are not symbolic victories. They are structural incentives aligned with public health rather than industry convenience.
Food policy has been the most visible arena of reform, and for good reason. The American diet did not become toxic by accident. It was engineered through regulatory loopholes that allowed synthetic additives to enter the food supply under the GRAS standard with minimal oversight. MAHA moved quickly to overhaul this system. Agreements now cover roughly 40% of the food industry, committing to remove petroleum-based synthetic dyes. The dairy industry has pledged to eliminate artificial dyes from ice cream by 2028. These changes matter because they reset norms. Once voluntary reform becomes expected, resistance collapses.
The same logic applies to infant health. Operation Stork Speed was launched to expand access to safe and nutritious infant formula while removing heavy metals that had no business entering baby food in the first place. For parents who watched institutions minimize legitimate safety concerns during COVID, this shift toward precaution and transparency has been decisive in rebuilding trust.
Critics often ask whether MAHA is anti-science. The premise is backward. MAHA is anti-dogma. It insists that science earns authority through openness, replication, and humility. This is why vaccine policy has been reframed around informed consent and gold standard trials rather than mandates. Honesty about uncertainty is not weakness. It is the precondition of credibility. Public trust returns when institutions stop pretending to be omniscient.
This emphasis on trust extends beyond food and vaccines. HHS issued guidance restoring biological truth, recognizing that there are two sexes, male and female. This was not culture war theater. Medicine depends on biological reality. When institutions deny observable facts for ideological reasons, patients notice. Restoring clarity restores confidence.
MAHA’s critics also underestimate the importance of state-level experimentation. Utah’s decision to ban added fluoride in public drinking water did not impose a national mandate. It reopened a conversation that had been closed by bureaucratic inertia. Communities are once again allowed to weigh risks and benefits rather than defer to outdated consensus.
Health care delivery itself has not been ignored. Prior authorization has long functioned as a hidden tax on patients and physicians, delaying care while enriching intermediaries. Secretary Kennedy and CMS Administrator Oz secured industry commitments to streamline this process across health plans. Less paperwork means faster treatment and lower burnout. These are the reforms patients feel immediately.
Drug pricing has followed the same philosophy. President Trump’s most favored nation order is being rapidly implemented to align U.S. prescription drug prices with those paid abroad. This is not price control masquerading as populism. It is a refusal to subsidize global markets at the expense of American patients. Lower prices are a public health intervention.
Physical health has returned to the cultural mainstream as well. The Pete and Bobby Challenge, launched by Secretary Kennedy alongside Defense Secretary Hegseth, did something that countless white papers failed to do. It made fitness visible again. A nation where most children cannot meet basic physical standards is not merely unhealthy. It is vulnerable.
The MAHA Commission’s release of the Make Our Children Healthy Again strategy, outlining more than 120 initiatives, signaled that childhood chronic disease is no longer being treated as a mystery or a taboo. New data linking rising thyroid and kidney cancers among children demands answers. Autism rates demand answers. MAHA has made clear that asking these questions is not forbidden. It is required.
Perhaps the most underestimated achievement of the first year is cultural rather than regulatory. Trust is returning because institutions are speaking plainly. The public understands that special interests once thrived behind closed doors. They know they were sold better cigarettes and sugar smacks with a health halo. What they demanded in 2024 was not perfection. It was honesty.
President Trump and Secretary Kennedy have delivered the first credible attempt in decades to dismantle the alliance between bureaucratic power and corporate profit that hollowed out public health. The appointments at NIH, FDA, and CMS reflect this shift. These are not partisan enforcers. They are reformers tasked with ending capture and restoring the mission.
No serious observer should claim that the work is finished. Chronic disease did not emerge in one year, and it will not be eliminated in one term. But trajectories matter. Incentives matter. Trust matters most of all. After years in which Americans were told to comply and not question, MAHA has reopened the social contract between the public and medicine.
Public health cannot function without consent. Consent requires trust. Trust requires truth. That is the chain MAHA is rebuilding. It is why the first year matters. Not because every problem has been solved, but because the system has finally been pointed in the right direction.
Sponsored by the John Milton Freedom Foundation, a nonprofit dedicated to helping independent journalists overcome formidable challenges in today’s media landscape and bring crucial stories to you.
Duncan Lock, Dflock, CC BY-SA 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons
The Supreme Court rejected a request to revive a Texas student’s lawsuit claiming he was bullied for supporting President Trump and for being white.
Brooks Warden, called B.W. in the initial suit because it was filed when he was a minor, claimed that a “years-long campaign of bullying and harassment” ensued after he wore a Make America Great Again (MAGA) hat on a school field trip.
He said he was made a target because of his race and political views, as a white male whose former school district is predominantly Hispanic.
“When his teachers and classmates at his predominantly Hispanic school found out that he was not only a white male but also a Trump supporter, it was open season,” the petition reads.
He had asked the justices to let his 2020 lawsuit against Austin Independent School District, which he claimed failed to stop the alleged abuse, move forward after a divided federal appeals court affirmed a lower court’s ruling throwing out the suit.
The question at hand was whether racial harassment lawsuits can be filed even when the “primary impetus” for the harassment was the challenger’s political views.
After a federal judge dismissed the case, a three-judge panel on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit upheld that decision. However, after the full 5th Circuit court heard Warden’s case, it split 9-9 over whether to revive the lawsuit. As a result, the dismissal was affirmed.
In a fiery dissent, 5th Circuit Judge James Ho wrote that “being white was absolutely one” of the reasons that Warden was bullied.
“It’s racist to characterize whites as racist,” Ho wrote. “Because it’s racist to attach any negative trait to a group of people based on their race.”
The Austin school district wrote in its opposition to the petition that it “does not condone harassment or bullying of any kind” and regrets Brooks’s experience — but rejected the student’s claims as political bluster.
ANALYSIS – With just three weeks to go until the U.S. midterm elections, a New York Times/Siena poll of likely voters finds the Republican party is gaining momentum national over the Democrats as concerns over the economy, inflation, illegal immigration, and crime, grow among voters.
When the the Times sounds the alarm, even in an understated way, expect things to be far worse for the Democrats than reported.
But when the Times “Chief Political Analyst” resorts to breaking down the numbers in the most comical and petty way, to lessen the impact on Dems, expect a red wave.
According to this poll, 49% of likely voters plan to vote for a Republican to represent them in Congress on November 8, compared with 45% who plan to vote for a Democrat.
That’s a four-point lead, versus a one-point lead Democrats reportedly had over Republicans just last month, making the total swing in voter preference in just a few months five points.
That’s a significant shift.
Rising inflation and declining stocks are making the economy the number one concern for voters, who believe Republicans are better equipped to deal with these concerns.
And this could mean that not only will the GOP most certainly win back the House but may gain control of the Senate too.
As the New York Times writes:
… [that’s a] notable swing from last month, when Democrats led by one percentage point among likely voters. Since then, the warning signs for Democrats have begun to add up, including Republican polling gains in key Senate races like those in Nevada, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, and surprising Republican strength in districts in Rhode Island and Oregon where Democrats would normally be safe.
The Times explains that this isn’t a one-off poll:
It adds, as I have predicted it would since the Roe vs Wade reversal:
The evidence for a shift toward Republicans appears to be underpinned by a change in the national political environment. Gas prices went up again. The stock market is down. A variety of data suggests that the electorate’s attention is shifting back to issues where Republicans are on stronger ground in public opinion, like the economy, inflation, crime and immigration, and away from the summer’s focus on democracy, gun violence and abortion, where Democrats have an edge.
In other words, the conditions that helped Democrats gain over the summer no longer seem to be in place.
But America’s “paper of record” can’t help itself so it desperately still tries to spin the narrative in a less damaging light for the Dems.
So, Nate Cohn, The Times’ chief political analyst, formerly with liberal New Republic, then goes on to laughably diminish the GOP four-point advantage into “only” a three-point advantage due to “rounding” of the poll result numbers.
He further goes on to spend a great deal of time discussing the intricacies of polling, and how imperfect polling is.
Something that I totally agree with.
However, this level of inane wonkery to diminish polls showing one party’s advantage nationally is something I’ve never seen in over 30 years of politics.
Meanwhile, many experts point out that the biggest error in polling in today’s political environment is how undercounted conservative Republicans are in the polls.
This was highlighted in a recent Washington Post piece that used Ohio as an example:
A look at the Marist poll’s fine print suggested something that should make Democrats nervous in the run-up to Nov. 8: Pollsters might be seriously undercounting the Republican electorate — specifically, the working-class White voters who were crucial to Trump’s electoral success.
What caught my attention in the poll’s details was the information that 45 percent of respondents had a college degree. A check of the most recent census data indicates that in Ohio, only about 29 percent of the adult population has a bachelor’s degree or higher.
The writer, Mark Weaver, an election law attorney, and communications consultant,adds something I have discussed before – that conservative Republicans and Trump voters have been cowed into silence, but they still vote.
He notes:
This isn’t just about a single poll or a single state. I regularly talk with pollsters and campaigns, and I hear a common lament: Trump voters distrust pollsters and the media that reports on poll results, and simply won’t participate, out of protest or paranoia.
He continues discussing undercounted ‘shy’ or ‘submerged Trump voters’:
Trump supporters might have the added worry of being attacked for frankly stating their views. Stories of those affiliated with Trump being arrested, subpoenaed, doxed or mocked — with Trump providing angry amplification — result in a lower social trust of strangers inquiring about political views.
So, if the the Times “Chief Political Analyst” wanted to be a real polling wonk, perhaps he should ask why the polls have been so wrong about Republicans recently.
And instead of doing intellectual summersaults to diminish a four-point GOP lead, admit the GOP lead is probably MUCH, MUCH, greater.
Opinions expressed by contributors do not necessarily reflect the views of Great America News Desk.
The threat of political violence is reaching a fever pitch.
Democrat lawmakers say their voters are enraged at the lack of ability to counter President Donald Trump‘s agenda, with some sounding the alarm that they could potentially resort to “violence,” Axios reported Monday.
The outlet says it spoke to over two dozen House Democrats to measure the temperature of the Democrat base and what it uncovered was red-hot anger and a desire to circumvent the rule of law.
“We’ve got people who are desperately wanting us to do something… no matter what we say, they want [more],” Rep. Brad Schneider (D-Ill.) told the outlet.
Axios noted that most of the lawmakers spoke on condition of anonymity.
“Our own base is telling us that what we’re doing is not good enough… [that] there needs to be blood to grab the attention of the press and the public,” one such lawmaker said.
Another said their constituents are convinced that “civility isn’t working” and that they should prepare for “violence… to fight to protect our democracy.”
A third lawmaker described some of the messages from people online as “crazy ****,” saying that some told them to “storm the White House and stuff like that.”
Another lawmaker compared Democrat voters to the “Roman coliseum,” saying, “People just want more and more of this spectacle,” the lawmaker said.
Other constituents have insisted that lawmakers take on the risk themselves, with one lawmaker saying they were told they should be willing to get “shot.”
“What I have seen is a demand that we get ourselves arrested intentionally or allow ourselves to be victims of violence, and… a lot of times that’s coming from economically very secure White people,” another lawmaker said.
A seventh lawmaker recounted a meeting they had with constituents that laid bare the desire for escalation.
“I actually said in a meeting, ‘When they light a fire, my thought is to grab an extinguisher,'” the lawmaker detailed. “And someone at the table said, ‘Have you tried gasoline?'” they added.
In June, a man assassinated two Minnesota lawmakers and their spouses while posing as a law enforcement official. Vance Boelter, 57, was captured in Sibley County after a two-day manhunt. He allegedly killed Minnesota House Speaker Melissa Hortman and her husband, Mark, early Saturday morning at their Brooklyn Park home in Minneapolis before allegedly shooting State Sen. John Hoffman, also a Democrat, and his wife, Yvette, in their nearby Champlin home in a related attack.
Washington – 3rd Congressional District – Joe Kent
Joe Kent. Photo via Joe Kent for Congress WA-03 on Facebook.
Joe Kent won a contested Republican Primary against pro-impeachment Jaimie Herrera Beutler earlier this year, much to the dismay of her fellow “Impeach” voters. Now, Kent is in a fight to keep the seat in Republican hands. Axios Seattle reported that after Herrerra Buelter’s “primary loss in August, the non-partisan Cook Political Report reclassified the race from “likely Republican” to “leans Republican.”
“Kent is a staunch pro-lifer” and “has previously said he supports the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade and would like to see a nationwide abortion ban.” “I believe life begins at conception,” he told Portland’s KGW news station in July. Joe Kent is also a staunch gun rights defender and has made known “his belief that the Second Amendment does not allow for restricting gun ownership rights in any way and he would oppose new restrictions.”
Axios Seattle also noted that Kent has criticized “the recently enacted Inflation Reduction Act as (an example) of government overspending that (has ) fueled inflation. He also has blamed Biden for high gas prices.”
“Political prognosticators believe the race skews in Kent’s favor. Trump won the district in 2020 by 4 percentage points. He endorsed Kent, who edged out Herrera Beutler despite a crowded primary. The Cook Political Report considers the race to “lean Republican.” Still, that is a downgrade from its earlier “solid Republican” rating before Herrera Beutler fell short.”
Michigan – 3rd Congressional District – John Gibbs
John Gibbs. Photo via John Gibbs for MI-03 on Facebook.
Another certified RINO-Hunter, Gibbs beat out the now-to-be one-term anti-Trump freshman Peter Meijer who was one of the Republicans who voted to impeach 45 last year. Gibbs has solid conservative credentials from his service in the Trump Administration as Assistant Secretary of Housing and Urban Development for Community Planning and Development. His background of truly living the American dream and going from growing up lower class to graduating from Harvard helps appeal to a wider demographic than just the Republican base voter.
The Cook Political Report ranks the seat as having a partisan voter index (PVI) of EVEN and an overall rating of “Toss-Up.”
New York – 14th Congressional District – Tina Forte
Tina Forte. Photo courtesy of Tina Forte for Congress.
New Yorker Tina Forte is running to unseat Democrat (Socialist) Darling Alexandra Ocasio – Cortez. According to Forte’s website, “Tina has been a vocal activist, fighting for families, and calling out hypocritical politicians. She has raised awareness for veterans issues, fought against draconian lockdowns and mandates, demanded schools open for students, and always supported our law enforcement.” Forte is a “small business owner, wife, mother, and grandmother.”
Forte has a tough uphill climb in the general election, but even some of the Democrats in AOC’s district don’t like her as it appeared that some of them protested a town hall of hers last week. Still: “An AOC spokesperson dismissed the protesters,” and told The New York Post “late Thursday that “the disruptors at last night’s town hall are part of a far-right wing group that regularly protests at vaccine clinics, against LGBTQ rights, etc. They were not constituents.”
Ohio – 13th Congressional District – Madison Gesiotto Gilbert
Madison Gesiotto speaking at the 2017 Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in National Harbor, Maryland. Photo by Gage Skidmore.
When he chose to run for Ohio’s Senate seat, OH-13’s current representative Tim Ryan vacated a seat that he has narrowly won the past few cycles. A lawyer, commentator, and former Team Trump spokeswoman, Gesiotto Gilbert is a complete package.
Gilbert is also a similar kind of candidate to Christina Hagan – who ran for the seat twice in an attempt to unseat Ryan. Now with Ryan out of the picture, Republicans are working hard to finally win the seat. Ohio is also a pretty pro-Trump state, so Gilbert’s time spent as a Trump campaign surrogate is serving her well with the Republican base in that state and district.
New Hampshire – 1st Congressional District – Karoline Leavitt
Karoline Leavitt speaking with attendees at the 2022 Student Action Summit at the Tampa Convention Center in Tampa, Florida. [Photo Credit: Gage Skidmore ]
The Gen Z former Trump White House staffer made history last month when she won her primary for New Hampshire’s First Congressional District seat, setting her up for a November showdown with incumbent Democrat Congressman Chis Pappas. Leavitt worked in the Trump White House and was endorsed by a number of Trump’s closest allies early in her campaign – including her old boss and former White House Press Secretary Kaleigh McEnany and Elise Stefanik – House Republican Conference Chairwoman for whom Leavitt worked as Communications Director after leaving the White House.
The Cook Political Report ranks the seat as having a partisan voter index (PVI) of EVEN and an overall rating of “Toss-Up.”
It’s Election Day eve and as most Americans focus on critical House and Senate races across the country it’s important to watch local races as well. In deep blue Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass is facing off against Republican challenger Rick Caruso and while most A-list stars typically endorse Democrats or try and stay out of politics altogether “Guardians of the Galaxy” series star Chris Pratt isn’t afraid to defend his conservative values.
A man linked to arson attacks at the Tesla Albuquerque Showroom and the Republican Party of New Mexico (RPNM) headquarters is facing 40 years behind bars after being indicted this week.
On February 9, two Tesla vehicles were damaged in an arson attack at the Tesla Albuquerque Showroom. The building was also damaged that day with graffiti reading “Telsa Nazi Inc.,” as well as swastika symbols spray-painted in red and black paint on the showroom’s exterior walls.
Nearly two months later on March 30, Albuquerque’s RPNM office was damaged in an arson attack which damaged the entrance. At both scenes, investigators located matching glass containers of improvised flammable mixtures with distinctive green lids.
Wagner was linked to the fires through surveillance footage, along with video of a white Hyundai Accent and matching scene evidence, federal investigators said.
Agents from the FBI and Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) raided Wagner’s house in Albuquerque on April 12.
There, investigators reported finding assembled fire-starting devices, ingredients matching the flammable mixtures found at the scene, a jar with a similar green lid, black and red spray paint, and a stencil bearing the phrase “ICE=KKK,” which matched the graffiti sprayed at the RPNM headquarters.
Wagner now faces two counts of malicious damage or destruction of property by fire, and will stay in custody while he awaits his detention hearing on April 16. If convicted, Wagner faces between five and twenty years behind bars for each count.
“All of these cases are a serious threat to public safety, therefore there will be no negotiating. We are seeking 20 years in prison,” said Attorney General Pamela Bondi, who had previously labeled vandalism of Tesla dealerships to be “domestic terrorism.”
“Let this be the final lesson to those taking part in this ongoing wave of political violence,” Bondi said. “We will arrest you, we will prosecute you, and we will not negotiate. Crimes have consequences.
“Hurling firebombs is not political protest,” Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche added. “It is a dangerous felony that we will prosecute to the maximum extent.
The New Headquarters Building (NHB) of the CIA. The Central Intelligence Agency, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons
A nonprofit legal watchdog has filed a federal lawsuit against the Central Intelligence Agency, seeking documents and records over an election-year government effort to cover up reporting seen as damaging to Joe Biden’s presidential campaign.
In particular, the group seeks information on the agency’s role in a letter signed by 51 intelligence officials that falsely claimed the Russian government “planted” evidence of criminal activity on a laptop owned by Biden’s middle-aged son Hunter.
Judicial Watch filed the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the CIA for all “communications of the spy agency’s Prepublication Classification Review Board (PCRB) regarding an October 19, 2020, email request to review and ‘clear’ a letter signed by 51 former intelligence community officials characterizing the Hunter Biden laptop story as having ‘all the earmarks of a Russian disinformation campaign,’” the group announced.
“The Deep State CIA, it seems, engaged in election interference and a political operation against the American people to help Joe Biden and hurt Trump,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “And now the CIA is ignoring FOIA law to cover up its role in the scandal, censoring and suppressing the Hunter Biden/Joe Biden laptop story just before the presidential election.”
In October 2020, the New York Post broke a bombshell story revealing that Hunter Biden’s laptop, which he abandoned at a Delaware computer shop, contained photographs of Hunter Biden engaged in drug use and using prostitutes, as well as emails describing what appear to be shady foreign business deals.
Fearing the story could damage Biden’s presidential campaign, social media companies attempted to suppress the sharing of the Post’s reporting.
The Biden campaign also reached out to intelligence officials, including the CIA and FBI, seeking their help in falsely discrediting the story.
“In a May 10, 2023, report the House Judiciary Committee revealed that on October 19, 2020, three days before the second presidential debate between President Donald Trump and Democrat candidate Joe Biden, then-Acting CIA Director Michael Morell sent the PCRB the finalized letter for review, calling it a ‘rush job,’ and quickly secured its approval,” Judicial Watch reports.
Judicial Watch filed the lawsuit after the CIA failed to respond to a May 11, 2023, FOIA request for:
Records and communications of the Prepublication Classification Review Board, Central Intelligence Agency, including emails, email chains, email attachments, text messages, cables, voice recordings, correspondence, statements, letters, memoranda, reports, presentations, notes, or other form of record, regarding an October 19, 2020, email request to review and “clear” a letter involving the Hunter Biden laptop story potentially having Russian involvement or being a Russian disinformation plot.
An investigation by the House Judiciary Committee and House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence found that the CIA, or a CIA employee, may have helped the Biden campaign find signers for the false letter.
One former CIA employee, David Cariens, reveals that while speaking with the PCRB in October 2020 to review materials for his memoir, a CIA employee “asked” him to sign the false letter.
“When the person in charge of reviewing the book called to say it was approved with no changes, I was told about the draft letter,” said Cariens.
“The person asked me if I would be willing to sign. . . . After hearing the letter’s contents, and the qualifiers in it such as, “We want to emphasize that we do not know if the emails provided to the New York Post by President Trump’s personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani, are genuine or not and that we do not have evidence of Russian involvement . . .’ I agreed to sign,” Cariens said.
“If accurate, this information raises fundamental concerns about the role of the CIA in helping to falsely discredit allegations about the Biden family in the weeks before the 2020 presidential election,” Judicial Watch notes.
Another former CIA officer, Marc Polymeropoulos, criticized the CIA’s involvement in his testimony to the House Judiciary Committee in the following exchange:
Q. Does what [Former CIA official David Cariens] described there, that interaction with the [Prepublication Classification Review Board], sound like a quid pro quo to you?
A. I can’t comment on this. This is—to me, this is something that the [Prepublication Classification Review Board] in my experience would never engage in something like that. They are just straightforward back and forth in terms of approval. The idea they would have a comment on any other thing that they were working on, that to me is not even close to what I’ve experienced with them.
Q. Does that concern you?
A. If it’s true, it would concern me, for sure. But I just—I have a hard time believing that occurred. If it did, that’s incredibly unprofessional.
The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the positions of Great America News Desk. It first appeared in American Liberty News.
Office of Congressman Tom Osborne, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons
Over the years, Republican presidents have shared Christmas messages that reflect their administrations’ values and the spirit of the holiday season.
Here are four notable Christmas messages from past Republican presidents:
George W. Bush (2001-2009):
In his first Christmas address after the September 11 attacks, President Bush spoke about the nation’s resilience and the importance of faith during challenging times.
“This year in the midst of extraordinary times, our Nation has shown the world that though there is great evil, there is a greater good.”
He emphasized the importance of love and sharing, noting: “Americans have given of themselves, sacrificing to help others and showing the spirit of love and sharing that is so much a part of the Christmas season.”
Listen:
George H.W. Bush (1989-1993):
December 11, 1991
At Christmas, we celebrate the promise of salvation that God gave to mankind almost 2,000 years ago. The birth of Christ changed the course of history, and His life changed the soul of man. Christ taught that giving is the greatest of all aspirations and that the redemptive power of love and sacrifice is stronger than any force of arms. It is testimony to the wisdom and the truth of these teachings that they have not only endured but also flourished over two millennia.
Blessed with an unparalleled degree of freedom and security, generations of Americans have been able to celebrate Christmas with open joy. Tragically, that has not always been the case in other nations, but we look to the future with optimism, and we celebrate the holidays with special gladness as courageous peoples around the world continue to claim the civil and religious liberty to which all people are heirs. The triumph of democratic ideals and the lessening of global tensions give us added reason for celebration this Christmas season, and as the world community draws closer together, the wisdom of Christ’s counsel to “love thy neighbor as thyself” grows clearer.
By His words and by His example, Christ has called us to share our many blessings with others. As individuals and as a Nation, in our homes and in our communities, there are countless ways that we can extend to others the same love and mercy that God showed humankind when He gave us His only Son. During this holy season and throughout the year, let us look to the selfless spirit of giving that Jesus embodied as inspiration in our own lives — giving thanks for what God has done for us and abiding by Christ’s teaching to do for others as we would do for ourselves.
Ronald Reagan (1981-1989):
Gerald R. Ford (1974-1977):
December 24, 1975
MERRY CHRISTMAS! These two words conjure up all of the good feelings that mankind has ever held for itself and its creator: reverence, tenderness, humility, generosity, tolerance–love. These are the stars we try to follow. These are the most enduring treasures we can bring to our world. I can remember a few Christmases in my own youth when just about the only thing we had to offer each other as a family was the love we shared, and the faith that together we could see things through to a better future. And it did. It made us work harder, study harder, try harder–and it brought out qualities and depths of strength and character that none of us in those days thought we had.
The spirit of Christmas is ageless, irresistible and knows no barriers. It reaches out to add a glow to the humblest of homes and the stateliest of mansions. It catches up saint and sinner alike in its warm embrace. It is the season to be jolly–but to be silent and prayerful as well.
I know this will be a particularly happy Christmas for me. I celebrate it surrounded by those I love and who love me. I celebrate it by joining with all of our citizens in observing a Christmas when Americans can honor the Prince of Peace in a nation at peace.
The Ford family wishes you and your family a Christmas that brings all of the joy, the fulfillment, and the inspiration of this most precious of seasons. May God’s blessings be with you all.
[Photo Credit: The White House from Washington, DC, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons]
South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott (R) responded to former President Donald Trump’s comments over the weekend naming him as a potential running mate.
Trump revealed to Fox News’s Maria Bartiromo over the weekend he is considering Scott, along with South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem to be the next vice presidential running mate. (RELATED: Trump Names Two People When Asked About Potential VP Picks)
“The only thing I can tell you is that the one thing we need is four more years of President Donald Trump,” Scott told Fox News Digital on Monday.
“We were better off under Trump. In order for us to be successful, the one thing I can’t afford to do is take my eye off the ball. The eye on the ball means making sure that President Trump gets four more years,” he added.
Over the weekend, Trump told Bartiromo that his top priority in choosing a vice presidential candidate is selecting someone who could easily step into his shoes in case of an emergency.
Trump brings up Tim Scott and Kristi Noem when asked about his pick for Vice President
“Always, it’s got to be who is going to be a good president. Obviously, you always have to think that because in case of emergency. Things happen, right? No matter who you are, things happen. That’s got to be No. 1,” Trump said.
On Monday, former Trump senior adviser Kellyanne Conway advised the President to consider choosing a person of color for VP during an op-ed published in The New York Times.
“With a crisis on the border, economic dissatisfaction, fears about crime, a parents’ rights renaissance and multiple wars and threats across the globe, Mr. Trump’s deputy must be able to navigate chaos and challenges at home and abroad,” Conway wrote.
“Taking all of this into consideration, if I were advising Mr. Trump, I would suggest he choose a person of color as his running mate, depending on vetting of all possibilities and satisfaction of procedural issues like dual residency in Florida,” Conway wrote. “Not for identity politics a la the Democrats, but as an equal helping to lead an America First movement that includes more union workers, independents, first-time voters, veterans, Hispanics, Asian Americans and African Americans.”
Conway listed Sen. Tim Scott, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), and Rep. Byron Donalds (R-Fla.) among the potential options.
MAHA Year One: How Trump & RFK Jr. Are Rebuilding American Health
For decades, Americans were told a story about their health that no longer matched reality. We were assured that food was safe, that regulators were vigilant, that medical advice was insulated from politics and profit, and that rising chronic disease was an unfortunate but unavoidable byproduct of modern life. Meanwhile, the health of the nation deteriorated in plain sight. Obesity climbed year after year. Childhood chronic disease became common rather than exceptional. Autism rates surged. Cancer diagnoses among children rose. By the time President Trump returned to office, 76.4% of Americans were living with at least one chronic disease. Eight out of 10 children could not qualify for military service. What should have been treated as a civilizational emergency was instead normalized, until that long-running failure of honesty and accountability culminated during the COVID-19 pandemic, when public health leaders abandoned transparency, misled the public, and, under Dr. Fauci’s direction, shattered trust in medical professionals and the institutions meant to serve them.
The collapse of trust that followed COVID did not occur in a vacuum. It was the culmination of years of regulatory capture, scientific arrogance, and a public health establishment that confused authority with truth. Americans were ordered, not persuaded. Dissent was pathologized. Data was selectively presented. Vaccine policy was enforced through mandate rather than transparency. Dr. Fauci became the symbol of an anti-science regime that claimed infallibility while revising its claims in real time. When institutions insist on obedience while refusing accountability, trust does not merely erode; it implodes.
It is against this backdrop that the Make America Healthy Again initiative must be understood. MAHA is not a branding exercise or a partisan slogan. It is a course correction. President Trump’s decision to place Robert F. Kennedy Jr. at the helm of HHS was not an appeal to nostalgia or name recognition. It was an explicit rejection of the managerial consensus that presided over the chronic disease explosion. The mandate was simple and radical: identify root causes, dismantle regulatory capture, and tell the truth even when it disrupts powerful interests.
Skeptics ask whether one year can matter. The answer depends on what one expects a first year to do. MAHA was never going to reverse decades of metabolic, environmental, and institutional decay overnight. Its purpose was to reorient the system, establish credibility, and force long-delayed questions back into the open. By that standard, the first year has been historic.
Start with the scope of institutional change. President Trump signed an executive order establishing the MAHA Commission, chaired by Secretary Kennedy, with a singular focus on chronic disease. For the first time in generations, chronic illness was treated not as an actuarial inevitability but as a policy failure demanding investigation. This alone marked a break with orthodoxy. Under previous administrations, chronic disease spending rose to $1.3T annually while prevention remained an afterthought. When Kennedy notes that the federal government once spent essentially nothing on chronic disease, he is not making a rhetorical point. He is diagnosing a structural blind spot.
The results are already visible. Thirty-seven states have enacted legislation advancing MAHA-aligned reforms. Nearly 100 MAHA-related bills have passed nationwide. Eighteen states secured SNAP waivers to restrict taxpayer-funded junk food purchases that directly fuel obesity and diabetes. These are not symbolic victories. They are structural incentives aligned with public health rather than industry convenience.
Food policy has been the most visible arena of reform, and for good reason. The American diet did not become toxic by accident. It was engineered through regulatory loopholes that allowed synthetic additives to enter the food supply under the GRAS standard with minimal oversight. MAHA moved quickly to overhaul this system. Agreements now cover roughly 40% of the food industry, committing to remove petroleum-based synthetic dyes. The dairy industry has pledged to eliminate artificial dyes from ice cream by 2028. These changes matter because they reset norms. Once voluntary reform becomes expected, resistance collapses.
The same logic applies to infant health. Operation Stork Speed was launched to expand access to safe and nutritious infant formula while removing heavy metals that had no business entering baby food in the first place. For parents who watched institutions minimize legitimate safety concerns during COVID, this shift toward precaution and transparency has been decisive in rebuilding trust.
Critics often ask whether MAHA is anti-science. The premise is backward. MAHA is anti-dogma. It insists that science earns authority through openness, replication, and humility. This is why vaccine policy has been reframed around informed consent and gold standard trials rather than mandates. Honesty about uncertainty is not weakness. It is the precondition of credibility. Public trust returns when institutions stop pretending to be omniscient.
This emphasis on trust extends beyond food and vaccines. HHS issued guidance restoring biological truth, recognizing that there are two sexes, male and female. This was not culture war theater. Medicine depends on biological reality. When institutions deny observable facts for ideological reasons, patients notice. Restoring clarity restores confidence.
MAHA’s critics also underestimate the importance of state-level experimentation. Utah’s decision to ban added fluoride in public drinking water did not impose a national mandate. It reopened a conversation that had been closed by bureaucratic inertia. Communities are once again allowed to weigh risks and benefits rather than defer to outdated consensus.
Health care delivery itself has not been ignored. Prior authorization has long functioned as a hidden tax on patients and physicians, delaying care while enriching intermediaries. Secretary Kennedy and CMS Administrator Oz secured industry commitments to streamline this process across health plans. Less paperwork means faster treatment and lower burnout. These are the reforms patients feel immediately.
Drug pricing has followed the same philosophy. President Trump’s most favored nation order is being rapidly implemented to align U.S. prescription drug prices with those paid abroad. This is not price control masquerading as populism. It is a refusal to subsidize global markets at the expense of American patients. Lower prices are a public health intervention.
Physical health has returned to the cultural mainstream as well. The Pete and Bobby Challenge, launched by Secretary Kennedy alongside Defense Secretary Hegseth, did something that countless white papers failed to do. It made fitness visible again. A nation where most children cannot meet basic physical standards is not merely unhealthy. It is vulnerable.
The MAHA Commission’s release of the Make Our Children Healthy Again strategy, outlining more than 120 initiatives, signaled that childhood chronic disease is no longer being treated as a mystery or a taboo. New data linking rising thyroid and kidney cancers among children demands answers. Autism rates demand answers. MAHA has made clear that asking these questions is not forbidden. It is required.
Perhaps the most underestimated achievement of the first year is cultural rather than regulatory. Trust is returning because institutions are speaking plainly. The public understands that special interests once thrived behind closed doors. They know they were sold better cigarettes and sugar smacks with a health halo. What they demanded in 2024 was not perfection. It was honesty.
President Trump and Secretary Kennedy have delivered the first credible attempt in decades to dismantle the alliance between bureaucratic power and corporate profit that hollowed out public health. The appointments at NIH, FDA, and CMS reflect this shift. These are not partisan enforcers. They are reformers tasked with ending capture and restoring the mission.
No serious observer should claim that the work is finished. Chronic disease did not emerge in one year, and it will not be eliminated in one term. But trajectories matter. Incentives matter. Trust matters most of all. After years in which Americans were told to comply and not question, MAHA has reopened the social contract between the public and medicine.
Public health cannot function without consent. Consent requires trust. Trust requires truth. That is the chain MAHA is rebuilding. It is why the first year matters. Not because every problem has been solved, but because the system has finally been pointed in the right direction.
If you enjoy my work, please subscribe: https://x.com/amuse.
Sponsored by the John Milton Freedom Foundation, a nonprofit dedicated to helping independent journalists overcome formidable challenges in today’s media landscape and bring crucial stories to you.
Sponsored
Arizona is at risk — and Turning Point needs you NOW. Your donation funds ballot chasers and wins critical state races. Donate TODAY to help save America — one state at a time.