We Get More Than COVID-19 From China: In Our Food

“One Day at a Time, Sweet Jesus…”

That’s the first line of an old song: a REALLY old song! Who sang that song? Think about it and I’ll give you the answer at the end of today’s podcast. “One Day at a Time, Sweet Jesus,” is a great thought for us today. We all awakened this morning. And we awakened to a World full of uncertainty — THAT’S certain!

Just a few words about COVID-19 today before I give you some information that is critical to us all to consider.

  • As of last evening, worldwide there have been 174,961 cases confirmed;
  • As of last evening, worldwide there have been 6705 deaths;
  • That means .0022% of Earth’s total population have been infected (7.7 Billion in the World);
  • That means 3% of those infected have died.

(These numbers are sourced by a very reputable institution: Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center)

Johns Hopkins has an online constantly updated map with complete numbers for each country on Earth with a map. Anyone can access it for updated and accurate information. Here’s a link that you can use anytime. I suggest you download and keep it somewhere saved: on your phone, laptop, iPad, or computer. And when you see or hear the raving of “The Sky is Falling!” that we hear all day every day now, click on this link to get REAL numbers. (It appears in more vivid detail when on a computer, but works with all wireless devices)


When one puts the horrors of this disease and its status in the “whole” instead of just a few counties, states, or large cities, it’s not nearly so daunting. But, once again, let me be careful to state this disclaimer: in NO way do we at TruthNewsNetwork denigrate the validity, seriousness and vast documented cases of COVID-19. Everyone should take all necessary precautions as presented by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) as they pertain to you and your specific circumstances.

I highly encourage all to stick to the representations and suggestions given and made by only EXPERTS. But also please keep this in mind: In many ways, we are seeing and hearing their OPINIONS on this matter. Just like you and me, the professionals have scant historical references regarding this virus. Keep that in mind.

What Things Can We Fix?

On Saturday in our podcast, I passed along a really good piece of information for all to consider — not just in these circumstances, but in each of our lives forever:

Nothing Changes if Nothing Changes

If we want to lose weight, we must regulate our diets and add exercise as well. If we don’t do those things, we will NOT lose weight. You can think of hundreds of things to which this will apply. But for the purposes of planning for and dealing with Coronavirus and any future similar emergencies and other possible events, we all need to adopt this thought in our preparations: “Nothing Changes if Nothing Changes.”


The U.S. outsourced a massive part of our lives, primarily to China, over the last 50 years. For decades we have basked in the good things about our doing so: less expensive, pretty much just as reliable, abilities to manufacture quicker and with higher volumes of production, etc. But as our country adopted a mindset of normalizing the American losses with this massive outsourcing, we forgot to examine some of the negative consequences we automatically have received just for outsourcing.

Many of our governmental regulations are costly and intensely complex for companies and even entire industries. Thankfully, by outsourcing to China, the regulations for all that for those things included in outsourcing, for the most part, go away. Year after year, the layers of reduced regulations have made a large pile, which has numbed us to just what and how much has been lost to us in the care and protection to Americans those regulations have given us.

Yes, in large part, these regulations have been cumbersome, costly, and unrealistic (and in many cases unnecessary) to keep us safe. But there’s one sector where there are glaring and very obvious regulatory protections that we need today and always will: Food and food products.

Today we inspect several of these and with research details pass along just what we are getting from American outsourcing in these goods and services while saving money.

Food From China’s Real U.S. Savings.

Smithfield Farms, the largest pork producing farm in the U.S.A., was sold recently to China with the unanimous support of its stockholders. The hogs will still be raised here but slaughtered and packaged for sale there before being sent back here. This includes labels of Morrell, Eckrich, Krakus, Cudahy, Premium Hams, Cook’s and Gwaltney. The same with many chickens. They can now be shipped there, but when they come back, all that is required regarding source is that they were “Raised in the U.S,” not that they were processed in China. The chickens will be all processed and most sold to fast-food restaurants for sandwiches, along with schools and supermarkets. Remember: restrictions and requirements for the slaughter and handling of pork and chickens being processed there are quite different than those in the U.S.

Meanwhile, Elsewhere…

We recently learned that Starkist Tuna is now owned by South Korea, which is in a major conflict with the U.S. concerning quality, safety, and record-keeping, which South Korea refuses to produce.

Sources from a Google search are numerous on this subject. One that was promoting the eating of Tilapia said to, “Avoid any Tilapia with China as its source.” During your next grocery shopping excursion, take a peek in the seafood section at the numerous packages of frozen Tilapia. Most are labeled as “Farm Raised.” That seems innocent but read further: most of those somewhere in the packaging will show their source to be China.

Several documentaries that are not well-marketed in the U.S. show the filthy conditions in which their meat and fish are raised and processed. Some foreign workers have to wear masks as they work in these places because the food is so rotten and filthy, it disgusts them. Many of their fish raised in Fish Farms are daily fed raw sewage. Asian countries, as a rule, have little or no food inspections for exports.

Some of the Most Common U.S. Imported Food

  • Green Giant frozen vegetables are from China, and so are most of Europe ‘s Best.
  • Arctic Gardens and Birdseye products are, for the most part, safe.
  • Grocery store garlic, unless clearly marked “from the USA or Canada,” can be unsafe for consumption. China is the largest producer of garlic in the world. It is common for garlic fields to be fertilized with human waste.
  • Most honey is shipped in huge containers from China and re-packaged here. Americans should consider buying only Honey that is marked “Home Grown” or “U.S. Sourced.”
  • The “Our Family” brand of Mandarin Oranges says on the can: “From China.”
  • Several large U.S. grocers sell canned peaches and pears in a plastic jar that comes from China.
  • All “High Liner” and most other frozen fish products originate in either China or Indonesia. It is common, for example, for the package to be marked “Pacific Salmon” on the front, but the small print states the salmon are farm-raised in one of those Asian countries. There are NO regulations in any Asian countries for use in farm raising fish.
  • The cold product Cold-FX is grown and packed in China. Laboratory tests have found some of the product contains fecal bacteria.

Some Good Suggestions Regarding Imported Food from China

  • If the country of origin is not clearly marked, beware. If produce, ask an employee.
  • Watch out for packages which state “prepared for,” “packed by,” or “imported by.” We don’t understand the lack of mandatory labeling, especially the produce.
  • The country of origin should be clearly shown on the item in the store.
  • Go to the local farmers’ markets in season and keep a wary eye open the rest of the year.

How is it possible to ship food from China cheaper than having it produced in the U. S. or Canada? For a few cents more, consider buying the “Liberty Brand.” Buy the “Gold Brand” or the “Dole Brand” from Hawaii or California.

Fish and Other Foods

  • Recently The Montreal Gazette had an article by the Canadian Government on how Chinese feed farm-raised fish: They suspend chicken wire crates over the fish ponds, and the fish feed on chicken droppings.
  • If you search the internet about what the Chinese feed their fish, you’ll be alarmed; e. g, growth hormones, expired anti-biotic from humans.? Never buy any type of fish or shellfish that comes from these countries: Vietnam, China, Philippines.
  • “Steinfeld’s Pickles” are made in India – just as bad. Another example is in canned mushrooms. “No-Name” brand came from Indonesia.
  • Be careful when purchasing those little fruit cups. They formerly were made in Canada in the Niagara region until about two years ago. They are now packaged in China. Most are sold in Aldi stores.


While the Chines inferior and sometimes even toxic products, dangerous toys, and goods are sold in North American markets, the media wring their hands. Yet, 70% of North Americans believe that the trading privileges afforded to the Chinese should be suspended. Think that through:

Why do we need the government to suspend trading privileges with any foreign nation? Free Market trade has been and still is the greatest determiner of the success or failure of products and services purchased and consumed by people. Consumers should simply send a message to China just as is done regarding domestic products. If they do not meet the standards expected by consumers, those consumers should cease their purchases.

Shoppers should make these decisions by educating themselves. Take a look at the labeling of every product you buy, and if it says “Made in China” or “PRC” (that means sourcing includes Hong Kong), one should consider another product or none at all. You will be amazed at how dependent you are on Chinese products, and you will be equally surprised at what you can do without.

If 200 million North Americans refuse to buy just $20 each of Chinese goods, that will create an immediate billion dollar trade imbalance resolved in our favor!

The downside? Some Canadian/American businesses will feel a temporary pinch from having foreign stockpiles of inventory.

Just one month of trading losses will hit the Chinese for 8% of their North American exports. The Chinese are brilliant in economics. They do the math just as do we. “Supply and Demand” is a simple read for them. Americans by sending the message NOT purchasing those products would force regulating production sufficient for the satisfaction of their consumers, Americans, or they would continually lose that business.

No, this story has nothing to do with COVID-19 or Armageddon, but it certainly strikes a chord for all of us. What we consume and its sources and development are critical to not only our pockets but, more importantly, to our health.

After all, is not that why the world is in a panic regarding Coronavirus: our health? The two SHOULD BE interchangeable.

I almost forgot: who sang that song, “One Day at a time, Sweet Jesus?” Cristy Lane.


Emergency: Very Important Message!

I’m writing this in the middle of the night after a day and one-half of fighting the fallout of the COVID-19 chaos that has now become part of all Americans’ lives.

I have a critical message to share with you today. But it will take me until 12:00 noon Central time to be able to present it. It will be ONLY in podcast audio format. Please come back at 12:00 noon Central today and plan on using your smartphone or computer to listen to a brief, information filled 1-minute podcast: no frills, no music, just frank talk.

It’s grim in America.

I’ll see you Saturday, March 14 high noon.



Stupid Is As Stupid Does

Can’t we in America ever agree on one single thing — like a pandemic? Or is there some golden rule out there that allows everyone in the media to simply ignore facts and paint  ugly pictures for their partisan perspective?

There’s plenty for which to be concerned. We are in the early stages of a potential health crisis. In the U.S., it is NOT a pandemic…yet. Yes, it may become a pandemic. But maybe it won’t!

CNN’s least credible and most caustic host, Don Lemon, went nuts after the President’s Oval Office address Wednesday evening. Former Ohio Governor John Kasich attempted to answer Lemon’s questions about the corrections made by White House staff regarding segments of the address. As usual, the CNN anchor chose the most negative and most aggressive outburst against the President that lasted for five minutes. Lemon would not even let Kasich respond to his questions.

Of course, CNN responded on their website with a story titled, “Trump address sparks chaos as coronavirus crisis deepens.” Here’s a short segment of the CNN report:

President Donald Trump set out to steady a rattled nation and a diving economy in a solemn Oval Office address, but instead sowed more confusion and doubts that he is up to handling the fast-worsening coronavirus crisis.

Trump’s big announcement for keeping the virus at bay — what he said was a 30-day ban on travel to the US by Europeans and restrictions on cargo — was immediately engulfed in confusion.
The President later rushed to clarify on Twitter that he was stopping travel and not trans-Atlantic trade in goods, and officials said his plan did not apply to Americans or US permanent residents — though such travelers would face mandatory quarantines.
“The restriction stops people not goods,” Trump tweeted after his speech.
Trump also caused a muddle when he said he had convinced health insurance providers to waive all copayments for coronavirus treatments. A White House official later said the President had meant to say that the copayments would be waived for coronavirus tests — but would still apply to treatments for the disease.
I’m not confident what your thoughts are about COVID-19, but I’m sure you agree with the President that coronavirus is a severe threat to not just America but to the World. Don Lemon acted as if President Trump brought coronavirus to the U.S. on Air Force One!
The President has a team of the most highly regarded physicians on Earth regarding all things infectious disease-related. That team has met daily for several weeks and conducts daily press conferences in which updates are given to the media, not by Vice President Pence, but by the doctors themselves. They answer every question asked by press members. Several billion dollars have been allocated and are being spent to quickly attack the virus at every level in the nation.
But let’s be honest: Lemon and others feel President Trump is responsible for everything negative that has happened to everyone in the world during the last three years. He has done absolutely nothing right as President, is doing nothing right fighting coronavirus, and no matter what he does in the continued fight, it will not have happened quick enough and certainly will not be enough. President Trump, I’m certain, long ago adopted the mindset that no matter what he does, the Lamestream media will immediately trumpet how wrong it is. And folks like Lemon prove the President right in that thought.
One thing that was NOT mentioned: doctors (you know, the ones the Left clamored should be running this campaign against coronavirus instead of the President) heaped praises on the President for his immediate travel ban of incoming persons from China. His doing so (according to the experts) prevented viruses arriving in the U.S. far sooner, which would have put millions more in harm’s way. When the President put that travel ban in place, the media and Democrats in Congress went crazy crying Mr. Trump in initiating that travel ban was xenophobic and racist!
Who would not expect today’s media to wait to report until THEY GET THE FACTS?

Where Do We Stand Regarding COVID-19?

We could go on and on with details of what actions have been put in place regarding every part known so far to be a piece of the coronavirus puzzle. But the U.S. has never before dealt with this type of medical attack. It is inconceivable to believe that any one person or any government could in one moment, one day, or even one month comprise and put together a list of actions that would eliminate the dangers pending with coronavirus.

I’ve heard numerous politicians and even some in the Media declare that this is NOT the time to point fingers, fire off attacks that are baseless at best and ridiculous and dangerous at worst. Rather than scream and cry about what is going to happen to Uncle Bill, let’s make sure we help Uncle Bill be as prepared as the medical experts, working 24/7 just like they have been, find a way out of all this for us.

As most of you know, I’m not a fan of the “traditional” media in America. Each day it becomes more obvious that today’s media have a political agenda. To that end, I understand those people need jobs; that most are just writing and reporting as they are being told by editors.

What we are missing are those wise sages from the 60s and 70s like Cronkite, Reasoner, Wallace and even Paul Harvey to talk “TO” and not “AT” us giving us JUST the facts. It is quickly becoming so ridiculous that no one can separate fake news from factual news. Isn’t that the antithesis of what Journalists are supposed to do?

As I write this, I sit in a resort looking over a gorgeous golf course behind which are snow-capped mountains in New Mexico. I came here to participate in a men’s conference — Men of Iron — that annually for 26 years convened in this spot with 1600 men who get together to share life experiences with God. I just received a call that the New Mexico Governor just decreed no meetings of more than 100 people in any one room can be conducted, and this conference has been terminated.

Yes, it’s very inconvenient for me. Yes, it will cost me great experiences with great guys, and what I have come to know is a beautiful time spiritually to seek (and find) guidance for every area of my life. But I’ll be fine! Those 1599 other men that came from nine different states will as well. (They are now going to stream the conference to all who will be at various locations)

What I refuse today is play “Don Lemon” and other media and political pundits who act that they are smarter and better prepared to lead this nation through this crisis than is President Trump. That premise is outlandish! Yet they think nothing of sharing that with all who will listen in.

  • Citizens of the U.K. questioned Winston Churchill as the Germans bombed London. “He can’t get this done!” He proved them wrong: “The only thing we have to fear is fear itself.”
  • Just 16 short years after Hiroshima and Nagasaki, in the shadow of that cloud of nuclear war, a young Bostonian went face-to-face with Russian leader Nikita Kruschev. American pundits immediately began to scream and cry, “Kennedy can’t do this! He doesn’t know anything about leading a nation. He’ll get us all killed!” With Russian warships loaded with nuclear missiles approaching Cuba, President John F. Kennedy drew Russia a literal line in the Caribbean that if they crossed, nuclear World War would ensue. Those Russian warships turned around: “Ask not what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your country.”

Not knowing everything doesn’t mean someone is stupid. Not knowing everything and refusing to get what is unknown from those who know IS stupid. Donald Trump is NOT stupid.

As pundits cried for his head regarding what they “thought” was illogical thinking, Mr. Trump — while they were just completing his impeachment  — he had already put together a team of the smartest, most knowledgeable professionals in every area of medicine — especially infectious diseases. They had met several times planning actions. The President initiated that BEFORE the Senate impeachment vote! Only AFTER the Senate vote to acquit the President did the brainsurgeons in Congress and in the Meda decide: “Maybe there’s something else we need to consider. That virus might be a path to impeach President Trump again.”

I rest my case. To quote that other great humanitarian sitting on a bus bench in Alabama — Forrest Gump: “Stupid is as Stupid does.”


Ground Zero: “King Kongoramus Virus”

Coronavirus or King Kongoramus Virus. It’s already been called many things. But what it will be called “if” it morphs into the biological epidemic many think it will become, will have many other names.

Do you think there might be some way to understand a little bit more about coronavirus and what we might be facing? Depending on to whom you listen, it might be equivalent to a bad cold or it might be the trigger to a pandemic. Getting an understanding of this is critical.

February 15, 2020, we published a story about the coronavirus and its purported origins. There are dozens of conspiracy theories in circulation about an alleged biological weapons purpose for its creation. Other stories claim it originated in bats, fish, or in a lab in Canada. Another origin story states it originated in lab animals in Wuhan, China.

We don’t know the truth of its origins. Probably the Chinese government is the only entity that knows that for certain. Biological scientists and immunologists are hard at the task of getting it taken care of.

Meanwhile, literally every country on Earth is taking emergency actions to protect their countries and its citizens against the coronavirus. And that includes the United States.

And, of course, Democrats have hopped on the coronavirus as the latest tool with which they can attack Donald Trump.

House Speaker Pelosi is not alone in placing the blame for coronavirus at President Trump’s feet.

Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY). During a floor speech, Schumer accused the Trump administration of “towering and dangerous incompetence” in its approach to addressing the virus.

“Here in the United States, the Trump administration has been caught flat-footed. The administration has no plan to deal with the coronavirus, no plan, and seemingly no urgency to develop one,” Schumer said.

Experts in Emergency Preparedness under President Trump

U.S. Northern Command is executing plans to prepare for a potential pandemic of the novel coronavirus, now called COVID19, according to Navy and Marine Corps service-wide messages issued this week. An executive order issued by the Joint Staff and approved by Defense Secretary Mark Esper this month directed Northern Command and geographic combatant commanders to initiate pandemic plans, which include ordering commanders to prepare for widespread outbreaks and confining service members with a history of travel to China.

The Navy and Marine Corps messages, issued Tuesday and Wednesday, respectively, reference an executive order directing U.S. Northern Command to implement the Department of Defense Global Campaign plan for Pandemic Influenza and Infectious Diseases 3551-13. The document serves as the Pentagon’s blueprint for planning and preparing for the widespread dispersion of influenza and previously unknown diseases.

U.S. Northern Command said Wednesday it was directed the Joint Staff February 1 to commence “prudent planning” in their assigned role synchronizing the department’s plans for pandemic flu and disease.

Are there Any Truths About the Virus?

Sure there are. In spite of Democrats using it to pelt the President with another nerf ball to try to make him look bad, his administration has been on the job for some time. It appears there is actually a vaccine on its way. An experimental coronavirus vaccine IS on its way according to top health officials. Massachusetts-based biotech firm Moderna said Monday that it created its first batch of mRNA-1273 to treat humans for the virus, and released it to officials at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, part of the National Institutes of Health.

“I want to thank the entire Moderna team for their extraordinary effort in responding to this global health emergency with record speed,” Juan Andres, the company’s chief technical operations and quality officer, said in a statement. “The collaboration with NIAID and with CEPI has allowed us to deliver a clinical batch in 42 days from sequence identification.”

The vaccine will not be immediately available to patients in the general public. The vaccine must be tested and the results of those tests need to be compared before it is released. How long that could take is not clear.

The U.S. Coronavirus Case Status

So far, there have been 60 confirmed cases of coronavirus in the U.S. in total. That figure includes individuals who have been repatriated to the United States. 15 people were in the initial set of cases, three more came from evacuation flights, and 42 from the Diamond Princess ship that was quarantined by Japanese health authorities earlier this month.

In a White House press conference on Wednesday, the president announced he was putting Vice President Mike Pence “in charge” of coronavirus prevention efforts, effective immediately. The White House had reportedly considered naming a virus czar to be the point person on the disease.

“Because of all we’ve done, the risk to the American people remains very low,” Trump said. “We’re ready to adapt, and we’re ready to do whatever we have to.”

The president revealed that of the “15” Americans confirmed to have the virus, eight have “returned to their homes to stay in their homes until fully recovered, one is in the hospital, and five have fully recovered; and one is, uh, we think in pretty good shape and is in between hospital and going home.” Trump later said the person was “pretty sick and hopefully will recover.”

Perspective of Numbers

Origin facts of coronavirus are sketchy at best: who should be believed. But the sheer volume of cases in China and the extent to which the Chinese government has gone to lockdown their people to prevent as much spreading as possible has created a very scary environment. The unknown along with how demonstrative the Chinese have treated the virus has fed the fear of a possible pandemic.

President Trump in his White House briefing was pilloried by reporters regarding the reported lack of immediate reaction on the part of his Administration to stem those fears. Reporters in the room had obviously taken their cues from the media talking heads who on Day One of this situation pushed the throttle to the floor in their one concept of the disease and its circumstances. What Americans have heard for several weeks from the media is “We’re all going to die!” I know, that’s a stretch. But their reports are not far from that.

Watching the dozen or so disease experts from the CDC and hearing them address concerns from the White House podium should have made reporters in the room a bit more relieved. Not so. In fact, it seemed like many were angry that no doctor came to the podium and screamed, “Hide in your basement and don’t come out for months!” Those reporters were doing what was expected for them to do: find a juicy story. There’s NOT a juicy coronavirus story — at least not yet.

The President made it clear that he and those in his administration know the coronavirus could escalate to epic levels. He also stated that, according to ALL the experts, it might not escalate at all. The President has been derided by members of the media claiming that he has not taken the coronavirus seriously. Seeing and hearing what Speaker Pelosi, Sen. Chuck Schumer, and Sen. Elizabeth Warren blamed the President for demonstrates what I feel is their primary goal: denigrate President Trump. Mr. Trump put it in perspective for all, specifically for a “today” understanding: from 25,000 to 69,000 Americans die each year from the flu. And that occurs even with a flu shot being made to all Americans for years. We have 60 confirmed cases in the U.S. It’s easy to do the math.

Mr. Trump was careful to state that the flu numbers are not a fair case to case comparison of those with coronavirus because of the differences in timing. “It just might spread exponentially,” he said, “But it might not. In either case, we are prepared as we possibly can be and have the best doctors and scientists in the world working on it daily.” The President pointed out that doctors from China, Italy, and other impacted countries are daily reaching out to U.S. specialists seeking help and advice on handling coronavirus cases in their countries.

Sen. Schumer’s slap at Mr. Trump for requesting only $2.5 billion dollars in funding to address the coronavirus situation was an indication that the Administration was caught “flat-footed” and are certainly not concerned or prepared to handle it.” President Trump responded to Sen. Schumer by stating that he doesn’t know of any other time Democrat Congressional leadership has offered more money than was requested. “If they give it to us, we’ll use it or keep what we don’t need for later,” President Trump replied.

Regarding Speaker Pelosi’s slap you saw or heard above, President Trump replied to the reporter who asked the question, “She’s incompetent. All she can think of is attacking me,” the President said. “This is not a Democrat or Republican issue. This is an American issue that we should all work together to solve.”


It certainly comes as no surprise that Democrat leadership is so desperate for any advantage they perceive will give them even a slight edge on the President they jump on it. I wonder if Pelosi and Schumer are even capable of seeing how ignorant their anti-Trump antics appear to the majority of Americans?

Think about Schumer’s attack. “We’re going to allocate $8.5 billion to get the job done right. Trump doesn’t care and he certainly has no knowledge of how to handle this.” First, they haven’t allocated a nickel yet! They’ve not even presented a bill in either House to do so. Most Americans don’t know that and Pelosi and Schumer know that. All those statements were about was blasting President Trump. And they certainly don’t need the truth to do that.

In closing the conference, the President cautioned everyone to be careful when interfacing with others. He encouraged all to wash their hands often, stay indoors if one feels they have a cold and be wary of mingling in close-quarters with others in public places. Above all else, pay attention to updates from medical professionals as more information and treatments are made available to attack coronavirus. One doctor in the conference mentioned one such test preliminarily has shown to be effective. It will take a few more weeks of testing to verify its success. And if successful, this particular one would be available to the public almost immediately.

In the meantime, enjoy what you’re doing! Don’t work so hard. I’ve never seen a UHaul following a hearse to the cemetery!



Coronavirus: A Weapon of War?

In an explosive interview, Dr. Francis Boyle, who drafted the Biological Weapons Act, has given a detailed statement admitting that the 2019 Wuhan Coronavirus is an offensive Biological Warfare Weapon and that the World Health Organization (WHO) already knew about it.

Francis Boyle is a professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law. He drafted the U.S. domestic implementing legislation for the Biological Weapons Convention, known as the Biological Weapons Anti-Terrorism Act of 1989, that was approved unanimously by both Houses of the U.S. Congress and signed into law by President George H.W. Bush.

In an exclusive interview, Dr. Boyle discussed the coronavirus outbreak in Wuhan, China, and the Biosafety Level 4 laboratory (BSL-4) from which he believes the infectious disease escaped. He believes the virus is lethal and an offensive biological warfare weapon (or dual-use biowarfare weapons agent) genetically modified with “gain of function” properties, which is why the Chinese government initially tried to cover it up and is now taking drastic measures to contain it.

The Wuhan BSL-4 lab is also a specially designated World Health Organization (WHO) research lab, and Dr. Boyle contends that the WHO knows full well what was happening while it was happening.

Dr. Boyle also touched upon a report in which details of how Chinese Biowarfare agents working at the Canadian lab in Winnipeg were involved in the smuggling of Coronavirus to Wuhan’s lab from where it is believed to have been leaked.

The Coronavirus did NOT originate in a Wuhan fish market!

Dr. Boyle’s position is in stark contrast to the mainstream media’s narrative of the virus being originated from the seafood market, which is increasingly being questioned by many experts.

Recently, Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) also dismantled the mainstream media’s claim that pinned the coronavirus outbreak on the market selling dead and live animals.

Cotton explained that the Wuhan wet market (referred to as a “seafood” or  “fish” market) had been shown by experts not to be the source of the deadly contagion.

Cotton referenced a Lancet study, which showed that many of the first cases of the novel coronavirus, including patient zero, had no connection to the wet market — devastatingly undermining mainstream media’s claim.

The Truths About Coronavirus

Sen. Cotton, in a Senate hearing, told us all exactly what is going on with this virus. As always, in his Senate sit down, Mr. Cotton pulled NO punches. He categorically listed the truth of international viral case numbers while at the same time projecting what real implications of Coronavirus which we see today but have few confirmed facts upon which to make right decisions:

Think about this: those comments were made two weeks ago! One would think information so dire and impactful should be being blasted worldwide. But they are not. And Sen. Cotton based his concerns on data and facts that were known at the time of that hearing. Where do we stand today?

History of Coronavirus

The journal GreatGameIndia published a piece titled “Coronavirus Bioweapon” – How China Stole Coronavirus From Canada And Weaponized It.

No, this is NOT a crazy, maniacal threat of a bunch of madmen. This is a simple compilation of what REALLY started the Coronavirus debacle. And it’s the reports that ignore Mainstream Media and go straight to the facts for all to see.

The authors were clever enough to put that article together with news of a security breach by Chinese nationals at the Canadian (P4) National Microbiology Lab in Winnipeg, where the novel coronavirus was allegedly stored with other lethal organisms. Last May (2019), the Royal Canadian Mounted Police were called in to investigate. In late July, the Chinese were kicked out of the facility. The chief Chinese scientist, Dr. Xiangguo Qiu, was allegedly making trips between Winnipeg and Wuhan.

Officials from several countries  have developed this probable track of the NCoV organism’s travels:

  • first discovered in Saudi Arabia
  • then studied in Canada
  • It was stolen by a Chinese scientist and brought to Wuhan
  • Its movement from Wuhan is being tracked by world authorities. But because so many different nations are seeing travelers directly and indirectly affected by exposure to the Wuhan-originated virus, it is difficult to keep track of its dissemination.

One thing is sure: Scientists do not know the nature of Coronavirus and, therefore, its tendencies for possible mutation, it’s spreading through types of transmission sources or its actual consequences.

Here’s a scary part of this: It’s highly probable that the 2019-nCoV organism is a weaponized version of the NCoV discovered by Saudi doctors in 2012. And we just heard about it!

Why haven’t we heard about these findings and specific facts? Mainstream Media have — and not surprisingly — quashed the release through regular news and social media channels. Facebook immediately deleted a story posted that included all the details we have shared today. The “fact-check” arm of Facebook, “Politifact,” published an attack piece on the story providing NO facts to support their assumptions. And no mainstream media sources have given any airtime or story space to Sen. Cotton’s warnings in that Senate hearing.


I’m sure U.S. and other world leaders are horrified of what might have initiated this biological incident. I’m confident they have a good idea of its sources and its purposes for its creation. I’m sure those authorities and others are rightly worried about what this could and might turn into: a real pandemic. One can only imagine what might happen and might happen quickly once the Coronavirus gets its legs and starts spreading!

It is safe to assume that what we are being told is not all there is to the story. This typically means it is already worse than we know and has spread faster and wider than we know.

If that is true, we are faced today with a real “conundrum.” We feel and know we should be doing something to “fix” the problem. But Americans walking the streets of our cities have no idea of what should or even can be done about it!

I’ll answer that question: Right now, Americans can do nothing!

Our suggestion is to do what we’ve known in the last cases of widespread viral threats have worked: avoid contact with those who show viral symptoms, keep hands as clean as possible, and stay in a place where you can comfortably and continually have access to current and new news reports about Coronavirus.

This today is certainly not in any way to scare anyone. It is to make sure our partners at Truth News Network know the truth to the level that we can inform without making personal speculations. What we have presented today is based on facts directly from those that are already in the line of fire of Coronavirus.

Be vigilant and watchful. Be deliberate and purposeful in choosing your surroundings. And pray!



“Medicare for All:” Where Are the Details?

Why haven’t any of the nearly two-dozen Democrat presidential candidates who are daily screaming on the campaign trail about the absolute necessity of “Medicare for All” given us a PowerPoint presentation showing exactly what we will get with their single-payer program? More importantly, why haven’t they used that same PowerPoint presentation to show us exactly what it will cost and how we will pay for it? The answers are simple: “The Government will pay!” Sure…

We found out a long time ago when a person already in office (and especially one already in office who wishes to remain in office) promises one of the myriads of government goodies we’ll all receive if they remain-in or get voted-into office never gives us any of the details because they don’t want us to know the details! That certainly is the case with Medicare for All. But guess what: we have the proof of what Medicare for All as proposed already in Congress will include. Wanna see? Straight from the horse’s mouth:

Single-Payer/Medicare for All Details

First, and probably most important is that it would wipe the healthcare payer slate clean and create an entirely new program of funding healthcare.

If it became law, Sen. Bernie Sanders’ bill would move 325 million Americans into a new health insurance program. Gone would be Medicaid, Medicare (as we know it), private coverage like Blue Cross and employer-sponsored insurance.

Currently about 74 million people on Medicaid (23 percent of people covered in the U.S.) are using healthcare, and the doctors and hospitals caring for them are losing lots of money. It’s not unusual for a medical provider to lose between 22 and 40 cents on each dollar’s worth of care they deliver to the 74 million people on Medicaid. If we moved the entire country to Medicaid payment levels, we would expect a lot of medical capacity to disappear, virtually overnight. And you can imagine the effect that would have on safety, quality and accessibility.

A Medicaid for all plan would be impossible because of cost for services to implement. Why? With reimbursement levels so low, even decent healthcare providers would run from that profession. We’d have to find another plan that might be more palatable to the industry.

Replacing these payers would require a single government entity that we would all be enrolled into (no choice about it) and is designed to replace our current healthcare experience with a risk-free, premium-free, deductible-free, copayment free, co-insurance free, out-of-pocket cost-free experience. In this proposed system referred to as “Medicare For All” you could access healthcare whenever you want without paying a dime.

So it we really wipe the healthcare cost slate clean as well except for those paid in total or in part by the government. It would mean the federal healthcare entity that would be charged with operating Medicare for All would have to find $3 trillion dollars for year one of the program and that amount would increase slightly each year going forward. Where would that $3 trillion come from? From government revenue paid to the government in taxes. So how are the current dollars spent on healthcare costs distributed between government, private insurance, and self-pay?

  • Private insurance premiums paid by individuals, families, and employers pay all the medical costs for those insured plus 31%. That 31% goes to partially fund Medicare and Medicaid costs.
  • Medicare employee and employer payroll deductions pay for 89% of providers costs.
  • Medicaid provider costs are 100% paid by federal and state governments.

It is important to note that only 9% of uninsured patient bills ever get paid, which means providers are required to underwrite 91% of those costs. These number seem pretty bleak and comprise a mighty hill that must be climbed in this healthcare finance debate. Maybe that’s why none of the candidates are talking about these details!

How Do We Pay For Medicare for All?

Know this for certain: there’s a reason none of the candidates have in any way broached on this subject during campaigning. No matter what solution is offered, its reality is horrible for American taxpayers.

If private insurance were removed, then all that money you are paying in premiums, deductibles, co- pays, coinsurance and max out-of-pocket costs would have to be converted into taxes so the federal government can keep healthcare going for all 325 million of us. All the money will become a tax — on you, on your boss and on every transaction you ever make. You could end up buying healthcare every time you buy anything else. And you can forget about the massive pre-tax benefits everyone who gets healthcare from their job enjoys today. That’s $250 billion a year that you and your employer save in taxes now that would also be converted into taxes and collected.

Who reading this today relishes the thought of us paying the federal government to not only fund but to manage our entire healthcare system? I shudder to think that would ever happen. I don’t know of a single entity on Earth more inept and more corrupt in handling tax dollars AND managing any operational processes than the federal government! As you contemplate the federal government running all of healthcare, factor into your thinking these quotes from a report by the Government Accountability Office on our existing government-funded healthcare, just so you can see how their OWN scorekeepers think they are doing today:

On Medicaid:

“With estimated improper payments totaling more than $36 billion (9% leakage) in federal dollars in fiscal year 2016, CMS needs to improve the effectiveness of its program integrity efforts to help identify and prevent improper payments, such as payments for non-covered services or services that were billed for but never provided.”

On Medicare:

“…it is clear that fraud contributes to Medicare’s fiscal problems. More broadly, in fiscal year 2013, CMS estimated that improper payments… were almost $50 billion (9% leakage).”


Here’s what NO one is talking about: we do NOT need to replace or even repair our “healthcare.” What needs to be tweaked is our “healthcare funding system,” leaving actual healthcare alone. By messing with the structure of the entire system will almost immediately destroy the amazing healthcare in the U.S.

So what can we do? What should we do?

We published a detailed plan in two parts titled “The ONLY Fix for Healthcare that will Work” in two parts on July 19 and July 20, 2017. I encourage you to take a few minutes and go back and read these.

In short, it’s certainly time now for these Democrat candidates to explain details of this concept as well as the concepts floated for the “Green New Deal” and free college tuition as well as government paying for all outstanding college debt. The candidates should never e too busy to explain details on anything and everything they promise.

There are some that will cringe when I say this: Donald Trump from his campaign promises has delivered more in his first two years in office than has any other president in U.S. history. That still gives no pass to him or any other 2020 candidate from giving Americans details of their proposals.

One thing we are slammed with by these single payer proponents is “It works in Scandinavia, so why can’t it work here?” Denmark is their “poster” system for single payer healthcare and overall socialism to which they point. While you’re considering all this, consider this about Denmark:

A school teacher in Denmark makes about $61,000 a year.  In Denmark all education is free.  Doctors and hospitals are free to use and students get paid to learn.  

Denmark’s minimum income tax rate is 40%.  National sales tax there is 25% plus there are government assessed duties and fees.  Gasoline is $10 a gallon.  The purchase of a car is taxed by the government at 180% of the selling price.  A car that sells for $20,000 in the U.S. costs $40,000 in Denmark.

Denmark is the highest taxed nation in the World — taxed an average of 80% of every dollar earned.  Danes have the highest personal debt in the World.  Few own cars or homes.  Anyone who makes over $80,000 a year pays a personal tax of 68%.  Most Danes with higher earning have either found ways to evade the tax or have left the Country, taking companies they own with them.

Denmark’s suicide rate for the past 5 decades has averaged 20.8 per 100,000 people, with a highest rate of 32.  The American suicide rate has averaged 11.1 during the same 5 decades and has never exceeded 12.7.  More than 11% of adult Danes — supposedly the happiest people in the World — are on antidepressants.  Everyone wants the American dream.  In Denmark’s Neo-communist economy, no one will ever own or accomplish anything.

”’Medicare for all’ is not Socialism. We’re just talking about healthcare now,” they respond. Honestly, one requires the other to even have a glimmer of a chance to work.

In their world, $100,000 in income from a job means you get to keep $10,000: that $800 a month.

I’m not ready for that. Are you?

Medicare For All: FRAUD!

It certainly sounds good: get all your healthcare that comes with 100% coverage for everyone. There are NO pre-existing condition exclusions, no deductibles, no co-pays, covers in-hospital treatments, out-patient treatments, dental, vision, and even covers pharmacy. That sounds too good to be true. 

Momma always said: “If it sounds too good to be true, it isn’t true.” All of the “hooey” above IS NOT true. “Medicare For All” is a FRAUD!

The “Real” Story

The United Kingdom has had national healthcare for as long as most remember. Heck, I’m 65 and I cannot remember a time when they didn’t have it. Proponents for “socialized healthcare” or “Medicare For All” as it has been called in the U.S. point to the U.K. and their National Health System. It technically is “single-payer” healthcare in which the government pays the tab.

Their system is failing. We’ll get into exhaustive details of the imminent demise of their system in a minute. First, let’s talk about the healthcare systems — Medicare specifically — that the U.S. has now.

In his 2016 bid for the Democrat Party’s nomination for president, Bernie Sanders (D-VT) rolled out his “Medicare For All” plan as being free for Americans. How so? Eliminate private insurance:

What Americans need to understand is that under our current system, healthcare coverage is NOT Free! What Bernie proposes is outlawing private insurance (premiums are now paid by the insured or their employers), BUT states under his plan, Americans save millions because they only have to pay for government healthcare premiums.

Medicare is NOT free. I hate it when in money discussions, members of Congress in interviews say, “We must cut entitlements!” Most Americans when the word “entitlements” is used think of government handouts: Welfare, food stamps, Medicaid, Medicare, etc. Of those, Medicare is the one that is NOT free for its recipients. Medicare recipients pay for their Medicare coverage in 4 different ways.

First, from every paycheck received from an employer throughout one’s professional career, a small percentage is deducted and paid to the Federal government (with an employer equal matched amount) to “prepay” to partially cover the cost of Medicare when that employee retires.

Secondly, when that person becomes age-eligible and enrolls in Medicare, there is a monthly or quarterly premium that must be paid by the enrollee. The amount of that premium is based on that person’s previous year’s personal income: “means tested.” Currently, the minimum monthly premium is approximately $120.

Thirdly, there is an annual deductible that must be paid by the enrollee before Medicare payments kick-in. It is not excessive, but it still must be paid. Currently, it is approximately $180 annually.

And fourth, under Medicare Part B, (which includes most services other than those received in-patient in a hospital) Medicare only pays 80% of the approved costs of treatment for patients. The 20% leftover amount must be paid by the enrollee, and most purchase a supplemental insurance policy to cover that balance.

The bottom-line is Medicare is NOT free.

We’ll look at the United Kingdom’s National Health Service. But U.S. “Medicare For All” proponents point to European countries as the models for American healthcare that supposedly dwarf the American healthcare system in quality, accessibility, and costs for its citizens. Let’s look at a recent rating of the Top 5 European healthcare systems:


Denmark has a universal health care system financed primarily through income taxes. Danish citizens and European Union citizens are eligible to receive free medical treatment in Denmark.

Officials in Denmark have gone through great effort to reduce bureaucracy in their system so that the majority of medical administration is done at the local level. The system is also broken up into two sectors. The primary sector is for those with general health issues, and the hospital sector is for those requiring more specialized care.


Norway has a mix of public and private health insurance, but the public system is much bigger and a lot more popular. Like many of the of the countries on this list, citizens are entitled to free health care through a system financed through taxes.

All hospitals and health facilities in Norway are owned by the central government and managed on a regional level. As radical of an idea as that may seem to those reading this in the United States, these facilities actually have a great deal of autonomy, so long as they operate within the budgetary restraints imposed on them by the government.


The Swiss have a health care system that is more similar to the American system than the other countries on this list. Their health care in Switzerland is not free. Instead, all residents are required by law to purchase a health insurance policy within three months of arriving in Switzerland.

Insurers in Switzerland sell a standardized form of basic insurance that covers a range of medical services. Companies aren’t allowed to make a profit on selling these plans, but instead, make money selling complimentary insurance that covers more medical services. Swiss health insurance plans also require consumers to pay for at least part of their health costs in the form of a deductible or other fees.

The Netherlands

The Dutch have a form of insurance based on universal health care in their country. Insurers are required by law to offer a basic government-defined health insurance plan to all those who would apply for it.

Typically the plan costs about 100 euros per month, with the insurance company optionally tacking on some extra administrative fees. Those buying Dutch health insurance have the option for extra supplemental insurance to cover more than the basic plan. For this extra insurance, you are required to apply and insurers can deny you for it.


Closing out the top five is Sweden. Swedes enjoy a high-quality universal health care system. Their system has a yearly deductible of about $170 for doctors visits and $340 for prescription drugs. Private health insurance does exist in Sweden however it’s not very common.

Health care accounts for 9 percent of Sweden’s GDP, with the state paying for about 97 percent of the cost of health care, with the rest covered through deductibles. Primarily the health care system is financed by the taxpayers.

The UK’s National Health Service: The “MotherShip”

The United Kingdom’s National Health Service, which celebrated its 70th anniversary this year, is imploding. You probably noticed in the European Union’s analysis of Europe’s best health insurance programs, UK’s NHS didn’t crack the top 15. In fact, it’s in the bottom 5.


Vacancies for doctor and nurse positions have reached all-time highs. Patients are facing unimaginable waits for care as a result. In August of 2018, a record number of Britons suffered more than 12 hours in emergency rooms. In July, the share of cancer patients who waited more than two months to receive treatment soared.

Yet enthusiasm for government-run, single-payer health care continues to build in the United States. The latest Reuters/Ipsos poll shows that 70% of Americans now support “Medicare for All.” Virtually all the major candidates for the Democratic nomination for president in 2020 have come out in favor of banning private insurance coverage and implementing a single-payer system instead.

One look across the Atlantic, to the disaster unfolding in the United Kingdom’s government-run healthcare system, ought to curb that enthusiasm.

The NHS has struggled to fully staff its hospitals and clinics since its inception in 1948. But today, the shortages are growing worse. 9% of physician posts are vacant. That’s a shortfall of nearly 11,500 doctors.

The NHS is also short 42,000 nurses. In the second quarter alone, nurse vacancies increased by 17%. Meanwhile, in the United States, nearly all states will have a surplus of nurses by 2030.

It’s not surprising that people don’t want to work as nurses in Great Britain; it’s a stressful job, with long hours and terrible working conditions. Some NHS nurses are taking positions at supermarkets because stacking shelves comes with better hours, benefits, and pay, according to a report in the London Economic.

Consider one nurse’s letter explaining why she quit the profession. She described horrific working conditions. Medical professionals worked 12-hour shifts with little time for necessities like bathroom breaks or food. Managers felt they couldn’t do anything to change unsafe conditions created by overcrowded hospitals. “You cannot safely practice under such conditions,” she wrote. “Mistakes will be made and people will be harmed, some fatally.”

The shortage of providers has resulted in longer wait times for patients. In May of 2018, 4.3 million people in the United Kingdom were on waiting lists for surgery, a 10-year high. Adjusting for population, that would be like having everyone in the state of Florida on waiting lists. Roughly 3,500 British patients have been on hospital waiting lists for more than a year.

More than one in five British cancer patients waits longer than two months to begin treatment after receiving a referral from a general practitioner. In Scotland, fewer than 80% of patients receive needed diagnostic tests — endoscopies, MRIs, CT, scans and the like — within three months.

These delays are deadly. An analysis that covered just half of England’s hospitals found that almost 30,000 patients died in the past year while waiting for treatment — an increase of 57% compared to 2013.

In some cases, the NHS has refused to provide treatment at all. In June of 2018, NHS England said that it would discontinue coverage of 17 procedures, including tonsillectomies and knee arthroscopies for osteoarthritis patients.

Even when patients receive treatment, the quality of care is poor. Patients in British hospitals are four times more likely to die than in U.S. hospitals, according to an analysis of outcomes from 2,000 similar surgeries conducted by researchers from University College London and Columbia University in New York. Among the more severely ill patients, the disparity was worse; the sickest Brits were seven times more likely to die.

It’s no wonder that Britons who can afford private health insurance pay for it. About 10% of the population uses private coverage to help cover the cost of care delivered outside the NHS system — sometimes by NHS doctors. (Notice that U.S. Democrat candidates for president in 2020 who have Medicare For All in their campaign commitments ALL demand ALL private insurance in the U.S. be banned)

NHS defenders claim that the system’s poor results are the inevitable result of underfunding. Yet spending on health care in the United Kingdom has more than doubled in the past 18 years, after adjusting for inflation.

The problem is one of supply and demand. Single-payer systems offer “free” care, so patients have no incentive to moderate their demand for care. But government cannot procure enough supply to meet that demand without bankrupting taxpayers. Government officials’ only option is to ration care.

Despite the failings of the NHS, Democrats want to establish a single-payer system in the United States. The “Medicare For All” bill sponsored by Sen. Bernie Sanders would outlaw private insurance and funnel nearly all Americans into a one-size-fits-all, government-run health plan. That bill promises comprehensive medical, dental, and even vision care, courtesy of John Q. Taxpayer.

The total bill? A cool $32 trillion over 10 years. Next year, the federal government projects it’ll take in $3.4 trillion in revenue. So “Medicare For All’s” yearly tab is nearly equivalent to the federal government’s entire annual tax take.

Put another way, the feds would have to essentially double tax revenue in order to pay for “Medicare For All.”

And “Medicare For All’s”multitrillion-dollar cost estimate banks on bringing payments for healthcare providers down to the level paid by the existing Medicare program. That would represent a reduction of about 40%, compared to private insurance rates. Such pay cuts are likely to drive providers out of business — or discourage the next generation of doctors and nurses from entering the field.

“Medicare For All’s” proponents say single-payer delivers high-quality, free care to all. Britons stuck on wait lists, unable to secure the care they need, would surely beg to differ.

Before I weigh-in with my two-cents in summary, let’s get a “different” perspective from talk-show host Kennedy:


This will be brief. When considering “Medicare For All,” ask yourself these questions:

  • Can we trust our government to manage our money? Should we trust our government to financially manage our healthcare system?
  • Can we legitimately expect doctors in a single-pay healthcare system who have their compensation slashed as government employees to provide the same level of care as we currently receive?
  • Do you want a Washington bureaucrat making a decision on your receiving or not receiving a heart by-pass because you are “too old?”
  • Are politicians who rave about the viability of single-payer healthcare really being honest? Why haven’t any of them presented statistical facts as you heard here today to Americans?

There are many more unanswered questions that should be answered, and their answers given to us should be the priority for politicians. Why don’t they do that? Simple: they don’t want Americans to know the truth. They are simply using “Medicare For All” as the “cool” talking point that sounds so good, Americans who are not armed with facts will want to vote them into office for “Free Stuff.”

Do you want facts? We are just now after years of watching our own veterans who each volunteered their lives in combat for us to preserve our freedom, die from the inability of our CURRENT government health program to “get around” to seeing them: V.A. hospitals. The government does so many things better than the private sector, right?

Do you want facts about a plan that will comfortably and cost-effectively plug the holes in our existing government/private healthcare partnership program? On July 19th and 20th of 2017, we published that plan in two parts here at TruthNewsNet.org. Go back and take a look: “The Only Healthcare Plan that Will Work, Part 1 and Part 2.”

“Medicare For All” — especially under THIS government the way it is currently structured — WILL NOT WORK! And if implemented in the U.S. will destroy healthcare. Count on it.



Healthcare Lies

Let’s face it: pretty much everything that comes out of D.C. is either “edited” to fit a political narrative or simply an outright lie. Healthcare is no exception. Let’s look at Healthcare Lies.

Obamacare Lies

  • “You can keep your insurance plan if you want to.”
  • “You can keep your doctor if you want to.”
  • “Premium costs per family will go down an average of $2500 per year.”
  • “I will not sign a plan that adds one dime to our deficits,” Obama stated in his 2009 State of the Union address.
  • “Obamacare will not raise a single tax on middle income Americans.”
  • “Obamacare will reduce emergency room visits.”
  • “Obamacare exchanges would increase competition for policy premiums.”

I almost did NOT include the above lies, simply because we’ve heard them over and over. I listed them simply to illustrate my first line above: all those Obamacare lies were either purposeful or simply for “a specific narrative or political expediency.” Regardless, you and I are paying for those lies.

What about the “new” Healthcare proposal? The Graham- Cassidy Plan details are included in my previous post including a link to the actual legislation that will go before the U.S. Senate next week. In the meantime, you can bet the Left — both inside and outside of D.C. — are going nuts, attacking it in every way imaginable and some ways that are simply unimaginable. Even television host Jimmy Kimmel weighed in. When watching this 9 minute clip of his attacks on Senators Cassidy and Graham AND Fox and Friends Brian Kilmeade against whom Kimmel makes personal attacks including name calling, note the claims he makes about the Cassidy-Graham Plan are lies that we will “document” below:

Kimmel’s lies? Graham-Cassidy DOES protect those currently under any pre-existing condition situation going forward. How? Money being spent now by the Federal Government — the same amounts being spent now (which Kimmel lied saying funding would be cut) — in block grants to the state include monies for pre-existing conditions. States will have the prerogative to structure their programs as they wish, even creating “high risk” pools which would include such individuals. Let’s face it: there is no “well” for which to go to for unlimited funds. Obamacare made that claim expecting that the exorbitant costs for many of those with pre-existing conditions would be offset by all the young people who would enroll and pay premiums without using the insurance. When that didn’t happen, the Federal Government (who don’t have any money but get it always from us through taxes, fees, and penalties) said, “No problem. We’ll just pay those claims and let taxpayers eat them.” Imagine having a REAL plan with REAL provisions that will work to cover those stuck in that position.

Kimmel also said that Cassidy lied when he stated every American regardless of physical condition should be able to get insurance coverage and that Cassidy would never vote for any bill that did not state that. Cassidy did NOT say “every American would have insurance.” Think about how ridiculous that is: there are millions of young Americans who are healthy, just getting started as adults, who don’t want health insurance — especially at the prices for premiums under Obamacare. 45% of those who rejected insurance under Obamacare and chose to pay the penalty instead are under the age of 37. They paid $1000 or more to NOT have insurance. Why? BECAUSE THEY DON’T NEED OR WANT IT! Also, if they were suddenly afflicted with something serious, they could simply pay $1000 and be immediately covered under Obamacare — even if they had never paid a dime for any coverage AND were diagnosed with terminal cancer. Obama promised these young Americans would run to the Exchanges the first day of enrollment to signup and begin paying premiums. Didn’t happen. Without those millennials in Obamacare paying premiums, blanket pre-existing coverage does not work financially. Under Graham-Cassidy it would.

Sidenote: does it seem American to you that the government forces Americans to pay for insurance, even if they don’t need it and don’t want it? It is purely socialist for a government to forcibly confiscate money from its citizens who don’t need or want medical services so that the government can pay for others’ medical services — “forcibly” being the operative world. Doesn’t that sound a little like the way Venezuela operates? And it’s working REALLY well for them!

Other Lies about Graham-Cassidy

  • It makes abortion illegal. Graham-Cassidy prevents government funding for abortions other than for the life of the mother, rape, or incest.
  • It terminates health insurance for over 30 million who have insurance under Obamacare. Graham-Cassidy terminates NO insurance policy. What it does is stop forcing Americans who choose to not have insurance (and didn’t have it until Obamacare forced it) to buy insurance. Those on the Left to confuse Americans state that this is “canceling insurance policies” when in fact it allows Americans to make their own health insurance decisions.
  • Graham-Cassidy cuts federal funding for healthcare. Graham-Cassidy actually STOPS government payments to insurance companies and exchanges for health insurance to instead block grant THE SAME AMOUNTS BEING PAID NOW to the states. It is true Graham-Cassidy terminates both the employer and employee mandate, but allows each state to re-instate those mandates at the state level “IF” the state decides to.
  • Graham-Cassidy Healthcare block grants shrink over time, then ends. This is absolutely false. Please go back to the previous day’s blog post that spells out provisions of the structure of the plan and see IN WRITING this claim is absolutely false.
  • “We don’t need a new plan. We have a plan to fix Obamacare ready to go that would be much more effective and inclusive that Graham-Cassidy.” I’ve heard this claim for months now from the Democrat leadership. What do you think about their “fix” plan? Uh…..I can’t find it, even though I’ve looked really hard. You know why? THERE ISN’T ONE!


Do you know the thing that shocks me the most about the furor in Washington and in all of the media about Graham-Cassidy? NO ONE HAS READ THE BILL. In the midst of their cries and complaints saying “We haven’t even seen the bill and don’t know what’s in it;” “The Republicans are waiting until the last minute to ram it through the Senate and House leaving bi-partisanship possibilities out.” (Imagine “IF” the GOP wanted to do that: kinda’ like the Dems did with Obamacare, right?) Even Sean Hannity today griped on his program that he has not been able to find the bill anywhere. (I sent him an email with a link to my story yesterday just in case he can’t find it tonight)

Folks, this is crazy! If we do not take control of the spending on health insurance now, our economy is doomed to slide into oblivion in a matter of just a few years. Yes, some say American healthcare is not #1 in the World. I disagree. Either they’re wrong or I am. In either case, it is at least in the top five. Why then was it necessary to spend more than $1 trillion more on Obamacare than we spent on our private/government healthcare finance partnership before Obamacare during a corresponding time period? This is crazy! Our healthcare didn’t get better. People who had insurance got poorer coverage at much higher premium costs, then couldn’t use their outlandishly priced policies because they could not afford the deductibles! In the meantime, thousands of doctors and other health professionals headed for the hills, retiring early or just switching professions. Why? BECAUSE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CANNOT GET ANY MARKETPLACE OPERATIONS RIGHT — NEVER HAS AND NEVER WILL!

            “Here Lies Healthcare: R.I.P.”

Bottom Line: Healthcare should be operated and managed primarily by the private sector in conjunction with the federal government for Medicare, Medicaid, VA, CHAMPUS, and the existing other federal programs, just like it so successfully has done for so many years.

Think about this: for all those before Obamacare that wanted insurance but couldn’t afford the premiums, we could have spent less than half the $1 Trillion we spent extra on Obamacare and bought each a commercial insurance policy. And if we had taken that route, we wouldn’t be scrambling to save the entire American Healthcare system today.

We can blame the previous Administration for that. And unless “WE” the People get this one right, American Healthcare as we have known it in our lifetimes is dead.




Graham-Cassidy Healthcare Bill

Why cannot Congress give to the American people the full text of pending legislation before their floor debate and vote?

Lindsey Graham and Bill Cassidy — U.S. Senators from South Carolina and Louisiana — have with several other Senators crafted an interesting replacement for Obamacare. Let’s face it: Obamacare is imploding financially. Short of a trillion dollar U.S. Government bailout, it will die a slow death in the next few months. It does not work, and was purposely designed to fail. Why? Liberals are committed to a Single-Payer Healthcare System. (See my post from several days ago explaining that system) The Senate is planning to roll out the Graham-Cassidy bill in the next few days. Fortunately for you, I have researched the proposed bill and I actually have the bill in its form in which Congress will receive it. First, here’s a simple summary, followed by a section of Frequently Asked Questions, then I’ve attached in .pdf the actual bill to be submitted that’s 140 pages long! To save time, read the first two sections. Then please download the actual piece of legislation.  Don’t get lost in the detail! This may be the most important piece of legislation in Congress during your lifetime.

Summary of the Bill

On September 13, 2017, U.S. Senators Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Bill Cassidy (R-LA), Dean Heller (R-NV), Ron Johnson (R-WI) and former U.S. Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA) unveiled legislation to reform health care.

The Graham-Cassidy-Heller-Johnson (GCHJ) proposal repeals the structure and architecture of Obamacare and replaces it with a block grant given annually to states to help individuals pay for health care.

This proposal removes the decisions from Washington and gives states significant latitude over how the dollars are used to best take care of the unique health care needs of the patients in each state. The block grant is run through CHIP and is subject to a mandatory appropriation.

The grant dollars would replace the federal money currently being spent on Medicaid Expansion, Obamacare tax credits, cost-sharing reduction subsidies and the basic health plan dollars.

The proposal gives states the resources and regulatory flexibility to innovate and create healthcare systems that lower premiums and expand coverage.

More specifically, GCHJ:

  • Repeals Obamacare Individual and Employer Mandates.
  • Repeals the Obamacare Medical Device Tax.
  • Strengthens the ability for states to waive Obamacare regulations.
  • Returns power to the states and patients by equalizing the treatment between Medicaid Expansion and Non-expansion States through an equitable block grant distribution.
  • Protects patients with pre-existing medical conditions.

GCHJ also eliminates the inequity of four states receiving 37 percent of Obamacare funds and brings all states to funding parity by 2026. As an example, Pennsylvania has nearly double the population of Massachusetts, but receives 58 percent less Obamacare money than Massachusetts.

Graham-Cassidy-Heller-Johnson treats all Americans the same no matter where they live.

Before you read the actual bill that will be submitted shortly to the full Senate, (and that final bill is attached at the end of this post) read these Frequently Asked Questions with answers.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is It?

  • Federal block grant given annually to states to help individuals pay for healthcare.
  • States would have significant latitude over how the dollars are used to best take care of the unique health care needs of the patients in each state.
  • The grant is run through CHIP (“Childrens Health Insurance Program”) and subject to a mandatory appropriation.
  • Grant dollars would replace the federal money currently being spent on Medicaid expansion, tax credits, cost-sharing reduction subsidies and the basic health plan dollars.
  • Repeals the individual mandate, employer mandate, and medical device tax.

What are examples of what states can do with the money?

  • Assist individuals to purchase health benefit coverage by premium support.
  • Enter into arrangements with insurers, including managed care providers, to encourage market participation.
  • Pay providers.
  • Help with out-of-pocket costs.
  • Up to 20% of the funds may be used to help the traditional Medicaid population.
  • High risk or reinsurance pools.

Why are we doing this?

  • Obamacare took power away from patients and states and gave it to the federal government. This returns that power to where it belongs.
  • Each individual state is a laboratory of democracy, allowed to innovate to find solutions.
  • Four states get 37% of Obamacare dollars. (California, New York, Massachusetts and Maryland) Support should be equal across the nation.

Do states have a match like they do under Obamacare?

  • No, there is no state match under the block grant.

How is money divided between the states?

  • The starting point is the amount of money the state and state residents receive from Medicaid expansion, ACA tax credits, CSR payments and BHP in 2017. The Medicaid expansion portion of the 2017 figures are brought forward using MACPAC inflators with the rest being grown by CPI-M until 2020, at which point the baseline formula begins.
  • By 2026, at base rate, every state will be receiving the same amount of money for each beneficiary in the 50-138% FPL range. This ensures that high-spending states and low-spending states come to parity at the end of the time frame. In order to ease this transition, the incremental increase in the national amount available is distributed evenly each year. Each year’s US total is calculated by adding 1/6 of the total amount in 2026 to the previous year’s total US amount.
  • Starting in 2021, the total number of eligible beneficiaries between 50 and 138% of Federal Poverty Level (FPL) is calculated for the United States in the previous year. Then, the percent of those in this FPL range that live in each state are calculated for each state. The total amount of federal money for a given year is then multiplied by the state’s percent of beneficiaries to give the state its amount for the year. This amount is recalculated annually to account for changes in population in the FPL range.
  • Also beginning in 2021, a risk adjustment formula begins to phase in to adjust for certain population factors. The risk adjustment formula overlay will be applied in a budget neutral manner and ensure that every state remains within ten percent of the mean per beneficiary amount in 2026.
  • In 2024, the model has an adjustment to account for enrollment in credible coverage, which is defined as having an actuarial value that fulfills the CHIP actuarial value which is approximately 70%.
  • As under the CHIP law, CMS may grant waivers allowing lower AV value.
  • If a state chooses to provide coverage with policies of (AV) less than CHIP, the amount of money the state receives is adjusted for this. This is done by multiplying the amount of money that the state would receive by the ratio of the average AV of what is provided divided by the AV of the CHIP standard.
  • This coverage transition occurs in order to align incentives for states to increase enrollment among their eligible population and is done in a way that provides non-expansion states sufficient time to catch up with expansion states in enrollment.

Why was 50% – 138% FPL selected to share money between states?

  • This percentage range represents the population currently on Medicaid expansion. This population disproportionately struggles to access heath insurance, and is, therefore, a better population to use when assessing need and determining state allotments.
  • This extends below 100% FPL because some states did not expand traditional Medicaid coverage to 100% FPL prior to accepting Medicaid expansion.
  • The goal is to achieve parity in the amount that states receive for each beneficiary within this range by 2026 on a risk adjusted basis.
  • Through regular population assessments, the formula accounts for states that experience dramatic population increase or decrease and for economic factors like recession that may cause more individuals to drop into this FPL category.
  • In 2024, the allocation begins to become progressively dependent on enrollment to incentivize coverage. This ramps up from a factor of 25% in 2024 to 75% by 2026.
  • The different factors of the formula are specifically designed to give states flexibility and account for population shifts and economic downturns.

Are states restructured to using the money on individuals between 50-138% FPL?

  • States may use the money at the individuals in any FPL with the exception that no more than 20% may be used on a state’s traditional Medicaid population.

Is this considered a further expansion of Medicaid?

  • No, Medicaid expansion as currently designed would end. Instead, states can use the money how they want to, as long as it is for health care.

How are shortfalls in funding for some states addressed?

  • States will have several options to address any shortfalls in their funding under the formula. If a state decides that it needs more revenue than it is receiving, it can replace the revenue lost by re-imposing the penalties associated with the employer and individual mandates, which this law repeals on the state’s businesses and residents.
  • Although this law does not require states to put up state match for the Medicaid expansion, states could continue to dedicate the money that they would use for math to augment money received from the federal government.
  • States will have increased flexibility in designing systems to deliver care. This should allow better use of federal dollars, saving states money.
  • For those states that lose money in any year under GCA compared to BCRA grown by CPI-M, they may continue to receive their scheduled DSH dollars that are cut under the ACA, provided they put up the state match rate for funds drawn down. They could not get more DSH dollars back than the amount of money they would have received if 2020 base rate had grown by CPI-M.
  • Should a state experience a shortfall in federal dollars in 2020 because their experience is different than projected, they may draw down funds from their total 2025 and 2026 allotment equal to their shortfall.

What happens to unused funds in the block grant?

  • States may roll over unused funds for up to two years.

FINAL Summary

Read as much of this as you care to weigh into. But under NO condition take the word for the Media pundits explanation of what this plan is or isn’t. Case in point: Jimmy Fallon went nuts on his show blasting this plan telling lies about several parts of it — most notable stating that it does away with coverage for those with pre-existing conditions. That is categorically incorrect.

My final thought for you is simple: if Congress does not pass this law now, we are headed toward the demise of Obamacare very quickly, unless the Feds want to write really big checks totalling around $1 Trillion to bail it out simply to keep it alive a little bit longer. That’s their goal. They want a Single-Payer Healthcare system to replace Obamacare.

Thanks for reading this lengthy post. Feel free to download the actual bill in the .pdf file below titled “LYN17709.”





Single-Payer Healthcare Part II: How Much Will it Cost?

“If” Congress and the President decide Single-Payer Healthcare is the correct replacement for Obamacare, how much will it cost?

That simple question requires a not-so-simple answer. The correct answer depends on what type of program would be developed and whose numbers you choose to believe. Senator Bernie Sanders calls his proposed plan “Single-Payer,” at the same time labeling it “Medicare for All.” That is a misnomer: Medicare is NOT Single-Payer. The government currently contracts with private commercial insurance companies regionally to process Medicare claims and make payments to medical providers of all types from funds provided by CMS — “Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.” His proposal is similar to the modified plan used in Canada described in Part I of this topic.

How much would Senator Sanders’ program cost? Watch this Sanders discussion about Single-Payer healthcare from 1987:


Obviously the Vermont Senator has changed his tune. Does he now believe it is financially viable? And if so, what are his estimates of cost? How would it be paid for? Directly from Senator Sanders, here is the financial structure of his “Medicare for All” plan. (these numbers are all provided by Sanders):

The Plan Would Be Fully Paid For By:

  • A 6.2 percent income-based health care premium paid by employers.
    Revenue raised: $630 billion per year.
  • A 2.2 percent income-based premium paid by households.
    Revenue raised: $210 billion per year.This year, a family of four taking the standard deduction can have income up to $28,800 and not pay this tax under this plan.A family of four making $50,000 a year taking the standard deduction would only pay $466 this year.
  • Progressive income tax rates.
    Revenue raised: $110 billion a year.Under this plan the marginal income tax rate would be:

    • 37 percent on income between $250,000 and $500,000.
    • 43 percent on income between $500,000 and $2 million.
    • 48 percent on income between $2 million and $10 million. (In 2013, only 113,000 households, the top 0.08 percent of taxpayers, had income between $2 million and $10 million.)
    • 52 percent on income above $10 million. (In 2013, only 13,000 households, just 0.01 percent of taxpayers, had income exceeding $10 million.)
  • Taxing capital gains and dividends the same as income from work.
    Revenue raised: $92 billion per year.Warren Buffett, the second wealthiest American in the country, has said that he pays a lower effective tax rate than his secretary. The reason is that he receives most of his income from capital gains and dividends, which are taxed at a much lower rate than income from work. This plan will end the special tax break for capital gains and dividends on household income above $250,000.
  • Limit tax deductions for rich.
    Revenue raised: $15 billion per year. Under Bernie’s plan, households making over $250,000 would no longer be able to save more than 28 cents in taxes from every dollar in tax deductions. This limit would replace more complicated and less effective limits on tax breaks for the rich including the AMT, the personal exemption phase-out and the limit on itemized deductions.
  • The Responsible Estate Tax.
    Revenue raised: $21 billion per year.This provision would tax the estates of the wealthiest 0.3 percent (three-tenths of 1 percent) of Americans who inherit over $3.5 million at progressive rates and close loopholes in the estate tax.
  • Savings from health tax expenditures.
    Revenue raised: $310 billion per year. Several tax breaks that subsidize health care (health-related “tax expenditures”) would become obsolete and disappear under a Single-Payer Healthcare system, saving $310 billion per year.Most importantly, health care provided by employers is compensation that is not subject to payroll taxes or income taxes under current law. This is a significant tax break that would effectively disappear under this plan because all Americans would receive health care through the new Single-Payer program instead of employer-based health care.

This plan has been estimated to cost $1.38 trillion per year.

Let’s put that dollar value in perspective: the United States Government’s budget is approximately $3.8 trillion. That means Senator Sanders’ plan will cost 36.3% of the current U.S. budget total.

Let’s Break it Down

There are certain assumptions made in this and any other Single-Payer Healthcare model:

  1. It is “assumed” numbers are accurate. Obviously, the government financial “experts,” and private consultants who weighed in on the Sanders plan have no history of accuracy in projecting healthcare costs. If any past projections (of Obamacare as an example) are what Americans could expect, that $1.38 trillion would certainly be too low a projection;
  2. It is assumed in this model that current healthcare providers — physicians, facilities, pharmacists, etc. —  will all agree to operate within this plan. In Canada, doctors took massive income cuts when their plan was initiated. Any suggestion otherwise is unfounded;
  3. Taxes, taxes, taxes. Senator Sanders in this plan taxes everybody: employers take a huge hit — 6.2% of grtoss payroll would be paid by employers. Personal income tax rates would climb for all who make $250,000 a year and above: from 37% on the low side to as high as 52%. The controversial “Death Tax” would NOT be eliminated as most feel should, the estate tax amounts would actually increase;
  4. Many tax deductions would disappear for those who make $250,000 or more.

The bottom line to the Sanders Plan is there is NO free ride — except for the poor. And the Middle Class and Upper Class in America would be taxed almost beyond comprehension.


Let’s be perfectly clear: this plan offered by Senator Bernie Sanders is just one concept of Single-Payer. Any such program will be driven by government payments for all healthcare costs. Remember this: the Government has NO money except what they take from taxpayers. For increased government spending, taxpayers must pay higher taxes.

Washington D.C. currently takes billions of dollars in income taxes from corporations and taxpayers and squanders a huge percent of those dollars. Financial abuse in the Government is rampant. Government financial abuse takes all kinds of shapes. There is an environment in D.C. that fosters such abuses. American taxpayers are viewed by many in government as nothing more than a bunch of piggy banks from which to take money at will. Who thinks there is any structure in Washington that can successfully take-on a new federal program with a estimated cost that equals 36.3% of the current U.S. budget? How many Americans are ready to pay these massive additional income taxes? How many Americans — who have just just single digit approval rates of members of Congress — do you think would trust government to handle such a program? No one at my house is interested in doing so.

In fairness, there are several other types of Single-Payer Healthcare programs in existence. But let’s be clear about one thing: NONE have been as successful as U.S. Healthcare. Healthcare as expensive as it is in the U.S. is still in the very top tier of healthcare in the World. Healthcare is no different than other services we use every day: you get what you pay for.

It was a huge mistake for the Democrats to ram Obamacare down the throats of Americans. It has been a dismal financial failure and has dumbed down American healthcare — and it’s getting worse. Obamacare was clearly the first step toward a Single-Payer system that those on the Left have been clamoring for since the early 90’s. But to quote the 1980’s version of Single-Payer Healthcare as defined by Bernie Sanders, doing so will bankrupt the United States.

Are you ready for that?