...The defensiveness of investigators and institutions in responding to problems severely heightens the suspicion. Rather than filing lawsuits and hiding behind carefully crafted statements, the scientific community should be engaging in a conversation about problems and potential solutions.
The article also quotes OSTP Director Michael Kratsios:
Science and politics need not be in conflict. Ensuring that the science used in decisions conforms to the highest standards of research integrity makes these judgments themselves transparent and scientific.
If you use the scientific method properly, it becomes very difficult to skew the data to show a pre-determined outcome without heavy cheating. Especially when you get to the part where you have someone else replicate your study. However, one must be mindful of comparing apples to oranges. I am reminded of asking to see a 'study' offered by a company about their hand lotion. Yes, it was a 'scientific' study with a control group and the treatment group. Unfortunately, the control group simply 'wrung their hands' instead of using an actual substance against which to compare the treatment. So, of course, if you just wring your hands together, you will not see any 'improvement' in a 'dry hands' condition. What the company was comparing was "do nothing" with "use our lotion." In this case, the company skewed the results to show 100% of participants in the 'lotion group' saw a difference whereas none of the participants in the 'wring your hands' group saw a difference. The May 11, 2025 ANP article has a nice selection of empirical research whereas the April 27, 2025 ANP article shows both empirical research and non-empirical research is used to "prove a point."
Even worse, a lot of government uses "opinion" pieces upon which to make decisions. These are 'scholarly' non-empirical writings that sound good until you look for the research backing the conclusions being drawn. In most cases, you either won't find any empirical data or you'll find cited research that has little to do with the conclusions being presented. We saw this with the face-masking research being touted by Fauci & Friends. And there was NO research for 'social distancing,' that was just something Fauci & Friends made up. These examples are NOT Gold Standard Science but it certainly reflects the science much of government uses in decision making.
Let's remember why most research is done. In academia, it's "publish or perish" for professors without tenure. In business, it's "figure out how to show what we want" so we can sell our products for employees. Remember to look to see who is paying for that research to be done!
The White House published 2 articles June 24, 2025 about the OBBB. The firstOne Big Beautiful Bill Will Protect American Jobs, Unleash Economic Growthstates that if it is passed it will restore our economic strength. They cite "everyday Americans" view of the OBBB with sentiments from it will give small businesses better opportunities to it will allow our companies to grow to the no tax on overtime will allow people more take-home pay to estate tax limitations for farms that will help family farms stay in the family.
The second article,President Trumps One Big Beautiful Bill Prevents the Largest Tax Hike in History and Unleashes Economic Growth, claims the OBBB contains a 15% tax cut for working Americans making between $30,000 and $80,000 per year. The OBBB also contains language to make it possible to deduct your interest on auto loans. It also provides "full expensing" for factories looking to create new facilities or expand/improve current ones.
9 SCOTUS stays or motions to vacate of lower court orders
1 SCOTUS affirmation of lower court order
17 suits where judges granted summary judgement or a permanent injunction
On June 24, 2025, in the case ofJ.O.P. v. Department of Homeland SecurityDistrict Court D of Maryland ordered the return of Melgar-Salmeron from El Salvador. Melgar-Salmeron spent 2 years in US prison for possession of an "unregistered sawed-off shotgun" but makes no mention of his immigration status. This lawsuit was originally filed July 1, 2019 with Docket Number8:19-cv-01944. Of course, now they are calling him a "father of 4" instead of an inmate who was jailed for 2 years on charges of firearm possession and nothing at all is said about his "undocumented" status!
ANP Fundraiser:
Dangerous, Derogatory, Harmful, Unreliable!
Those are some of the exact words used by Googles censors, aka 'Orwelliancontent police,' in describing many of our controversial stories.Stories later proven to be truthful and light years ahead of the mainstream media. But because we reported those 'inconvenient truths' they're trying to bankrupt ANP.
