Roughly 10 million U.S. children and young adults ages 2-24 are on medication for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) — and 40% of those are on multiple psychotropic drugs, including antipsychotics, according to Gretchen Watson, Ph.D., a clinical psychologist and researcher.
“That is just absolutely unconscionable,” Watson said. “It makes no sense. The children aren’t the problem. We are.”
Watson is one of the U.S.’s foremost authorities on the overmedication of children with psychiatric drugs, according to her website.
On May 4, she spoke at the MAHA Institute’s Mental Health and Overmedicalization Summit in Washington, D.C. She discussed the explosion of U.S. childhood ADHD diagnoses in the late 1990s that snowballed into prescribing an ever-growing list of psychotropic drugs to young children.
“It’s now evident with the benefit of hindsight that ADHD is a gateway diagnosis that opened the door to the medicalization of childhood and to drug cocktails for young children,” she told the audience.
In a May 26 exclusive interview with The Defender, Watson gave a sneak peek at material from her forthcoming book, “Prescription Affliction.” She calls the book “a road map for parents, educators, and clinicians who want to protect children and find better paths forward.”
In the 1990s and 2000s, Watson was studying the prevalence and impact of ADHD diagnoses and drug treatment patterns.
Initially, she worked as a psychologist in a pediatrics department in San Diego, where she saw very few children diagnosed with ADHD.
But that changed when she took a job in Hampton Roads, Virginia. “I was supposed to be doing exactly the same work, but the pediatricians were diagnosing most of the children with ADHD,” Watson recalled.
She kept pushing back, saying, “Why are we doing this?… We’ve diagnosed 75% of the children who’ve come into our clinic with ADHD. This doesn’t make sense.”
Wanting to investigate what was going on beyond the clinic where she worked, Watson analyzed student data from local schools. Her discovery stunned her.
By 1999, nearly 1 in 5 children in Hampton Roads had received an ADHD diagnosis. Half of those diagnoses happened before the child entered first grade.
Eighty-four percent of those diagnosed were medicated — and of the kids who were medicated, 28% were on two, three or four psychiatric medications.
“That meant we were diagnosing more ADHD than any place else in the country and we were medicating it aggressively,” she said.
Watson kept checking her data to be sure the numbers weren’t skewed.
“I was able to look at what was going on in the country and see that, in fact, my data really were on target because we were in the top 1% for Ritalin consumption for the country,” Watson said.
Why was Hampton Roads such a hotspot for ADHD diagnoses and prescriptions?
Since the area is home to many military families, Watson compared the rate of military children to non-military children — and determined that it didn’t explain the increased ADHD diagnosis and prescription rates.
However, Watson later discovered this: Pediatric neurologists at the local children’s hospital had developed a clinical research organization that conducted drug trials.
The organization started out testing ADHD drugs. “But it was so lucrative that they rapidly expanded,” Watson said.
The pediatric neurologists involved in the drug trials likely had good intentions, she said. But “research has shown it takes very little contact with a pharmaceutical rep to have a prescriber’s behavior influenced. So if you’re interacting extensively and getting large payments for testing their drugs, you’re going to also prescribe their drugs.”
Watson added:
“It really started at the children’s hospital with the ‘experts’ who had been trained. And then what happens is the community doctors want to mirror the experts. So it becomes a thing, and then parents don’t want their child left behind.
“When the parent says, ‘Well, Sarah has been getting straight A’s, she comes right home and does her homework if I give her Ritalin.’ Well, the next parent who hears them thinks, ‘Well, maybe my child should get the medication too.’”
Once doctors and parents felt comfortable putting children on stimulants to medicate ADHD, the prescribing of psychotropic drugs for children “rapidly expanded,” Watson said.
Since long-term use of stimulants has significant side effects, including altering one’s mood and causing mania or depression, doctors start prescribing other drugs to address those effects, Watson said.
“Antidepressants get added, mood stabilizers get added. Now you’ve got children’s moods and minds being affected in a variety of ways. And before you know it, antipsychotics are added to the mix,” she said.
What happened at Hampton Roads should have been the alarm that warned the country about overprescribing ADHD medication — instead, the trend spread across the nation, and children today are suffering as a result, Watson said.
Despite what pharmaceutical companies might wish people to believe about ADHD medication, the data show that the drugs can have major negative impacts, Watson said.
For instance, higher prescription rates in schools have been linked to higher drug abuse rates, she said.
Educational outcomes are also worse for kids medicated for ADHD versus kids diagnosed with ADHD who are unmedicated.
The notion that ADHD medication led to poorer educational outcomes went against everything Watson had been told, so when she first saw it in her Hampton Roads data, she thought, “Gosh, that can’t be right.”
But then the government’s own huge ADHD study confirmed it.
Although kids on ADHD medication appeared to do slightly better in the short term, “the longer the children were on the medication, the worse their social, emotional and academic functioning became,” Watson said.
“But those long-term results were never trumpeted in the media, while the short-term effects were,” she said. “And to this day on the NIMH website, it lists only the outcome of the short-term — the first pass of the data — and it still pitches the medication as safe and effective. That’s a misnomer.”
Watson encourages parents to try to find out about how many kids in their local community are diagnosed with ADHD and prescribed medication.
Big national statistics can be overwhelming. But knowing your community’s numbers gives you something to work with, she said. “People need access to what’s going on in their community so they can take action at the community level.”
In her book, she provides advice to parents on how to resist the pressure to prematurely or unnecessarily accept an ADHD prescription for their child.
“I talk about the importance of really seeing your child for who they are. That sounds simple, but I go through some strategies of how we get back to really having a presence where we can more realistically see our children without panic.”
Cultural norms about what kids are expected to be and do need to become more tolerant, she said. “We’re intolerant, we’re afraid and our kids are indoors and on devices way too much.”
Doctors should think about non-drug options first and always give full informed consent before putting a child on a drug.
Social workers, psychologists and family counselors also need to step up. “They are part of the problem because they have bought into the mindset, too, that we are suffering from these chemical imbalances and they play a role in referring people to doctors and reinforcing what doctors are doing.”
Watson warned against letting children’s mental health become a partisan issue.
“This has nothing to do with politics left, right or center. This is strictly evidence-based and affects people of every persuasion.”
Watson said we have an opportunity to make big shifts at the national level — if we don’t get derailed by partisan divisions.
Referring to U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., she said:
“We are really at a historic moment when we have somebody who is historically a Democrat working in a Republican administration to move these issues front and center.
“So I hope that people don’t get distracted by partisan politics when it comes to improving child mental health.”
The daughter of the late Cuban dictator Fidel Castro is doing little to quell rumors that Justin Trudeau is her biological half-brother.
Speculation has abounded for years that the former Canadian Prime Minister is the biological son of Castro because of their younger resemblance and the close relationship his mother was said to have had with him.
During NewsNation’s Katie Pavlich Tonight, Castro’s exiled daughter, Alina Fernandez, was brought on to discuss the humanitarian crisis in Cuba and the potential threat of military action.
However, Pavlich ended the conversation by asking about the possible Trudeau connection.
“For years, we’ve heard rumors that Justin Trudeau, the former prime minister of Canada, could be your half-brother. What do you think about it?” she said.
“The only thing I can say is that his mother used to visit the country very often,” Fernandez responded with a wry smile.
“Well, that may be a tell then,” Pavlich responded. “I guess that’s a half-answer.”
“Yes,” said Fernandez.
“Do you plan to call him and maybe find out?” Pavlich followed up.
“No, no,” Fernandez said. “If he wants, he’s welcome but I won’t, I won’t. I think he keeps that to himself, and you have to respect that.”
NewsNation@NewsNation
Alina Fernandez, daughter of Fidel Castro, joins @KatiePavlichNN to discuss the challenges facing Cuba and respond to rumors that former Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is her half-brother. MORE: tinyurl.com/yc3rxk48
3:44 AM · May 27, 2026 · 10.6K Views
5 Replies · 15 Reposts · 39 Likes
The claim was promoted by President Trump back in 2024, who wrote in his Save America Book that Trudeau’s mother was “somehow associated” with Fidel.
“A lot of people say that Justin is his son,” Trump wrote. “He says that he isn’t, but how the hell would he know!”
Yet the conspiracy still has one massive hole that remains unexplained.
Canadian government records show that the first official visit Pierre and Margaret Trudeau took place in 1976, five years after Justin was born.
This means that unless Margaret had made unreported trips to Cuba before their first visit, any chance of a whirlwind romance is an impossibility.
There is also the fact that Justin bears at least some resemblance to his supposed father, Pierre, who led Canada for over two decades across two separate terms in office.
The following information is based on a report originally published by A Midwestern Doctor. Key details have been streamlined and editorialized for clarity and impact. Read the original report here.
Tucker Carlson admitted he used to make fun of people who believe vaccines cause autism.
He now describes his behavior as “unthinking, stupid, and reactionary.”
Tucker says people are noticing what Robert De Niro noticed about vaccines before he suddenly vanished on the issue: “There’s something there that people aren’t addressing” with vaccines and autism.
De Niro declared this on “The Today Show” back in 2016. Let the clip roll, and you’ll see it.
Fast forward to today, and it’s hard to believe De Niro actually said what he did on mainstream television.
What’s even harder to believe is just how most of the vaccines used today got approved in the first place.
“Placebo” doesn’t mean what most people think it means when it comes to vaccines.
Once you understand what a vaccine “placebo” is, the way evidence gets buried starts making a lot more sense.
Something strange happens when people first start looking seriously at vaccine safety data.
They do the research. They find the studies. They bring the evidence carefully into a conversation that feels safe and possible.
But nothing moves.
The other person doesn’t adjust. Doesn’t even get curious. They just double down harder.
Nothing about it feels like a normal disagreement. It feels like something else entirely.
Because it is.
And there’s actually a specific reason for that. A reason that goes much deeper than tribalism.
The reason vaccine orthodoxy functions differently from almost every other medical debate isn’t random.
It’s structural. It was designed and built this way.
To understand why the evidence lands differently here—why the same standards of proof that apply literally everywhere else somehow don’t apply to vaccines—you have to understand what vaccines actually represent in Western medicine.
And it’s probably not what you think.
This information comes from the work of medical researcher A Midwestern Doctor. For all the sources and details, read the full report below.
How vaccines became the holy water of Western civilization
In 1979, a physician named Robert Mendelsohn published “Confessions of a Medical Heretic.”
His central argument was this: modern medicine isn’t an art or a science—it’s a religion.
Doctors replaced priests. White coats replaced priest robes. Hospitals became temples. Drugs became communion wafers.
And vaccines became the holy water—the ritual that baptizes you into the faith.
Mendelsohn made numerous television appearances on vaccine dangers in the early 1980s—debates that were broadcast to millions. Those segments could never air today. The exact same arguments he made back then were validated in nearly every detail throughout COVID-19.
That framing—medicine as religion, vaccines as holy water—isn’t just a metaphor. It explains exactly what you’re up against when you try to have a factual conversation about vaccine safety.
Three forces converged to create this.
The first is structural: medicine’s entire claim to social prestige rests on a mythology—that it rescued humanity from the dark ages of infectious disease. Vaccines are the centerpiece of that mythology.
But there’s a problem. The actual data shows that only 3.5% of the decline in overall death rates can be attributed to all medical interventions combined. The rest was sanitation, nutrition, and improved living conditions.
Medicine falsely claimed credit for a transition it mostly watched happen. And vaccines are the flag planted on top of that false claim.
If vaccines fall, the mythology falls. Which means those who built careers on it are, psychologically speaking, unable to reconsider.
The second force is cognitive. Medical training relies on shortcuts—if A then B—without necessarily verifying why. When those assumptions are challenged, the trained response is to double down, not investigate. That tendency gets reinforced by the fact that admitting vaccine harm means admitting you harmed patients you personally treated.
The third force is societal. When traditional religion was displaced in Western culture, the need for shared faith didn’t disappear—it got redirected.
Science filled the gap. But science-as-institution gradually morphed into scientism: a framework claiming objectivity while functioning like doctrine. You can hear it in the language. “I believe in science.” “I believe in vaccines.” “Anyone who questions this must be silenced.”
That’s not the language of evidence. That’s the language of heresy.
The vaccine-as-holy-water metaphor isn’t just philosophical.
Medical students and healthcare workers are required to be fully vaccinated—which filters out anyone not aligned with the doctrine before they can enter the profession. Those who comply are then expected to administer the sacrament to patients.
During COVID-19, segments of the public began formally excommunicating the unvaccinated—excluded from employment, restaurants, social life.
The ritual function was visible in real time. This wasn’t public health policy. It was enforcement of a faith boundary.
The full article from A Midwestern Doctor lays out exactly how vaccine orthodoxy became untouchable—and how the research system was deliberately built to make harm nearly impossible to prove. It’s worth the read.
How vaccines became the holy water of Western civilization
Here’s the mechanism that protects the entire system from evidence.
Placebo-controlled trials—the gold standard of medical proof—are declared “unethical” for vaccines because they would deny children a “life-saving” intervention. So large retrospective studies comparing vaccinated and unvaccinated children become the best available evidence.
But when those studies show harm, they’re dismissed as “non-controlled.” Demands go up for the controlled trials that were just declared unethical.
The trap closes. Evidence of harm can never satisfy the evidentiary standard, because the evidentiary standard requires the study design that’s been banned.
The Institute of Medicine—cited for decades as the definitive authority on vaccine safety—published major reports in 1994 and 2012. What those reports actually said was that insufficient evidence existed to definitively support or disprove a link between vaccines and serious injury, and that this research should be urgently conducted.
But it never was.
Meanwhile, retrospective data supporting vaccine safety is widely published and cited without scrutiny. The same data type showing harm gets dismissed as inadequate. Same methodology. Different outcome based on the direction of the finding.
That asymmetry wasn’t accidental.
Leaked records obtained through litigation show that IOM committee members were told at the outset that their final report—the one cited as definitive proof of vaccine safety—could not provide evidence suggesting vaccines cause harm.
The conclusion was set before the review began.
There’s a phrase for treating absence of evidence as evidence of absence.
It’s a category error. A logical fallacy covered in any introduction to philosophy course.
In vaccine science, it became official regulatory policy.
The structural manipulation inside vaccine trials goes further.
Trials are monitored for extraordinarily short follow-up periods. The clinical studies for the hepatitis B vaccine—given to every newborn in the United States—tracked side effects for only four to five days post-vaccination.
Most of the chronic conditions associated with vaccines—autoimmune disorders, neurological injuries, developmental changes—take weeks, months, or years to become apparent.
A four-day window doesn’t miss those outcomes by accident. A four-day window is specifically sized to miss them.
But the most structurally dishonest feature of vaccine trial design is what gets used as the “placebo.”
Real placebos are inert. Saline. Something that does nothing, so any adverse event difference between groups is visible.
Shockingly, most vaccine trials use another vaccine as the control—often for a completely different disease. That means the “placebo” group is also experiencing vaccine-induced biological effects. When adverse event rates look similar between groups, the vaccine is declared safe.
In the HPV vaccine trials, the control substance used as a “placebo” was an aluminum adjuvant—a compound with its own documented inflammatory properties. In those trials, 2.3% of participants in both the vaccine and “placebo” groups developed life-altering autoimmune conditions.
The placebo was also causing autoimmune conditions. That’s not a clean comparison. That’s a mechanism specifically designed to make the signal disappear.
And if you trace any vaccine trial chain back far enough, the very first vaccine in the sequence was simply never tested against an inert placebo at all. It was assumed safe. Every trial after it built its “safety” comparison on top of that untested assumption.
In the initial Gardasil trials covering over 21,000 subjects, the death rate in the vaccine group was 8.5 per 10,000. The “placebo” group’s death rate was 7.2 per 10,000.
The expected background death rate for girls and young women of the same age: 4.37 per 10,000.
Both the vaccine group and the control group were dying at nearly double the baseline. The FDA’s determination: no concern, because the rates matched each other.
But they matched each other on purpose. Young women and girls died by design.
A system designed to detect safety signals failed to notice that both groups were dying at an anomalous rate. Because matching an also-anomalous control means the trial, by design, cannot see its own signal.
The full piece from A Midwestern Doctor goes deeper into this—including the complete HPV adverse event table, the mechanics of injury reclassification, and additional trial data that never reached the public.
How vaccines became the holy water of Western civilization
One of the most striking aspects of this story involves a physician who agreed to conduct a vaccinated vs. unvaccinated comparison study—promising in advance to publish the results regardless of what they showed.
The data came back showing vaccines were dangerous—immensely.
The physician refused to publish.
Later, when caught speaking about it on a hidden camera, he admitted he withheld the findings to protect himself.
The footage can be seen in the film “An Inconvenient Study.”
When the record becomes inconvenient, the record gets deleted.
The CDC itself maintained a large population dataset—one that could have ethically compared vaccinated and unvaccinated children at scale. It’s the exact dataset safety advocates had been requesting for years.
But when Secretary Kennedy prepared to access it, the CDC deleted it.
Peter Gøtzsche is one of the world’s foremost experts on pharmaceutical research fraud. What he documented about the AstraZeneca COVID vaccine trial is worth considering.
After his own wife received the vaccine, she experienced severe insomnia, fever, intense headache, muscle aches, nausea, and dizziness—missing four days of work. On the third day, family members described her as cognitively altered in a way they’d never seen.
The first 13 colleagues in her hospital department became similarly debilitated. Every one of them needed sick leave.
But in AstraZeneca’s published trial report in The Lancet: 1% of participants had severe adverse reactions.
100% vs 1%
That gap—100% real-world, 1% published—has a documented mechanism.
Trial investigators have the authority to determine whether an adverse event was caused by the vaccine. They consistently conclude it was not. Because they can.
In COVID vaccine trials, participants testified that a severe cancer was reclassified as enlarged lymph nodes. A permanent disability was reclassified as “functional abdominal pain.”
The injury didn’t disappear. The category changed.
It is shockingly easy to lie with data.
This pattern isn’t unique to vaccines.
When SSRIs first came to market, the FDA was flooded with reports linking them to suicide, homicide, and mass violence. The agency convened a formal hearing on the subject in September 1991. The industry knew the risk. The data existed.
None of it reached the public until victim lawsuits forced the documents out through discovery decades later.
The same architecture—capture the regulator, suppress the signal, wait for litigation—has operated across every major pharmaceutical category. Vaccines are the most protected version of a system that has never worked the way it claims to.
The agencies meant to catch this have a structural reason not to.
FOIA’d emails revealed that the CDC’s Immunization Safety Office head was in routine communication with the pharmaceutical industry to set national vaccine policy—while simultaneously blocking citizen groups that were advocating for vaccine safety research. This wasn’t a rogue actor. This was standard operating procedure documented in internal correspondence.
When the CDC and FDA fought to suppress a surge of severe injury reports following the HPV vaccine, the CDC director overseeing that effort subsequently became a Merck executive. Her compensation from Merck exceeded thirty million dollars.
Thirty. Million. Dollars.
Peter Marks—the FDA director who worked consistently to conceal COVID vaccine injury signals and fast-track authorization toward mandates—left the agency and became an executive at Eli Lilly. Trump’s former FDA commissioner joined Pfizer’s board.
This is the incentive structure that governs the regulatory apparatus. Not a conspiracy. A system of rewards so reliable it doesn’t require coordination.
There’s a financial reason the federal government cannot afford to find vaccines harmful.
The government pays out vaccine injury claims directly. If even one in five autism cases were linked to vaccines, estimated liability would reach approximately $1.3 trillion.
For context: the entire federal budget in 2017 was $3.3 trillion.
That’s not an abstraction. That number easily explains why the research doesn’t get done. Why the databases get deleted. Why the IOM committee was told what its conclusion needed to be before the members sat down.
The science was never designed to find harm. It was designed to disarm the question.
The full article from A Midwestern Doctor goes so much deeper. It also points to a companion piece reviewing over a dozen suppressed studies showing vaccinated children developed chronic illness at dramatically higher rates and experienced neurological changes that may have reshaped society.
How vaccines became the holy water of Western civilization
COVID-19 significantly changed the calculation.
Vaccines were mandated despite failing to stop transmission. Millions were injured. The resulting polling data started coming in and has stayed there ever since.
Surveys consistently conducted since 2022 find roughly a third of recipients experienced side effects, with about one in ten describing those effects as severe. In the most recent survey, 46% of Americans said they believe the COVID vaccine likely caused a significant number of unexplained deaths—with 25% saying this is very likely.
Those aren’t fringe numbers. That’s half the country expressing mainstream population-level doubt that years of official messaging has failed to suppress.
The vaccine brand was used to sell COVID gene therapies. And when that brand corroded, it opened a door.
People who’d been injured by other vaccines—flu shots, childhood immunizations, HPV vaccines—began speaking publicly in numbers impossible to dismiss.
Tucker Carlson told millions of viewers his son developed Guillain-Barré syndrome from a flu shot.
The old wall isn’t holding anymore.
And it’s long overdue.
Lawmakers are starting to name it now.
For decades, the system’s protection required that debate never really begin—because the moment debate starts, the contradictions become immediately visible.
No placebos because unethical. No non-placebo evidence because uncontrolled. No data because deleted. No liability because legally shielded.
Anyone who looks at all four of those things together stops being confused and starts being angry.
What’s actually happening here is larger than any single injection.
For decades, the same pattern repeated: data buried, trials manipulated, databases deleted, researchers silenced, regulators captured. Not because of a conspiracy in the traditional sense—but because of something more ordinary and more durable.
A system of incentives that rewards conformity, punishes dissent, and grows its legitimacy on a single premise it can never afford to question.
When a society hands a scientific institution the authority of religion—when criticism becomes heresy, when questioning becomes threat, when conclusions must be set before data is collected—it hasn’t elevated science. It’s replaced it with something that wears science’s clothing.
The faith is fracturing now. What gets built in its place—whether it’s something genuinely more honest or simply a new set of untouchable orthodoxies—is a question everyone paying attention is going to have to answer. Before we lose the opportunity.
Thanks for reading! This information was based on a report originally published by A Midwestern Doctor. Key details were streamlined and editorialized for clarity and impact. Read the original report here.
How vaccines became the holy water of Western civilization
For a deeper dive into what modern medicine has overlooked—or intentionally buried—check out these other eye-opening reports by A Midwestern Doctor:
While you’re at it, give A Midwestern Doctor a follow. No one brings more research, clinical insight, or historical context when it comes to exposing the health myths we’ve all been fed. This is easily one of the most valuable accounts you’ll ever follow.
If you haven’t subscribed to this Substack yet, take a moment to read what some of the most powerful voices in the medical freedom/truth movement have to say:
“The Vigilant Fox has been putting in a lot of work to create a news platform that shares the stories we want to hear about and brings attention to the most important things to know about. If you want a daily newsfeed in alignment with our …”
In what may be the most bizarre story of the week, if not all of 2026, the NYTimes reports that a senior CIA official was arrested last week after investigators found hundreds of gold bars worth over $40 million stashed in his Virginia residence, a non-fiat fortune that he apparently brought home from work, according to court papers.
The CIA official, David Rush, is being held in jail while he awaits a detention hearing in the coming days on charges of stealing public money by filling out fraudulent time sheets. But, as the NYT admits, the charging documents filed in Alexandria, Va., still leave a lot unanswered about his recent conduct.
The only formal charge lodged against Rush is that he inflated his academic credentials and obtained military leave pay worth tens of thousands of dollars. The authorities say he falsely claimed to be a member of the Navy Reserve when he was discharged.
In a 2009 application for a government position for which he was subsequently hired, Rush allegedly lied about obtaining a bachelor’s degree from Clemson University and a master’s degree from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, according to the affidavit. The investigation revealed that Rush never attended or obtained a degree from either institution, according to the affidavit.
The court papers describe Rush as a “former senior executive service-level employee at a United States government agency.” According to NYT sources, he until very recently held a senior position at the CIA.
In a joint statement, the CIA and FBI said the arrest occurred on May 19, after the agency alerted the bureau.
“After a C.I.A. internal investigation identified potential violations of the law, C.I.A. Director John Ratcliffe referred the information to the F.B.I. for a law enforcement investigation,” the statement said.
From last November to March, the court papers say, Rush asked for, and received, “a significant quantity of foreign currency and tens of millions of dollars in gold bars for work-related expenses.”
When the CIA conducted a review of where the gold and currency were stashed, the agency was “unable to locate the gold bars or significant amounts of the foreign currency,” according to court papers.
On May 18, FBI agents searched Rush’s home and found “approximately 303 gold bars, each of which weighed approximately one kilogram,” according to an affidavit. Based on the price of gold, the affidavit said, the estimated value of the gold exceeded $40 million. Investigators also seized nearly three dozen luxury watches, many of them Rolexes.
The affidavit also claims that Rush lied about his military credentials while applying to enter the senior executive service level ranks and committed “timecard fraud” regarding military leave. He allegedly claimed 744 hours of military leave, resulting in $77,000 in compensation, since being honorably discharged from the Navy in 2015, according to the affidavit.
The biggest question of all remains unanswered: the court papers do not indicate why Rush appears to have kept so much gold, and $2 million in U.S. currency, not to mention 35 Rolexes in his home, or what work project would have required him to amass such wealth.
Below is the full charging affidavit from the criminal case (1:2026mj00177 USA vs Rush, Virginia Eastern Court).
New bodycam footage shows retired Maj. Gen. William Neil McCasland had a dinner meeting with US Space Force members the night before his unexplained disappearance, deepening concerns over experts tied to sensitive programs.
McCasland, central to advanced aerospace and nuclear research, walked out of his Albuquerque home on February 27, 2026, leaving behind his phone, prescription glasses, and wearable tracking devices. He took his wallet, a .38-caliber revolver with holster, and a red backpack. Despite extensive searches in the rugged Sandia Mountains foothills with FBI assistance, no trace has been found, and a Silver Alert remains active.
The newly surfaced video obtained by the Law&Crime Network captures officers interviewing a witness who dined with McCasland the night prior. The woman, connected through the Kirtland Partnership nonprofit, described a dinner meeting involving McCasland and US Space Force members around 6pm in Albuquerque.
She told authorities: “I was shocked this morning when I saw the alert because what I noticed Thursday evening [February 26] is he wasn’t his usual self. He was kind of spacey and quiet and you know that that happens with people.”
McCasland’s wife, Susan McCasland Wilkerson, appeared in the footage and revealed he had been prescribed new medication the night before for sleep issues, unexplained weight loss of about 20 pounds, and anxiety.
She stated: “Today he had taken a drug that the doctor prescribed last night that was supposed to help him sleep with weight gain… He’s lost about 20 pounds for no reason and with anxiety. Today he woke up and said, ‘Well, I have got better sleep, but it’s like the after effects of a bad hangover. I’m just foggy. I can’t get any motivation to do anything.’”
The witness further claimed McCasland remained deeply involved despite retirement: “He was the head of Air Force Research Lab to the point the man’s names are in the UFO documents that are fixed to be released… He’s in that depth, so he has a very high security clearance.”
This meeting with Space Force personnel, tasked with tracking unexplained aerial phenomena for national security, occurred against the backdrop of Trump’s disclosure order. The timing fuels skepticism toward any narrative minimizing potential connections.
McCasland commanded Kirtland Air Force Base in New Mexico — a hub for nuclear weapons research and Space Force operations — and the Air Force Research Laboratory at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base in Ohio. Wright-Patterson has long carried UFO associations, including unconfirmed claims of housing Roswell debris.
Tennessee Congressman Tim Burchett described him pointedly: “He’s the guy that had a lot of nuclear secrets. I’ve been told by several sources that he was the gatekeeper for the UFO stuff.”
His wife has downplayed direct UFO involvement, noting only a brief unpaid consulting role with Tom DeLonge’s To The Stars Academy for fictional projects, stating he “does not have any special knowledge” on extraterrestrial matters. Yet the pre-disappearance meeting and documented clearances keep legitimate questions alive, especially as two sets of UFO disclosure files have now been released under the current administration.
This development fits into a disturbing sequence of disappearances and deaths.
These reports detail repeated losses among personnel with overlapping expertise in NASA projects, nuclear propulsion, aerospace engineering, JPL rocket technology, and potential UFO-related programs.
From a NASA scientist found charred in a Tesla crash to an aerospace engineer and family killed in a plane incident, the cases accumulated, pushing reported totals toward 11 or more. Speculation around JPL disappearances and experts tied to “dark project secrets” added layers, highlighting vulnerabilities in fields critical to U.S. superiority.
The pattern emerged alongside Trump’s push for openness, with file releases aiming to counter secrecy that has long shielded sensitive programs from scrutiny. While coincidence remains possible, the concentration among those familiar with advanced propulsion, space intelligence, and unidentified phenomena warrants full examination to safeguard innovation and defense capabilities.
President Trump addressed the string of incidents directly in exchanges with reporters. He stated: “Well, so far, I mean, they’re individual. We have a lot of scientists… Some were sick. Some left this earth self-inflicted. Some had other things. So far we’re finding that there’s not much of a connection. We’re going to be doing a full report and it’s very serious.”
TPUSA Rapid Response@TPUSARapidRep
NEW: President Trump was asked about the growing number of missing or deceased scientists who had access to classified information.
He confirmed he has been briefed and said the cases appear to be mostly individual so far, some involving illness or suicide, with “not much of a
7:57 PM · Apr 30, 2026 · 1.82K Views
3 Replies · 41 Likes
The incidents cluster around key sites: Wright-Patterson’s National Space Intelligence Center, Kirtland’s nuclear and Space Force activities, and JPL’s propulsion work. Space Force’s UAP monitoring mandate adds relevance. Losses of experienced personnel weaken continuity precisely when disclosure efforts and geopolitical pressures from adversaries like China demand strength.
Excessive classification has historically created vulnerabilities — to leaks, foreign intelligence, or internal pressures. Trump’s releases counter that by promoting oversight. Yet personnel protection is equally vital. Even absent a proven conspiracy, the pattern exposes gaps during rapid advancements in space and nuclear domains. McCasland’s “foggy” state post-medication, the revolver taken, and the Space Force dinner all require exhaustive review without preconceptions.
Many are convinced that there is a ‘deep state’ effort to battle against Trump’s move toward disclosure.
Historical context around Wright-Patterson includes longstanding claims from researchers like Hal Puthoff and Eric Davis on advanced materials. McCasland’s leadership there made him a potential knowledge bridge. Similar questions apply to other cases, and public distrust grows when mainstream coverage minimizes while facts accumulate, underscoring the value of independent reporting that prioritizes transparency.
Broader questions persist on safeguarding talent. With hundreds of thousands of scientists in government and defense, isolated tragedies occur, yet clusters in niche classified fields invite scrutiny. Full reports promised by the administration could clarify, but delays risk further erosion of trust.
The Justice Department launched a criminal investigation into Trump rape accuser E. Jean Carroll.
In 2019, E. Jean Carroll alleged that Donald Trump raped her in a Bergdorf Goodman dressing room in the 1990s but she could not name the date or even the year this allegedly took place.
Carroll previously said ‘rape is sexy’ and a ‘fantasy’ – CNN’s Anderson Cooper was so disturbed he cut to a commercial break.
The Post Millennial@TPostMillennial
FLASHBACK: Trump “rape” accuser E. Jean Carroll says “rape is sexy” during CNN interview with Anderson Cooper
5:34 PM · Jan 26, 2024 · 31.1K Views
57 Replies · 156 Reposts · 313 Likes
The jury sided with Carroll anyway, with no evidence.
Trump has denied the allegations and called E. Jean Carroll a “whack job” who’s “not my type.”
The jury decided that E. Jean Carroll did not prove that Trump raped her.
However, the jury said E. Jean Carroll proved Trump sexually abused her when he ‘inserted fingers into her vagina.’
A Manhattan jury reached a verdict in the E. Jean Carroll rape/defamation case in May 2023 and ordered Trump to pay her $5 million.
In a separate defamation case brought by E. Jean Carroll, in January 2024, Trump was ordered to pay $83.3 million in damages to Carroll.
Federal investigators are probing whether Carroll perjured herself when she said under oath that no outside source was paying her legal fees.
E. Jean Carroll told then-Trump attorney Alina Habba under oath that no one was helping her pay her legal fees.
However, it was later revealed that billionaire Reid Hoffman was bankrolling Carroll’s legal fees.
The Justice Department has launched a criminal investigation into E. Jean Carroll, the former magazine columnist who accused President Donald Trump of sexual assault, according to multiple sources familiar with the matter.
The investigation is focused on whether Carroll committed perjury in testimony tied to her two civil lawsuits against the president – one alleging he sexually abused Carroll in a New York department store in the mid-1990s, and a second for defaming her when in 2019 he repeatedly denied the assault, said she wasn’t his type and claimed she made it up to boost sales of a book.
Prosecutors’ theory hinges on a 2022 deposition statement by Carroll, 82, that she received no outside funding for her lawsuit, though it was later revealed that billionaire Reid Hoffman had paid some legal fees and expenses.
STORY #1 – The Trump administration is facing outrage from the MAHA movement after filing a Supreme Court brief that many supporters see as a direct blow to religious liberty.
The firestorm erupted after the DOJ reportedly argued employers can allow medical exemptions to vaccine mandates while denying full religious exemptions, a distinction many Americans thought the post-COVID legal battles had already settled.
Attorney Aaron Siri, one of the nation’s leading lawyers fighting COVID-era mandate abuses, warned the real-world outcome is simple: workers with religious objections can still lose their jobs. Legal experts say the filing effectively treats religious convictions as second-class rights, despite years of legal battles centered on the First Amendment and medical freedom. Tom Renz called it “an absolute attack on the heart of MAHA.”
Maria’s report explains why so many MAGA supporters never imagined Trump’s own DOJ would take this position.
#ad: There are two financial systems—one for the connected, and one for everyone else.
While most people struggle to grow their savings, the wealthy have been quietly multiplying theirs through crypto.
Now, that advantage can be yours.
Animus AI, available through BlockTrust IRA, analyzes market data and executes trades with precision most investors simply can’t match. Since 2022, it has outperformed Bitcoin by 250%.
In 2025 alone, it helped create over 80,000 new millionaires.
Right now, you can get $2,500 in bonus crypto when you open a qualifying account.
DISCLOSURE: This post contains affiliate links. If you make a purchase through them, we may earn a small commission at no extra cost to you. This helps keep our work independent. Thank you for your support.
STORY #2 – The Iran war is becoming almost impossible to track in real time, and that confusion may be telling us more than officials want to admit.
One day there’s a ceasefire. The next day there are fresh strikes, new military threats, and growing fears the public still isn’t getting the full story.
New reports say U.S. casualties have now climbed to 423 as military operations resume despite ongoing “peace” negotiations between Washington and Tehran. Meanwhile, accusations of a cover-up continue growing after Pentagon figures reportedly shifted multiple times with little explanation.
Iran is now accusing the U.S. of a “flagrant violation” of the ceasefire after American strikes reportedly hit targets near the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s most critical energy chokepoints. Israel is also warning it will not accept what officials call a “bad deal” with Iran, even as Trump insists negotiations are close.
The deeper this conflict goes, the harder it becomes to separate diplomacy from escalation. Watch Maria’s report before this situation gets even more dangerous.
#ad: Want protection from surveillance, hacking, and even electromagnetic threats?
Escape Zone’s elite Faraday bags block GPS, Bluetooth, RFID skimming, and EMF—perfect for phones, laptops, wallets, and more.
Their premium ballistic backpack even combines Faraday shielding with Kevlar armor, giving you the upper hand in an unpredictable world.
Want to shield your body, too? Try their EMF-blocking beanies and blankets—because protection shouldn’t stop with your phone.
Whether it’s for you, your family, or someone you love—don’t leave it to chance.
DISCLOSURE: This post contains affiliate links. If you make a purchase through them, we may earn a small commission at no extra cost to you. This helps keep our work independent. Thank you for your support.
STORY #3 – A viral detention case in Canada is fueling fears that governments may no longer need criminal charges to silence politically outspoken individuals.
The most chilling part is that the activist at the center of the case claims he was never given a real opportunity to attend a voluntary mental health appointment before police and a psychiatric response unit arrived to detain him.
Nicholas Wagter, a biophysics graduate turned activist researcher, had been publicly delivering documents to Canadian officials warning about alleged foreign interference, authoritarian legislation, and CCP-linked operations inside Canada. He also compiled a large research archive citing RCMP, CSIS, and other official government sources before being detained under British Columbia’s Mental Health Act.
The footage exploded online after Wagter calmly insisted he was willing to cooperate, while authorities allegedly argued they simply didn’t believe he would appear voluntarily. For many Canadians, the case is becoming a disturbing test of how far psychiatric powers can go when politically inconvenient individuals are treated as mentally unstable instead of criminal.
Now, the case is spiraling into even darker territory as online investigators question who requested the psychiatric hold, what happened behind closed doors, and whether outspoken activists could increasingly be viewed as mental health threats rather than political dissenters.
Watch Maria’s full breakdown before the official story gets locked in.
#ad: Health insurance in America is broken.
Over 200,000 Americans go bankrupt because of medical bills every year—and many of them already had insurance. On average, 20% of claims are denied, leaving families stuck paying massive out-of-pocket costs after spending thousands on premiums.
But there’s an alternative.
CrowdHealth is a community-powered model helping members fund nearly 100% of their medical bills at a fraction of the cost.
More than 28,000 members have been helped so far, with a 99.9% funding success rate and over $56 million in medical bills saved.
CrowdHealth isn’t insurance. It’s a way to step outside the broken system and take control of your healthcare.
Get started today for $99 per member per month for the first three months.
Reprinted from Andy Worthington’s website. 962 days since Israel’s genocide in Gaza began, and 227 days since a ceasefire took effect through the implementation of the first phase of Donald Trump’s “Peace Plan”, Nickolay Mladenov, the Bulgarian former UN official who is now the “High Representative of Gaza” in Donald Trump’s “Board of Peace”, has […]
Republican lawmakers have joined Democrats in a bipartisan effort to keep the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), an agency involved in pushing online censorship, alive.
Republican Nebraska Rep. Don Bacon and Democratic Virginia Rep. James Walkinshaw pushed back against President Donald Trump’s cuts to the agency, which had previously collaborated with private entities to censor online speech and the contents of Hunter Biden’s laptop, according to the Federal News Network. CISA has downsized by about one-third of its employees since Trump took office, including direct layoffs and relocations through the Management Directed Reassignments.
Walkinshaw said restoring and expanding CISA’s capabilities should be a “top priority.”
Bacon told the Daily Caller News Foundation that while CISA’s efforts to discredit Hunter Biden’s laptop were wrong, the cuts to the agency were “harmful to the country.”
“The efforts to discredit the Hunter Biden laptop story were wrong and were a significant leadership mistake. But the manpower and budget cuts we saw a year ago against CISA were harmful to the country,” Bacon told the DCNF. “CISA is responsible for defending our private sector and financial and energy grids from cyberattacks. It is the frontline defense. I also criticize the Democrat leadership for forcing a record 76-day shutdown of the Department of Homeland Security, including CISA, all while President Trump was taking long-overdue action against Iran. We need an effective CISA because China and Russia are conducting cyber warfare against America every single day.”
Walkinshaw’s office did not immediately respond to the Daily Caller News Foundation’s request for comment.
Lawmakers in the House and Senate have opposed cuts to CISA over the past year. Senate Appropriations Committee leaders rejected the administration’s proposed cuts to CISA funding in 2026, the Federal News Network reported.
Former officials and industry leaders have worried that CISA no longer has the ability to help banks, utilities and other infrastructure operators prepare for a wave of artificial intelligence (AI) cyberattacks, according to Axios. Republican lawmakers on the House Homeland Security Subcommittee on Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Protection, including chairman Andy Ogles, warned that state and local governments are facing cyber threats because of the cuts to CISA.
Ogles stated Tuesday that Congress should not allow the Protecting Information by Local Leaders for Agency Resilience (PILLAR) Act of 2015, which is strongly related to CISA, to expire in September.
“We should not let that happen, and we certainly should not let it happen at a moment when the threat is growing ever worse. That is why I am committed to enacting the PILLAR Act, which we passed and we sent to the Senate Homeland Security Committee,” Ogles said.
Other Republicans such as Reps. Nancy Mace of South Carolina and Andrew Garbarino of New York have also backed CISA’s cyber missions and infrastructure partnerships.
Democratic Mississippi Rep. Bennie Thompson, the ranking member of the House Homeland Security Committee, and Democratic Illinois Rep. Delia Ramirez wrote a letter to acting CISA Director Nick Anderson expressing concerns about the administration’s actions.
“We are concerned that this incident reflects a diminished security culture and/or an inability for CISA to adequately manage its contract support. Over the past year, the Trump administration has decimated CISA’s workforce, and it lost nearly 1,000 personnel,” Thompson and Ramirez wrote in a joint letter.
Republican Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, who chairs the Senate Homeland Security Committee, has been critical of CISA and its supporters, accusing the agency of being a threat to First Amendment rights. He also stated in April 2025 that the agency has “been weaponized to silence dissent.”
“I’d like to eliminate it,” Paul told POLITICO in June 2024. “The First Amendment is pretty important, that’s why we listed it as the First Amendment, and I would have liked to, at the very least, eliminate their ability to censor content online.”
The agency, which is an arm of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), worked to discredit reporting on Hunter Biden’s laptop by linking it to QAnon and Pizzagate conspiracy theories, with one CISA employee calling the story a “convoluted web of falsehoods being spread to undermine Joe Biden,” according to documents obtained by the America First Legal Foundation in 2023. The agency also worked to crack down on “misinformation,” including through the facilitation of the “Election Integrity Partnership” (EIP), which flagged content to be removed from Facebook, Twitter, TikTok and other social media platforms during the 2020 election.
The Daily Caller News Foundation verified the contents of Hunter Biden’s laptop two weeks after Twitter locked the New York Post’s account for reporting on the matter in October 2020. The New York Times, The Washington Post and other outlets have since verified the contents as well.
Fifty-one former intelligence officials signed a letter attempting to discredit reports on the laptop. Many of these officials later ended up with roles in former President Joe Biden’s administration.
In January, the Republican-led House passed a funding package that included full-year FY2026 DHS appropriations with $2.2 billion for CISA. Senate Democrats removed the full DHS bill from the larger package over disputes on immigration enforcement, leading to a partial shutdown of DHS.
In December 2021, a CISA advisory panel repeatedly pushed to enlist outside left-wing groups and individuals linked to Democratic causes to further their efforts on addressing misinformation and disinformation, the Daily Caller News Foundation exclusively reported in April 2023.
I regard this article by Suavek as remarkable, and possibly one of his most powerful and important pieces, because of its potential to unlock the minds of others.
It still takes an unusual characteristic, the courage to read something which, at the outset, has the potential to yield answers which will have profound implications.
Lots of people, it seems to me, have a highly developed “tripwire detection system”. Most people react to proximity of information that’s going to make maintaining the illusion in your mind that the world is a broadly honest place extremely difficult, by immediately turning away from it.
They don’t want to learn from you, because of the implications, if what you’re telling them is right.
We know that “Ebola” is not caused by a “virus”. Knowing that, I’d be very interested to learn in comments how the information Suavek provides lands with you.
This is a sibling piece to Suavek’s counterblast against the fakery of the “Ebola virus” and points unwaveringly to deliberate fraud, protection of the gobbets of money from gold mining in unregulated environments and the cynical, malevolent use of industrial poisoning in order to strike fear into the hearts of ordinary people everywhere.
Avoid arsenic poisoning and you will be fine from “Ebola”.
Avoid letting anyone stab you with a hollow metal needle in order to inject you with intentionally harmful materials and you’ve dodged both bullets.
Arm yourself with the basics here, that arsenic poisoning, commonplace in rural African gold mines, can cause severe symptoms and death then deliberately misattributed to a virus.
Suavek surpasses himself with these two articles. My sincere thanks to him for his important work.
A decision made not to leave the future entirely to others, but to very actively join the battle is how we win this.
Any of you can do it. Every time any of you decides to do this, in whatever way you can, you immediately create yet another source of truth, and of questioning what we’re being told.
Best wishes
Mike
Subscribing to Suavek, sharing his posts, is one simple way to join the battle and help me
Nothing is behind a paywall. Of course paid subscriptions would help him but I would be most grateful if you would subscribe any which way you can to Suavek’s publication.
His articles are very strongly centred on extending my voice but also draw on a wide net. I am used to communicating often on Telegram. Via Suavek these writings make their way to Substack.
I look forward to seeing his numbers rise dramatically. Well deserved that would be.
