When the government takes everything without proving anything



Imagine you founded a company with a stop-smoking product that actually works — no nicotine, better than anything on the market. You are the largest investor. You take no salary. You build it into something real, serving 756,000 customers. You are doing exactly what America is supposed to reward.

Then one night, without warning, without a trial, without any finding of wrongdoing, the federal government comes. The government freezes every account you own or are even associated with — personal and business accounts, life insurance, and retirement savings. A court-appointed receiver sells your office furniture. They tell you that you no longer have Fourth Amendment rights. They come for the wedding ring on your wife's finger.

This attack sounds like some hypothetical scenario. It is my story.

I am writing this so that every American understands just what weaponization by the government really means.

The Federal Trade Commission came for me in 2018 using Section 13(b) of the FTC Act — a provision Congress created for injunctions only, not for seizing assets or freezing accounts. The receiver the agency installed consumed nearly $4 million of my money in fees before anyone proved the FTC did not have legal rights to my assets.

When I went to court and asked for access to my own frozen money just to pay lawyers and keep my home, the government's response was: You can go live under the freeway for all we care.

While this was happening, inspired by President Trump's Made in America initiative, I built VPL Medical — the world's first made-in-USA three-ply surgical face mask manufacturing operation, based in California, where I was born and raised.

This was before COVID. When the pandemic hit, VPL Medical was ready. The Department of Health and Human Services awarded us a $14,500,000 contract to deliver 20,000,000 American-made masks to the Strategic National Stockpile. The factory was going to employ 400 Americans. The country didn't want masks from China, and we were ready to deliver.

Then the FTC came for VPL Medical, too. The factory went dark for three months while Americans died and hospitals begged for PPE. The FTC's offer to reopen: Pay the receiver $25,000 per week to run my own company under a law that didn't authorize the demand. I refused. The receiver's first act was to cancel the HHS contract. Twenty million American-made masks and 400 American jobs gone.

In April 2021, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously in AMG Capital Management v. FTC that the commission had no authority to seek monetary relief. Nine justices. Zero dissents. My civil FTC case collapsed. The district court returned my company to me. Zero dollars — after four years of destruction, a factory closed during a pandemic, a $14.5 million federal contract canceled, and nearly $4 million consumed by a fraudulent receiver.

There is no mechanism to get that back. You win. And you are still destroyed.

My family and I moved to Ireland to take a break. We were through the nightmare and wanted to recover. Or so we thought.

RELATED: Trump’s anti-weaponization fund puts GOP cowards on trial

Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images

When I flew home to see my dying father, I was arrested at Los Angeles International Airport. The Biden DOJ had indicted me for the same conduct the FTC had litigated for four years and won nothing from — conduct the prior Trump administration's DOJ had already reviewed and declined to charge.

The Trump administration's own 2018 “No Piling On” directive explicitly prohibits this practice. The alleged consumer harm: approximately $154, across 756,000 customers who all received their product or a refund. My criminal defense costs: in the millions and climbing.

What is happening in my case now has no precedent in American federal prosecution. The supervising AUSA withdrew in April 2025. No replacement has appeared in 14 months. There is no confirmed U.S. attorney supervising the case. The DOJ unit employing the trial attorney was abolished in September 2025. Thirty-one demands for that authorization have gone unanswered. The prosecution continues anyway.

Six fully briefed motions to dismiss — covering fraud on the court, due process, double jeopardy, evidence suppression, and the “No Piling On” violation — have all been denied by District Court Judge Jesus Bernal, an Obama appointee.

Every player in this case, with the exception of myself, is a Biden or Obama appointee. This is what Biden-Obama weaponization looks like — a rogue agency, an unauthorized prosecution, and politically appointed judges, all targeting an American entrepreneur who built American manufacturing and supported President Trump.

I have filed a restitution claim with the DOJ Anti-Weaponization Fund. I am not asking for sympathy. I am asking for what the rule of law promises: that the government must prove its case before it destroys you. Right now, for me, that promise has not been kept. I am writing this so that every American understands just what weaponization by the government really means.

Editor’s note: This article was originally published by RealClearPolicy and made available via RealClearWire.

Hospital consolidations and ‘nonprofit’ tax breaks are driving up medical costs



Everybody talks about the cost of health care as if it is one single thing. But in our complicated system, many elements contribute to our health care affordability crisis, and some are bigger problems than others. Spending on hospital care accounted for 40% of the growth in national health spending between 2022 and 2024. And when the providers who set those rising prices consolidate their power, families, employers, and taxpayers get squeezed even more.

Over the past few decades, major hospital chains have merged with competing providers and become local monopolies. Since 1998, there have been nearly 1,600 mergers among these systems. It’s no surprise that the Federal Trade Commission now considers 90% of hospital markets highly concentrated.

If a hospital wants the legal privileges of being nonprofit, it should have to earn them every year.

And it’s not just large systems acquiring each other. They have gobbled up doctors’ offices too. Between 2013 and 2018, the share of hospital-owned physician practices more than doubled, and by 2020, more than half of physicians worked directly for a hospital or for a practice owned by one.

This is a problem because these big health systems then use that market power to charge more. Leading budget experts found that after a hospital buys a physician practice, the price of services such as MRI scans, drug infusions, and chemotherapy rises by two to three times their prior cost, and the overall price of health care services increases 14%. One patient saw the out-of-pocket expense of arthritis treatments rise over 1,000% after her outpatient clinic was acquired by a hospital. Despite these increased costs, government research has also shown that hospital mergers do not improve quality.

Another problem is just plain abuse of the tax code. Many of the largest hospital systems are legally “nonprofit,” which makes them tax-exempt, despite behaving like corporate conglomerates. In New York, the vast majority of hospitals are tax-exempt because they ostensibly provide charity care. The result is a substantial public subsidy, estimated as a $9.4 million windfall per hospital.

New York Presbyterian shows how this model can be exploited. Reporting indicates that less than 1% of the services it provides are charitable in nature, yet the institution retains the tax advantages of a nonprofit. In 2021 it recorded roughly $1.5 billion in profits and an operating margin of 17.4%. Its CEO compensation reached almost $11 million per year. It even had resources to sponsor the New York Mets.

This is not just a New York story. Most hospitals claim nonprofit status, but leadership compensation can reach the tens of millions. Those packages persist because the IRS grants large tax benefits and the standards for keeping them are weak. The Lown Institute has documented a wide gap between tax breaks received and community benefit delivered, estimating that fair share deficits in 20 states total $11.5 billion per year. Meanwhile, executives travel on private jets.

RELATED: Venture socialist health care in America: Employer insurance plans now cost as much as a car

RapidEye/iStock/Getty Images

And the care can be anything but caring. Several of the California hospitals in the CommonSpirit Health nonprofit system were disciplined by federal and state officials in 2022, 2023, and 2024 for moving deceased patients to an off-site morgue, where they were stored and even allowed to decompose for months — or in some cases years — without notifying the families.

This is a governance failure. If a hospital wants the legal privileges of being nonprofit, it should have to earn them every year by providing a real, transparent community benefit, meaningful charity care, and outcomes that justify public support. If it wants to operate like a profit-maximizing corporation, then it should pay taxes like one.

Congress already has a starting point. The Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee issued a report on the overuse of charitable designations by nonprofit hospitals and recommended greater federal scrutiny and possible changes in the tax code. That scrutiny should be paired with payment reform, especially site-neutral payments, and stronger antitrust enforcement in markets the FTC already calls highly concentrated.

The status quo is a quiet transfer of wealth from patients, workers, and taxpayers to consolidated hospital systems that can raise prices, claim tax exemptions, and restrict competition. The goal is not to punish hospitals. It is to achieve affordability by restoring the validity of nonprofit status and the power of competitive markets.

Trump Admin Officials Pull Democrat Inflation Tactic Amid Iran War

'Overarching economic pending disaster'

Major Ad Agencies Agree To End Alleged Censorship Scheme That Targeted The Federalist

'Disinformation' firms weaponized the 'misinformation' designation to 'promote the demonetization of disfavored political viewpoints.'

FTC Moves To Bar ‘Brand Safety’ Advertising Scheme Used To Censor Conservative Media

'Anticompetitive conduct'

FTC Tells ‘Woke’ Christian School To Rethink Speech-Freezing Code Of Conduct

Parents who spoke to The Federalist allege the policy is meant to silence critics of the private school and its theological direction.

FTC Warns Big Law Over DEI Program That Sets 'Unwritten Rules' for Diversity Hiring

The Federal Trade Commission is warning top law firms that their participation in a DEI program that sets hiring standards for the legal industry may violate antitrust laws.

The post FTC Warns Big Law Over DEI Program That Sets 'Unwritten Rules' for Diversity Hiring appeared first on .

Google Email Tells 13-Year-Olds How To Disable Parental Controls

'Most predatory corporate practices I have seen'

FTC slams CarShield: $10M scam exposed



Most drivers don’t expect to hear from the federal government — unless something has gone very wrong.

But this month, more than 168,000 Americans opened their mailboxes to find checks from the Federal Trade Commission, tied to a case that exposed widespread deception in the vehicle service contract industry.

The FTC’s action may be a turning point, signaling that regulators are paying close attention to misleading automotive advertising.

The fallout is significant: More than $9.6 million is being returned to consumers who were misled and often left paying for repairs they believed were covered by CarShield and American Auto Shield.

It’s one of the largest automotive-related refunds of the year — and it raises serious questions about how these companies operate, what consumers should watch for, and whether the settlement goes far enough.

Scam watch

After years investigating automotive scams and pushing for transparency, I can say this case highlights a deeper problem: service contract companies relying on aggressive marketing, inflated promises, and fine print that favors the seller.

In July 2024, CarShield and American Auto Shield — two of the most recognizable names in the extended warranty business — agreed to pay nearly $10 million to settle an FTC complaint. The allegations included misleading advertising, deceptive telemarketing, and coverage claims that didn’t match reality.

Many drivers believed they were buying protection for major repairs, sometimes paying up to $120 a month. When problems arose, they discovered that coverage often disappeared behind exclusions, denials, and carefully crafted contract language.

Cover story

According to the FTC, the companies advertised that virtually all repairs — or all repairs to “covered” systems — would be paid. Drivers were told they could use any repair shop and receive free rental cars during breakdowns. Instead, many were stuck with bills they thought they had avoided.

The FTC argued these claims persuaded consumers to buy service contracts that failed to deliver. Under the settlement, both companies must stop deceptive marketing practices and ensure that endorsements and testimonials reflect real, verifiable customer experiences — an important change given how central celebrity endorsements were to their advertising.

Checks and balances

Refunds are already under way. Checks have been mailed to 168,179 affected drivers and must be cashed within 90 days. No banking information or payment is required. Consumers with questions are directed to the refund administrator or the FTC’s website.

This action is part of a broader FTC push to hold companies accountable in industries where consumers are easily confused or misled. In 2024 alone, FTC enforcement returned more than $339 million to consumers nationwide. Automotive issues remain a major focus because unexpected repair costs can quickly become a financial burden.

Vehicle service contracts — often sold as “extended warranties” — can be useful when offered clearly and honestly. Too often, however, consumers are sold peace of mind that turns into high monthly payments and denied claims, with exclusions overwhelming any real benefit.

RELATED: Ford just lost $20 billion on its EV investment

Bloomberg/Getty Images

New scrutiny

The FTC’s move may signal a shift toward tougher oversight of automotive advertising. Whether it leads to broader industry reform remains to be seen, but companies using vague language and unrealistic promises are clearly facing more scrutiny.

Drivers deserve clear information and coverage that matches what is advertised. This case is a reminder to stay skeptical: If a deal sounds too good to be true, it probably is.

Bottom line: Big print gives, small print takes away. Read the contract carefully — because most of these deals simply aren’t worth it.

SCOTUS Appears Poised To Recognize That Presidents Run The Executive Branch

The arguments from Slaughter's attorney didn't appear convincing to the court's conservative justices.