Mexico President Blames Americans for Fentanyl Crisis

(Dmytro “Henry” Aleksandrov, Headline USA) Mexico’s president Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador blamed American families for the deadly fentanyl crisis ravaging the U.S.

In a Friday conference, Lopez Obrador said that the reason why the drug crisis took 70,000 American lives in 2022 is not because of the wide-open border that allows drug cartels to bring fentanyl to the United States but because of the deterioration of values in American households, according to the Daily Wire.

“There is a lot of disintegration of families, there is a lot of individualism, there is a lack of love, of brotherhood, of hugs and embraces,” he said. “That is why they [U.S. officials] should be dedicating funds to address the causes.”

The Mexican president denied that fentanyl is produced in Mexico and added that Mexicans don’t consume the drug, even though the Drug Enforcement Agency [DEA] said that Mexican transnational criminal organizations are “increasingly producing wholesale quantities of illicit fentanyl pills and smuggling them into the United States.” The organization also added that Mexico’s two largest cartels, the Sinaloa and the New Generation Jalisco, “are likely the primary trafficking groups responsible for smuggling fentanyl into the United States from Mexico.”

There is also another proof that Mexico produces fentanyl. Customs and Border Protection caught a train heading into Arizona from Mexico transporting 700,000 fentanyl pills last December. According to the DEA, 50.6 million fake prescription pills laced with fentanyl and 10,000 pounds of fentanyl powder had been found in the U.S. last year.

Lopez Obrador’s recent comments come after he threatened to meddle in American elections after Republican politicians dared to call to use the U.S. military to go after Mexico’s powerful drug cartels. The reason why conservative politicians raised this issue is that four Americans were kidnapped by a cartel in Mexico last week and two of them were murdered.

ABC Refuses to Look at Hunter Biden Laptop While Reporting His Claims

(Dmytro “Henry” Aleksandrov, Headline USA) ABC News acknowledged that it refused to review Hunter Biden’s abandoned “Laptop from Hell,” while reporting on it by printing scoops from Hunter’s legal team.

The legacy outlet’s reporter Lucien Bruggeman and a former Stephen Colbert intern admitted in its Friday report on Hunter’s “counterclaims alleging invasion of privacy in response to a defamation lawsuit brought by the Delaware-based computer repairman” that it “has not reviewed nor verified the contents of the laptop or hard drive,” according to Breitbart.

“It’s reassuring to see ABC News is still reliably liberal, and Hunter Biden is very fortunate to have ABC News reporter and former Stephen Colbert intern Lucien Bruggeman on his legal team,” Mike Davis, founder and president of the pro-Trump Article III Project, said.

Even though some media outlets verified that the laptop is authentic, they still refuse to acknowledge that Joe Biden may be implicated in the wrongdoing found on the abandoned laptop, namely, that Joe was a direct beneficiary of Hunter’s deals.

The media even comes as far as to invite people who come from the very institutions that outright lied and misrepresented the laptop and what was on it in the first place.

For example, MSNBC published a column by former FBI assistant director for counterintelligence, Frank Figliuzzi. In his column, Figliuzzi, a former member of the organization that covered up the laptop in 2019 and called it “Russian disinformation,” insisting that there is no incriminating information on Joe on the hard drive, wrote that any focus on Joe’s involvement with Hunter is essentially a fixation of the “far-right,” adding that Hunter’s behavior is a typical thing in Washington D.C.

ABC News’ bias comes after Hunter’s response to a defamation lawsuit brought by John Paul Mac Isaac, the person who found the laptop.

Hollywood Director Will Restore ‘American Way’ in New Superman Movie

(Dmytro “Henry” Aleksandrov, Headline USA) James Gunn, the director of Guardians of the Galaxy, was assigned to direct the new movie about Superman, in which the hero’s slogan — Truth, Justice and the American Way — will be restored after DC Comics decided to get rid of the “American Way” and replace it with “A Better Tomorrow” because it wasn’t “inclusive” enough.

The movie that is set to release in 2025 will return to the hero’s roots, the Daily Mail reported.

“Superman: Legacy tells the story of Superman’s journey to reconcile his Kryptonian heritage with his human upbringing as Clark Kent of Smallville, Kansas,” the press release stated, before referencing the new slogan.

“He is the embodiment of truth, justice and the American way, guided by human kindness in a world that sees kindness as old-fashioned.”

Dean Cain, a blacklisted conservative actor who played Superman / Clark Kent on “Lois & Clark: The New Adventures of Superman,” once said that if he were to play Superman today, he wouldn’t be able to say the “American Way” slogan because of the current woke political climate in both the comic book industry and Hollywood.

Now, however, DC Comics and Hollywood decided to restore the original motto after they faced backlash from people for shoving their political views down their throats.

“The Superman motto restoration is a very minor item, but it didn’t happen in a vacuum,” right-wing critic Christian Toto said.

“Hollywood is slowly realizing how off-putting woke theatrics can be, and the Biden economy is making studios pinch pennies in every possible way.”

‘If that means appeasing a huge swath of comic book fans eager for an old-school, all-American Superman, so be it,” he added, citing the low ratings of this year’s Oscar ceremony.

“The message is finally hitting Hollywood. Stop dividing us and take a knee in the culture wars.”

CDC Collected Phone Data of Americans to Check Their Lockdown Compliance

(Dmytro “Henry” Aleksandrov, Headline USA) The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) purchased data from tracking companies to make sure that people comply with COVID-19 lockdowns.

Overall, the CDC paid $628,000 for data that gave them access to location data from at least 55 million cellphone users, the Epoch Times reported.

According to the contracts that were obtained by the publication, the contracts that were approved under emergency review due to the COVID-19 pandemic were aimed at providing the CDC “with the necessary data to continue critical emergency response functions related to evaluating the impact of visits to key points of interest, stay at home orders, closures, re-openings and other public health communications related to mask mandate, and other merging research areas on community transmission of SARS-CoV-2.”

The tracking data would be used to “assess home-by-hour behaviors (i.e. curfew analysis) by exploring the percentage of mobile devices at home during a specific period of time,” the CDC said. The data could also be used by integrating it with other information “to provide a comprehensive picture of movement/travel of persons during the COVID-19 pandemic to better understand mandatory stay-at-home orders, business closure, school re-openings and other non-pharmaceutical interventions in states and cities.”

The CDC also said that it could use data to connect the forced closures of bars and restaurants with COVID-19 infections and death rates. The organization also said that it will also try to assess the impact of state restrictions on close contact between people outside of their homes.

The data could also be used to monitor whether people comply with the mandated or recommended quarantines after they arrive from a different state. Also, the data could be used to examine the correlation between mobility patterns and spikes in COVID-19 cases at facilities such as churches, concerts and grocery stores, as well as movement restrictions such as curfews to show “patterns” and “compliance.”

Rasmussen Poll Shows Kari Lake Won Ariz. Election by 8 Points

(Dmytro “Henry” Aleksandrov, Headline USA) Rasmussen Reports and College Republicans United issued the results of a type of “late exit” poll on Friday that was conducted on Monday and Tuesday, revealing that likely Arizona voters said they voted for former Republican gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake over Katie Hobbs 51% to 43%.

The gubernatorial poll showed that 5% of people who live n Arizona voted for someone else and 2% of people said that they were unsure, the Arizona Sun-Times reported. The poll also revealed that Lake was more popular than Hobbs among women since they voted for her over the latter by a 49 to 43% margin. Also, Arizonans, in general, favored Lake rather than Hobbs. Over 50% of people in Arizona view Lake positively, with 30% of people finding her “very favorable” and only 21% of people saying that they consider Lake “somewhat favorable.” Unlike Lake, Hobbs is not that popular. Overall, only 44% of Arizonans like Hobbs, with 25% of them viewing her as “very favorable” and 19% saying that she is “somewhat favorable.”

The survey also asked voters whether they think the election fraud in the fall midterm election happened or not. Over 50% of Arizonans thought that it was at least somewhat likely that “2022 election irregularities in heavily Republican areas of Arizona happened intentionally to suppress Republican votes.” Thirty-one percent of people also said that they find election fraud “very likely,” with 19% founding it “somewhat likely,” 14% saying that it is “not very likely,” 29% stating that it was “not likely at all,” and 8% admitting they’re not sure.

Rasmussen Reports and College Republicans United also asked whether people think problems in the Maricopa County election affected the outcome of races in Arizona. Fifty-five percent said it likely happened, with 35% saying that it was “very likely” and 20% saying that it was “somewhat likely.” There were, of course, those who disagreed. Eleven percent of people said that it was “not very likely,” 29% said that it was “not at all likely” and 6% said they weren’t sure.

Security Footage Shows Pledge of Allegiance Lawsuit Based on False Accusations

(Headline USA) A South Carolina school district said a ninth grader walking in a hallway was stopped during a moment of silence and not the Pledge of Allegiance, as the student had said in a lawsuit filed last month.

Marissa Barnwell said she was pushed against the wall by a teacher at River Bluff High School when she didn’t stop to recite the pledge as she walked to class in November, according to her family’s lawsuit.

A lawyer for Lexington School District 1 said videos from the hallway shows the teacher touched Barnwell’s shoulder to get her attention but didn’t push her.

It also shows the confrontation didn’t take place until after the end of the Pledge of Allegiance — which state law says students can refuse to recite if they are not disruptive — and the start of a moment of silence.

Barnwell was not silent, arguing with the teacher until she walked away, the district said.

“There would be no prohibition on the school requiring students to stop doing whatever they are doing, including walking down the hall, and to remain silent during the moment of silence,” school district attorney David Lyon wrote.

Barnwell told reporters this month she was humiliated and feared she was in trouble.

“I was completely and utterly disrespected,” the 15-year-old said. “No one has apologized, no one has acknowledged my hurt.”

The district said while the principal did discuss the incident with her, a full investigation determined neither she nor the teacher should face discipline.

The district said it reviewed all footage from the hallway and not just the clip released by the student’s parents. The family’s attorney and parents were also shown all videos.

Police also did their own investigation and did not file charges.

Along with the teacher, the teen’s family is suing the principal, school district and state education officials, saying they violated the student’s civil rights and her First Amendment rights to both free speech or not to speak at all.

Adapted from reporting by the Associated Press

Partisan Divide Preventing Congress from Addressing Bank Failures

(Headline USA) The partisan divide in Congress makes action on the banking crisis improbable.

Democrats are, once again, calling for even more regulations while Republicans want to know why regulators are failing to enforce the laws that already exist.

“There’s people who are going to choose bills, but I cannot imagine that … we can pass anything significant,” said Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, chairman of the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee.

Republicans say the fault is with regulators and not the laws.

“If there are ideas out there that people have, you know, at some point, we would be willing to entertain those, but I think it would be premature to start talking about solutions before we fully define the problem and ultimately get answers from the regulators about why they were asleep at the job,” said Sen. John Thune of South Dakota, the second-ranking Republican.

The House Financial Services Committee has announced its first hearing for March 29, featuring at least two witnesses: Martin Gruenberg, chairman of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.’s board of directors, and Michael Barr, vice chair for supervision with the Federal Reserve’s board of governors. “We will conduct this hearing without fear or favor to get the answers the American people deserve,” lawmakers said.

On the Senate side, Brown said his committee will also hold a hearing soon to help lawmakers assess what went wrong. He said the first hearing is likely to focus on bringing in witnesses responsible for regulating the failed banks. The Fed board was the primary regulator for Silicon Valley Bank in California, while the FDIC was the primary federal regulator for Signature Bank in New York.

Brown spelled out some of the questions lawmakers probably will have for the regulators in a letter Thursday asking them to undertake a comprehensive review of what went wrong. What role did social media-led coordination among customers play? What role did the large percentage of uninsured deposits at Silicon Valley Bank play? Were there regulatory gaps with respect to capital, liquidity and stress testing that played a role in the failures?

Sen. Bill Hagerty, R-Tenn., said he wants to know why regulators did not act on detailed reports of a liquidity risk at Silicon Valley Bank and why the FDIC failed to auction off the bank’s remaining parts last weekend.

Sen. Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyo., said she wants to know if regulators intend to use the failure of Signature Bank to further crack down on cryptocurrency. She has been a vocal advocate for cryptocurrency development and is an investor in bitcoin. Signature was the first FDIC-insured bank to offer a blockchain-based digital payment platform in 2019 and had been a go-to bank for the crypto industry.

Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., said he wanted to know how private stock analysts had warned about Silicon Valley’s investments but regulators did not seem to know about potential problems.

Democrats have proposed new regulations in the form of a new bill, but Republicans pointed out that the tiered oversight they established in 2018 with the support of several Democrats in both chambers gave federal regulators all the tools they needed to catch the problems at Silicon Valley and Signature before they became fatal.

“I think the issue here is liquidity and there are liquidity stress tests that regulators have established for the banks,” said Sen. Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, and the author of the 2018 changes to Dodd-Frank. “If they need to tighten those up, they have the authority to do it.”

With that philosophical divide, it’s unlikely the Democrat’s bill will advance in Congress.

One bill which is not a solution, but rather a punishment for greedy executives, might have a better shot. The bill from Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., and Democratic Reps. Adam Schiff and Mike Levin of California would recoup any bonuses and profits that bank executives receive from stock sales make in the 60 days before a bank failure.

Republicans directed considerable ire at the executives of the failed banks this week.

“I think all of that ought to be clawed back,” Kennedy said of bonuses. “And this time, I hope somebody goes to jail.”

Adapted from reporting by the Associated Press

Nikki Haley and Vivek Ramaswamy Take on Wokeness

(Headline USA) Two Republicans who are seeking to lead their party in the 2024 presidential race are gathering in South Carolina this weekend with a goal at the forefront of their agenda: taking on woke ideology.

On Saturday in North Charleston, Palmetto Family, which lobbies for Biblical values, is hosting Vision ’24. The event attempts to “cast the conservative vision” for the next White House race.

More than 400 attendees are expected to hear from presidential hopefuls, including Nikki Haley, a former South Carolina governor who was Donald Trump’s U.N. ambassador, and tech entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy.

There is an expectation that much of the focus will be on pushing back against woke affronts to traditional ways of life.

Organizer Mitch Prosser of Palmetto Family says Vision ’24 is shaping up as an opportunity for Republicans to outline their ideas in the state that holds the first GOP primary votes in the South next year.

“You’re going to hear a lot about woke ideology, specifically when it comes to children in school, and in parenting,” Prosser said.

Haley has adopted “strong and proud, not weak and woke” on yard signs, shirts and campaign stickers.

At the Conservative Political Action Conference earlier this month, she said that “wokeness is a virus more dangerous than any pandemic, hands down.”

For Ramaswamy, being anti-woke is central to his political brand. Leaving his biotech company following pressures for him to “make a statement in favor of the Black Lives Matter movement,” Ramaswamy called at CPAC for “an opportunity for the conservative movement to rise to the occasion and fill that void with a vision of American national identity that runs so deep that it dilutes this woke poison to irrelevance.” He later launched his own firm intended to pressure companies to quit ESG initiatives.

It’s a similar vein of messaging that South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott, yet to announce his own 2024 bid but expected to be in attendance Saturday, has been making for years. In a 2021 op-ed, Scott wrote that, due to his status as the Senate’s sole Black Republican, he had long endured critique from “woke folk” because “my ideology does not match that which they prescribe based on my complexion.”

Others scheduled to attend include former Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson, Sens. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, John Kennedy of Louisiana and Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee, Rep. Mike Rogers of Michigan and former Democratic Rep. Tulsi Gabbard. Stumping for GOP Rep. Nancy Mace in November, Gabbard criticized her former party for “trying to push these radical woke policies on us, in every way, in every aspect of our lives.”

Adapted from reporting by the Associated Press

 

State Defies Judge by Banning Abortion Pills

(Headline USA) Wyoming Gov. Mark Gordon signed a bill Friday night prohibiting abortion pills in the state and also allowed a separate measure restricting abortion to become law without his signature.

The pills are already banned in 13 states with blanket bans on all forms of abortion, and 15 states already have limited access to abortion pills.

The Republican governor’s decision comes after the issue of access to abortion pills took center stage this week in a Texas court. A federal judge there raised questions about a Christian group’s effort to overturn the decades-old U.S. approval of a leading abortion drug, mifepristone.

Medication abortions became the preferred method for killing one’s own baby long ago in America. A two-pill combination of mifepristone and another drug is the most common form of abortion in the U.S.

Wyoming’s ban on abortion pills would take effect in July, pending any legal action that could potentially delay that. The implementation date of the sweeping legislation banning all abortions that Gordon allowed to go into law is not specified in the bill.

With an earlier ban tied up in court, abortion currently remains legal in the state up to viability, or when the fetus could survive outside the womb.

In a statement, Gordon expressed concern that the latter law, dubbed the Life is a Human Right Act would result in a lawsuit that will “delay any resolution to the constitutionality of the abortion ban in Wyoming.”

He noted that earlier in the day, plaintiffs in an ongoing lawsuit filed a challenge to the new law in the event he did not issue a veto.

“I believe this question needs to be decided as soon as possible so that the issue of abortion in Wyoming can be finally resolved, and that is best done with a vote of the people,” Gordon, a Republican, said in a statement.

Of the 15 states that have limited access to the pills, six require an in-person physician visit. Those laws could withstand court challenges; states have long had authority over how physicians, pharmacists and other providers practice medicine.

States also set the rules for telemedicine consultations used to prescribe medications. Generally that means health providers in states with restrictions on abortion pills could face penalties, such as fines or license suspension, for trying to send pills through the mail.

Thirteen states are now enforcing bans on abortion at any point in pregnancy, and one more, Georgia, bans it once cardiac activity can be detected, or at about six weeks’ gestation.

Courts have put on hold enforcement of abortion bans or deep restrictions in Arizona, Indiana, Montana, Ohio, South Carolina, Utah and Wyoming. Idaho courts have forced the state to allow abortions during medical emergencies.

Adapted from reporting by the Associated Press

MURDOCK: Wokesters Lose Sight of Civil-Rights Prize in Favor of Shiny Objects

0

(Deroy Murdock, Headline USA) Focus.

That’s the one thing that too many American institutions cannot do these days.

Companies, government agencies, and professional groups neglect their basic duties. Instead, they chase the shiny objects of “diversity, equity and inclusion” and search relentlessly for racism under every rock.

Yesterday’s managers have become today’s magpies.

What could go wrong?

Everything.

Defunct Silicon Valley Bank had no chief risk officer between April 29 and Jan 3. That’s when it wolfed down Treasury bonds whose value slid while the Federal Reserve jacked up interest rates.

SVB also should have broadened its customer base, rather than till Big Tech’s narrow soil.

SVB did have a chief diversity officer on duty. It also loaned to shaky clean-power companies.

SVB’s board might have demanded more corporate attention to these matters, but what did they know? Only one member had a clue about banking—former Barclays executive Tom King.

SVB did cultivate friends in the Democrat Party. This proved handy when it derailed last week. The White House raced to the rescue and guaranteed all deposits above the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation’s $250,000 legal threshold.

If this were such a great idea, Congress should have passed such a law. Instead, Pharaoh Joseph I simply waved his scepter.

So let it be written. So let it be done!

Failed Signature Bank looked like a university sociology department. It spent insufficient time on such mundane matters as asset management.

However, on Oct. 20, chairman Scott Shays co-hosted a company gathering called “Know Your Pronouns” along with Finn Brigham, a “genderqueer trans masculine person.” Signature also produced videos with singing staffers covered in feathers. (Really.)

California should focus on its $22.5 billion budget deficit, citizens stranded behind massive snow drifts in the San Bernardino mountains and a fleeing population. Instead, Sacramento is crafting a statewide slavery reparations scheme. Estimated cost: $640 billion.

San Francisco should focus on its vagrancy crisis, open-air heroin use and rampant social disorder.

Boring!

Instead, far-left officials act as if they were in Selma in 1953, and the Golden Gate morphed into the Edmund Pettus Bridge.

They are busy hallucinating a bizarre and severely divisive reparations bonanza that would give eligible blacks seven-figure checks, debt forgiveness, $97,000 annually for 250 years, and homes for $1 each. Potential price: $232 billion or 16 times this year’s $14 billion city budget.

“Let me get this straight,” radio host Larry Elder wrote via Twitter. “A black college educated San Franciscan, with money in the Silicon Valley Bank, gets full reimbursement though his deposit exceeds FDIC’s $250K limit, receives $5mil in reparations, AND gets student debt loan forgiveness. Is this a great country or what?”

The Pentagon should focus on China’s mounting menace. Instead, it is pouring time, energy, and morale into hunting down white nationalists in the ranks, wherever they are.

Rather than scan the skies for Russian bombers, the Air Force seeks at least four new DEI chiefs. Salary: Up to $183,500.

Never mind that Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III is black. The former four-star general and millions of other black GIs have excelled in uniform, both the enlisted and officers.

The military is arguably America’s least racist and most color-neutral institution and has been since Democrat President Harry Truman integrated the armed forces in 1948. So, Austin & Co. treat our beloved service members as if they lived in Mississippi in 1962.

The American College of Surgeons should focus on safer, more effective medical procedures. Instead, it now aims to “confront racism in surgery.” An ACS leadership retreat showcased Critical Race Theory guru Ibram X. Kendi.

The United States is crumbling, in large part, because radical leftists from coast-to-coast refuse to do their jobs so they can battle the racist ghosts of yesterday.

Americans suffer badly while political and business leaders take their eyes off the prize and pretend that Martin Luther King never lived, and George Wallace never died.

Deroy Murdock is a Manhattan-based Fox News Contributor.