Meet The ‘Really Very Crunchy’ Mom Who Turned Her Holistic Life Into Viral, Educational Comedy

Meet The ‘Really Very Crunchy’ Mom Who Turned Her Holistic Life Into Viral, Educational Comedy

Emily Morrow may seem normal, but one glance at her thrifted clothes and iconic bottle of homemade kombucha confirms she’s certainly not mainstream.

“I would describe myself as a very regular mom. I guess not like a mainstream mom, though,” Morrow told The Federalist. “I just have an interest in holistic living and I’m also a very sarcastic person, so I can see the humor in the choices that I make.”

Morrow is the star of @reallyverycrunchy, one of the most followed holistic social media accounts. Her humor-filled spin on the natural lifestyle she embraces earned her more than 1 million followers across TikTok and Instagram since the accounts’ creation in 2022.

“It just feels hilarious and surreal because I am the most awkward person ever and also the most average mom. Just a mom just making fun of her life,” Morrow said.

Corporate media accuse viral advocates of natural living like Morrow of “radicalizing” vulnerable new parents with dangerous, “anti-science” information. In reality, influencers like Morrow just want everyone to learn how to think for and laugh at themselves.

Underneath the quirky facade she puts on her internet shorts is a woman inspiring her followers to think for themselves, evaluate what they are putting in their bodies, and prioritize how they are spending their time with their families.

“It should never be about somebody making the wrong choice. Just about you making the right choice for your family,” Morrow said.

Crunch 101

The Morrows first stumbled upon the crunchy lifestyle during their mission to save money on food. At the time, the Morrows were living in an RV and trying to calculate how to maximize their nutrients while keeping the grocery bill low.

“I read somewhere that if you only buy processed foods that have five ingredients or less, then it cuts out a lot of the stuff that you eat. Really, that was more of like a money-saving thing for me than a healthy eating thing. But it made me start looking at ingredients, which sparked my interest in, ‘Why are there so many crazy ingredients in the food I’m eating? What is this?’” Morrow said.

When the Morrows had children they “had to make decisions for,” they then decided to commit to a holistic life.

In late 2021, the Morrows realized Emily’s passion for healthy living and Jason’s interest in content creation could be harnessed to create online humor. The couple went to work writing, filming, and producing videos exaggerating and mocking Morrow’s affinity for eating veggies off of the vine, toad husbandry, and sharing the healing power of breastmilk.

The Morrows started out with a small goal: make and post one satirical video every day in 2022.

“By our eighth video, the one about crunchy mom at a birthday party, that one went viral, and then it kind of went crazy from there,” Jason said.

Parodies about “mouth tape” and “store-bought bone broth” may be niche but, as evidenced by thousands of likes and comments, they clearly resonated.

“If you’re crunchy, you can laugh at it. If you know someone who’s crunchy, you can laugh at it. If you hate crunchy people, you can laugh at it because it is sort of outside looking in how you feel like crunchy people are,” Morrow said.

In addition to portraying herself in the now every other day skits, Morrow plays characters based on stereotypes — some truer than others — and how they react in countercultural situations.

Juniper’s mom,” an overzealous woman who scoffs when Morrow falls short of ultimate crunch, is rivaled by “silky mom,” a sugar-loving woman in a Coca-Cola tee who is always on the hunt for her kids’ iPads. Well-meaning but nicotine-addicted “Aunt Claudia” occasionally makes an appearance in the shorts, as does barefooted “Shady,” a dealer who sells coveted health goods such as unpasteurized raw milk and elderberry syrup to crunchy moms.

After a few well-received appearances in early videos, Jason also started playing himself, a well-read husband who lovingly tolerates his wife’s odd, organic-inspired antics like oil pulling and ribbon dancing by moonlight.

Jason may be less crunchy than his wife, but even he admitted in one skit that if he “had to do it over,” he would “live every crunchy moment with you again.”

“The people who really get it realize that it’s Emily’s self-deprecating humor. She’s making fun of herself and then turning it up about three or four notches,” Jason said.

Trading Toxins For Truth

Going viral prompted Morrow’s followers to beg for more content and even more advice about how they can embrace more natural living. That’s exactly what Morrow plans to share in her upcoming book, which will be published by HarperCollins in one year.

“It’s basically going to be a tongue-in-cheek guide to being really very crunchy,” Morrow said.

Morrow said the book’s tagline, “Removing toxins from your life without adding them to your personality,” is a nod to how hostile the crunchy world can be, especially to newcomers.

“One thing that I think, in general, the holistic community fails at is they get so judgmental,” Emily said.

Committing to a non-mainstream lifestyle can get expensive, overwhelming, and even induce worry about making the healthiest choices possible. That is why Morrow said anyone interested in becoming crunchier should make “one little decision at a time.”

“Don’t allow it to consume you with anxiety, because anxiety is far more harmful than the silky or non-crunchy choices that you would be making,” Morrow said.

The best place to start, according to Morrow, is to “evaluate your habits and ask yourself why.”

“Start questioning why you’re doing what you’re doing and what exactly you’re doing,” Morrow said. “For example, food. What food are you eating? Where did it come from? What are the ingredients? And why do you feel good about eating it? That’s going to be different for everybody.”

Morrow also said eliminating screens and teaching kids life skills like cooking is a great place to start.

“It’s cool to see your kids learn new things,” Morrow said.

Contrary to what her “crunchy or not” series may suggest, Morrow said there’s no “right” way to explore how to live a happy, healthy, intentional life.

“People make a big show out of their choices. You can quietly make decisions. If somebody is curious, they can ask you why. And you can answer without it being full of shame,” Morrow said. “If you want someone to support the decisions you’re making for your family, you have to do the same for them. Even if you don’t agree with what they’re doing, as far as crunchy toys, or feeding their kids Cheetos, or whatever. It’s really none of your business.”

Jordan Boyd is a staff writer at The Federalist and co-producer of The Federalist Radio Hour. Her work has also been featured in The Daily Wire and Fox News. Jordan graduated from Baylor University where she majored in political science and minored in journalism. Follow her on Twitter @jordanboydtx.


New Emails Suggest Twitter Misled Public On ‘Hamilton 68’ Data Pushing Russia Hoax

New emails released as part of the “Twitter Files” show the company appears to have misled reporters, politicians, and the public, allowing a high-level disinformation operation to fester in government and media. A comparison of emails uncovered by Matt Taibbi with the company’s public statements in 2018 reveals serious discrepancies.

This operation, known as Hamilton 68, was founded by former FBI agent and current MSNBC contributor Clint Watts. It functions as a digital “dashboard” where journalists and academics can gauge alleged “Russian disinformation” being spread by specific lists of people online.

Taibbi’s latest report on internal Twitter documents included emails from former Head of Trust and Safety Yoel Roth proving the company knew the anti-Trump dashboard was spreading false information that wrongfully classified Americans as Russian bots. This allowed the data dashboard to fuel false media and Democrat claims that President Donald Trump had treasonously colluded with Russia, hamstringing Trump’s execution of his presidential duties.

Taibbi discovered that Twitter “reverse-engineered” Hamilton 68’s methodology to recreate its highly publicized list of alleged Russian bots. Publicly, though, Twitter was feigning ignorance.

In a Jan. 3, 2018 email, Roth said his reverse-engineering proved Hamilton 68’s claims of providing data to prove Russian disinformation was festering on social media were “totally bogus.”

“They don’t know that we have the list, though, and they’ve refused to release it,” he wrote.

Roth recommended hitting the Alliance for Securing Democracy, one of the groups behind Hamilton 68, with an ultimatum: “either you release the list, or we will.”

The timeline here is important. Roth reverse-engineered the list on Oct. 3, 2017, and emailed it to his colleagues in a Google Doc. Over the next several months, Twitter employees repeatedly vented their frustrations with Hamilton 68 over email. The amount of media attention the project was generating created a public relations headache for Twitter, so they were eager to expose the truth about the dashboard.

Frenzied politicians desperately clinging to the Russia-collusion narrative started to pressure Facebook and Twitter in early 2018. When Republicans on the House Intelligence committee penned a now-vindicated internal report on FBI abuses, a hashtag that said “#ReleaseTheMemo” went viral on Twitter.

“When the hashtag went viral, [Rep. Adam] Schiff had a theory that it wasn’t the American public that was interested in abuse of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act,” Mollie Hemingway noted all the way back in 2018. “Nope, it was Russians! Secret Russian bots were trying to make it look like Americans were interested in FISA abuse against a Trump campaign affiliate.”

Citing Hamilton 68, Schiff and Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-California, wrote a letter to Jack Dorsey and Mark Zuckerberg demanding their companies crack down on alleged Russian bots. Twitter responded with a letter defending its work to police foreign interference. An analysis of #ReleaseTheMemo, General Counsel Vijaya Gadde wrote back, “has not identified any significant activity connected to Russia.”

Worse, Gadde claimed Twitter could not evaluate Hamilton 68’s claims. “Because the Hamilton Dashboard’s account list is not available to the public, we are unable to offer any specific context on the accounts it includes,” he wrote. “There may be individual cases where Twitter accounts are operating within our rules but are included in the Dashboard. We have offered to review the list of accounts contained in the Dashboard and this offer remains open.”

Yet the emails Taibbi uncovered five years later show Twitter had the list for months before that point. Roth himself wrote, “They don’t know that we have the list,” three weeks earlier.

In mid-February, Emily Horne wrote, “we’re working extensively with reporters [off-the-record] and on background to explain the flaws in Hamilton 68’s methodology (without getting into our full knowledge of it),” before adding, “we have to be careful in how much we push back on ASD publicly.”

Horne’s concern, along with that of a colleague who was “frustrated” but understood the need to “play a longer game,” was that Twitter couldn’t kill critical media stories with off-the-record warnings if it didn’t also go public with what it knew. Both former Twitter employees now work in the Biden administration.

Hamilton 68 intentionally concocted junk science and concealed important parts of their methodology to bolster a narrative against their political opponents. The intended end result was to silence and discredit all dissent. A stunning number of journalists at allegedly top publications and even researchers at allegedly elite universities took the bait, as Taibbi’s story shows.

Twitter’s internal records raise questions about what key Democratic politicians like Schiff and Feinstein knew about Hamilton 68. Did Twitter brief them privately on its public knowledge of the list? Were any reporters briefed on that as well? Was Gadde seriously unaware that Roth had the list for months at the time of his letter?

The evidence suggests clearly that Twitter employees — who never counted on Elon Musk buying the company and releasing their emails — actively misled the public about a powerful political hoax.

Emily Jashinsky is culture editor at The Federalist and host of Federalist Radio Hour. She previously covered politics as a commentary writer for the Washington Examiner. Prior to joining the Examiner, Emily was the spokeswoman for Young America’s Foundation. She’s interviewed leading politicians and entertainers and appeared regularly as a guest on major television news programs, including “Fox News Sunday,” “Media Buzz,” and “The McLaughlin Group.” Her work has been featured in the Wall Street Journal, the New York Post, Real Clear Politics, and more. Emily also serves as director of the National Journalism Center, co-host of the weekly news show “Counter Points: Friday” and a visiting fellow at Independent Women’s Forum. Originally from Wisconsin, she is a graduate of George Washington University.


Report: British Army Tracked, Monitored Lockdown Critics

Report: British Army Tracked, Monitored Lockdown Critics

UK coronavirus lockdown critics and sceptics were placed under government surveillance using the resources of the country’s military, a report Sunday alleges.

The Mail on Sunday reports military operatives in the UK’s “information warfare” 77 Brigade drove the operation that targeted politicians and high-profile journalists who raised public doubts about the official pandemic response through their social media activities.

The report claims those being watched included public figures such as ex-Conservative Minister and army veteran David Davis, who questioned the modelling behind alarming death toll predictions, as well as journalists such as Peter Hitchens and Toby Young.

They were just three of the public figures who numbered amongst the tens of thousands who protested against the UK government’s lockdown policies.

Covid-19 sceptics hold placards as they gather for a ‘Unite For Freedom’ rally against Covid-19 vaccinations and government lockdown restrictions, in Parliament Square, central London on May 29, 2021. (BEN STANSALL/AFP via Getty Images)

Covid-19 sceptics gather for a ‘Unite For Freedom’ rally against coronavirus vaccinations and government lockdown restrictions on May 29, 2021. (BEN STANSALL/AFP via Getty Images)

Their dissenting views as openly expressed online through social media were then reported back to the government and No 10. The Mail further alleges:

Documents obtained by the civil liberties group Big Brother Watch, and shared exclusively with this newspaper, exposed the work of Government cells such as the Counter Disinformation Unit, based in the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, and the Rapid Response Unit in the Cabinet Office.

But the most secretive is the MoD’s 77th Brigade, which deploys ‘non-lethal engagement and legitimate non-military levers as a means to adapt behaviours of adversaries’. According to a whistleblower who worked for the brigade during the lockdowns, the unit strayed far beyond its remit of targeting foreign powers.

They said that British citizens’ social media accounts were scrutinised – a sinister activity that the Ministry of Defence, in public, repeatedly denied doing.

The British Army whistleblower told the newspaper: “It is quite obvious that our activities resulted in the monitoring of the UK population… monitoring the social media posts of ordinary, scared people. These posts did not contain information that was untrue or co-ordinated – it was simply fear.”

Former Cabinet Minister Davis, a member of the Privy Council, told the outlet: “It’s outrageous that people questioning the Government’s policies were subject to covert surveillance” – and questioned the waste of public money.

Veteran journalist Hitchens questioned if he was “shadow-banned” on social media over his criticisms, with his views effectively censored by being pushed down in online search results.

He says the “most astonishing thing about the great Covid panic was how many attacks the state managed to make on basic freedoms without anyone much even caring, let alone protesting. ”

A Downing Street source responded by saying the units from 77 Brigade – which uses both regular and reserve troops – had scaled back their work significantly since the end of the lockdowns.

Read the Sunday Mail report in full here

Follow Simon Kent on Twitter: or e-mail to:


Stop Recording Yourself In The Gym

Stop Recording Yourself In The Gym

The worst thing you could possibly do in the gym is not hoarding dumbbells or failing to re-rack plates; it’s recording yourself. I’m not talking about the people who record themselves for one set to check their form. What I’m talking about is the overwhelming number of social media influencers and wannabe influencers who set up a camera, record every part of their workout, and then post it on social media at the expense of making everyone else in the gym uncomfortable.  

The perfect example of why recording workouts needs to end is the recent viral TikTok posted by Twitch streamer Jessica Fernandez. In the video, Fernandez calls a man who glanced at her and offered to help her load plates on her barbell at the gym “feral” and a “stupid piece of f-cking sh-t.” 

According to Fernandez, the man, who appeared to be minding his own business, was staring at her “like a piece of meat” during her workout. Anyone who watches the video can tell that Fernandez is either lying through her teeth or completely delusional because the poor man she maligned did nothing inappropriate: 

Her video has since been deleted after multiple users called out Fernandez for baselessly trying to destroy the man’s reputation, complaining about “sexualization” when she sexualizes herself all the time on Fanhouse (a competitor app to OnlyFans), and discrediting women who are actually harassed in the gym. 

“This guy kept making me extremely uncomfortable at the gym,” Fernandez wrote in the caption. In reality, the only person making people uncomfortable in the gym is Fernandez and everyone else who decides to record their workouts. 

Self-absorbed gym girls pretending to be harassed in the gym is an entire genre on TikTok. Women will record their workouts and point out a man benignly glancing in their direction, and then proceed to post a video shaming that man for being a “creep.” There are also women whose gym attire can be described as nothing other than underwear, and yet they record and vilify men who stare at them. 

There are even entire social media accounts dedicated to secretly recording and then ridiculing people for either their lack of strength or improper use of gym equipment. Despite being illegal, many male gym influencers will record and post themselves flexing in locker rooms while unsuspecting people are changing in the background.

There’s a disturbing level of narcissism and entitlement that comes from gym influencers. There are dozens of videos showing influencers actually getting angry at people for accidentally walking through their shots or using equipment that they want.

Many people start going to the gym because they are weak or overweight. It takes a lot of courage to enter the gym when you’re starting from zero, which can be embarrassing and discomforting. For clicks and likes, toxic fitness influencers have made it so much worse for gym newbies by creating an environment of intimidation and disrespect. It’s become so bad that some gyms have banned recording, but not enough of them have taken that step. 

All the problems plaguing the fitness industry are rooted in narcissism. Wanting to look lean, strong, and healthy is a good thing, but an intense desire for attention and validation at the expense of everyone’s peace in the gym is self-centered and wrong. A study actually found that “narcissists more frequently [post updates] about their achievements,” which could explain why all the worst people feel the need to film themselves working out. 

For most of us normal people, setting up a camera and recording yourself and others while working out would be unthinkable. Fear that you’d be perceived as egotistical is enough to deter most of us from doing it, and that’s a good thing. 

Apparently, some of the people who record their workouts do in fact have that little voice in their heads telling them to resist whipping out a camera and ring light in the gym, but unfortunately, the internet is assuring them it’s okay. “How to Record Your Workouts in the Gym With Confidence,” reads one article, and “How to Film Yourself in the Gym Without Feeling Akward…” (sic) is the title of a YouTube video on the subject. To all you influencers feeling uncomfortable with your recordings: your brain is telling you your behavior is wrong. Please listen to the little voice in your head, not other influencers! 

To anyone who justifies recording yourself and others at the gym, here are some serious signs that you are need to put the camera away and focus on working out instead of getting likes: you’re wearing makeup at the gym, you’re making fun of someone else, you’re illegally recording someone in the locker room, you’re bench pressing or squatting women or other things that aren’t actual weights, or you’re thinking about what will get you attention, instead of what will be a good workout. If you desperately need to do something to feed your ego, consider looking in a mirror. That way the rest of us don’t have to pay for your vanity. 

Evita Duffy is a staff writer to The Federalist and the co-founder of the Chicago Thinker. She loves the Midwest, lumberjack sports, writing, and her family. Follow her on Twitter at @evitaduffy_1 or contact her at


Don’t Let Instagram Or HGTV Distort Your Picture Of A Life-Filled Home

Don’t Let Instagram Or HGTV Distort Your Picture Of A Life-Filled Home

We’ve all seen those articles calculating what a mother would earn on the free market. No matter how high they estimate a wage for motherhood and homemaking, we all know it’s ridiculous.

There is no price we can put on late-night feedings, intense parenting conversations, or making a grocery trip both frugal management and a fun preschool field trip. Some people might pay a salary to nannies and personal chefs, but that is not the standard that determines a mother’s value.

In a society where schools and universities think their job is qualifying people for careers, it seems like being a stay-at-home mom is throwing any diploma or degree away. Many are still brave enough to do it. Many committed moms also have jobs, yet prioritize motherhood and homemaking and feel the feminist flak.

Why Martha Stewart Isn’t a Homemaking Model

After a schooling career that ignored the importance of home and family, it’s no wonder so many moms feel uncertain about their roles and unequipped for them. We look around for a manual so we can stop feeling like failures.

That’s why Martha Stewart was such big business. She tapped into the desire and longing for homes that were more than wayside refueling pits, serving up enough tips and lists and recipes to keep women coming so she could sell advertising to us — and she made a lot of money doing it.

But Stewart was building a brand, not a home. Presented with gorgeous image after gorgeous image in magazines, on HGTV, and on Instagram, we can be caught in that trap: trying to turn our houses into personal brands rather than domains for family-building.

When we copy the people making money off selling advertising to women, it’s no wonder we don’t become more successful homemakers — that’s never been the point. Their goal is to encourage women to buy more things. Advertising works by stirring discontent.

Woven into the tips and craft instructions, embedded in the gorgeous photography, are the seeds of discontent with real homes, where nothing ever turns out the way it does on a production set. Homes used and lived in by people being raised up into the next generation often don’t reflect the crafted aesthetic we’d prefer.

Homes Are a Tool for Building People

Unlike Stewart’s staged house, our homes are a different kind of stage: for the drama of real life. No one would pay money to see our little dramas acted out, but they’re meaningful nonetheless. While Stewart and other influencers use the home as a tool to build a business, we can use our homes as a tool to build people.

Building people is better for the economy than building businesses because people are a prerequisite. Without people, there is no business, no economy, no society. How can it be more fulfilling to build a business than a family?

In creating families, homes, and communities then, we mothers can be brilliant, strategic, and successful. Women are uniquely created to be nurturers and life-givers. If we focus our efforts on building up healthy, happy people, the world will feel the effects — even if it never knows why it happened or where the change started. The world needs more gospel in it, and every functioning Christian family is a mini gospel message, shining light into the darkness.

The Most Important Job in the World

Functioning families are so fundamental and vital to society that one-half of a married couple is devoted to cultivating them with all her creative and productive energy. The other half is devoted to providing for them and protecting them.

C.S. Lewis explains the power of women in his famous quote on homemaking: “I think I can understand that feeling about a housewife’s work being like that of Sisyphus (who was the stone rolling gentleman). But it is surely in reality the most important work in the world. What do ships, railways, miners, cars, government etc. exist for except that people may be fed, warmed, and safe in their own homes? As Dr. Johnson said, ‘To be happy at home is the end of all human endeavour.’”

Men can build houses or set up camps, but it takes a woman to have a home and a family. A man cannot do it alone. Homes are not just a pit stop, a personal hideout, or a place where everyone refuels before they go back out into the world where important work is done. They are tools for creating, serving, and raising people, and a woman’s power is, in part, in taking the resources available to her and making a home in which life’s most significant relationships thrive. Homes are worth pouring our lives into without a salary or benefits.

After all, a mother gets a richer reward than a paycheck — though the reward can be easily overlooked when we stew in discontent and envy after spending hours in front of disguised advertising each day.

As Lewis points out, the work that happens out in the world flows back to the home. Without healthy, happy homes to support, the work of the world finds no purpose or satisfaction.

Where to Find More Apt Role Models

Martha Stewart, HGTV, Instagram, and Pinterest are not our best sources of homemaking help, just as paychecks and good grades are not our best sources of fulfilling feedback.

Look around you in your real, in-person, local community. Where are the older moms who love their families? Seek them out. Ask them questions. Don’t be put off when their answers don’t match your expectations for how things are supposed to look and happen. Listen and learn wisdom.

Band together with other moms and swap tips, sharing a meal together in your average, everyday home life. Work together to teach your children how to share and speak kindly during play dates.

Motherhood is a business beyond wages. Investing our very selves into the work yields far greater returns than any job we may or may not take. Degree or not, paid work or not, a mother’s skills are put to their best use in the home, building people not brands.


America Needs More Unapologetic Christians Like Tony Dungy

America Needs More Unapologetic Christians Like Tony Dungy

Former NFL head coach Tony Dungy made his first-ever appearance at the March for Life in Washington, D.C. on Friday, and predictably, Twitter’s leftist blue checkmark brigade is out in full force demanding he be canceled for it.

After tweeting on Thursday morning that he and his wife would be attending the annual gathering of pro-lifers, Dungy, an outspoken Christian, soon found himself on the receiving end of a wave of attacks from left-wing activists masquerading as journalists. Within hours of Dungy’s announcement, The Nation’s sports editor, Dave Zirin, published an article accusing the co-host of NBC’s “Football Night in America” of being a “right-wing zealot” and “anti-gay bigot.”

“Dungy should feel shame. Instead, he is emboldened, ready to take the stage at a rally that’s been a blunt instrument for robbing people of their rights to privacy and the rights to their own bodies,” Zirin wrote, adding that NBC and the NFL’s “silence speaks volumes. It’s a silence that’s … almost as loud as the thousands of people descending upon Washington—some mandatorily—to celebrate a fascistic, discredited Supreme Court and the loss of our rights.”

Grown man-child and former sportswriter Keith Olbermann decided to throw his irrelevant opinion into the mix, calling for NBC Sports to fire Dungy for attending the annual event.

“Dear @nbcsports – if you have any remaining concern for your operational reputation, fire Tony Dungy now. He is using you,” Olbermann demanded in melodramatic fashion.

During a speech before pro-lifers at the March, Dungy evoked the collapse of Buffalo Bills safety Damar Hamlin, specifically pointing to the power of prayer and God’s use of football “to shine some light on the subject of life for all of us.”

“An unbelievable thing happened that night. A professional football game with millions of dollars of ticket money and advertising money on the line – that game was canceled. Why? Because a life was at stake, and people wanted to see that life saved,” Dungy said. “That should be encouraging to us, because that’s exactly why we’re here today because every day in this country, innocent lives are at stake. The only difference is they don’t belong to a famous athlete, and they’re not seen on national TV. But those lives are still important to God and in God’s eyes.”

The backlash against his appearance at this year’s March for Life rally isn’t the first time Dungy has faced hatred from miserable leftists over his religious views. In 2018, the former Indianapolis Colts head coach caught flak for saying on live television that then-Philadelphia Eagles quarterback Nick Foles would play well in the Super Bowl “because his Christian faith would allow him to play with confidence.”

“Nick Foles told me last week that he felt the Lord had him in Philadelphia for a special moment and he played like it tonight,” Dungy added in a tweet following the Eagles’ victory over the New England Patriots.

Two days after Dungy’s remarks and tweet, Editor-in-Chief Kyle Koster of The Big Lead published an article questioning whether the former head coach was “analyzing or evangelizing” Foles’ Super Bowl performance.

“Dungy, a very public and proud Christian, pushed a narrative favorable to Christianity that may or may not be true,” Koster wrote. “His possible agenda should come into play here, just as it would if an outspoken vegan was trumpeting Tom Brady’s revolutionary diet or an outspoken atheist crediting Arian Foster’s worldview for his performance.”

In boss-like style, Dungy refused to bow to the mob and defended his comments.

Christians Should Replicate Dungy’s Bravery

While Dungy shouldn’t be viewed as any sort of idol (after all, we’re all sinners), his unapologetic devotion to Christ when faced with attacks on his faith is something Christians should seek to mimic.

It’s no secret the secularization of our modern culture has led many Christians to either compromise their faith or hide it entirely. Figures such as Dungy and Philadelphia Flyers defenseman Ivan Provorov, who refused to wear his team’s pro-LGBT jersey during pregame warmups on religious grounds, are a rarity among high-profile figures, let alone everyday followers of Christ. And therein lies the problem.

At the end of the day, Christians can’t leave it up to one or a few individuals to be lone voices publicly standing for their faith. In many respects, the surrender of our beliefs — in large part, to avoid scrutiny from fellow sinners — has further enabled the sinful rot plaguing the nation’s devolving culture. If Christians want America to rediscover its biblical roots, it’s going to require all of us to take a page from Dungy’s playbook and place our love for God above our fear of the mob.

Shawn Fleetwood is a Staff Writer for The Federalist and a graduate of the University of Mary Washington. He also serves as a state content writer for Convention of States Action and his work has been featured in numerous outlets, including RealClearPolitics, RealClearHealth, and Conservative Review. Follow him on Twitter @ShawnFleetwood


Soc Media Files: Emails Reveal The CDC’s Role In Silencing C-19 Dissent

Soc Media Files: Emails Reveal The CDC’s Role In Silencing C-19 Dissent

Facebook Files: Emails Reveal The CDC’s Role In Silencing COVID-19 Dissent


Authored by Robby Soave via

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) played a direct role in policing permissible speech on social media throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. Confidential emails obtained by Reason show that Facebook moderators were in constant contact with the CDC, and routinely asked government health officials to vet claims relating to the virus, mitigation efforts such as masks, and vaccines.

For a broader analysis of the federal government’s pandemic-era efforts to suppress free speech—and whether they violated the First Amendment—see Reason‘s March 2023 cover story on the ramifications of these emails. This article provides screenshots of the emails themselves.

After Elon Musk took control of Twitter, he permitted several independent journalists to peruse the company’s previous communications with the FBI, the CDC, the White House, and government officials elsewhere. These disclosures, which have become known as the Twitter Files, reveal that government bureaucrats put substantial pressure on Twitter to restrict alleged misinformation relating to elections, Hunter Biden, and COVID-19.

The Facebook Files, which were obtained by Reason as a result of the state of Missouri’s lawsuit against the Biden administration, reveal that the CDC had substantial influence over what users were allowed to discuss on Meta’s platforms: Facebook and Instagram.

The messages reveal an environment where the CDC kept tabs on Meta’s moderation practices and regularly told the company what the agency wanted it to do.

For instance, in May 2021, CDC officials began routinely vetting claims about COVID-19 vaccines that had appeared on Facebook. The platform left it up to the federal government to determine which assertions were accurate.

Facebook’s moderator notes that some of the above claims “would already be violating”—an implicit admission that the CDC’s opinion on the other claims would be a deciding factor in whether the platform would restrict such content. Facebook was clearly a willing participant in this process; moderators repeatedly thanked the CDC for its “help in debunking.”

Claims vetted by the CDC included whether “COVID-19 is man-made.” The CDC told Facebook that it was “theoretically possible, but extremely unlikely.”

For months, it was Meta policy to prohibit users from asserting that the pandemic may have originated from a lab leak. The platform revised this policy around the same time that the above email exchange took place.

By July 2021, the CDC wasn’t just evaluating which claims it thought were false, but whether they could “cause harm.”

Then, in November, the Food and Drug Administration granted emergency authorization for children to receive Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine. Meta proudly informed the CDC that it would remove false claims—”i.e. the COVID vaccine is not safe for kids”—from Facebook and Instagram. Meta also provided the CDC with a list of new claims about vaccines and asked whether the government thought they could “contribute to vaccine refusals.”

The CDC determined that this label applied to all such claims.

It’s important to consider the ramifications. Meta gave the CDC de facto power to police COVID-19 misinformation on the platforms; the CDC took the position that essentially any erroneous claim could contribute to vaccine hesitancy and cause social harm. This was a recipe for a vast silencing across Facebook and Instagram, at the federal government’s implicit behest.

Meta frequently gave the CDC lists of pandemic-related topics that had gone viral, seeking guidance on how to handle them. And the CDC informed Meta “to be on the lookout” for misinformation stemming from specific alleged misconceptions.

Meta also kept the CDC apprised of criticism of Anthony Fauci, the White House’s COVID-19 advisor and head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID). One email warned the CDC that Facebook users were mocking Fauci for changing his mind about masking and double-masking. The CDC replied that this information was “very helpful.”

If the tone of Meta’s communications seems overly friendly, it’s worth noting that staffers viewed government employees at the CDC as their “colleagues.” In one email, Meta discussed providing said colleagues with access to a “reporting channel” for COVID-19 misinformation. The list of individuals with access included CDC staff, as well as employees at Reingold, a communications firm advising government health agencies.

This is just a snapshot of the messages exchanged between the CDC and Meta. They also had regular conference calls. The CDC was not the only arm of the federal government engaged in this work, of course: White House staffers also castigated Meta for not deplatforming alleged misinformation fast enough. President Joe Biden himself accused Facebook of “killing people” in July 2021.

One wonders whether these condemnations, from Biden and others in his administration—which included the specific threat of punitive regulation if demands for greater censorship were not met—influenced Meta’s decision to delegate COVID-19 content moderation to the CDC.


(TLB) published this article from ZeroHedge as Authored by Robby Soave via and posted by Tyler Durden

Header featured Image (edited) credit:  CDC dir/Twitter grab

Emphasis added by (TLB) editors



Stay tuned to …


The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)


Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.


Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.


Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.


Yes Virginia, There IS A Deep State & It’s Worse Than You Think

Yes Virginia, There IS A Deep State & It’s Worse Than You Think

Yes, Virginia, There IS a Deep State – and It Is Worse than You Think

By: William L. Anderson

Mention the term “deep state” in polite company and most likely no one will want to speak to you the rest of the evening. The deep state is what Wikipedia calls “discredited,” something reeking of conspiracies, false accusations, and the substitution of fantasy for the truth.

After the FBI raided Donald Trump’s home in Florida, Trump alluded to “deep state” actions, which brought predictable ridicule from the mainstream media. Trump was speaking conspiratorially, and if one follows the mainstream media these days, the only conspiracies are on the right. (You know, like the one in which the unarmed, ragtag January 6 rioters nearly overthrew the US government.)

After the recent revelations about how Twitter worked to hide the story of the infamous Hunter Biden laptop, Trump attributed the secrecy to a plot by the “deep state.” However, while the facts of the story really are outrageous, I don’t believe it was as much a secret conspiracy as a case of people being able to engage in certain actions with no political consequences.

Furthermore, journalist Matt Taibbi’s regarding FBI and CIA agents’ outright interference in the 2020 election via Twitter on the pretense that Russian operatives were spreading disinformation has further exposed both the involvement of federal law enforcement agents in partisan activities and the sad fact that those agents need not worry about being held accountable—especially if they are engaged in a “progressive” cause.

The Standard Deep State Narrative

One does not have to believe in a single conspiracy (not even about the 9/11 attacks) to understand that there really is what we can call a deep state. Indeed, what we might call the real deep state has nothing to do with conspiracies, secret meetings, and the like. Instead, this deep state operates in the open and in broad daylight, and that makes the deep state narrative an even greater threat than the secret cabal narrative.

When I was a young adult, I read a novel by two anticommunist journalists called The Spike, in which a young, liberal, and crusading journalist uncovers a nest of Soviet agents embedded in the US government. The journalist’s story on the affair, however, is spiked by his employer (a Washington Post–like paper), but the protagonist manages to get the story out elsewhere. The result is that a compromised president is brought down and the federal government is able to ferret out the Soviet agents.

Thus, in a dramatic moment, a motivated journalist and political allies expose the equivalent of the “deep state” and the US government makes a rightward turn. The deep state goes away.

The Hard Truth

Unfortunately, no novelist can write out our present deep state because that would be a bridge too far. The reason is that our present deep state simply is the executive branch of government, which has been written into our laws and our courts, and this branch has taken over much of the role originally assigned to the judicial wing of government, that of interpreting the laws.

The real power of the modern state is in its civil service, which is composed of employees of all the federal departments and agencies—employees who hardly are neutral ideologically and politically, employees who are protected by civil service laws and by unions. When progressive regimes such as the Biden and Obama administrations occupy the West Wing and Congress, the federal courts become almost irrelevant. The president and his political appointees govern by executive orders, which, not surprisingly, the allegedly neutral government employees enthusiastically support.

Much of modern lawmaking is by executive order, with many orders not even having to square with the statutes underlying them, something that has gone on for a long time. For example, when President Franklin Roosevelt seized private gold holdings in 1933, he based his executive order upon the 1917 Trading with the Enemy Act. When President Biden announced student loan forgiveness, he based his order on the 9/11 Heroes Act, stretching that law and its obvious intent to the point that it was unrecognizable.

While not all executive orders have the effect of Executive Order 6102, they nonetheless involve the executive branch of the US government assuming powers that well may violate the Constitution yet are carried out without a worry that any outside agency—including the US Supreme Court—will intervene. (Yes, the courts so far have slapped down Biden’s student loan forgiveness scheme, but the litigation process is not complete, and the courts can be unpredictable.)

All-Powerful Bureaucracy Has Progressive Support

One would think that educated Americans would blanch at the prospect of federal agencies making policies independent of congressional or court oversight, but the opposite is true, especially when federal agents pursue progressive policies. For example, when the Supreme Court placed some legal fences around the Environmental Protection Agency’s powers to regulate carbon dioxide emissions, the progressive establishment exploded in anger.

For example, the New York Times, which carries the progressive standard, declared that the court had placed American lives in danger:

Regulatory agencies staffed by experts are the best available mechanism for a representative democracy to make decisions in areas of technical complexity. The E.P.A. is the entity that Congress relies upon to figure out how clean the air should be, and how to get there. Asserting that it lacks the power to perform its basic responsibilities is simply sabotage.

Governance by “experts” has been the progressive mantra for more than a century, the idea being that so-called experts embedded deep in government should be free to make whatever decisions they believe best to govern the rest of us. The assumption of the editors of the NYT is that the “experts” always (or at least usually) know what is best for everyone else and how to achieve those important social and economic ends.

Likewise, the revelations that the FBI and CIA were coercing social media companies to censor anything that contradicted certain progressive narratives coming from Washington, DC, should have been banner headlines everywhere and the lead story on the evening news. Instead, mainstream progressive journalists attacked Matt Taibbi, or like David French, they downplayed the seriousness of what happened and made excuses for federal agents.

(French argued that the only real question was whether federal agents had “violated the First Amendment” and that anything else was not fit for discussion. And, yes, he concluded that those agents probably had not violated the Constitution, missing the more important point that federal agents were trying to influence the outcome of an election.)


We are not speaking of secret conspiracies in which nefarious actions are carried out in the darkness. These things are carried out in daylight, complete with the names of the characters involved, yet people who raise serious questions about the legality of these actions, let alone the question of right and wrong, are praised and encouraged by our institutional gatekeepers.

That is why I say that this version of the deep state is much worse than whatever the authors of The Spike might have believed to exist. The people involved do what they darn well please, all the while claiming they are the soul of democracy, and many Americans seem to either believe them or no longer care.



The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)


Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.


Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.


Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.



Please help truthPeep spread the word :)