RFK Jr. Probes SSRIs and Links to Mass Violence

Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has announced that his department is investigating the possible link between selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and incidents of mass violence.

The announcement has already ignited fierce debate in the medical community and beyond, drawing applause from parents and conservatives concerned about overmedication while triggering alarm from the pharmaceutical establishment and liberal commentators.

Kennedy made the remarks in response to renewed concerns about the role of antidepressants in school shootings and other violent acts. During an interview, he suggested that his department would “take a serious look” at the issue, despite the fact that mainstream experts have long tried to shut down any public debate.

“We are launching studies into these medications,” Kennedy said, confirming that HHS is re-examining warnings surrounding SSRIs.

He pointed out that antidepressants already carry black-box warnings about suicidal ideation and questioned why the federal government has not examined whether those risks extend to homicidal tendencies.

Critics rushed to dismiss Kennedy’s statements as “conspiratorial.” The Washington Post argued that Kennedy had blurred the line between scientific evidence and anecdotal claims, noting that current warnings only cover suicidal behavior.

Yet his comments highlight a growing skepticism in America about the influence of Big Pharma and its unwillingness to confront the potential dangers of its most profitable drugs.

Kennedy’s call for investigations comes as part of his “Make America Healthy Again” initiative, created by executive order earlier this year. The program is designed to address childhood health crises, the overuse of medications, and the lack of transparency in pharmaceutical regulation.

For many, this as a rare bright spot in an administration plagued by government overreach, seeing Kennedy as one of the few officials willing to confront entrenched corporate power.

Mental health professionals have pushed back hard. A Columbia University study, often cited by the mainstream media, claimed that antidepressant use was actually lower among mass shooters compared to the general population. For Kennedy, however, the issue is not about defending the drug industry’s reputation but about protecting children and ensuring accountability.

“The American people deserve honest answers,” Kennedy said. “If these medications are contributing to the violence we see in our schools and our streets, we need to know. We cannot keep sweeping it under the rug.”

That sentiment resonates with millions of parents who have long worried about the overprescription of psychiatric drugs to young people. For years, schools and doctors have rushed to medicate children rather than address underlying family, social, and cultural problems. Kennedy’s probe challenges that status quo.

Conservatives argue that this investigation is not only necessary but long overdue. SSRIs were first marketed in the late 1980s, and their use exploded throughout the 1990s and 2000s. During that same period, America saw a rise in mass shootings, particularly among young men. While correlation does not prove causation, many believe the connection is too important to ignore.

Pharmaceutical companies have made billions from antidepressant sales, and their lobbying influence in Washington is legendary. Critics of Kennedy fear that he will face enormous political pressure to back down. But if his history is any indication, Kennedy will not shy away from taking on powerful corporate interests.

The media establishment is already circling the wagons. Outlets like The Washington Post have rushed to portray Kennedy’s comments as reckless. But Americans are increasingly skeptical of these outlets, especially when they appear more interested in protecting corporate profits than public safety.

Republicans in Congress are calling for transparency. Several lawmakers have demanded hearings on the subject, arguing that Kennedy’s investigation must be paired with legislative oversight. “This is not about partisan politics,” one conservative representative said. “This is about whether our children are being harmed by drugs that should have been more thoroughly studied decades ago.”

Grassroots activists see Kennedy’s announcement as a vindication of their warnings. Parents who have lost children to suicide or violence linked to psychiatric drugs have been dismissed for years. Now, for the first time, their concerns are being taken seriously at the federal level.

The pharmaceutical lobby, meanwhile, is expected to fight tooth and nail. SSRIs remain among the most prescribed drugs in America, with millions of patients taking them every day. Any admission of a link to violence would be catastrophic for the industry’s bottom line.

The broader implications are enormous. If SSRIs are found to contribute to violent behavior, the fallout would make past pharmaceutical scandals look small by comparison. Trust in both Big Pharma and government regulators would take yet another devastating hit.

Kennedy stressed this initiative as a moral duty. “The health of our children and the safety of our communities cannot take a back seat to corporate profits,” he said. “If the science shows there is a risk, we must act, no matter how uncomfortable the truth may be.”

BREAKING: Anna Paulina Luna Claims The Biden DOJ DESTROYED…

Representative Anna Paulina Luna has leveled explosive information against the Biden Department of Justice, claiming that critical materials related to the Jeffrey Epstein investigation have been deliberately destroyed.

Luna, who chairs a congressional task force focused on federal transparency, has stated unequivocally that she possesses evidence implicating high-ranking officials in the DOJ.

According to her, these officials not only failed to disclose materials related to Epstein but actively destroyed them to conceal the extent of powerful individuals’ involvement in Epstein’s criminal network.

She introduced legislation titled the SHRED Act, aimed at imposing severe penalties on government agents who destroy or conceal federal records. The proposed bill calls for 20 years to life in prison for anyone caught eliminating evidence in cases of national significance.

“Even if they are conducting a criminal investigation, you should probably pick up the phone and call us,” Luna told Fox News. “We have been more than patient.”

These developments come amid growing conservative suspicion that the Biden administration has no interest in unmasking Epstein’s full network. The notion that key records could be gone forever only intensifies fears that justice is being buried under a bureaucratic rug.

Luna’s office has reportedly sent multiple requests to the Department of Justice demanding clarity on the handling of Epstein-related materials. So far, those inquiries have been met with either vague responses or complete silence.

The congresswoman did not mince words in her public statements, suggesting that the DOJ’s behavior constitutes a deliberate act of obstruction. If true, such actions could violate federal law and trigger an entirely new legal battle.

“The Biden DOJ has obstructed Congress, ignored subpoenas, and now appears to have destroyed critical evidence,” Luna said. “This is corruption at the highest level.”

Critics argue that this is yet another example of double standards in Washington. “Had this been a Republican-led DOJ accused of destroying documents in a child sex trafficking case, the media would be apoplectic,” one conservative commentator noted.

For years, the Epstein case has symbolized the deep rot within America’s elite circles. The financier’s suspicious death in prison and the subsequent lack of high-profile indictments have fueled accusations of a widespread cover-up.

Now, Luna’s allegations breathe new life into those concerns. If records were indeed destroyed, the implications are profound. It would mean that the DOJ, under Biden, actively shielded criminals from justice.

What’s more troubling is that these destroyed materials could have named prominent individuals—politicians, celebrities, and global financiers—who participated in or enabled Epstein’s crimes.

In this context, Luna’s SHRED Act isn’t just legislative symbolism. It is a clarion call for accountability in an era marked by elite impunity. Her bill seeks to ensure that future officials think twice before erasing truth from the historical record.

Despite Luna’s repeated calls for transparency, there has been no formal response from Attorney General Merrick Garland. The silence speaks volumes to many who believe the DOJ is stonewalling on purpose.

Meanwhile, conservative lawmakers have rallied behind Luna. A growing number of Republicans in the House and Senate are voicing support for investigations into the DOJ’s handling of Epstein evidence.

Some have even floated the idea of appointing a special counsel to probe the matter independently. Given the stakes, such a move may be the only path forward to restore public confidence.

This latest scandal further erodes the credibility of an already battered Department of Justice. From the Hunter Biden laptop fiasco to the political targeting of conservatives, the agency has been repeatedly accused of partisanship.

Now, with Epstein documents allegedly destroyed, the DOJ’s credibility is in tatters. Public trust, once broken, is hard to rebuild.

The American people deserve the truth. And if Luna’s allegations are accurate, they deserve justice, no matter how high the guilty parties sit.

BREAKING: Tom Homan Reveals an Investigation is Underway Into AOC For…

Border Czar Tom Homan confirmed that a federal investigation is underway into Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez for allegedly employing a criminal illegal alien and helping others evade federal immigration authorities.

Speaking from his post as one of President Trump’s top immigration officials, Homan revealed that ICE has launched a formal probe after multiple allegations emerged against the congresswoman.

“This is a live federal investigation. We’ve asked ICE to take immediate action,” Homan said during a televised interview.

The individual in question is reportedly an undocumented alien with a criminal record, unlawfully hired by AOC’s office.

According to internal reports, the employee had multiple encounters with law enforcement and should have been deported years ago.

Homan stressed that AOC’s potential interference with ICE operations could amount to obstruction of justice.

“This goes beyond hiring an illegal alien. There’s evidence she actively helped shield this person from deportation,” he stated.

Conservative leaders are sounding the alarm, warning that this may be only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to far-left officials flouting immigration laws.

AOC has long been known for championing sanctuary cities and attacking border agents, often labeling them as “racist” and “oppressors.”

Now, critics say her reckless rhetoric has crossed over into potentially criminal behavior.

“If a sitting congresswoman used her office to harbor an illegal alien, that’s a clear violation of federal law,” Homan declared.

Sources inside ICE say agents have already gathered documentation and begun interviewing individuals connected to the case.

Evidence suggests AOC may have leveraged her political power to block enforcement action against the individual she employed.

House Republicans are demanding accountability, with several calling for a formal ethics investigation into her conduct.

“This is what happens when radicals gain power. They think the law doesn’t apply to them,” said Rep. Andy Biggs.

Democrats quickly circled the wagons, accusing Homan of launching a political smear campaign.

But Homan stood firm, reminding the public that the law is the law and political office offers no immunity from prosecution.

“This isn’t about politics. It’s about national security and public trust,” he said.

Homan emphasized that ICE agents are working independently and that the White House is not interfering in the investigation.

“We are following the facts. If those facts point to criminal activity, then action will be taken,” Homan confirmed.

Legal experts say AOC could face charges ranging from unlawful employment to obstruction of federal agents, depending on the evidence.

Citizens outraged by the news are demanding swift justice and a full public accounting of the congresswoman’s actions.

Homan urged Americans not to let political ideology blind them to the seriousness of the allegations.

“We must restore the rule of law,” he concluded. “No one, no matter how powerful, is above it.”

BREAKING: The FBI Launches Criminal Investigation Into..

It’s finally happening.

John Brennan and James Comey—two of the most powerful Obama-era intelligence chiefs—are now facing criminal investigations.

Their role in pushing the fabricated Trump-Russia collusion narrative derailed a presidency and deceived the nation.

Sources inside the Justice Department confirm that former CIA Director Brennan is under investigation for allegedly lying to Congress.

Ex-FBI Director Comey is also the subject of an ongoing probe.

Their roles in the origin and manipulation of the Trump-Russia hoax are being scrutinized, years after millions of Americans demanded accountability.

Brennan is accused of pushing the phony Steele dossier into official intelligence assessments.

CIA Russia experts warned the document was so flawed it didn’t meet even “the most basic tradecraft standards.”

“Jasmine Crockett didn’t just insult Trump,” Leavitt said during her White House briefing. “She smeared over 70 million Americans who believe in freedom, God, secure borders, and the Constitution. Calling them mentally ill is not just false—it’s dangerous.”

Brennan ignored the warnings and formalized his demand in writing, insisting the fake dossier be included anyway.

James Comey, for his part, did the same.

The CIA’s review makes clear: FBI leadership under Comey pressured the intelligence community to embed the Steele dossier in their final report on Russian election interference.

The FBI “repeatedly pushed” for its inclusion.

These two didn’t just make bad calls. They rigged the process.

Even worse, Brennan later told Congress under oath that the Steele dossier “wasn’t part of the corpus of intelligence” used in the Russia assessment.

But a newly surfaced email shows that he pushed the dossier hard, despite being warned it could destroy the report’s credibility.

And why did they push it so aggressively? Because it wasn’t about national security.

It was about kneecapping President Trump before he was even sworn in.

“This was Obama, Comey, Clapper, and Brennan deciding, ‘We’re going to screw Trump,’” former Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe told the press.

“They all knew what they were doing.”

Millions of tax dollars were wasted. Reputations were destroyed.

“Jasmine Crockett should visit a Trump rally before shooting her mouth off,” Leavitt challenged.

“She’ll meet grandmothers, veterans, farmers, teachers, truckers—all proud Americans who just want their country back. These are the people she called mentally ill. What an absolute disgrace.”

And for what? To push Hillary Clinton’s opposition research as gospel truth.

Clinton and the DNC paid Fusion GPS to dig up dirt.

Fusion hired British ex-spy Christopher Steele. Steele gave them fiction.

Senator Josh Hawley demanded action: “If Brennan and Comey lied to Congress or weaponized their agencies against a political opponent, they should be prosecuted—no exceptions, no excuses.”

This scandal is bigger than Watergate.

It poisoned public trust, warped the 2016 election aftermath, and set the tone for years of baseless attacks on a sitting president.

The investigations are underway.

Now the question is, will the justice system do its job, or will the same people who buried the truth for years bury it again?

Brennan and Comey must be held accountable.

No one is above the law, not even the architects of one of the most dishonest political smear campaigns in American history.

BREAKING: Joe Biden Admits to New York Times That…

Joe Biden admitted to The New York Times that he did not personally sign off on every pardon and commutation issued during his presidency, an acknowledgment that has sparked intense debate over how involved he truly was in carrying out one of the most consequential powers of the office.

“I made every decision on the categories and top-level individuals, but the mechanics were left to staff,” Biden told the Times. That sentence alone sent shockwaves through political and legal communities.

According to the New York Post, Biden’s White House Chief of Staff Jeff Zients authorized the use of the autopen to execute a sweeping set of clemency actions on January 19, 2025. This included about 2,500 pardons and 1,500 commutations.

The New York Post confirmed, “Biden admitted that he didn’t review every clemency case individually and that his chief of staff, Jeff Zients, authorized the use of the autopen.”

The same report added, “The autopen application, which Biden also used to sign some legislation, allowed staff to speed up paperwork processing.”

While Biden insisted, as quoted in ABC News, that he personally made “every decision,” he conceded that he did not individually sign off on each document, saying, “I approved each of the clemency decisions before they were issued.”

The Daily Beast quoted Biden dismissing Republican criticism: “That is utter BS,” he said, responding to allegations that he had no hand in the clemency spree.

Still, Biden’s comments confirmed the worst fears of critics who have questioned his cognitive fitness and decision-making capacity. As Time reported, the final flurry of clemency actions was conducted with Biden out of public view.

Time added context, noting, “Emails show Biden’s chief of staff, Jeff Zients, approved the use of the autopen to execute clemency documents on the president’s behalf.”

In the same article, the legal implications were underscored: “While it is legally permissible, it is extremely rare for a president to use an autopen to sign something as consequential as a clemency order.”

Republican leaders swiftly seized on the opportunity to highlight Biden’s detachment. House Oversight Chair James Comer was quoted as saying, “This isn’t just about a signature. It’s about transparency, accountability, and who really was making decisions in that White House.”

Comer continued, as cited in ABC News, “We are investigating whether this use of the autopen was a way to obscure Biden’s declining capacity and whether any of the beneficiaries had connections to the administration.”

The legal debate over autopen use isn’t new, but Biden’s large-scale application is unprecedented. According to Time, “It has never been used on this scale or for something with the constitutional gravity of a pardon.”

Even some Democrats were privately concerned. One DNC strategist, speaking anonymously to Politico, said, “It feeds the narrative that Biden isn’t all there.”

The same strategist added, “If he wasn’t fully engaged on something as serious as clemency, what else was he rubber-stamping?”

In response to concerns, the Daily Beast reported that Biden maintained, “Each recipient was vetted and met the established standards for clemency.”

But skepticism remains. As Time highlighted, “The Justice Department is now investigating whether any of the pardons were improperly influenced.”

This adds to a growing list of concerns among voters and lawmakers alike. ABC News reported that the clemency decisions were made with “speed and secrecy,” raising transparency questions.

Donald Trump, seizing the moment, weighed in: “He didn’t have the guts or the capacity to do his job,” he said during a recent rally, as quoted in The Daily Beast.

Trump added, “You don’t get to hide behind a machine when you’re playing with the law.”