Hey, everyone. Welcome back to Underreported Stories, where I cover the news that CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News failed to report on or don't report on enough. And welcome into my new studio and my new look. To be clear, the mission of this show is exactly the same. We're sharing news and stories that aren't getting reported on by corporate media. That's the goal of this show since inception, and will continue in this rebrand. The frequency of the show, also the same.
Every Tuesday and Thursday, you will get a full podcast episode. And when I feel inspired or have additional thoughts, I'll put out bonus videos and vlogs on the Crissy Clark YouTube and Rumble channels. So today is a huge day, not only for me and my rebrand, but a huge day in the news. So we have a lot of big stories that I wanna get right into. If you ever wanna skip ahead to listen to a certain story, please remember you can always use the chapters feature.
Let's start off with talking about Elon Musk threatening to take back $59,000,000 in funding from FEMA that he claims was sent to luxury hotels in New York City to house illegal immigrants. So there's a lot of confusion because, of course, Elon tweets one thing, Doge is putting out some information, and then we have the corporate media on the other hand saying, oh, you this isn't the full story. Here's what we know to be fact.
I will do all the research for you so you can just tune in here and know the facts. Okay? FEMA gave $59,000,000 to the City Of New York. And mind you, FEMA is a disaster relief agency. Right? A hurricane strikes Florida. FEMA is there supposedly doing the groundwork. Right? But in this case, in this instance, FEMA has come in given $59,000,000 to New York City. Nineteen Million of that 59,000,000 will be spent on housing illegal immigrants in hotels. That is confirmed by the state.
City Of New York, actually not state of New York, the City Of New York. From that $59,000,000 of funding, roughly 26,000,000 will go towards food and security services, again, for illegal immigrants. So when Elon Musk tweeted that all the hotels that migrants are staying at are luxury hotels, according to city records, there are in fact two luxury hotels that city dollars are being spent on, the Roe Hotel and the Watson Hotel, which is nuts.
However, the majority of the funding goes towards makeshift shelters that are far from luxurious, And that is kinda where the media is making it a sticking point. They're saying, oh, well, technically technically, they're not all funding illegal immigrants to stay at luxurious hotels, which is what Elon Musk claimed. But he's not wrong. There still are illegal immigrants who are getting FEMA dollars to stay at luxurious hotels in New York City.
So what Elon Musk uncovered was that the migrant crisis, for which New York City has allowed to grow up, by the way, has cost $7,000,000,000, and the city anticipates that the feds are gonna shout out 237,000,000 addition dollars additional dollars. So kind of a lot of numbers to be throwing at you, but only 81,000,000 I say only. Wow. I'm, like, sitting there, like, only 81,000,000.
80 1 million dollars has been paid of the 237,000,000 that New York City anticipates the federal government is going to give them. So we know for a fact after this investigation, Elon Musk alleged that 59,000,000 had gone out last week, which is true. FEMA sent 59,000,000 last week to the City Of New York for the migrant crisis. Not all on the luxurious hotels, but the mainstay of the point is correct.
And then at some point before Trump took office, the federal government doled out an additional $22,000,000 to the city for migrant shelters as well. So we're not not necessarily just migrant shelters, but migrant facilities, migrant shelters, migrant security, migrant food, all for illegal immigrants. That's the point. Right? Now we as a nation did not vote for the city Of New York to be a sanctuary city.
If the city and the citizens want to be a sanctuary city, I I mean, I think that should be illegal. But if that is the decision that the city makes, then the city and those taxpayers who voted for it should have to pay for the crisis when it inevitably comes. I'm confused why America and the federal government are shouldering the burden of a decision that a city made.
So from Elon Musk's perspective, he sees this aid as a violation of FEMA's duty because the goal of FEMA, again, is to provide disaster relief for Americans, by the way, not financial relief to a city that is reaping the consequences of its actions. And by the way, this is not the only incident with FEMA in the last year. Last year, I was reporting all throughout the fall and the summer about FEMA agents who were getting hyper political.
In one instance, there was a FEMA agent who told her team to avoid houses with Trump signs, and then we also found a video of a FEMA worker telling a woman whose house had been destroyed by a hurricane that she didn't know if she wanted to give relief to that hurricane victim because she had a Trump sign in her yard.
So in lieu of all of this, Trump has signed an executive order creating a council that will review FEMA's, quote, serious concerns of political bias, which, as evidenced by the examples I've shown you, is very serious. Now here is where my criticism of this entire story comes in. So, Doge seemingly, and I believe, has a serious communications problem right now. Elon Musk tweeted this out. Okay?
The Doge team just discovered that FEMA sent $59,000,000 last week to luxury hotels in New York City to house illegal migrants. True, but also not entirely true. Right? The Doge team discovered that FEMA spent sent $59,000,000 to New York City. The city then spent $19,000,000 of those funds on hotels for illegal immigrants, some of which are luxury, and $26,000,000 for food and security services for illegal immigrants. Again, he's not wrong, but he's not a % right.
His tweet went on to read, that money is meant for American disaster relief instead of being spent on high end hotels for illegals. Now where my critique comes in is that I just wish Doge would put out screenshots of this funding as well, because so long as the documents are not security problems, like, Elon should be putting out these documents for us to verify his claims.
Of course, you and I, if you're listening to this podcast, likely believe in what Elon is doing, and therefore, you have trust in the man. But the narrative turns so quickly into correcting the record instead of reporting the fact when people are so rushed to get information out, and then they don't quote or cite their sources. Okay? I made this complaint last week about the Politico story that went very viral.
Betty Johnson put out a claim saying that USAID had spent $82,000,000 on political subscriptions when USAID wasn't the only department, and then the whole narrative about this quickly shifted from reporting what was actually going on to correcting the record. And listen, I have grace because I have to correct the record all the time because I'm a one woman show. But, again, I am a one woman show.
Elon Musk, Benny Johnson, these massive personalities, they have people that help them fact check things. And so I'm just begging these people, please just double check your claims before you tweet them out, Site a source or two. Ensure that you are 100% accurate so that the media are then forced to report these facts as opposed to correcting the record because we were in such a haste to get that out.
Anyway, let's get on to some other big stories that crossed my radar over the last few days while I've been on nothing of a vacation. I've been building this studio. The other big story that has crossed my desk was that ICE made 11,000 illegal immigrant arrests in just eighteen days.
Among the people that have been nabbed include a hired killer working for the Gulf Cartel and several members of the Venezuelan prison gang, Trende Aragua, including this very notorious gang banger named Christian Jose Concepcion Manrique, who snuck across the border back in December and had a prior criminal conviction for assault. Now here's what's insane about this story is that in 2024, Biden's last year in office, ICE made a total of 33,000 arrests.
Now if you do the math there, in just eighteen days, the Trump administration did one third of the entire ICE year under Biden. That's crazy. That means it wasn't about the funding. It wasn't about the manpower. It was all about an unwillingness from the federal government and the Biden administration to get criminals off our street. It's very clear. It's very evident. If you needed legitimate proof, these numbers speak for themselves.
Now the last story that came across my desk over the weekend slash Monday came late last night when the Department of Justice announced its plans on tossing out the bribery case against New York City Mayor, Eric Adams. I'm almost blanking on his name for a second. Now I personally have a very vested interest in this because pop star Sabrina Carpenter actually helped bring Eric Adams' case to the federal government. It's a really nuts video slash idea, and I did a whole video about it last year.
So that's why I'm very invested in this. But, anyway, the Department of Justice ordered federal prosecutors to drop the corruption charges against Eric Adams. Now what we know right now is that the Department of Justice believes the timing of the case was very problematic due to the upcoming mayoral elections. I believe it's this year, if not next year. It appears that the Department of Justice believes it's election interference to push this case against Adams in an election year.
Yes. It it is this year. I'm, like, 99% positive. In fact, check me in the comments if I'm wrong. Anyway, when I've done a video about this, when I've done all my research on this, I'd always floated the idea that Biden's Department of Justice was trying to punish Eric Adams for speaking out about the illegal immigration crisis in New York City. And I think that this the Department of Justice, the current Department of Justice dropping these charges is partially vindicated by this decision.
Right? Charges are not gonna be filed against Eric Adams by the DOJ again either. Right? The Department of Justice is not dropping the charges, letting the election play out, and then refiling those charges. That is not happening, or at least the DOJ has indicated that that is not happening. However, a complaint could be filed against Adams after the election by somebody else, maybe another, state court or something like that.
Now, personally, I was thinking about this, and I'm like, I'm very split on this because I personally I'm sorry. I'm not split on dropping the charges. I'm split about the rationale for dropping the charges because, personally, as a voter, I like having all the information I can possibly get. That's why I've been railing against the Hunter Biden laptop conundrum for however long since 2020, almost five years now, because I like to have all the information before I know who I'm voting for.
Now I was never voting for Joe Biden, but that is neither here nor there. If Eric Adams is actually corrupt, then people would want to know that before voting for him. If the DOJ had said, well, we don't have much of a case against him, then I'd be a hundred percent on board. I wouldn't even be bringing this up. I'd be like, okay. Cool. We're dropping this case because there's not really much against them. These were trumped up charges. Yada yada yada. But that's not what was said.
A case, of course, could interfere with the election, but if a if it's a worthy case, then voters deserve to know the truth, and that can only be played out in the court in this case. Right? And I guess I'm saying this in, like, in my head, I'm also like, I'm really not getting my panties in a lot about this because if Eric Adams is guilty or if he is innocent, I truly just don't care about him enough as a human being to have a strong opinion about it. I just like the truth coming out.
That's all I've gotta say on that. Anyway, let's get into our docket for today. So here's here's what we're gonna be talking about today. A former state police employer submitted a criminal complaint alleging that Pennsylvania governor Josh Shapiro was involved in the attempted assassination of president Trump. Is this real? Is it fake? We're gonna go through that. Plus, a Michigan Democratic lawmaker made an insane claim about voluntarily sterilizing herself in Trump's America.
We've got these so we've got these stories and so much more. So without further ado, let's get into the five underreported stories that you need to know. Today's show is brought to you by my merch line, Based. I'm an independent journalist, and the best way to support this show is by purchasing a hat, a hoodie, or the new base not basic toe, or really any item from the apparel collection.
Instead of asking you guys for donations to fund my independent journalism, my business partner and I created a line of merch called Based Apparel. Based means you are the opposite of woke. It means you're based in logic, you're based in truth. You get it. Head over to basedinlogic.com to check out our latest apparel. My personal favorite right now is the Based two Tone shirt. And remember, when you buy merch, you are directly supporting this show. Thank you, friends.
Let's start out with the Trump assassination update. So a former Pennsylvania State Police employer submitted an official criminal complaint, actually, not just complaint, criminal complaint, alleging that Pennsylvania governor Josh Shapiro was involved in the attempted assassination of Donald Trump in Butler, Pennsylvania last year in July. So the individual who filed this is a female, and she told a reporter or has been putting this out.
I don't think she actually told the reporter, but she's been putting this out, and a reporter with the publican now kind of picked up on this and tweeted about it. And long story short, back in July of twenty twenty four, this criminal complaint against Josh Shapiro was put out. And the source, the girl who has put this complaint out, said the tip was blocked by the Biden administration. Now I'm very unclear on how a tip could be blocked.
A tip could be ignored, but blocked was very interesting choice of words. But then the actual complaint was resubmitted and refiled on January 7 or February 7, sorry, dates. February seventh of twenty twenty five. So to be clear, originally, these complaints started in July of twenty twenty four. One was submitted and officially submitted into the record on February seventh of twenty twenty five. Okay. Let me let me be, like, extra extra clear. This is a legitimate complaint. Right? It's real.
It has been filed. I am going to show you pictures of an official authentic statement. But this is not to be taken as truth. In fact, the probability of this being true is seemingly very low. Anyone in the world can file a complaint. A total nut job can go in there and file a complaint with no evidence and allege literally the most wild things. But at the same time, crazy things have been proven true. So while I am personally 98% certain that this is woo woo nonsense, there's a chance it's true.
So when I say that many people are are probably wondering, okay. Well, if it's probably not true, Chrissy, why did you bring this up? Now I just think it's really important to flex the critical thinking skills for all of us. Right? So I wanna go through the complaint, and I want to logically piece together what this complaint is telling us so that you can decide for yourself whether you think this is true or not. Okay? The media is never going to do this for you, so I figured why not.
Okay. So these documents were put together and compiled by Sarah Fields, who again, she just took them from a private criminal complaint lodge in the Commonwealth Of Virginia. This was created and submitted by a woman named Hadassah Feinberg, and we'll kinda get into her. I have a video for for you guys about her later.
And she says, basically, the criminal complaint I have and affidavit that I've created, and it says, I, Hadassa Feinberg, a find and federal whistleblower hereby alleged that the defendant Joshua Shapiro and his personal individual and official capacity facilitated, organized, and carried out his plan to assassinate president Donald j Trump on July thirteenth of twenty twenty four.
Defendant Shapiro was unsuccessful in committing his mission, but is responsible for organizing and facilitating it as well as injuring the president and, of course, killing an individual. So the affidavit in and of itself then goes, and this is the point where you would try to convince us of your argument. Okay?
It says defendant Shapiro conspired included with Pennsylvania officials, namely the Pennsylvania state police commissioner Christopher Perez to carry out the attempted assassination of Trump. Defendant Shapiro commenced the facilitation and coordination of the attempted assassination by utilizing Pennsylvania state trooper commissioner Christopher Perez to conceal the crimes.
Now I don't know why this has just always been a bugaboo of mine in maybe as, like, a grammar nerd that traditionally when I see unnecessary upper case letters in a sentence, it signals to me that something's off. It is a radar that goes off in my head. So when I see attempted assassin assassination, which, again, those words should not be in upper case. That's just that makes no sense. It should the first letter shouldn't be capitalized.
It should just be, similar to the the line above it where it says attempted assassination with lowercase a's, that signals to me something is off here. It just does it it rubs me the wrong way solely because it's something traditionally done in community. It's just like it it signals low IQ to me. But anyway, defendant Christopher Perez made false and inconsistent statements under oath to the Senate Judiciary Committee. This is the, again, the Pennsylvania State Police Commissioner.
He falsified statements to thwart and impede the criminal investigation and obscure the discovery of facts. Now here's where I go, okay. This is this is why I don't believe you. You cannot assume someone's motivation.
Of course, a commentary someone in, like, a commentary system, of course, like, we can ascribe what we believe to be the blame for these people, and I'm sure a lot of people were apathetic in their role for protecting president Trump, and that's how we got to what happened on 07/13/2024. That is totally fine to ascribe that motivation, in an analysis. In a criminal affidavit to state as fact that that is what you don't you can't you're not inside their brain.
Therefore, it is very difficult to prove that as fact. It goes on to say, Trump was shot from the Pennsylvania State Police perimeter at Butler, Pennsylvania rally. Fact check true. This is not within the perimeter assigned to the Secret Service, and all statements relating to the Secret Service's failures are false.
In his sworn testimony to find that Paris fabricated, distorted, and willfully blamed the US Secret Service for security failures in effort to divert the criminal investigation and conceal the crimes. Again, in an effort to divert the criminal investigation and conceal the crimes. That is describing motivation where there is motivation. Now it does get a little wackier.
It goes on to say, in the days leading up to the attempted assassination, Alex Soros, that is the son of George Soros, made credible threats to assassinate Donald Trump junior or Donald j Trump. My bad. He has never faced the criminal investigating despite his valid threats.
Defendant Josh Shapiro, a close confidant of Soros and recipient of large campaign donations, carried out the efforts created by a so her theory here is that I'm trying not to laugh because to me, this is like a little this is a little nutty. Alex Soros doesn't like Donald Trump, has made probably some bad comments on the Internet about Donald Trump, which I have not seen myself. And then he also his dad, his whole family, the Soros family, gave money to a Democrat. Very normal.
Sadly, very normal. And now that ascribes problem to Josh Shapiro because he is friendly with Democratic donors who don't like Trump. It also goes on to say that Josh Shapiro invited president Zelensky to meet with him in person in 2024, where he physically signed bombs in an unprecedented photo op and goes on to to say that Shapiro and Paris are guilty and liable of willful misconduct and their plans to facilitate and organize the attempted assassination must be investigated and charged.
Again, not really giving us much information on why other than personal opinions. It does go on in even one instance to claim that because Josh Shapiro was unable to successfully delete Donald Trump, it it that's why he wasn't chosen to be Kamala's VP. That's in there somewhere. Also, Josh Shapiro, I guess, the allegation is that, the police commenced a walk through prior to the Butler rally and knew at the time that Thomas Matthew Crooks would be carrying out the attempted assassination.
We don't know that for a fact. How how would we know that? Right? It was premediated, organized, and facilitated. Again, like, I I I actually, like, could totally believe this. I just want proof. Right? And nowhere in this criminal complaint does it give us actual proof. It more so reads like a manifesto of a crazy person, if I'm being blunt. Okay? Now I do wanna note that this was actually originally filed as a RICO charge. She had already filed this. Okay?
This is Hadassah Feinberg versus Ferdinand Cintron, and she filed this against Ferdinand Cintron Junior, Josh Shapiro, and a list of other people arguing this. And the only reason it was dismissed was in, form a papyrus, which, to my understanding means she didn't pay the fines associated with filing something like this. So not even that it was dismissed on the actual grounds, it was dismissed on an ability to pay within a twenty one day period, which had elapsed.
So that's why I'm saying the federal government isn't doing a good job of, like, silencing her. Like, she's getting it out. I'm just not quite sure what it is, if that makes sense. I I see her claims, but, again, they read like a manifesto, not necessarily like something with evidence, not an actual affidavit. Now the last thing I wanted to show you really quick is Hadassah herself. This is what she looks like, what she sounds like.
I feel like sometimes it is very helpful to get a assessment on people or read on people when you can physically see them. So, I think that's very important when deciding on who to trust and who not to trust. So without further ado, here is Hadassah Feinberg. Hi, everyone. My name is Hadassah Feinberg. I've posted a couple videos to YouTube. First off, I just wanted to thank everyone for the support that we're receiving and other victims are receiving.
But I did wanna hop on here and, clarify a couple things. Again, I will pay close attention to this story and the statistically improbable chance that this is a real story. But either way, I thought it was good for us to flex that critical thinking muscle or maybe just give you some insight into why I think the way that I think. Anyway, let us get into our next story, which showcases kind of the exact opposite of critical thinking.
A Democratic lawmaker in the state of Michigan said she underwent voluntary sterilization to prevent a pregnancy in Donald Trump's America. She claimed at a rally that she underwent surgery to ensure she wouldn't have to navigate a pregnancy in Trump's America and then proceeded to do an article with the Telegraph about her decision. So this story ended up getting a a lot more attention than a story typically associated with a state representative in Michigan.
Her name is Lori Pohutsky, that's the representative's name, and she tweeted this. The fact that so many conservative men take personal offense to a decision that I made with my husband about my health care and future just proves the point that we shouldn't assume that the right is secure. I'm gonna say right off the bat that if you do a magazine article about your voluntary sterilization over perceived future policy decisions of America, That's no longer a personal health care decision.
You put it out there for the world to opine on, so I personally feel no sympathy opining on her health care decisions when she made them public. Therefore, I will opine. And, I think that this is a horrible standard to set for women. Okay? First off, it makes her look crazy. You're not doing anything for our gender by acting like a nut job. Thanks very much. You're really feeding into the idea that women are crazy. Good. But, more importantly, she's fear mongering.
And worse off, she's fear mongering to a generation of young women to a level so extreme it should be taken seriously. There is value in being a mother. There is so much value in being able to get and stay pregnant. It is a superpower that God has blessed women with. I don't know why women hate it so much. Obviously, it is very taxing, but it's still a blessing. Lots of blessings are very taxing. Okay?
And to tell young women that the only solution is to sterilize yourself because abortion may not be as readily available, even though it's more than available in the state of Michigan, because, you know, abortion is a state's right now. Right? But this is just disgusting messaging to young women. And by the way, Laura what's what what is her name again? Laura something. I had it written down. Poe Pohutsky? Pohutsky. Yes. Lori Pohutsky. By the way, she is married.
She claimed in her tweet that she and her husband made this decision together, which likely means they don't want kids anyway. I'm just assuming that. Now I could be totally wrong. But if you and your husband decide to sterilize yourself, I I mean, wouldn't you just assume that they don't want kids?
And if that's the case, then pushing this off as some sort of political virtue that you're sterilizing yourself instead of, I don't know, taking birth control and being careful around your husband, that's absurd. Absolutely absurd. This is clearly a stunt. And if you're going to pull stunts, even as serious as sterilizing yourself, you deserve pushback, and you will get pushback for it. Because this sets the tone for how young women should handle themselves in polite society.
And in no society should we sterilize ourselves in the name of politics. It's absurd. Anyway, let's get into our next story, which is another woman acting crazy. A female activist was arrested after she tore down a US flag from a park in Bakersfield, California. She threw that flag in the mud and then raised the Mexican flag in its place. I'm going to show you the body cam footage of this interaction. I'm just reminding you that the quality of the video is very low.
And, also, warning, the audio is laced with profanities from the woman being arrested, but here it is. You're not gonna tell me what to do. This is Mexican, mad motherfuckers. No. Look at that flag because that flag isn't on the floor, is it? Hey. Is it? Hey. You can't sound disrespecting. No. Come here. Okay. My people kill you. Turn around. I'm going in peace and you're hurting me and you're gonna regret it when you okay. Touch me, motherfucker, when your kids die.
When your kids die, you're squishing my hand and I they already know. I really don't say this to score points or anything. For real, this is either a mental illness or really ghetto behavior. If you sincerely hate America and love Mexico, I know this sounds like a low IQ take, but honestly, go. Go where you want to be. There's no reason you have to be here if you want to be in Mexico. You are not trapped here in America.
But telling the police that you're going to kill them, That's where I was looking at this video, and I was like, this is either an insane person who I think a lot of insane people tend to look for community invalidation of their feelings through political organization and political action, or this is someone who is just sincerely ghetto as hell. There's really no in between on this one. I don't know what else to say. She's either crazy or just ratchet.
I just I try really hard to understand the why behind people's actions. And sometimes I might disagree with the action, but I can understand or I can empathize with the why. In this situation, I, like, I don't understand the why. Why would someone think that tearing down The US flag, replacing it with the Mexican flag is somehow going to revolutionize reality?
The only response I really have for that is that social media has made people, well well, too many people, think they're bigger and more important than they are, if I'm being honest. If you love this podcast, then you will absolutely love the underreported stories substack. It's an email sent straight to your inbox Monday through Friday.
You'll get an in-depth analysis of stories that are underreported, hot takes from me on the biggest news of the day, and underreported wrapped where I'll let you in on personal updates, big news that flew under the radar, and you'll get a few pictures from America's Goodest Boy, my dog, Harper. Check out the link in the description to subscribe for free. And while you're down there, be sure to give this episode a thumbs up or a five star review. Okay. Let's get into our next story.
So the Department of Education, before it hopefully gets abolished, canceled $15,000,000 in federal grants that were used to fund diversity, equity, and inclusion programs at just three universities. So the schools were California State University in LA, Virginia Commonwealth University, and the University of Saint Thomas in Minnesota. So here's how schools were spending $15,000,000 from the Department of Education. K?
At the University of Saint Thomas, a cultural assessment quiz asked teachers whether they understood how white privilege and racism affect me and others. This is a grant application reviewed by the Washington Free Beacon. At Virginia Commonwealth University, the education school hosted workshops on decolonizing the curriculum and becoming an antiracist educator because that's so important.
And then California State University, those grants were used to fund the development of equity and social justice centers along with more general efforts to boost educator diversity. Again, it's not exactly clear how much money went to each school, but a lot of money was spent.
I'm going to guess, just guessed, that it was somewhere in the, like, $4,000,000 range for the Virginia school and the Minnesota school and a bigger grant to the California school because it costs more to operate in California. Therefore, they probably dole it out on a state by state basis based on cost of living and whatnot.
Anyway, I think that this story comes at a very important time because it does come at the same time that Trump has expressed interest in closing the Department of Education and sending control of school standards back to the states. So I do wanna note that from my research, it does appear that the president cannot unilaterally shut down a department. It would require an act of Congress just as a heads up.
But what he can do is he can slash the Department of Education into bits and pieces, rendering it ineffective, which great. I got to admit, as evidence, I'm a huge fan of the Department of Education closing its doors. It has been wildly ineffective at approving education in America. If anything, it's just a federal department that corroborates with a yearly national report card how poorly our kids are doing in the existing government schools. All it does is show us why it shouldn't exist.
But what I find so interesting is the less reaction to this news. I believe I was talking about it on Newsmax on Friday. I was talking about the story, and I really wanted to bring it to you guys in a different audience, in a different, platform, is that I was thinking, you know, the progressive left has upheld themselves as this standard bearer of radical change. And then, all of the sudden, that radical change comes in.
And that radical change comes in the form of putting education at a more local level, and they throw a fit about it. How does that make any sense? What we've seen and I've been reading about this data for weeks, if not months, if not years since 2020, showing that kids are not recovering from post pandemic learning losses. In fact, it's getting worse. Our kids are suffering horribly.
They're a bunch of distracted and borderline illiterate children who are crying for help, and our federal government is more interested in creating a bureaucratic net of control instead of finding creative solutions to help kids who simply want to succeed. It is not their fault that they are stuck in this downward spiral. Now what I think we should all be able to agree is that the data is bad. It is not sugar coated data that the right is cherry picking. The data is bad.
And we as a society, as a government, therefore, should be able to agree that we need to change things up in order to get a different outcome. We cannot keep the same bureaucracies in place and expect a different result. That is literally the definition of insanity. Something dramatic needs to happen in order to radically change the way education is done in this country.
And from my experience, from my political bias, I believe that slashing regulations to get this transformation completed is the ideal and optimal way to get that goal accomplished. If you agree with me, holler in the comments. Okay? I just am a firm believer in this, and I really, really, really hope that the Department of Education goes by the wayside or is downsized traumatically. Trump, if you hear this, please get it done. Okay. Let's get into our fifth in our final story.
If you would turn on mainstream corporate media right now, which why the hell would you do that? Anyway, if you happened to, you're going to hear that the maternal mortality rate among black women has risen since the overturning of Roe versus Wade. This is everywhere. The mainstream media love to report on this. And while it is technically true, I want to explain why this statement is so misleading. Again, let's turn on those critical thinking skills. Turn it up a notch. Okay?
The truth is that The US maternal mortality rate fell, and these numbers are kinda wonky. But in '20 no. Since Roe versus Wade over fell okay. Overturned. Since Roe versus Wade was overturned, the birth rate was at twenty two point three per 100,000 births. It is now down to eighteen point six, our maternal mortality rate. That is a seventeen percent decline. The lowest figure actually we've seen since 2018, which would be considered very good news.
But that also means that the maternal mortality rate fell by seventeen percent after Roe versus Wade, which for the left, not such a good talking point because, of course, their talking point was that if we don't have access to abortions, women are going to die. So instead of reporting out the facts, the media has gone to their typical routine of reporting on the ever so slight increase in maternal mortality in racial disparities.
Now I have to say this because people are fucking nuts on the Internet, but, obviously, I would love all these numbers to be zero. K? I'm not an evil person. I would not wish maternal death on anyone of any race. But in statistics, which are just facts, that there are considered statistically significant increases and decreases and statistically insignificant increases and decreases. Okay?
A statistically insignificant increase or decrease is point five or less, which means that if you went from eighteen percent to eighteen point five percent, that is considered statistically insignificant, and we do not say that it rose or fall, the data. Right? This means that when the mainstream media reports that maternal mortality among black women has risen over the years, it has risen by less than point five percent, which is again statistically insignificant, though technically true.
And that is exactly what the media is doing. Okay? This report that was put out on the updated maternal mortality rates of 2025 only found a statistically insignificant increase for maternal mortality rates among black women. Now, again, I wish it was lowering for everyone, but pretending that point five percent gain is newsworthy when all maternal mortality is down seventeen percent is pretty misleading and, of course, very agenda driven.
So just had to fact check for that for you guys because I found it to be it's just, like, it was frustrating me very much. Anyway, that is all I've got for you guys today. First episode down in the new studio. And if you're a real one and you made it to the end of today's show, we'll drop the green book emoji as an homage to our new green era. I will see you guys back here on Thursday. Bye. Thanks so much for watching.
If you liked what you heard, please be sure to subscribe and leave a comment about how beautiful, intelligent, and funny I am. And if you want more content, click right over here for more videos and clips of my show. I'll see you back here next time. Bye.