I’m not addicted to opioids, I can stop anytime I want to but I just don’t want to.
The Senate Homeland Security Committee released a report in mid-January that received surprisingly little media attention despite its provocative assertion that Obamacare, and particularly its enormous expansion of Medicaid, is a driving force behind the opioid epidemic.
The case laid out by the report is straightforward, logical, and politically unspeakable. It’s an argument generally made in hushed tones until now, and it’s easy to see why. Even the Senate Homeland Security report was swiftly denounced as a “partisan fantasy” peddled by chairman Ron Johnson (R-WI) in what little mainstream media coverage it received. Thou shalt not speak ill of Medicaid.
Older people are becoming addicted to opioids also.
And yet, the critics could find no way to refute the actual data in the report. They denounced it with thunderous virtue-signaling outrage, attacked those involved in preparing it, criticized arguments it did not make – such as pretending the report claims the opioid epidemic was caused by Medicaid expansion, rather than exacerbated by it – or simply assumed that all critiques of Medicaid and Obamacare must be partisan hit jobs, Q.E.D.
This validates one of the core concerns about politicizing medicine, or any other scientific field, by putting Big Government in charge of it. Rational discussion becomes impossible. Every analysis quickly devolves into a partisan brawl.
The report postulates Medicaid expansion is a contributing factor to the epidemic of opioid abuse – not the sole or original cause, as the report itself and Sen. Johnson took pains to point out, despite mischaracterizations by critics. Much of the opioid crisis involves prescription drugs, which can become addictive even when legitimately prescribed, and are often stolen through fraud and resold on the street. Medicaid expansion greatly increased access to prescription drugs. Medicaid also includes programs to fight drug abuse, but some of those programs involve pharmaceutical treatments that can themselves become addictive, especially when they fall into the hands of street pushers.
It requires no great leap of logic to see the connection between a dramatic increase in access to drugs and a problem driven by easy access to drugs, and yet it is evidently heretical to state that relationship out loud. That’s even more remarkable when the increased use and abuse of painkillers is universally acknowledged as a major element of the opioid crisis.
No one seems to have trouble acknowledging that fact when blaming pharmaceutical companies for creating and pushing drugs, doctors for over-prescribing them, or Americans for reporting remarkably high levels of pain and demanding truckloads of pills to deal with it. The Senate report itself states at the very beginning that the opioid epidemic is complicated, and “most agree that development, marketing, and medical training regarding drug usage – and the resulting over-prescription of opioids – have played a key role.”
Ask if a massive government program that makes it much easier for over one-fifth of the population to get drugs could be part of the problem, however, and you’re a hyper-partisan monster who really just wants to kill poor people by taking away their Obamacare. The Senate committee demonstrated its understanding of just how hot this political potato is by filling the early pages of the report with lavish praise for Medicaid and its good intentions, and repeatedly stating that government spending on drugs is but one factor in a complex crisis that deserves careful analysis.
The report studied hundreds of cases in which Medicaid was abused and defrauded to obtain opioids that were often resold on the streets. The report quotes Sam Quinones’ award-winning book Dreamland: The True Tale of America’s Opiate Epidemic to explain why this outcome was entirely predictable: “We can talk morality all day long, but if you’re drawing five hundred dollars a month and you have a Medicaid card that allows you to get a monthly supply of pills worth several thousand dollars, you’re going to sell your pills.”
Some of the fraud cases detailed in the report go far beyond individual beneficiaries making the sort of calculation Quinones described. Some of them were organized conspiracies involving large numbers of Medicaid beneficiaries recruited to provide inventory to drug dealers. The largest scheme chronicled in the report saw over a billion dollars change hands.
A police officer quoted in the report observed that pharmacists are more likely to fill dubious prescriptions when Medicaid is involved. The Justice Department launched a program over the summer to study the role played real and fraudulent prescriptions for opioids in the drug crisis.
The Senate Homeland Security report further notes that Medicaid fraud is rampant and has not been handled effectively by the government, a fact known to any serious student of the waste, fraud, and abuse that politicians of both parties vow to crack down upon during every election.
Other fraud-susceptible programs such as Medicare, the VA, and the food stamp program are duly cited by the report as sources of opioids.
(Yes, the food stamp program. Among other things, it is well-known to investigators that some SNAP card holders engage in “trafficking” of their benefits, and often purchase drugs with the money they receive. This has been specifically cited as a contributing factor to the opioid crisis. Also, shop owners have been prosecuted for allowing customers to use SNAP benefits to pay directly for forbidden items. One such case documented in the Senate report involved a small grocery store with a back-room stash of “Medicaid-funded OxyContin pills.”)
“The research suggests, however, that Medicaid is the federal program most prone to abuse, and the primary government funding source for the epidemic,” the authors point out.
“There appears to be no limit to the types of schemes used to scam the Medicaid program, from large drug rings that employ beneficiaries as ‘runners’ to fill oxycodone prescriptions, to nurses working the night shift who steal hydrocodone pills from patients. Illicit painkillers obtained with Medicaid cards are being resold at handsome profits nationwide, in places ranging from the streets of Milwaukee to a Native American reservation in upstate New York,” says the report.
Another problem is the illicit use of drugs intended to treat drug addiction, notably suboxone. The attorney general of Kentucky is quoted declaring that “wrongful prescribing of suboxone is flooding our communities with yet another drug that is killing our children.”
It’s not just illicit street purchases increasing in tandem with Medicaid expansion. National Review points to Centers for Disease Control data that “opioid prescribing rates among Medicaid enrollees are at least twofold higher than rates for persons with private insurance.” In Washington State, the CDC found that Medicaid beneficiaries were 5.7 times more likely to die of opioid-related causes.
The most provocative section of the report introduces facts and figures to buttress the argument that opioid abuse has grown worse in states that expanded Medicaid under Obamacare.
“More than 80 percent of the 298 separate Medicaid-opioids cases identified were filed in Medicaid expansion states, led by New York, Michigan, Louisiana, New Jersey, and Ohio,” the report states. “The number of criminal cases increased 55 percent in the first four years after the Medicaid expansion, from 2014 to 2017, compared to the four-year period before expansion.”
It is further noted that drug overdose deaths are increasing almost twice as fast in expansion states, hospital stays for opioid-related issues “massively spiked” after expansion, and Medicaid spending for drug abuse treatment is rising faster in expansion states.
Conversely, as Investors Business Daily notes, eight of the 15 states with the lowest overdose rates did not expand Medicaid. All of these observations should be considered with the usual caveat that correlation does not necessarily indicate causation – there are almost certainly other factors common to expansion states that help to explain their rising addiction rates, although the dramatic increase immediately after the expansion is not easily dismissed.
These assertions are based on official figures that most analysts agree are significantly under-stating the depths of the opioid crisis. One specialist quoted in the Senate report said the opioid epidemic is “deadlier than the AIDS epidemic at its peak.”
Reviewing the Senate Homeland Security report for Forbes, Sally Pipes notes that state Medicaid expansion had the perverse effect of “enrolling able-bodied, childless adults in their Medicaid programs than it does for children and the destitute elderly.” Able-bodied childless adults are also the group experiencing an anomalous increase in mortality rates, which in turn is believed to be strongly influenced by opioid addiction.
“About 80 percent of heroin and fentanyl users spiraled into their addictions after first getting hooked on prescription painkillers. The Medicaid expansion made those painkillers widely and cheaply available,” Pipes notes, succinctly stating the point nobody is supposed to make.
She also tackles the bizarre argument that Medicaid is a net plus because it treats more drug addicts than it creates, which is the sort of argument that only makes sense to people whose capacity for reason has been eroded by decades of worshipping Big Government. (Try this argument for comparison purposes: “Tobacco companies are a net plus for public health because they provide so much funding to treat smoking-related illnesses.”)
Pipes suggests addressing the crisis by rolling back the Medicaid expansion and block-granting funds to states, which could help to drain the bureaucratic swamp that hides so much Medicaid corruption and strongly incentivize states to watch their health-care dollars more carefully.
Such suggestions run strongly against the current political tides, with Democrats pushing hard for even more centralized political control of medicine and ever-larger bureaucracies, with an eye toward midwifing the birth of the doomsday bureaucratic monstrosity known as single-payer socialized medicine. Imagine how bad the opioid crisis will get if everyone gets Medicaid.
But of course, you’re not supposed to imagine that, much less conduct hard research into any aspect of the absolutely forbidden notion that government makes problems worse by subsidizing them.
I’m sure Jeff will get around to indicting Peter and “Horse Lady” Lisa after he stops Legal Marijuana.
Peter Strzok, the FBI agent who led the Trump and Clinton investigations said he needed to wrap up the Clinton probe after it became clear it was a Trump-Clinton race; joked he’d throw his son out on the street for supporting Ted Cruz; and said the government should stop pro-life demonstrators by taking away their permit under false circumstances.
His mistress, FBI lawyer Lisa Page, mocked an ethics presentation and implied that the FBI was also racist and put “idiots” in charge if they were “white males.”
The comments come from 500 pages of texts released Wednesday by Senate investigators.
On May 2, 2016, Page wrote “Holy shit Cruz just dropped out of the race. It’s going to be a Clinton Trump race. Unbelievable.”
Strzok replied, “Now the pressure really starts to finish MYE.” MYE stands for Mid-Year Exam, a code name for the Clinton probe.
Obama had such an honest and transparent administration didn’t he?
On May 10, 2016, Strzok says he “talked to [redacted]. Banner evening. Concluded by saying I cannot overstate to you the sense of urgency about wanting to logically and effectively conclude this investigation.”
Strzok indicated that half the country’s population — apparently Republicans — are filled with “bigoted hatred,” and appeared to express concerns that affirmative action would keep children close to him from getting into top schools, before finally implying it might be worth it to “demonstrate the absolute bigoted nonsense of Trump.”
The FBI agent handling the Clinton and Trump investigations for the FBI was discussing affirmative action with his mistress, Lisa Page. Page spends hundreds of texts strategizing about how to get ahead in her career, and says the is a “white male hierarchy that NEVER eats its own. That pushes even idiots forward for promotion. I think you’re going to be OK,” she said.
The two discuss affirmative action after seeing an article about illegal immigrants who were valedictorians. Strzok wrote “While I hate Trump, part of me thought [redacted] would not/may not get into [redacted] because they’re white and not from buttf*ck Texas.”
“I’m torn between their achievement and the reality of the limitations it places on others. All of that separate and distinct from the bigoted hatred of half (it seems) of our population.”
Page responded: “Dude. THESE GIRLS ARE THE VALEDICTORIANS IN THEIR CLASS… THEY OVERCAME SERIOUS ODDS. THEY HAVE EARNED IT. Do you think Yale would be best served being entirely populated by smart upper income white boys? Come on.”
Strzok says “I’m saying the difference between equal opportunity and equal outcome is hazier as you get closer… I’m saying their background gave them an advantage the upper class white boy didn’t get. Is that fair?”
Page says “Their background gave them an advantage?!”
After an angry rant by Page, Strzok appears to weigh concern for his own kids versus opposition to Trump, saying the illegal immigrants “fully deserve to go, and demonstrate the absolute bigoted nonsense of Trump.”
Page spends hundreds of texts trying to figure out how to advance in the FBI’s ranks. She speaks of a “white male heirarchy that NEVER eats its own. That pushes even idiots forward for promotion. I think you’re going to be OK.”
Discussing the Republican primary, Strzok says “I keep hoping the charade will end and people will just dump [Trump]. The problem, then, is [Marco] Rubio will likely lose to [Ted] Cruz.”
Then he appears to joke that he would make his own child homeless if he supported Ted Cruz. A redacted name, apparently referring to his child, is “arguing about how great Bernie Sanders is and the evils of a two-party system. Sigh. YOU can explain how Bernie isn’t electable in a general election and it’s more important to field a competitive candidate.”
Page responds, “Hell, at least be happy he’s arguing for Bernie Sanders and not Ted Cruz.”
Strzok says “true re Cruz. THAT would be enough to put him on the street entirely.”
The pair later complain about pro-life demonstrators in DC. “F*cking marchers making traffic problems,” Strzok says.
Page replies “I truly hate these people. No support for the woman who actually has to spend the rest of her life rearing this child, but we care about ‘life.’ Assholes.”
Strzok then says, “I have an idea!” The government, he says, should cancel the protesters’ permit under the guise of a “snow emergency.” Then they mock “Rep candidates” who say climate change isn’t real.
Canceling a permit to silence protesters might seem unethical, but Page described having to take her “annual ethics training” as “painful.”
“Apparently they have waaaaaaay too much time on their hands,” she said of the ethics presenters.
James The Corrupt Comey and Peter S. Needs to be investigated NOW.
The FBI didn’t flag that some emails from Hillary Clinton’s private email server were marked classified with a “(C)” when they were sent — something that seemingly would have been one of the first and most obvious checks in an investigation, and one that FBI agents instantly recognized put the facts at odds with Clinton’s public statements.
The Intelligence Community Inspector General noticed it after the FBI missed it, texts between FBI agent Peter Strzok and his mistress, FBI lawyer Lisa Page, reveal. “Holy cow,” Strzok wrote, “if the FBI missed this, what else was missed?”
“Remind me to tell you to flag for Andy [redacted] emails we (actually ICIG) found that have portion marks (C) on a couple of paras. DoJ was Very Concerned about this,” he wrote.
“Found on the 30k [emails] provided to State originally. No one noticed. It cuts against ‘I never sent or received anything marked classified,’” he wrote, referring to statements by Clinton downplaying the danger of her email practices.
Much of the more in-depth investigation considered whether Clinton and her aides emailed materials that were classified but were not marked as such, a harder determination to make.
The exchange occurred on June 12, 2016. FBI Director Jim Comey disclosed the findings of marked-classified emails to the House on July 7.
On May 10, 2016, Strzok had suggested that in his mind, the investigation was closer to being finished than to just getting started — suggesting that if it weren’t for the inspector general, it might have closed down and cleared her despite missing the most obvious first step.
“I cannot overstate to you the sense of urgency about wanting to logically and effectively conclude this investigation,” he said.
The ommission allowed Clinton to repeatedly and prominently state that she had “never received nor sent any material that was marked classified” on her private email server while secretary of state.
She even said so at major debates, and because the FBI hadn’t caught the letter (C), and therefore never stated its findings, PolitiFact rated the claim “Half True.”
When the FBI belatedly noticed and relayed the truth, the fact-checking site said “Now we know it’s just plain wrong.”
Clinton decided to print out 55,000 pages instead of providing the State Department with her emails in their digital format, a technique sometimes used by lawyers to make searches harder for their opponents. A CTRL-F search for “(C)” could have missed the markings because State had to re-digitize the forms with Optical Character Recognition, which can get tripped up on symbols, perhaps interpreting it as something like “[C]” or a copyright symbol. Nonetheless, the classified marker always appears at the beginning of a paragraph and is visually distinct.
The comments come from 500 pages of texts released Wednesday by Senate investigators.
Markings denoting the different levels of classified information include (C) for confidential, (S) for secret, and (TS) for top secret.
Donald Trump is bringing all of the hate and evil out in these insane Hollywood Nuts.
“I used to date Ivanka, you know,” Jones told the outlet in response to a question about racism and Trumpism.
“Yes, sir. Twelve years ago,” the music mogul explained. “Tommy Hilfiger, who was working with my daughter Kidada, said, ‘Ivanka wants to have dinner with you.’ I said, ‘No problem. She’s a fine motherfucker.’”
“She had the most beautiful legs I ever saw in my life. Wrong father, though,” Jones said of Ivanka and President Trump.
The interview saw the 27-time Grammy-winner hurl one explicative-laden swipe at Trump after another.
Asked what “stirred everything up” racially in America, Jones said, “It’s Trump and uneducated rednecks. Trump is just telling them what they want to hear. I used to hang out with him. He’s a crazy motherfucker. Limited mentally — a megalomaniac, narcissistic. I can’t stand him.”
“He doesn’t know shit,” Jones said of President Trump, after being asked if he believes his friend Oprah Winfrey would be a good president. “Someone who knows about real leadership wouldn’t have as many people against him as he does. He’s a fucking idiot.”
Business man Donald Trump and musician Quincy Jones shake hands during a recess in the second day of the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board Hearings at the Pennsylvania State Museum in Harrisburg Tuesday Nov. 14, 2006. (AP Photo/Daniel Shanken)
Elsewhere in the interview, Jones suggested that Hillary Clinton’s secrets cost her the election.
“I was around the White House for eight years with the Clintons,” he said, later adding that so many people dislike like Hillary “because there’s a side of her — when you keep secrets, they backfire … I know too much, man.”
US President Bill Clinton(R) bestows the National Medal of Arts award to US musician Quincy Jones(L) during ceremonies 20 December, 2000 at Constitution Hall in Washington, DC. AFP PHOTO/ Stephen JAFFE (Photo credit should read STEPHEN JAFFE/AFP/Getty Images)
Speaking briefly about the wave of sexual assault and misconduct allegation against some of Hollywood biggest actors and executives, the 84-year-old Jones said, “Feminism: Women are saying they’re not going to take it anymore. Racism: People are fighting it. God is pushing the bad in our face to make people fight back.”
“Women had to put up with fucked-up shit. Women and brothers — we’re both dealing with the glass ceiling,” Jones said, adding, “It was all of them. Brett Ratner. [Harvey] Weinstein. Weinstein — he’s a jive motherfucker. Wouldn’t return my five calls. A bully.”
Asked about Bill Cosby, who’s been accused of assault by several women, Jones said, “We can’t talk about this in public, man.”
Jones also said Oprah Winfrey shouldn’t run for president because “she doesn’t have the chops for it.”
Last month Jones ripped pop superstar Taylor Swift’s songwriting ability, saying “we need more song man. Fucking songs, not hooks.”
Does Psycho Joe Know what happened to Lori Klausutis?
With recent attacks on President Donald Trump and accusations of threats of blackmail by Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski, the daughter of the co-founder of the Trilateral Commission Zbigniew Brzezinski. Some information about Scarborough’s past has come to surface.
No matter what you believe about the exchange between Trump and the two MSNBC hosts the following information is more important than allegations of behavior between the two because it involves the death of a young intern Lori Klausutis and the subsequent cover up. I won’t be looking at the speculation of any of the drama. I draw no bias to either side or conclusion until evidence is presented instead, I’ll be examining the case of Klausutis who was found dead in Scarborough’s Fort Walton Beach office.
Scarborough used to serve as a U.S. Republican Congressman from Florida’s 1st District from 1995 – 2001, he shortly resigned five months into his fourth term in September 2001. Two months before his resignation on July 20th, 2001, his intern Lori Klausutis was found dead inside his office on his floor.
Her body was discovered by a couple who wanted to speak to Klausutis about a work permit issue they had.
However, the once respected news agency CNN reported that Scarborough was set to reign as early as May 2001. So the death of his aide probably didn’t have anything to do with his resignation.
Scarborough’s office released the following press release on Klausutis’ death:
“My staff and family are greatly saddened by the loss of Lori Klausutis. I know Lori will be missed by the thousands of citizens who regularly contact my office to seek assistance with a variety of problems. May God grant Lori’s family the grace, comfort, and hope that will get them through this difficult time,” Scarborough’s office said.
Scarborough claimed that he had resigned “in order to spend more time with his children.”
“In the last month or two, I’ve had thousands of different rumors launched against me. I’d rather keep this private right now,” he added.
The story of the death of Klausutis was swept under the rug and was barely covered by the media perhaps because two months later on September 11th the largest terrorist attack on American soil occurred or maybe the media didn’t see significance in covering the mysterious death of a young woman?
Fort Walton Beach Police Chief Steve Hogue said that preliminary findings from the medical examiner’s office of Dr. Michael Berkland showed “no foul play or any outward indication of suicide.”
So how did Klausutis die then?
The official autopsy report stated her death was an “accident” attributed to – “undiagnosed cardiac arrhythmia” and due to this fact her “breathing stopped she fell and hit her head, on an office desk and died,” Berkland said.
Scarborough’s press secretary, Miguel Serrano also stated that Klausutis had known prior “health conditions” but didn’t provide specifics when questioned. And Scarborough himself told reporters that she had a “complicated medical history” including “stroke and epilepsy.”
Which an immediate family member disputed and denied stating she had no prior “health conditions” since she was a documented marathon runner who had recently run an 8K with a respectable time and she belonged to the Northwest Florida Track Club.
On August 29th, 2001, two Fort Walton Beach police officers Stephen Sequeira and crime scene expert Dusty Rhodes who witnessed the autopsy of Klausutis, said that her “skull had been fractured,” reportedNWFDailyNews.
But this was never taken into account in the final autopsy report, and Dr. Berkland stated knowledge of the injury was insignificant and was simply just from the cause of her fall.
“We know for a fact she wasn’t whacked in the head because of the nature of the injury,” Berkland said, downplaying the woman’s injury.
Then on Sept, 1st 2001 Dr. Berkland released the autopsy report of Klausutis’ death an 18-page document stating he wanted to “extinguish the fires Of speculation” surrounding the case.
Reiterating his previous claims the report stated that Klausutis had “died from striking her head on the edge of a desk in the office. The fall that caused her to strike the desk was likely triggered by an undiagnosed heart condition known as floppy mitral valve disease, which is typically marked by abnormal heart rhythms.”
Berkland noted his report was backed up by two people, including a postal worker and co-worker of Klausutis a woman identified as Tiffany Bates, both said she told them she was “anxious and did not feel quite right” prior to her death.
There was no sign of a break-in or struggle. However, a security guard Don Graham, owner of D-Train security company, stated that he “may have missed” checking to see if the doors at Scarborough’s office were locked.
Scarborough himself has an alibi he was in Washington at the time of her death according to a report by the Pensacola News Journal.
Despite these facts several questions remain, as Denis Wright and Chris George, AMPOL (American Political Journal) pointed out.
1. “Were Lori’s medical records thoroughly examined for any evidence of the pre-existing heart condition? It would seem that someone must have examined her heart if she ran 8Ks. 2. “Did Dr. Berkland personally examine the site of death in undisturbed condition in order to support his later conclusion that the physical evidence was compatible with his later conclusions? 3. “Presumably the heart valve condition alluded to is Mitral Valve Prolapse. This may be associated with arrhymias, but rarely with VTach (Ventricular Tachacardia) or VFib (Ventricular Fibrillation), the only arrhythmias which would stop the flow of blood to the brain.
4) If Lori’s death was just a simple accident, then why did Rep. Scarborough and his spokesman Miguel Serrano feel the need to go to two different local TV stations within three hours of her body’s being found and invent a nonexistent history of chronic medical conditions for
her — in other words, why did they feel the need to lie about Lori’s health?
5) Would you trust without question the word of a Medical Examiner who lost his ME license in two separate states (Missouri and Florida) because he LIED about his autopsy work (for instance, saying he had autopsied some brains when he hadn’t)?
6) Why should whoever wrote Ms. Klausutis’ obituary feel it was appropriate to mention nearly everything about her life — EXCEPTwhere she’d been working since 1999?
7) Dr. Berkland and his supervisor at the time, Dr. Gary Cumberland were known to be high-giving donors to Scarborough’s Congressional campaigns. Did their relationship with Scarborough influence any and all the results issued by the M.E.’s Office?
Curiosity also peaks when you learn medical examiner Dr. Berkland’s medical license in the state of Missouri was revoked in 1998 as a result of him reporting false information regarding brain tissue samples in an 1996 autopsy report.
He moved to Florida in 1997 and in July 1996, Berkland was suspended from his position as Medical Examiner in the State of Florida. Yet in 2001, he was issuing reports on Klausutis’ death that were questionable if not outright false.
He was then fired in 2003 for not completing autopsy reports.
Further the man was arrested in 2012, for storing human body parts in a Florida storage unit in containers filled of formaldehyde and methyl alcohol.
Berkland was charged with – improper storage of hazardous waste, keeping a public nuisance and driving with a suspended license according to CBS News.
Which not only does Berkland’s work ethic come into question whether he was competent enough for the autopsy but also the man’s sanity keeping remains of deceased humans why would anyone do that? Organ trafficking? But that’s a story for another day.
Back to the death of Klausutis knowing this medical examiners shady history you may find it interesting that the autopsy of Klausutis makes no reference to the time of death according to a now deleted copy of the autopsy report.
Then there is Scarborough’s alleged odd behavior on a radio show years later after Klausutis death in 2003.
On May 29, 2003, Scarborough appeared on Don Imus’s radio show where he made the shocking admission about killing his intern. While complimenting Scarborough on his sense of humor, Imus said, “Don’t be afraid to be funny, because you are funny. I asked you why you aren’t in Congress. You said that you had sex with the intern, and then you had to kill her.” Scarborough laughed and replied, “Yeah, well, what are you gonna do?”
The audio from the only known recorded upload is curiously “missing” and the page for the archive.org page is also dead. However, I was able to dig up the oldest date of existence for this claim from 2004 from the Democrats own website.
If true this is a tasteless “joke” that had it been made today would have instantly gotten the attention of social media and ruined both men’s careers.
Author and film maker Michael Moore also accused Scarborough of killng his intern when he “registered the domain name JoeScarboroughKilledHisIntern.com,” and was later sued for his action.
i’ll let you draw your own conclusions by the amount of information provided herein. In no way am I personally suggesting that Scarborough killed his intern, in fact, someone of his stature would have that job done for him. I am simply stating that her death is suspicious in my opinion and many things don’t add up.
