Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Archive for the ‘Law’ Category

Dr. Richard D. Land Op-ed: Pro-abortion Violence and Officials Noncompliance: A dagger Aimed at the Heart of the Rule of Law


Commentary By Dr. Richard D. Land, Christian Post Executive Editor| Friday, June 24, 2022

Read more at https://www.christianpost.com/voices/pro-abortion-violence-and-officials-noncompliance.html/

A person holds up a sign reading “Ruth Sent Us” as pro-choice activists gather outside the U.S. Courthouse to defend abortion rights in downtown Los Angeles on May 3, 2022. | Frederic J. Brown/AFP via Getty Images

Every freedom-loving American should be appalled at the violence and threats of violence against U.S. government employees. We have witnessed the chilling sight of a potential assassination of a sitting Supreme Court Justice at his personal residence.

We have had to witness through national media film clips hundreds of American citizens protesting in front of the justices’ homes.

Around the country we hear and see spreading reports of acts of violence against crisis pregnancy centers (whose only aim is to save the lives of the unborn and to minister to their mothers).

Circulars and posters have popped up, declaring: “Call to Action night of rage.” These “woke warriors” declare: “TO OUR OPPRESSORS: If ABORTIONS are not SAFE, THEN YOU’RE NOT EITHER.” Some crisis pregnancy centers have been targeted with firebombs.

Now we have the even more dangerous specter of thousands of elected officials, openly declaring that they will not enforce abortion-related laws.

First, most of these protestors, or recalcitrant public officials, have been whipped into a frenzy by political operatives (including mass media) that have misinformed them that this is true. Thus, they proclaim “if Roe is overturned, democracy dies!”

Nothing could be further from the actual truth. If Roe is overturned, democracy is restored in America. The citizens of each state will decide for themselves when and under what circumstances abortions would take place — a decision taken out of their hands by an imperial Supreme Court 48 years ago.

Given the current mood in the country, it is critically important to know the facts.

I cannot think, however, of a greater threat to our nation’s rule of law, the bedrock of our entire legal system, than having public officials exercise a self-proclaimed “right” to disobey and ignore laws with which they are in disagreement — laws which they have taken an oath to enforce.

It is bad enough when private citizens refuse to obey the nation’s laws. When elected officials refuse to fulfill their oath of office, society has descended into a dark and dangerous place. The other day a very disturbing headline appeared in newspapers, “If Roe falls, some DAs won’t enforce abortion ban.”

In both red states and blue states, you have District Attorneys and other public officials who are openly declaring that they will not enforce laws they have taken an oath to uphold.

As I said earlier, I cannot think of anything more destructive to the rule of law (a precious and fragile thing that Americans too often take for granted since it has always been part of the “furniture in the room” ever since the ratification of the Constitution in 1789).

Once the rule of law is imperiled, it is a swift descent into oligarchy and then insurrection and chaos.

Back in 1960, during one of the most intriguing presidential elections in our entire history as a nation, one huge issue was the fact that the Democrat candidate for president, Sen. John F. Kennedy, was a Roman Catholic and a Roman Catholic had never been elected to the presidency.

This was a big deal! You must remember that you are dealing here with a pre-Vatican II Roman Catholicism, which could give formidable pause to your average American Protestant. Would the pope tell the president what to do under the threat of excommunication?

So on September 12, 1960, a memorable weekday night during that hot and very contested campaign, which in the end would be decided by less than 100,000 votes (less than one vote per precinct nationwide), then Sen. John Kennedy came to my hometown of Houston, Texas, to answer the question of whether his Catholic beliefs would compromise his oath of allegiance if he were to be victorious.

I was in my 14th year and new to all things political. Democrat presidential candidate John F. Kennedy was going to address the Greater Houston Ministerial Association (made up of Protestant ministers, including my pastor) on the question of his Catholicism — and he was going to take questions. Trust me, it was a big deal!

I have seen the video of the event several times and I have read the transcript at least 50 times. I deemed the speech important enough historically to have it reprinted as part of “Appendix D (Presidential Addresses)” in my book, The Divided States of America? What Liberals AND Conservatives are Missing in the God and Country Shouting Match! 

JFK was clearly miffed that he was having to address the issue at all. Near the beginning, he says, “because I am a Catholic and no Catholic has ever been elected President, … it is apparently necessary for me to state once again what kind of America I believe in!”

JFK then observes,

“Contrary to common newspaper usage, I am not the Catholic candidate for President. I am the Democratic Pary’s candidate for President who happens also to be Catholic. I do not speak for my church on public matters — and the church does not speak for me.”

Then the president gets down to the heart of the issue. Having declared his allegiance to religious liberty as defined in the First Amendment, JFK states:

“Whatever issue may come before me as President…I will make my decision…in accordance with what my conscience tells me to be in the national interest, and without regard to outside religious pressures or dictates. And no power or threat of punishment could cause me to do otherwise.”

In other words, his Roman Catholic faith informs his conscience, and he would be guided by his, not the Roman Catholic hierarchy’s, conscience. The “no power or threat of punishment” undoubtedly refers to the threat of papal excommunication.

Then JFK, in my opinion, “threads the needle” perfectly by saying:

“If the time should ever come…when my office would require me to either violate my conscience or violate the national interest, then I would resign the office. I hope any conscientious public servant would do the same.”

JFK was laying down a fundamental marker. He would not violate his conscience or his oath of office in which, if elected, he would, “solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the office of the President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution…so help me God.”

This should be an example for every elected official in the United States. You have sworn an oath to uphold the law as it is, not as you would like for it to be. If you cannot in conscience do so, resign and then protest the law as a private citizen. Just ignoring the laws you have sworn to uphold is not an option — and some might legitimately call it treason.

Dr. Richard Land, BA (Princeton, magna cum laude); D.Phil. (Oxford); Th.M (New Orleans Seminary). Dr. Land served as President of Southern Evangelical Seminary from July 2013 until July 2021. Upon his retirement, he was honored as President Emeritus and he continues to serve as an Adjunct Professor of Theology & Ethics. Dr. Land previously served as President of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission (1988-2013) where he was also honored as President Emeritus upon his retirement. Dr. Land has also served as an Executive Editor and columnist for The Christian Post since 2011.

Dr. Land explores many timely and critical topics in his daily radio feature, “Bringing Every Thought Captive,” and in his weekly column for CP.

Category:

Law, Political

Tagged with:

Antifa, radical leftists reportedly call for ‘night of rage’ in wake of SCOTUS abortion overturn: ‘Enough is enough with peaceful protest’


Reported by DAVE URBANSKI | June 24, 2022

Read more at https://www.theblaze.com/news/antifa-night-of-rage-abortion/

Photo by ALEX EDELMAN/AFP via Getty Images

Antifa expert Andy Ngo on Friday posted screenshots of tweets from Antifa-affiliated groups and other radical leftists around the country calling for a “night of rage” and similar actions in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s overturn of Roe v. Wade, which has permitted abortion nationwide for nearly 50 years. In a Twitter thread that he promised to update, Ngo first warned that the violent anarchist group Jane’s Revenge — which has claimed responsibility for a number of attacks on pro-life groups since the leak of the Roe v. Wade overturn draft — has updated its flyers and is calling for violence Friday night:

Ngo also tweeted that the Washington, D.C., chapter of the Youth Liberation Front — another “violent Antifa group” — is “calling for people to wear black, mask up & to meet at Folger Park at 7:30 p.m. The YLF was responsible for months of extreme violence in Portland & Seattle in 2020.”

He added that Antifa in Portland already made plans for violence Thursday and announced a “direct action gathering starting at 5:30 pm PT at Lownsdale Square — the same location they occupied in 2020 & used as a base to carry out mass violence & arson.”

Ngo also pointed to an “Anifa account representing members in DC, Maryland & Virginia” from which a tweet read, “Is your bag packed? Let’s f***ing go.”

He added that the “Florida chapter of #Antifa group Revolutionary Abolition tells comrades to ‘bloc up.’ This refers to wearing black clothing & black masks to hide identities during crimes.” Ngo also said the group “retweeted a post calling for addresses of the family of their target.”

Ngo also mentioned that “far-left writer” Gretchen Felker-Martin, who he said penned a “novel where two trans people murder their targets,” called for “violence.” One of Felker-Martin’s Friday tweets read, “Enough is enough with peaceful protest.”

Ngo added that the “far-left Abolitionist Law Center”— anticipating that its “comrades will be arrested for crimes” — is “calling for people to donate to abortion & bail funds. Many far-left groups exist in US to provide legal support & bail money to violent far-left extremists.”

Category:

Law, Political

Tagged with:

Alito Takes a Blow Torch to Liberal Justices’ Dissent


Posted by Katie Pavlich | @KatiePavlich | Posted: Jun 23, 2022

Read more at https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2022/06/23/alito-takes-a-blow-torch-to-liberal-justices-opinion-on-latest-gun-case-n2609218?utm_campaign=inarticle

Source: (Erin Schaff/The New York Times via AP, Pool)

On Thursday morning the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 to strike down restrictive “may issue” concealed carry laws in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen.  Justice Clarence Thomas wrote the majority opinion and explained how the Second Amendment is not a second-class right. 

The arguments made by the dissenting justices were wildly irrelevant from the issue of constitutionality and current law, prompting Justice Samuel Alito to file a separate, concurring opinion destroying their claims. He also took issue with their ignorance and arrogance surrounding the facts of lawful gun ownership vs. criminality. (Take a look, bolding is mine)

Much of the dissent seems designed to obscure the specific question that the Court has decided, and therefore it may be helpful to provide a succinct summary of what we have actually held. In District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U. S. 570 (2008), the Court concluded that the Second Amendment protects the right to keep a handgun in the home for self-defense. Heller found that the Amendment codified a preexisting right and that this right was regarded at the time of the Amendment’s adoption as rooted in “‘the natural right of resistance and self-preservation.’” Id., at 594. “[T]he inherent right of self-defense,” Heller explained, is “central to the Second Amendment right.” Id., at 628. Although Heller concerned the possession of a handgun in the home, the key point that we decided was that “the people,” not just members of the “militia,” have the right to use a firearm to defend themselves. And because many people face a serious risk of lethal violence when they venture outside their homes, the Second Amendment was understood at the time of adoption to apply under those circumstances. 

The Court’s exhaustive historical survey establishes that point very clearly, and today’s decision therefore holds that a State may not enforce a law, like New York’s Sullivan Law, that effectively prevents its law-abiding residents from carrying a gun for this purpose. That is all we decide. Our holding decides nothing about who may lawfully possess a firearm or the requirements that must be met to buy a gun. Nor does it decide anything about the kinds of weapons that people may possess. Nor have we disturbed anything that we said in Heller or McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U. S. 742 (2010), about restrictions that may be imposed on the possession or carrying of guns.

In light of what we have actually held, it is hard to see what legitimate purpose can possibly be served by most of the dissent’s lengthy introductory section. See post, at 1–8 (opinion of BREYER, J.). Why, for example, does the dissent think it is relevant to recount the mass shootings that have occurred in recent years? Post, at 4–5. Does the dissent think that laws like New York’s prevent or deter such atrocities? Will a person bent on carrying out a mass shooting be stopped if he knows that it is illegal to carry a handgun outside the home? And how does the dissent account for the fact that one of the mass shootings near the top of its list took place in Buffalo? The New York law at issue in this case obviously did not stop that perpetrator. What is the relevance of statistics about the use of guns to commit suicide? See post, at 5–6. Does the dissent think that a lot of people who possess guns in their homes will be stopped or deterred from shooting themselves if they cannot lawfully take them outside?  The dissent cites statistics about the use of guns in domestic disputes, see post, at 5, but it does not explain why these statistics are relevant to the question presented in this case. How many of the cases involving the use of a gun in a domestic dispute occur outside the home, and how many are prevented by laws like New York’s?

The dissent cites statistics on children and adolescents killed by guns, see post, at 1, 4, but what does this have to do with the question whether an adult who is licensed to possess a handgun may be prohibited from carrying it outside the home? Our decision, as noted, does not expand the categories of people who may lawfully possess a gun, and federal law generally forbids the possession of a handgun by a person who is under the age of 18, 18 U. S. C. §§922(x)(2)–(5), and bars the sale of a handgun to anyone under the age of 21, §§922(b)(1), (c)(1).1 The dissent cites the large number of guns in private hands—nearly 400 million—but it does not explain what this statistic has to do with the question whether a person who already has the right to keep a gun in the home for self-defense is likely to be deterred from acquiring a gun by the knowledge that the gun cannot be carried outside the home.

And while the dissent seemingly thinks that the ubiquity of guns and our country’s high level of gun violence provide reasons for sustaining the New York law, the dissent appears not to understand that it is these very facts that cause law-abiding citizens to feel the need to carry a gun for self-defense.

No one apparently knows how many of the 400 million privately held guns are in the hands of criminals, but there can be little doubt that many muggers and rapists are armed and are undeterred by the Sullivan Law. Each year, the New York City Police Department (NYPD) confiscates thousands of guns,2 and it is fair to assume that the number of guns seized is a fraction of the total number held unlawfully. The police cannot disarm every person who acquires a gun for use in criminal activity; nor can they provide bodyguard protection for the State’s nearly 20 million residents or the 8.8 million people who live in New York City. Some of these people live in high-crime neighborhoods. Some must traverse dark and dangerous streets in order to reach their homes after work or other evening activities. Some are members of groups whose members feel especially vulnerable. And some of these people reasonably believe that unless they can brandish or, if necessary, use a handgun in the case of attack, they may be murdered, raped, or suffer some other serious injury.

Ordinary citizens frequently use firearms to protect themselves from criminal attack. According to survey data, defensive firearm use occurs up to 2.5 million times per year. 

I reiterate: All that we decide in this case is that the Second Amendment protects the right of law-abiding people to carry a gun outside the home for self-defense and that the Sullivan Law, which makes that virtually impossible for most New Yorkers, is unconstitutional. 

Category:

Law, Political

Tagged with:

‘We’re In a Revolutionary Period’: Victor Davis Hanson Issues Dire Prediction for Future of America


REPORTED BY HAROLD HUTCHISON, REPORTER | June 22, 2022

Read more at https://dailycaller.com/2022/06/22/victor-davis-hanson-law-fox-news-tucker-carlson/

DCNF - VDH Rule of Law - Featured
Screenshot/Rumble/Fox News

Historian Victor Davis Hanson told Fox News host Tucker Carlson Tuesday that the United States no longer had the rule of law and was in a “revolutionary period.”

“I hesitate to say this, we’re not in a society ruled by law,” Hanson, a senior fellow with the Hoover Institution at Stanford University, said on “Tucker Carlson Tonight,” referring to attacks on pro-life groups which he argued have largely gone unpunished. “We’re in a revolutionary period like 18th century France or 1920s Russia where the law is fluid and it’s whatever the power to be says it is.” (RELATED: VICTOR DAVIS HANSON: The Subordinate Citizen)

Multiple crisis pregnancy centers, churches and pro-life groups have been attacked since the leak of a Supreme Court opinion indicating the court is likely to overturn Roe v. Wade. Republicans have criticized the Biden administration over alleged inaction with regards to the attacks and the attempted assassination of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh by a man who targeted the justice over potential Supreme Court rulings on abortion and gun rights.

Hanson predicted left-wing violence could increase if non-enforcement of laws continued.

“If we put graffiti on a person’s office or burn it, what’s the next thing?” Hanson asked.

Hanson cited investigations and prosecutions targeting James O’Keefe of Project Veritas and former Trump aides Peter Navarro and Steve Bannon, contrasting it to the reaction to Eric Holder defying congressional subpoenas during the Obama administration.

WATCH:

“The message the left wants to send is, you better be careful because the government is on our side and not on your side,” Hanson said.

Hanson claimed that nobody was held accountable after the events of May 31, 2020, when rioters allegedly set St. John’s Church on fire.

“I think the law is very fluid,” Hanson told Carlson Tuesday. “Merrick Garland is much to blame, so is Joe Biden.”

Hanson earlier commented on the actions of the left in a May op-ed, citing the leak of a draft opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization that would overturn Roe v. Wade.

“It violated all court protocols,” Hanson wrote. “Yet it was met with stunning approval from the American Left.”

Hanson also argued that the Left’s “radical” agenda would never find majority support.

“It sees success only through altering the rules of governance or changing the demography of the electorate – or both,” he wrote.

Hanson and the Justice Department did not immediately respond to requests for comment from The Daily Caller News Foundation.

Category:

Law, Political

Tagged with:

Protesters Block Roads Leading to Supreme Court Ahead of Possible Abortion Verdict


REPORTED BY DIANA GLEBOVA, ASSOCIATE EDITOR | June 13, 2022

Read more at https://dailycaller.com/2022/06/13/protesters-block-roads-intersections-supreme-court-abortion-verdict-roe-wade/

US-JUSTICE-SUPREME COURT-ABORTION
ROBERTO SCHMIDT/AFP via Getty Images

Left-wing protesters blocked intersections Monday leading to the Supreme Court in anticipation of a possible verdict on the abortion decision that could overturn Roe v. Wade. Protest group ShutDownDC said it successfully blocked several intersections Monday morning after previously having posted its plans to do so “to rise up for the transformative change that our communities need” on its website.

“We have successfully split off into different groups to hold multiple intersections #ShutDownSCOTUS,” the group tweeted.

The website lists instructions for what protesters should do if they’re arrested, including filling out a “jail support form.” There is also a form to sign up for an “affinity group,” with an option for “people who have been organizing protests at conservative justice’s homes.”

Monday is one of the Supreme Court’s decision days, and the court has not issued a verdict on Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization — which could overturn Roe v. Wade — for over a month. The draft opinion was leaked May 2 indicating the majority of the court would vote to overturn it. (RELATED: SCOTUS Intends To Overturn Roe V. Wade: REPORT)

Several protesters held posters with conservative Supreme Court justices, calling them “liars.”

A man was arrested and charged with attempted murder Wednesday after claiming he wanted to kill Justice Brett Kavanaugh. Police said they caught him with a weapon and burglary tools outside Kavanaugh’s home. The left-wing protest group Ruth Sent Us gathered at his home the same night.

Pro-abortion protesters with ShutDownDC protested at Kavanaugh’s home in 2021.

Category:

Law, Political

Tagged with:

Activists firebomb pro-life pregnancy center in Buffalo; 2 firefighters admitted to hospital


Reported By Ryan Foley, Christian Post Reporter | June 9, 2022

Read more at https://www.christianpost.com/news/activists-firebomb-pro-life-pregnancy-center-in-buffalo.html/

Shattered glass from a window lies outside the CompassCare clinic in Buffalo, which was firebombed in one of many acts of vandalism to take place ahead of an expected U.S. Supreme Court decision on abortion. | CompassCare

A pro-life pregnancy center in upstate New York was firebombed Tuesday morning, making it the latest

pro-life organization to experience vandalism ahead of a major U.S. Supreme Court decision on abortion. 

CompassCare, a group of pro-life pregnancy centers committed to “serving women in Buffalo and across NY State” and “erasing the need for abortion,” announced Tuesday that its Buffalo office was “firebombed by abortion terrorists.”

According to the statement, police and firefighters responded in the early morning to a report of smoke at the office on Eggert Road.

“The windows in the reception room and nurses’ office were broken and fires lit. Graffiti on the building left by arsonists refers to the abortion terrorist group Jane’s Revenge, reading ‘Jane Was Here.'”

As the statement explained, Jane’s Revenge took responsibility for a similar act of vandalism at a pro-life pregnancy center in Wisconsin. Following the attack on the Wisconsin Family Action office in Madison, the group released a manifesto demanding “the disbanding of anti-choice establishments, fake clinics, and violent anti-choice groups within the next thirty days.”

“Wisconsin is the first flashpoint, but we are all over the US, and we will issue no further warnings,” the manifesto reads. “And we will not stop, we will not back down, nor will we hesitate to strike until the inalienable right to manage our own health is returned to us.”

In subsequent weeks, the group has claimed responsibility for other acts of violence. 

In a statement, CompassCare CEO Jim Harden described the violence as “the pro-abortion ‘Kristallnacht.'”

“[B]ecause of this act of violence, the needs of women facing unplanned pregnancy will go unmet and babies will die,” Harden said. “CompassCare will rebuild because women deserve better.”

He vowed that “CompassCare will not stop serving because pre-born boys and girls deserve better.” The clinic offers confidential abortion information, pregnancy diagnosis and STD testing and treatment.

CompassCare alerted the local police and FBI. According to reports, local Amherst police, the district attorney and the FBI are investigating the possible arson. 

Town of Amherst Supervisor Brian Kulpa said in a statement shared with media that two volunteer firefighters “were admitted to the hospital after they were overcome while battling a suspected arson fire.” According to police, the firefighters were treated for minor injuries. 

“With reports that this fire was set intentionally, I am disgusted that lives were put at risk,” Kulpa said, according to WKBW. “Our thoughts are with the firefighters as they recover. A violent response is never the answer. There is no place in Amherst for such attacks. Amherst Police are working with our partners to continue its investigation to hold those responsible accountable for their actions.”

Harden said CompassCare has consulted with security professionals for a safety plan “and engaged a security firm who were expediting the installation of armored glass for the Buffalo office.”

Harden elaborated on the organization’s next steps in a video Tuesday, reporting that the vandalism caused “extensive damage that’s going to take months to repair.”

“They broke glass in the middle of the night, under cover of darkness, to keep us from doing the work of the Lord, from being the light of the world,” he said. “We offer absolutely necessary services, ethical medical care and comprehensive community support to women seriously considering abortion and they’re trying to keep us from doing that.”

Harden said that organization would operate out of a new facility starting Wednesday.

“We’re looking at a more medium-range facility to house our services short-term while this facility gets repaired,” he said. 

CompassCare, which operates several pro-life pregnancy centers throughout New York State, had its Buffalo office firebombed in one of many acts of vandalism to take place ahead of an expected United States Supreme Court decision on abortion. | Screenshot: Google Maps

The vandalism at CompassCare comes just over a month after Politico published a leaked draft opinion in the Supreme Court case of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health. The draft opinion, which is not final, indicated that a majority of justices were inclined to overturn the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion nationwide. Should the Supreme Court overturn Roe as expected, abortion would not automatically become illegal in all 50 states. Instead, states would decide the legality of abortion.

In the absence of Roe, 21 states would either completely ban or restrict abortion more severely than they do now. Sixteen states that have codified the right to abortion into law would continue to allow abortion late into a pregnancy or up until the moment of birth. Ten states would likely continue enforcing their current abortion restrictions, while the three remaining states may soon put the future of their abortion laws in the hands of voters in the form of ballot referendums. 

Ryan Foley is a reporter for The Christian Post. He can be reached at: ryan.foley@christianpost.com

Category:

Law, Political

Tagged with:

Will The FBI Do Anything About the Alarming Number of Attacks on Pro-Life Centers Following SCOTUS Leak?


REPORTED BY: JORDAN BOYD | JUNE 08, 2022

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/06/08/what-will-the-fbi-do-about-the-alarming-number-of-attacks-on-pro-life-centers-following-scotus-leak/

Pregnancy care center

The same agency that investigated hate crime allegations that a garage pull cord was a noose is failing to investigate arson, death threats, and terror threats from pro-abortionists.

Author Jordan Boyd profile

JORDAN BOYD

VISIT ON TWITTER@JORDANBOYDTX

MORE ARTICLES

Pro-life centers in nearly half of U.S. states have been attacked following a premature leak of the U.S. Supreme Court’s Dobbs v. Jackson, but the FBI’s plans to address threats of past or future violence, especially if the high court overturns Roe v. Wade, are not clear.

Ever since a leaked opinion surfaced, churches, crisis pregnancy centers, and billboards openly support protecting life in the womb have sustained vitriolic attacks, vandalism with pro-abortion mantras, and been burned to the ground by arsonists.

Even student activists advocating for saving preborn babies are suffering bullying and brutality from their classmates. One pro-life student in New Jersey sustained minor injuries after pro-abortion classmates physically attacked her for holding a sign calling for “Equal Rights For Babies in the Womb.”

This is where the FBI often comes in when the victims are favorable to the political left, but so far, the same agency that flocked to Talladega Superspeedway over hate crime allegations that a garage pull cord was a noose designed to target NASCAR driver Bubba Wallace and spied on a presidential candidate because Hillary Clinton said he colluded with Russians doesn’t seem to have the same urgency about life-forward centers that care and advocate for mothers and babies.

There are many open calls for violence against Supreme Court justices and anyone who believes unborn babies have a right to life. The Department of Homeland Security warned in a May memo of future threats that may come from a “broader ideological spectrum” than they previously notated.

To put it simply, DHS, the same agency that established a disinformation governance board headed by a Russia collusion hoaxer acknowledged that “grievances related to restricting abortion access could fuel violence by pro-choice abortion-related violent extremists and other [domestic violent extremists]” are finally on their radar.

Yet at the time DHS issued this memo, multiple pro-life centers had already been vandalized and harmed by what appeared to be pro-abortion activists. A mysterious anarchist-connected group called Jane’s Revenge took responsibility for some of these attacks, including one on the Wisconsin Family Action building. That burned after aggravators graffitied the walls with ominous messages and threw Molotov cocktails. They also threatened to continue “adopt increasingly extreme tactics to maintain freedom over our own bodies” and carry those out across the United States

The FBI field office in Milwaukee reportedly joined local law enforcement for an investigation into the Wisconsin bombardment but told The Federalist that the Madison Police Department “remains the lead agency for information and updates on the investigation.” When asked whether the FBI plans to investigate Jane’s Revenge, a spokeswoman told The Federalist that “As a matter of longstanding policy, the FBI does not comment upon the existence or the nonexistence of any investigation.” 

Other pro-life centers that experienced damage from similar attacks involving lit Molotov cocktails including Oregon Right Life in Keizer, Oregon, however, did not appear to have the benefit of an investigation. The FBI field office in Oregon told The Federalist that “the FBI cannot confirm the existence of an investigation” into the break-in and fire that damaged the ORL building.

Not only have the feds overlooked some of these crimes but corporate media, which loves to highlight every time an abortion clinic feels threatened, has been relatively silent.

DHS claims that it, in partnership with the FBI, will “continue to share timely and actionable information and intelligence with the broadest audience possible,” but where is the information on this group that has threatened to strike again?

“While we have no comment on any specific incidents, the FBI remains vigilant and continues to work every day with our law enforcement partners to detect and disrupt any potential threats of violence in our communities,” the FBI told The Federalist in a statement. “As always, we remind members of the public that should they become aware of any suspicious activity to immediately contact law enforcement.”

Pro-life centers and churches openly fear more violence and destruction in wake of the imminent Dobbs v. Jackson ruling but their resources for protection and prevention are already limited by their own states. Even though pregnancy centers, including one that was set on fire in Buffalo, are clearly at risk if the court decides to overturn Roe, Democrat-led states such as New York are focused on funneling $35 million in taxpayer funds to beef up security at abortion facilities instead.

That combined with the FBI and DHS’s vague plans to prevent attempts to browbeat pro-life organizations and people leaves organizations that advocate for life and take care of babies and mothers vulnerable.

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.

Category:

Law, Political

Democrats Yell ‘Do Something!’ On Guns While Their Prosecutors and Policies Create Our Culture of Crime


REPORTED BY: KYLEE ZEMPEL | JUNE 08, 2022

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/06/08/democrats-yell-do-something-on-guns-but-their-prosecutors-and-policies-create-our-culture-of-crime/

crime at Robb Elementary School, Joe Biden visits after Uvalde shooting

Just as the humanitarian crisis at the border is the predictable result of the left’s open-borders policies, so our crime wave is a consequence of their anti-punitive philosophy of criminal justice.

Author Kylee Zempel profile

KYLEE ZEMPEL

VISIT ON TWITTER@KYLEEZEMPEL

MORE ARTICLES

Since a spate of recent shootings, Democrats led by President Joe Biden have been busy exploiting the tragedies to call for more gun control, go after the “gun lobby” bogeyman, and yell that we must “do something!” about firearm-related crime. They’ve been clear that they aren’t interested in talking about effective solutions that don’t involve gun-grabbing, so they probably also don’t want to talk about who’s responsible for America’s unsettling crime wave: the left.

Meanwhile, as of late Tuesday night, the Associated Press projected that San Francisco voters had handily recalled left-wing District Attorney Chesa Boudin, whose soft-on-crime policies wreaked havoc on the California city.

While a prosecutor recall might seem disconnected from an uptick in mass shootings and subsequent gun-control chatter, the two are intertwined. Just as the humanitarian crisis at the border is the predictable result of the left’s open-borders policies, our crime wave is the inevitable result of their anti-punitive philosophy of criminal justice. And the biggest culprits are progressive prosecutors like Boudin who champion Democrats’ policies and have been installed across the country after being bankrolled by left-wing radicals like George Soros and other groups.

Prosecutors Who Don’t Prosecute

According to a new report out from the Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund (LELDF), Soros alone has poured a staggering $40 million into prosecutor races to help elect 75 leftists that have contributed to the crime wave, and he’s just one of many billionaires working to destroy law and order, influence elections, control the media, and otherwise destroy the country.

The left and its skeptics continue to use guns as a scapegoat and say there’s no direct correlation between left-wing prosecutorial philosophies and crime, but the evidence suggests otherwise. According to the LELDF report, more than 40 percent of the roughly 22,500 homicides in 2021 — so more than 9,000 — happened in these 75 district attorneys’ jurisdictions, which accounted for more than one-third of last year’s violent crimes and property crime.

These DAs’ decisions produce consequences even in the areas they don’t oversee, however, since there’s nothing keeping released offenders in the prosecutors’ jurisdictions. Light sentences, low cash bail, and other slaps on the wrist send criminals right back onto their streets and those of their neighbors.

“These radical activists now preside over 72 million Americans and 40% of US homicides,” said LELDF President Jason Johnson, noting that Soros has already spent another $1 million to date this year to boost his preferred prosecutors. “Soros is using that campaign money and the hundreds of millions more for supporting organizations to quietly transform the criminal justice system for the worse, promoting dangerous policies and anti-police narratives to advance his radical agenda.”

The country saw the effects of progressive prosecutors up close over the last holiday season. The Waukesha parade murderer didn’t need a firearm. To kill six people and injure 62 more, he needed only a vehicle, a soft-on-crime district attorney’s office that let him out on a pittance of bail, and leftist policies that “guaranteed” offenders would kill people. It’s evil like that, enabled by leftist policy failures, that expose America’s crime problem as being so much bigger than a few psychopaths with guns.

Democrats’ Progressive Dream

But the rise in crime is much bigger than Soros and 75 district attorneys too. More fundamentally, it’s the predictable result of a long list of so-called leftist policy goals and beliefs that are prevalent not only among the radicals of the left, but also among the mainstream Democrat Party.

For a particularly grotesque example, look at cities in blue bastion California — particularly Boudin’s San Francisco, where the sidewalks are littered with used needles, passed-out junkies, and homeless encampments, and street sightings of human feces number in the tens of thousands each year. Facing an explosion in shoplifting, retailers in Los Angeles, Sacramento, and San Francisco were helpless to do anything but reduce store hours. As a Wall Street Journal article noted in October 2021, “Walgreens has closed 22 stores in [San Francisco], where thefts under $950 are effectively decriminalized.”

That little $950 tidbit is courtesy of Democrats’ woke Proposition 47, which more than doubled the amount a person could steal before facing a felony. In other words, Prop 47 reclassified felonies as no-biggie misdemeanors. Crime in the Bay Area has gotten so bad that even Democrat Mayor London Breed was forced to admit that the left’s soft-on-crime approach has led to “all the bullsh-t that has destroyed” San Francisco.

Meanwhile, in 2021, Los Angeles experienced its highest number of homicides in 15 years, and looters ran rampant on that area’s train tracks, with some railroad companies reporting a “160% increase in criminal rail theft,” and “approximately $5 million in claims, losses and damages” to the train companies alone.

The Left’s Culture of Crime

The crime wave isn’t confined to California, though. It’s swept through Democrats’ strongholds across the rest of the country too. As The Federalist’s Jordan Boyd wrote in January, “New York, D.C., and Chicago all saw ‘record-high‘ murders in 2021 while Philadelphia; Portland, Oregon; Louisville, Kentucky; and Albuquerque, New Mexico, ‘had their deadliest years on record.’”

And let’s not forget the scores of rioters, looters, and vandals who went unpunished after the 2020 summer of rage that resulted in billions of dollars in damages. In fact, rather than condemn them, prominent Democrats including our very own Vice President Kamala Harris helped bail out of jail those who were caught. It was Minneapolis Democrats who voted to dismantle its police department in 2020, enabling a crime wave there. And Democrat lawmakers joined the chorus of those calling to “defund the police,” only stopping when they realized that abhorrent position could hurt them politically.

This approach to law and order is to say nothing of the left’s other principles that cultivate a culture of death, such as the celebration of snuffing out human life in the womb and exploiting children as sex objects.

It’s hard to take Democrats’ tired calls for gun control seriously anyway, given their debunked talking points and faulty logic. But it’s especially disqualifying for the left when you take into account all the lawlessness and violence they enable as hallmarks of their criminal justice platforms. If voters in far-left San Francisco can see it, it’s a safe bet the rest of the country can too. America’s culture of crime belongs to Democrats, and no amount of gun control can fix it.

Kylee Zempel is an assistant editor at The Federalist. She previously worked as the copy editor for the Washington Examiner magazine and as an editor and producer at National Geographic. She holds a B.S. in Communication Arts/Speech and an A.S. in Criminal Justice and writes on topics including feminism and gender issues, religious liberty, and criminal justice. Follow her on Twitter @kyleezempel.

Category:

Law, Political, Society

Tagged with:

REPORT: Harvey Weinstein Will Be Charged Again In New Assault Case


Reported by KAY SMYTHE, REPORTER | June 08, 2022

Read more at https://dailycaller.com/2022/06/08/harvey-weinstein-charged-metropolitan-police-uk-assault-reports/

New,York,,Ny,-,June,5,,2018:,Harvey,Weinstein,Leaves
Shutterstock/LevRadin

Notorious former Hollywood overlord and convicted sex offender Harvey Weinstein will reportedly be charged Wednesday in a new assault case in the U.K. Weinstein, who was allegedly the inspiration behind the Orcs in the “Lord of the Rings” movies, will be charged with two counts of indecent assault against a woman in London, according to the BBC. The assaults allegedly took place in the U.K.’s capital in 1996, but no further details have been released on the identity of the woman or the scope of the investigation, the BBC noted.

The head of Crown Prosecution Service’s special crime division, Rosemary Ainslie, said that the charges were authorized after a thorough investigation by London’s metropolitan police, the BBC continued. (RELATED: Kevin Spacey Charged With Four Counts Of Sexual Assault)

The disgraced former producer recently tried and failed to have his 2020 rape conviction overturned in New York. A five-judge panel unanimously decided to dismiss his appeal, ensuring that Weinstein continues serving his 23-year prison sentence. In July 2021, Weinstein pleaded not guilty to sex crimes charges in Los Angeles, California. Should he be convicted on these charges, he faces up to 140 years in prison in the U.S.

Accusations against Weinstein started in October 2017 after a detailed expose by The New York Times was released. To date, at least 87 accusers have come forward against Weinstein and he has denied every allegation of non-consensual sex, according to USA Today.

Category:

Law

Tagged with:

Activists claim police shot unarmed pregnant woman with her hands up. Then body cam footage is released.


Reported by CHRIS ENLOE | June 02, 2022

Read more at https://www.theblaze.com/news/police-charge-leonna-hale-body-cam-footage-shows-firearm/

Prosecutors have filed charges against a Kansas City woman who activists claim was the victim of excessive police force. Leonna Hale, 26, was approached by police officers last Friday after she was spotted inside a car that police say matched the description of one involved in an armed carjacking. According to police, the driver of the vehicle jumped out and ran when police approached. They claim Hale also exited the vehicle, went to the rear of the car, and drew a firearm. Police told Hale to drop the firearm, but she allegedly pointed it at police. Law enforcement responded by firing three shots. Hale was wounded in the incident, but she did not die.

The incident generated significant attention online. Activists claimed police had shot an unarmed pregnant woman five times. Even worse, they claimed she had her hands up.

  • Activist Leslie Mac: “#LeonnaHale is a 26 year old unarmed pregnant Black Woman who was shot five time by Kansas City police on Friday. She had her hands up and told police she could not follow their directions to get on her stomach b/c she was pregnant. There is no reforming this. #AbolitionNow.”
  • CRT scholar Kimberlé Crenshaw: “Please send prayers and support to Leonna Hale, unarmed, shot 5 times in a traffic staff. If mass murderers of Black people can be apprehended alive, why must Black people in traffic stops constantly fear for their lives?”
  • The Kansas City Defender: “Kansas City Police Department shot an unarmed Black woman 5 times. Eyewitnesses say the woman had her hands up. The police handcuffed her while she was bleeding out on the pavement.”
  • Linda Sarsour: “Cops can apprehend white mass murderers without a scratch but will shoot unarmed Black people that pose no threat to them. Leonna Hale. Kansas City, MO.”
  • Occupy Democrats: “BREAKING: A witness reveals that Kansas City police shot Leonna Hale, a pregnant unarmed Black woman, five times as she was running away from them — she has been hospitalized with serious injuries but remains stable.”

Prosecutors are now charging Hale after they say body cam footage shows that Hale was, in fact, in possession of a firearm and that she pointed her weapon at police.

Jackson County prosecutor Jean Peters Baker explained in a statement:

Some false narratives about what happened last Friday night at 6th and Prospect Avenue, unfortunately, were relied upon by some media and other sources. Our job, as prosecutors, is to remain neutral and review all evidence. Our review of body cam videos provided the actual accounting of events that night.

Our review of the investigation revealed the defendant, although she denied having a weapon at the time of the encounter with law enforcement officers, continually displayed a weapon during her encounter with police officers and also appeared to be attempting to flee. The two officers stated that she was armed with what they believed to be a handgun. Body camera footage confirms the officers’ statements that Hale was holding a handgun. Still photos, taken from body cam footage, of this encounter also demonstrate a weapon was present and in the hands of the defendant.

Hale has been charged with unlawful possession of a firearm, unlawful use of a weapon, and a misdemeanor resisting a lawful detention. Local activists, however, do not believe police are being truthful, the Kansas City Star reported.

Hale remains in the hospital. The driver of the vehicle who fled from police has also since been apprehended. Neither the police nor the media have confirmed that Hale is pregnant, WDAF-TV reported.

Supporters of woman shot by KC police shocked of image, charges of her pointing weapon at officers www.youtube.com

Category:

Law, Religion, Society

Tagged with:

Radical socialist San Francisco DA poised to be ousted from his job in embarrassing fashion


Reported by PHIL SHIVER | June 01, 2022

Read more at https://www.theblaze.com/news/san-francisco-da-recall-effort/

San Francisco’s far-left socialist district attorney Chesa Boudin promised a “new vision” and “radical change” to the Bay Area’s criminal justice system. He was supposed to usher in a utopian period of peace and safety by ending mass incarceration, the war on drugs, and the criminalization of poverty. But now, just over two years into his term, he appears poised to be ousted by recall, Politico reported on Wednesday. Voters in the largely Democratic city will head to the polls on June 7 to determine whether or not Boudin should be recalled as top prosecutor. The recall effort comes amid a backdrop of worsening crime and quality of life in the Bay Area, of which residents have taken notice, many holding Boudin to account. A groundswell of activists led by a group called San Franciscans for Public Safety sought action last year by gathering the over 50,000 signatures needed to put the recall on the ballot. Now it’s up to voters to decide.

Should Boudin be ousted, it would serve as a major blow to the national criminal justice reform movement and a signal that Americans — even those in progressive cities — want crime to be punished and victims to be protected.

Boudin, the son of violent radicals and the former employee of Venezuelan socialist dictator Hugo Chavez, was elected in 2019 as part of a national tide of progressive prosecutors running for office on promises to roll back decades of tough-on-crime policies, which they claimed disproportionately affected minority people. His candidacy was supported by several key national progressive figures, such as Vice President Kamala Harris and socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), and radical anti-Israel activist Linda Sarsour, who claimed that she cried tears of joy following his victory.

Boudin entered office with a bang. Within his first two days on the job, he abruptly fired seven tough-on-crime prosecutors. Before that, he vowed not to prosecute cases involving quality-of-life crimes, such as public camping, prostitution, public urination, and blocking a sidewalk. It was all part of his new lenient approach to criminal justice. That approach has since soured with many residents, who have watched as the city has deteriorated as a result of rampant crime and homelessness.

“It’s clear that San Franciscans have had enough and want a new course for our city — one that doesn’t include Boudin as district attorney,” said Mary Jung, chair of the recall campaign, according to the Huffington Post. She added that amid the rise in homicides and property crimes, residents “have had enough of Boudin’s failed leadership.”

“Chesa Boudin’s failure as District Attorney has made San Francisco a more dangerous place to live and work,” said venture capitalist Ron Conway in a December missive calling on people to fund the recall, Politico reported.

One volunteer for the recall effort, Ron May, told KTVU-TV that Boudin’s office putting repeat offenders out on the streets has led him to support the recall: “All the victims, all the cases. We’re protecting the criminals. We’re not protecting the victims.”

Former prosecutor Brooke Jenkins, who resigned due to Boudin’s failed leadership, said she and other prosecutors “felt that he was personally intervening in a number of cases, including our own cases which involved very serious and violent offenders in order to garner them lenient sentence.”

Jenkins added: “While Chesa is not responsible for everything that’s happening in this city, he has a job as the district attorney to set a tone to let criminals know there is accountability and consequences for their actions.”

According to the former prosecutor and many others involved in the recall campaign, he has done the exact opposite.

Category:

Law, Political

Tagged with:

Off-duty Border Patrol agent rushed into Uvalde school with borrowed gun, says police stood outside in ‘gear’


Posted by BLAZETV STAFF | May 31, 2022

Read more at https://www.theblaze.com/video/off-duty-border-patrol-borrows-gun?rebelltitem=1#rebelltitem1

Jacob Albarado, the off-duty Border Patrol agent who rushed into Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas, to save his wife and daughter, joined NBC’s “Today” show on Tuesday to recount his harrowing experience. Albarado told host Savannah Guthrie that he believes police were “doing the best they could, given the circumstances,” but details he inadvertently revealed during the interview have raised new questions about the Uvalde police response.

Albarado explained that he was getting a haircut when he received a text message from his wife, Trisha, who is a fourth-grade teacher at the elementary school.

“There’s an active shooter. Help. I love you,” the text said, according to Albarado.

Albarado described how he borrowed his barber’s shotgun and rushed to the school to save his wife and 8-year-old daughter, Jayda. As he made his way into the school, he saw police officers in “their gear” gathered outside.

“Did you ever see those officers that were poised outside the door?” asked Guthrie. “Obviously, there’s a lot of scrutiny now with [the police] actions and whether they should have gone in,” she added.

“At one point, I was there at the door fixing to go in, but once again, I didn’t have any of my gear,” Albarado answered. “It wouldn’t have been a smart move for me. All those guys had their gear and stuff. […] My wife texted me, called me, that she was okay …. so I went on to find my daughter in her wing.”

After finding and getting his daughter out safely, Albarado went on to evacuate the rest of the classrooms in that wing while two officers provided cover, according to the New York Times.

“Even more questions after this morning[‘s] interview on the Today show with the CBP agent who was off duty and went to rescue his daughter and wife at Robb Elementary. He said he was near the door where [the] gunman was while searching for his daughter. Saw officers with their ‘gear’ on,” CNN correspondent Simon Prokupecz said in a tweet.

Even more questions after this mornings interview on the Today show with the CBP agent who was off duty and went to rescue his daughter and wife at Robb Elementary. He said he was near the door where gunman was while searching for his daughter. Saw officers with their “gear”on.

Here’s the full quote: “I was there at the door fixing to go in, but once again, I didn’t have any of my gear. It wouldn’t be it wouldn’t have been a smart move for me. All those guys had their gear and stuff.”

This appears to be early on because he is still searching for his daughter and before the CBP tactical teams arrived.

Originally tweeted by Shimon Prokupecz (@ShimonPro) on May 31, 2022.

Abarado, who is currently “out of work” due to an unrelated surgery he had just two days after the shooting, has started a fundraiser on GoFundMe to help cover his family’s expenses. He says his wife will not be teaching this summer “because she is too traumatized from the events that occurred on May 24th” and that his family will need “time and plenty of counseling” but promises to keep “pushing forward one day at a time.”

Category:

Education, Law

Tagged with:

Court Testimony Shows Spygate Conspirators Deceived the FBI Using Same Strategy Twice


REPORTED BY: MARGOT CLEVELAND | MAY 26, 2022

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/05/26/court-testimony-shows-spygate-conspirators-deceived-the-fbi-using-same-strategy-twice/

John Durham going to court

Tech executive Rodney Joffe fed the Alfa Bank hoax to the FBI via two distinct routes, testimony in the Michael Sussmann criminal case indicates.

Author Margot Cleveland profile

MARGOT CLEVELAND

VISIT ON TWITTER@PROFMJCLEVELAND

MORE ARTICLES

Tech executive Rodney Joffe fed the Alfa Bank hoax to the FBI via two distinct routes, testimony from yesterday’s proceedings in the Michael Sussmann criminal case indicates. This apparent circular reporting further cements Special Counsel John Durham’s Section 1001 false statement case against Sussmann by highlighting the significance of Sussmann’s alleged lie to former FBI General Counsel James Baker. Sussmann, who is in the middle of week two of his trial in a D.C. federal court, was charged last fall in a one-count indictment with lying to Baker when he provided Baker two flash drives and several “white papers” purporting to establish the existence of a secret communication network between the Russian-based Alfa Bank and the Trump Organization.

According to prosecutors, Sussmann lied to Baker when he claimed during their September 19, 2016, meeting that he was presenting this information to help the FBI and not on behalf of any client. In truth, though, the government maintains that Sussmann represented both the Clinton campaign and Joffe when he met with Baker and provided the supposed Alfa Bank intel.

Prosecutors working for the special counsel’s office closed their case-in-chief earlier this week, after presenting about a dozen witnesses. Those included Baker, who testified that he was “100 percent confident” that Sussmann had claimed during their September 19, 2016, meeting that he was not there “on behalf of any particular client.”

Bill Priestap, who in September 2016 served as the assistant director of the FBI’s Counterintelligence Division, and Trisha Anderson, the FBI’s then-deputy general counsel, also testified. They confirmed notes they took at the time that memorialized Baker’s statements to them that Sussmann had claimed he was not coming to the FBI on behalf of any client. Baker also testified that because Sussmann had claimed to be coming on his own behalf, Baker treated Sussmann as a confidential source and kept Sussmann’s identity secret from other agents. As a result, agents investigating the supposed Trump-Alfa Bank network were kept in the dark concerning Sussmann’s role in bringing the data to the FBI. Consequentially, agents were also left unaware of Joffe’s role in procuring the data and whitepapers.

In addition to claiming the Hillary Clinton campaign would not have wanted Sussmann to pass the Alfa Bank information to the FBI, Sussmann’s legal team also challenged the prosecution’s case by arguing that Joffe had no reason to use Sussmann to share the Alfa Bank information with the FBI. They said that was because at the time of Sussmann’s meeting with Baker, Joffe was a confidential human source, or a “CHS,” for the FBI.

Questioning last week by Sussmann’s lawyers further indicated that in September 2016, when Sussmann was allegedly meeting with Baker on behalf of Joffe, Joffe had presented FBI Special Agent Tom Grasso a copy of the Alfa Bank whitepaper, under the presumption that Grasso served as Joffe’s handler. Those questions seemingly served to counter the prosecutor’s claims that Joffe used Sussmann to sidestep his handler. However, yesterday when the defense called Grasso to testify on behalf of Sussmann, Grasso revealed that he was not Joffe’s handler. Rather, Grasso, who knew Joffe was a CHS, had a long working relationship with Joffe and believed Joffe had provided credible information in the past.

With their questioning of Grasso, Sussmann’s legal team attempted to bolster their argument that Sussmann was rightly concerned with the “intel” Joffe shared and thus gave it to Baker out of a concern for national security. But the plan backfired when on cross-examination Grasso revealed several facts damaging to Sussmann’s defense and supportive of the prosecution’s legal theory of “a look, a leak, and a lie.”

First, Grasso testified that “in early October 2016,” the tech executive had “called Agent Grasso and provided some information on the purported ties between the Alfa Bank/Trump Organization. Joffe further informed Agent Grasso that there was an ongoing investigation on this matter – something Agent Grasso had been unaware of up until that point.”

That testimony proves significant because it shows that within two weeks of Sussmann meeting with Baker, Joffe knew the FBI had launched an investigation into the Alfa Bank “intel,” even though FBI agents testified that they were holding the investigation “close.” The only logical explanation for Joffe’s knowledge is that he knew of the Alfa Bank investigation because Sussmann apprised his client that he had given the data to the FBI.

Grasso also testified that “Joffe specifically asked [Grasso] not to disclose his identity to other people in the Bureau.” According to Grasso, Joffe claimed he wanted to stay anonymous because “this is very sensitive information. People’s safety could be at risk.” Because of that request, Grasso did not contact Joffe’s handler to inform him that Joffe had provided Grasso supposed intel—something Grasso testified he had done in the past when Joffe gave him information.

Joffe’s demand for anonymity with Grasso parallels the tech executive’s alleged use of Sussmann to take his anonymous tip of the Alfa Bank hoax first to the FBI and then later to the CIA. It also further refutes Sussmann’s argument that Joffe had nothing to gain by having Sussmann go to the FBI with the tip on his behalf: Clearly, Joffe had a motive for having others provide the Alfa Bank information to the FBI without it being connected to him, because he used his connection with Grasso to repeat the process, when Joffe could have instead provided the information directly to his handler.

As requested, Grasso passed the Alfa Bank “tip” on to the agents working the case in Chicago, without informing them of Joffe’s involvement in providing the data. From Chicago’s perspective, then, the FBI had received two separate reports of data supposedly connecting Alfa Bank and the Trump organization. It appeared as though Agent Grasso, who was out of Pittsburgh, was working with one source and the FBI in D.C. was obtaining intel from an apparent second source, when in fact, Joffe served as the source in both cases.

During his cross-examination of Grasso, lead prosecutor Andrew DeFilippis introduced this theory to the jury when he asked Grasso “whether he knows what circular reporting is and whether he has ever encountered someone planting information with two different parts of the FBI so it looks corroborating.” While Grasso responded that he had “never encountered that,” the special counsel is sure to stress in its closing argument that the evidence suggests that is precisely what happened here. That is why it was imperative that Sussmann lie to Baker—so that his client Joffe could feed the Alfa Bank theory to other parts of the FBI and thereby bolster the theory of Russia collusion.

If this all sounds strangely familiar, it is. Christopher Steele followed the same tack when, on the condition of anonymity, he provided Yahoo! News the same “intel” contained in the dossier that he handed to the FBI. The FBI would then rely on the Yahoo! News reporting to seemingly confirm the Steele dossier when the DOJ submitted FISA applications to surveil Carter Page.

To date, it appears that Steele will be getting off Scot-free for this ploy. Whether Sussmann will also will be up to the jury, which will likely receive the case for deliberation early next week.

Margot Cleveland is The Federalist’s senior legal correspondent. She is also a contributor to National Review Online, the Washington Examiner, Aleteia, and Townhall.com, and has been published in the Wall Street Journal and USA Today. Cleveland is a lawyer and a graduate of the Notre Dame Law School, where she earned the Hoynes Prize—the law school’s highest honor. She later served for nearly 25 years as a permanent law clerk for a federal appellate judge on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. Cleveland is a former full-time university faculty member and now teaches as an adjunct from time to time. As a stay-at-home homeschooling mom of a young son with cystic fibrosis, Cleveland frequently writes on cultural issues related to parenting and special-needs children. Cleveland is on Twitter at @ProfMJCleveland. The views expressed here are those of Cleveland in her private capacity.

Category:

Law, Political

4th Grader Who Survived Uvalde Reveals What Shooter Said, Did After Entering Classroom


Reported By Jack Davis | May 26, 2022

Read more at https://www.westernjournal.com/4th-grader-survived-uvalde-reveals-shooter-said-entering-classroom/

A new report says that the Texas school shooter told fourth graders what was coming after he shot his way into their classroom Tuesday at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde. The report from KENS-TV was based on the account of a fourth-grade pupil it did not name. The gunman killed 19 children and two adults before he was killed in a shootout with law enforcement. The fourth grader explained that the ordeal began with a gunshot.

“He shot the next person’s door, and then, we have a door in the middle, and he opened it. And then he came in. He crouched a little bit, and he said, ‘It’s time to die,’” the boy said.

The boy was doing all he could to survive.

“When I heard the shooting through the door, I told my friend to hide under something, so he won’t find us. I was hiding hard. And I was telling my friend to not talk because he is going to hear us.”

Four boys hid with the child who spoke to KENS, partially shielded by a tablecloth. The boy recounted a harrowing moment near the end of the ordeal.

“When the cops came, the cop said, ‘Yell if you need help!’ And then one of the persons in my class said ‘help.’ The guy overheard, and he came in and shot her,” the boy said.

“The cop barged into that classroom, and the guy shot the cops. And the cops just started shooting,” he said.

Then came silence.

“I just opened the curtain. And I just put my hand out,” he said. “I got out with my friend. I knew it was the police when I saw the armor and the shield.”

The boy recalled the actions of his slain teachers, Irma Garcia and Eva Mireles.

Related: Harrowing Videos Show Parents Begging Cops to Stop TX School Shooter – Now Revealed Cops Waited 40 Minutes

“They were nice teachers,” he said. “They went in front of my classmates to help. To save them.”

Fear ran through the school as the attack began, according to another child.

“We were scared, and the teacher started telling us we can pray,” Timothy Silva, 8, told CBS.

His second-grade teacher alerted the students, he said.

“She started yelling, and I didn’t think it was a drill because they would have announced it. The teacher just went out there and started yanking on our door to go hide.”

Jack Davis

Contributor, News

Jack Davis is a freelance writer who joined The Western Journal in July 2015 and chronicled the campaign that saw President Donald Trump elected. Since then, he has written extensively for The Western Journal on the Trump administration as well as foreign policy and military issues.

Category:

Education, Family, Law, Society

Tagged with:

Frightening details emerge about Texas school shooter’s rough home life, strange behavior leading up to elementary massacre


Reported by PHIL SHIVER | May 25, 2022

Read more at https://www.conservativereview.com/frightening-details-emerge-about-texas-school-shooter-s-rough-home-life-strange-behavior-leading-up-to-elementary-massacre-2657388259.html/

As neighbors and classmates continue to share more information about Salvador Ramos in the aftermath of the horrific school shooting in Uvalde, Texas, on Tuesday, an all-too-familiar portrait of the killer has begun to emerge.

Ramos, 18, allegedly shot and critically wounded his grandmother in a rage moments before going on a shooting rampage at nearby Robb Elementary School. At the school, he senselessly murdered at least 19 students and two adults and injured several others before he was fatally shot by police. Ramos was reportedly wearing a tactical vest during the shooting spree and was armed with a rifle.

The mass killing immediately gripped the nation and caused widespread mourning. Many of the victims were just 10 years old.

  • Those who knew Ramos described him as a loner who endured a rough home life with a drug-abusing mother. He was reportedly the frequent target of bullying as a teenager due to his lisp and stutter and social awkwardness. But, they said, Ramos responded to his circumstances by violently lashing out at “peers and strangers” and engaging in lawless behavior, often leading to run-ins with local law enforcement.
  • Speaking with the Washington Post, a childhood friend of Ramos who used to play video games and sports with him said he would often exhibit strange behavior, even cutting up his own face for “fun” on one occasion. That same friend said Ramos would often drive around town with another friend at night, shooting random people with a BB gun and egging people’s cars.
  • Another former friend told the Post that Ramos was bullied incessantly in middle school and junior high before he eventually stopped going to school. One time, he posted a picture on social media wearing black eyeliner. The post garnered a slew of negative comments. Ramos was not on pace to graduate with his peers this year.
  • One high school classmate said that in recent months, Ramos posted videos on Instagram “where the cops were there and he’d call his mom a b***h and say she wanted to kick him out.” The classmate added that in the videos, “He’d be screaming and talking to his mom really aggressively.”
  • He worked at a local Wendy’s restaurant, where co-workers remembered him as a mostly quiet kid with “an aggressive streak,” according to the Daily Beast.
  • “He would be very rude towards the girls sometimes, and one of the cooks, threatening them by asking, ‘Do you know who I am?’ And he would also send inappropriate texts to the ladies,” said one former co-worker, adding, “At the park, there’d be videos of him trying to fight people with boxing gloves. He’d take them around with him.”

Here’s what we know about the 18-year-old shooter who officials say killed 19 students, 2 adults…www.youtube.com

In the weeks before the massacre, and right after he turned 18, Ramos appears to have purchased two semi-automatic rifles. He reportedly posted photos of the guns online along with cryptic messages. An unidentified former classmate said that days before the attack, Ramos texted him a photo of a firearm and a bag of ammo, CNN reported.

“He would message me here and there, and four days ago he sent me a picture of the AR he was using … and a backpack full of 5.56 rounds, probably like seven mags,” the classmate said, “I was like, ‘Bro, why do you have this?’ and he was like, ‘Don’t worry about it.'”

  • A since-deleted TikTok account that authorities believe belonged to Ramos featured only a short clip of a mobile game and the line, “Kids be scared IRL.”
  • Then, on Tuesday, the day of the attack, he posted another photo of the rifles on Instagram and tagged a random girl who lives in California, the New York Post reported. He then messaged the girl, urging her to repost the image. She responded confusedly.
  • Early Tuesday morning, Ramos messaged her again, saying, “I’m about to.” The girl asked “about to what” to which he answered, “I’ll tell you before 11.”
  • “I got a lil secret I wanna tell u,” he wrote in another message, accompanied by a smiley-face emoji covering its mouth. He never shared the secret, but sent one last message at 9:16 a.m., saying, “Ima air out.”

Shortly after, alerts of an active shooter in Uvalde hit the news.

Both the Instagram and the TikTok accounts in question were taken offline on Tuesday.

National news reporter John Mone, of Newsy, paraphrased an alleged eyewitness account of the moments prior to the attack. He said the eyewitness, Eduardo Trinidad, claimed that Ramos “got into an argument with the grandmother and she was screaming, ‘He shot me! He shot me!’ and then he got in the car, zoomed down the street, there was some kind of crash.”

“The suspect got out, he had two weapons, and then started engaging gunfire. From that point on, apparently, according to Mr. Trinidad, the suspect walks into the school and unfortunately the rest is history,” Mone said.

Editor’s Note: This article previously stated that Ramos was wearing body armor and carrying multiple firearms when he entered the school. That reporting has since been disputed.

Category:

Family, Law, Society

Tagged with:

DHS warns of threats to burn down Supreme Court, kill justices as abortion decision looms


Reported By Ryan Foley, Christian Post Reporter | Friday, May 20, 2022

Read more at https://www.christianpost.com/news/dhs-memo-warns-of-threats-to-burn-down-supreme-court.html/

A pro-choice activist holds up a sign during a rally in front of the U.S. Supreme Court in response to the leaked Supreme Court draft decision to overturn Roe v. Wade on May 3, 2022, in Washington, D.C. | Alex Wong/Getty Images

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security is warning that some pro-abortion extremists have expressed a desire to burn down the U.S. Supreme Court building if the 1973 Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion nationwide is overturned. 

A Department of Homeland Security memo published May 13, obtained by Axios, warns that violent threats directed at Supreme Court justices and others involved in the abortion debate, such as politicians, members of the clergy and healthcare providers “are likely to persist and may increase leading up to and following the issuing in the Court’s official ruling” in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health. 

The memo comes amid protests of an initial draft opinion written by Justice Samuel Alito. the draft indicates that a majority of justices are poised to reverse Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion nationwide. Politico published the leaked draft opinion on May 2, but the draft is not final.

The prospect of Roe’s reversal, which would send the abortion issue back to states to decide, has already led to acts of vandalism and violence at churches and pro-life pregnancy centers. Protesters have also descended upon the homes of the six Supreme Court justices appointed by Republican presidents, five of whom signed onto the draft of the majority opinion in Dobbs. 

Axios reports that the U.S. government is gearing up for a potential surge in political violence once the Supreme Court decision is released, and law enforcement agencies are investigating social media threats to burn down or storm the Supreme Court building and murders justices and their clerks. According to CBS News, the National Capital Region Threat Intelligence Consortium has referred over two dozen online posts to its partner agencies to investigate. Some of those posts spoke of “burning down or storming the U.S. Supreme Court and murdering Justices and their clerks, members of Congress, and lawful demonstrators.”

Although the violence in recent weeks has been directed at churches and pro-life pregnancy centers, the DHS memo expresses concern that “some racially or ethnically motivated violent extremists’ embrace of pro-life narratives may be linked to the perception of wanting to ‘save white children’ and ‘fight white genocide.'”  

At the same time, the document stresses that “mere advocacy of political or social positions, political activism, use of strong rhetoric, or generalized philosophic embrace of violent tactics does not constitute domestic violent extremism or illegal activity and is constitutionally protected.” 

A DHS spokesperson told Axios that the agency is “committed to protecting Americans’ freedom of speech and other civil rights and civil liberties, including the right to peacefully protest.”

“DHS is also committed to working with our partners across every level of government and the private sector to share timely information and intelligence, prevent all forms of violence, and support law enforcement efforts to keep our communities safe,” the DHS spokesperson said. 

Last week’s DHS memo follows an earlier warning from the agency that predates the debate about the Dobbs case.

Shortly after the riot at the U.S. Capitol in January 2021, DHS included “abortion-related domestic violent extremists” on a list of groups that “pose an elevated threat to the homeland in 2021.” The U.S. Department of Homeland Security is not the only government agency concerned about the possibility of increased violence following the Dobbs decision. 

The Virginia Fusion Center, a partnership between the Virginia State Police and the Virginia Department of Emergency Management to “improve the Commonwealth of Virginia’s preparedness against terrorist attacks,” has compiled a document warning its Shield members to “be prepared for a potential increase in abortion-related events, rallies and protests with the potential for violence and criminal activity.” 

“We have seen groups from both sides of the issue begin to organize, plan and execute a variety of gatherings and protests,” the organization stated. “We expect these gatherings to increase in intensity as the date of the official decision approaches. Some may become violent.”

The Virginia Fusion Center also predicted that an “increase in abortion-related protests and marches could attract the attention of other violent extremists or mass attackers with motives unrelated to abortion.” This could include “groups or individuals interested in attacking large crowds and those with grievances against women, such as involuntary celibate (Incel) violent extremists.” 

The Virginia Fusion Center also anticipated that activists on both sides of the abortion debate would find themselves subject to “merciless doxing, or the release of personal information to increase targeted attacks,” as has already happened to Supreme Court justices.

Recalling that a Planned Parenthood facility in Los Angeles was subject to a cyberattack that led to the theft of patient information, the Virginia Fusion Center maintained that “similar attacks could occur due to heightened tensions.”

A decision in the Dobbs case is expected by the end of June.

The Women’s March has promised to embark on a “Summer of Rage” on behalf of Roe, insisting that “We won’t rest until abortion rights are protected.”

The group will conclude the summer with a “Women’s Convention” in Houston, Texas. While congressional Democrats have sought to codify the right to abortion into law by passing the Women’s Health Protection Act, their efforts have stalled in the evenly divided U.S. Senate. 

If Roe is overturned as expected, 21 states will either ban or restrict abortions more than they currently do, 16 states have codified abortion access in state law, 10 states will continue to enforce their current abortion laws and/or restrictions and voters in the remaining three states may have the opportunity to weigh in on their abortion laws at the ballot box in the near future. 

Ryan Foley is a reporter for The Christian Post. He can be reached at: ryan.foley@christianpost.com

Category:

Law, Political

Tagged with:

Court Agrees to Let Spygate Cabal Hide Some of Their Emails from The Grand Jury


REPORTED BY: MARGOT CLEVELAND | MAY 13, 2022

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/05/13/court-agrees-to-let-spygate-cabal-hide-some-of-their-emails-from-the-grand-jury/

Trump Tower

Given that Marc Elias maintained all the emails were protected by attorney-client privilege, the court’s unquestioningly accepting his word seems strange.

Author Margot Cleveland profile

MARGOT CLEVELAND

VISIT ON TWITTER@PROFMJCLEVELAND

MORE ARTICLES

Tech executive Rodney Joffe may assert attorney-client privilege for communications he had with employees of Fusion GPS because those communications furthered Joffe and the Clinton campaign’s common interest, a federal judge presiding over the criminal case against Michael Sussmann ruled yesterday. Prosecutors will now be greatly limited in the material they may elicit from one of the two witnesses granted immunity in exchange for their testimony against Sussmann.

Sussmann, whose trial in a D.C. federal court on a false statement charge is set to begin on Monday, scored a victory Thursday when presiding judge Christopher Cooper rejected Special Counsel John Durham’s attempts to present the jury copies of emails previously withheld by Joffe, the Clinton campaign, and the Democratic National Committee as privileged. The ruling came in response to Durham’s motion to compel Fusion GPS to provide the court, for in camera review, 38 emails the investigative research firm withheld from the grand jury based on the Clinton campaign’s claim of attorney-client privilege and work-product privilege. The latter protects notes, memoranda, and other communications capturing the mental impressions of an attorney, or those helping an attorney prepare for litigation.

Of the 38 emails, the court held that the Clinton campaign “had no valid basis to withhold 22 of” them. Those emails, the court concluded, did not concern legal advice but involved Fusion GPS employees’ interactions “with the press as part of an affirmative media relations effort by the Clinton Campaign.” “That effort,” the court noted, “included pitching certain stories, providing information on background, and answering reporters’ questions.”

Among the emails related to the “ordinary media-relations work” undertaken on behalf of the Clinton campaign were “internal Fusion GPS discussions about the underlying data and emails circulating draft versions of one of the background white papers that was ultimately provided to the press and the FBI.” Because those emails were not written in anticipation of litigation, but instead related “solely to disseminating the information they and others had gathered,” the court held the emails were not protected by either attorney-client privilege or work-product privilege.

Although the court held those 22 emails and the related attachments were not protected by attorney-client privilege, Judge Cooper nonetheless concluded that the special counsel’s office waited too long to file its motion to compel. “As a matter of principle,” the court explained, it would not “put Mr. Sussmann in the position of having to evaluate the documents, and any implications they might have on his trial strategy, at this late date.” Accordingly, the court held, “the government will not be permitted to introduce the emails and attachments that the Court has ruled are not subject to privilege.”

In reaching this conclusion, Judge Cooper noted that the emails did not appear “particularly revelatory,” suggesting there will be little harm to the special counsel’s case against Sussmann from the court’s ruling that the emails will be inadmissible at trial. And beyond the Sussmann case, the court’s ruling inures to the special counsel’s benefit because it establishes a precedent for Durham’s team to seek access to other communications withheld based on the Clinton campaign’s claims of attorney-client privilege. In total, there were nearly 1,500 other documents Fusion GPS withheld as privileged that the special counsel’s office may move to compel the production of as part of future grand jury proceedings or trials.

While that aspect of yesterday’s ruling proves positive for the broader special counsel’s investigation, the court’s conclusion that 16 of the 38 other emails remain privileged creates larger problems for Durham’s team. Eight of those emails also involved internal communications among Fusion GPS employees, the court noted, but because the court was “unable to tell from the emails or the surrounding circumstances whether they were prepared for a purpose other than assisting Perkins Coie in providing legal advice to the Clinton Campaign in anticipation of litigation,” the court deferred to claims by Fusion GPS’s attorney Joshua Levy and Clinton campaign attorney Marc Elias that the emails related to legal advice.

Given that Elias maintained all the emails were protected by attorney-client privilege, the court’s unquestioningly accepting his word seems strange. And if a court applies the same standard to assess whether the remaining approximately 1,500 emails are privileged, the special counsel’s office may face challenges obtaining much that matters.

But it was the court’s ruling concerning the final eight emails that has the most immediate effect on the special counsel’s office, namely its prosecution of Sussmann for allegedly lying to former FBI General Counsel James Baker. The last eight emails, with attachments, consisted of two email chains initiated by Joffe to both Sussman and Fusion GPS employee Laura Seago. In opposing disclosure of the email threads, Joffe asserted that “the purpose of the [] communications at issue was to obtain [Fusion’s] assistance in cybersecurity and technical matters to allow Mr. Sussmann to provide [Mr. Joffe] competent, informed legal advice.”

The court held that Joffe’s communications to Sussmann were protected by attorney-client privilege even though the emails included a non-lawyer, Seago, because attorney-client privilege extends to communications by third parties that an attorney hires to facilitate “the effective consultation between the client and the lawyer.” In reaching this conclusion, the court reasoned that Seago’s “involvement related to the technical analysis of the data, which would naturally inform Mr. Sussmann’s advice to his client about the data.”

The court, however, ignored the fact that Fusion GPS, for whom Seago worked, was hired by Perkins Coie to assist the Clinton campaign and the DNC, not Joffe. And Joffe did not pay for Fusion GPS’s services, nor did Perkins Coie charge Joffe. Further, as the special counsel noted in its briefing of the issue, “Perkins Coie also had no agreement, contract, or other arrangement reflecting that Fusion GPS was providing services specifically to aid Perkins Coie’s legal representation of [Joffe].”

Nonetheless, the court held the email threads between Joffe, Sussmann, and Seago were protected by attorney-client privilege based on case law holding communications that further “a common interest” are protected. What the court didn’t say, though, but what must be true under privilege law and “the common interest rule” is that the court believed the communications furthered a common goal of Joffe and the Clinton campaign.

“The joint defense privilege,” or “the common interest rule,” is “an extension of the attorney-client privilege that protects from forced disclosure communications between two or more parties and/or their respective counsel if they are participating in a joint defense agreement.” The common interest rule “protects communications between the parties where they ‘are part of an on-going and joint effort to set up a common defense strategy’ in connection with actual or prospective litigation.” That rule applies to communications subject to the attorney-client privilege, including communications with technical experts retained to assist in the legal defense.

In this case, as prosecutors stressed in their briefing, there was no “formal or informal legal relationship” between Joffe and the DNC and the Clinton campaign. Case law holds, however, that the “parties need not agree in writing to pursue a common interest; the doctrine permits an exchange of confidential information when the parties have clearly and specifically agreed in some manner to pool information for a common goal.” But “without a written agreement, the party’s burden of proving that a statement was made in the common interest will undoubtedly be more difficult.”

Yet, even without a written agreement, the court found a “common interest” existed to protect Joffe’s communications with Fusion GPS’s Seago, who was hired by Elias to provide legal support to the Clinton campaign. And what was that “common interest?”

According to Joffe, he hired “Sussmann to assist him in a specific legal matter – namely, to advise him how to share sensitive information concerning an extremely litigious Presidential candidate with either investigative journalists or Government agencies without revealing his identity and exposing himself to potential liability, frivolous litigation, and/or threats of violence and/or harassment.”

So, in concluding a “common interest” existed between Joffe and the Clinton campaign, the court implicitly also found “the parties have clearly and specifically agreed in some manner to pool information for a common goal,” here the goal of feeding the press and the government the Alfa Bank hoax.

The end results then are that the special counsel’s office cannot compel Fusion GPS to turn over the eight emails between Joffe, Sussmann, and Seago. But yesterday’s holding has broader consequences for the trial because, in closing its 11-page opinion, the court noted that it “will apply the principles set forth above to any assertions of privilege during witness testimony at trial.”

That means if prosecutors seek to elicit testimony from Seago, or any other employee of Fusion GPS for that matter, on various communications with Joffe, the court could rule the questions out of bounds based on attorney-client privilege. Given that the special counsel was forced to provide Seago with immunity to obtain her testimony at Sussmann’s trial, the court’s ruling yesterday represents a setback to Durham’s case.

Durham does have a few options, including asking the appellate court to resolve the issue of privilege before the trial starts. Prosecutors may instead decide to push forward and play any claim of privilege by Seago on the stand to their advantage, using it as further evidence that Sussmann was representing Joffe and the Clinton campaign when he presented Baker with the Alfa Bank material. They may also point to the “common interest” underlying the privilege analysis as proof that yes, there was a joint venture between the Clinton campaign, Joffe, and others, sufficient to overcome the defendant’s hearsay objections to other evidence.

Whether yesterday’s ruling represents an overall loss to Sussmann or the special counsel is yet to be seen, but what is clear is that it is another damning indictment of Hillary Clinton.

Margot Cleveland is The Federalist’s senior legal correspondent. She is also a contributor to National Review Online, the Washington Examiner, Aleteia, and Townhall.com, and has been published in the Wall Street Journal and USA Today. Cleveland is a lawyer and a graduate of the Notre Dame Law School, where she earned the Hoynes Prize—the law school’s highest honor. She later served for nearly 25 years as a permanent law clerk for a federal appellate judge on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. Cleveland is a former full-time university faculty member and now teaches as an adjunct from time to time. As a stay-at-home homeschooling mom of a young son with cystic fibrosis, Cleveland frequently writes on cultural issues related to parenting and special-needs children. Cleveland is on Twitter at @ProfMJCleveland. The views expressed here are those of Cleveland in her private capacity.

Category:

Law, Political

Justice Samuel Alito Speaks About Historic Supreme Court Leak for First Time Since Roe v. Wade Decision Divulged to Press


Reported By Jim Hoft | Published May 13, 2022

Read more at https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/05/justice-samuel-alito-speaks-historic-supreme-court-leak-first-time-since-roe-v-wade-decision-divulged-press/

Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito delivered a virtual speech at George Mason University’s Antonin Scalia Law School on Thursday. This was his first public appearance since a SCOTUS insider leaked the upcoming Roe v. Wade decision to the liberal press.

A SCOTUS insider leaked the decision to far-left media outlet Politico which ran it last week. The leak happened to coincide with the release of the documentary “2000 Mules” that proved the 2020 election was stolen by a network of leftist ballot traffickers in the battleground states.

Alito told the audience on Thursday after being asked about the decision, “The court right now, we had our conference this morning, we’re doing our work. We’re taking new cases, we’re headed toward the end of the term, which is also a frenetic time as we get our opinions out.”

The FBI and law enforcement still have not found the leaker after a two week investigation. It’s funny how bad they are when the culprit is helping the leftist cause.

Huffington Post reported:

Samuel Alito, the Supreme Court justice who authored the leaked draft majority opinion showing the court is preparing to strike down landmark Roe v. Wade abortion rights, addressed the leak for the first time Thursday.

“This is a subject I told myself I wasn’t going to talk about today regarding, you know — given all the circumstances,” Alito said at an event at the Antonin Scalia Law School at George Mason University, in response to a question about how the justices were getting along, according to The Washington Post.

The nine high court justices met in private Thursday morning for the first time since Politico published Alito’s draft last week.

“The court right now, we had our conference this morning, we’re doing our work. We’re taking new cases, we’re headed toward the end of the term, which is always a frenetic time as we get our opinions out,” Alito said.

“So that’s where we are,” he continued.

Chief Justice John Roberts told a meeting of lawyers and judges at a judicial conference in Atlanta on May 5 that he hoped “one bad apple” would not change “people’s perception” of the Supreme Court, according to CNN.

Roberts previously confirmed the authenticity of the leaked document and said he had ordered an investigation. The source of the leak remains unknown.

Jim Hoft

Jim Hoft is the founder and editor of The Gateway Pundit, one of the top conservative news outlets in America. Jim was awarded the Reed Irvine Accuracy in Media Award in 2013 and is the proud recipient of the Breitbart Award for Excellence in Online Journalism from the Americans for Prosperity Foundation in May 2016.

Category:

Law, Political

Tagged with:

Pro-abortion groups claim responsibility for setting fire pro-life office on fire: report


Reported By Ryan Foley, Christian Post Reporter | Wednesday, May 11, 2022

Read more at https://www.christianpost.com/news/pro-abortion-groups-take-credit-for-fir-at-pro-life-office.html/

The pro-life group Wisconsin Family Action had its headquarters attacked with two Molotov cocktails and graffiti following the leaking of a draft opinion of a United States Supreme Court case that could overturn Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court case that legalized abortion nationwide. | Screenshot: Twitter/AlexanderShur

Authorities are investigating after groups of pro-abortion advocacy organizations identifying themselves as “Jane’s Revenge” claimed credit for vandalizing the headquarters of a pro-life advocacy group in Wisconsin, vowing to carry out future attacks if their pro-life counterparts do not “disband.” 

Robert Evans, a reporter with the Netherlands-based news operation Bellingcat, took to Twitter Tuesday to share the contents of a message he received from Jane’s Revenge, which purportedly claimed responsibility for the vandalism at Wisconsin Family Action’s headquarters in Madison, Wisconsin, on Sunday.

The exterior of the pro-life organization’s headquarters was vandalized with graffiti, a molotov cocktail was thrown through a window and an office at the facility was set on fire. 

Earlier this week the office of a Wisconsin anti abortion organization was firebombed.

I have received a statement from the group claiming responsibility. They call themselves “Jane’s Revenge” (a reference to the Jane Collective).

More follows.https://t.co/wgGX3l5DEU— Robert Evans (The Only Robert Evans) (@IwriteOK) May 10, 2022

The incident at Wisconsin Family Action is one of several examples of violence directed at pro-life groups and churches following Politico’s publication of a draft U.S. Supreme Court opinion that suggests the court could reverse the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion nationwide.

Jane’s Revenge, which described itself as “not one group, but many,” attributed the act of vandalism to outrage over the leaked Supreme Court opinion. The Christian Post has not independently verified the validity of the statement shared by Evans. Evans said the statement was sent to him through an anonymous intermediary that he trusts. The statement is titled “first communique.”

The Madison Police Department told NBC15 that it is aware that a group claimed responsibility for the attack on the Wisconsin Family Action office and is working with federal law enforcement to determine the claim’s validity. A spokesperson for the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives told The Guardian that the agency is aware of the claims of responsibility but couldn’t offer further comment.

The message began with an insistence that “[t]his is not a declaration of war” as “war has been upon us for decades,” which “they did not want and did not provoke.” The group stated that “we been attacked for asking for basic medical care.”

“[T]oo long have we been shot, bombed, and forced into childbirth without consent,” the message stated.

The reported Jane’s Revenge communication said the vandalism at Wisconsin Family Action “was only a warning.”

“We demand the disbanding of anti-choice establishments, fake clinics, and violent anti-choice groups within the next thirty days,” the group added. “This is not a mere ‘difference of opinion’ as some have framed it. We are literally fighting for our lives. We will not sit still while we are killed and forced into servitude.”

The message proclaimed: “We have run thin on patience and mercy for those who seek to strip us of what little autonomy we have left” before accusing the pro-life movement of instigating violence in the forms of “bomb[ing] clinics and assassinat[ing] doctors with impunity.”

The most notable example of violence against abortion doctors is the assassination of Kansas abortion doctor George Tiller in 2009. Still, for the most part, violence against abortion clinics and doctors has been rare.

“Medical imperialism will not face a passive enemy,” the statement reads. “Wisconsin is the first flashpoint, but we are all over the US, and we will issue no further warnings. And we will not stop, we will not back down, nor will we hesitate to strike until the inalienable right to manage our own health is returned to us.”

Evans said the group told him that “we are in your city” and “we are in every city,” promising that “next time the infrastructure of the enslavers will not survive.”

Wisconsin Family Action had initially attributed the vandalism at its headquarters in Madison to “Anarchy 1312,” noting that a logo featuring the phrase was painted on one of its exterior walls.

Last year, before the Supreme Court announced its intention to hear the challenge surrounding Mississippi’s 15-week abortion ban, the U.S. Director of National Intelligence included “ideological agendas in support of pro-life or pro-choice beliefs” on a list of domestic violent extremists that “pose an elevated threat to the homeland in 2021.”

The document referred to them as “abortion-related domestic violent extremists.” Examples of pro-abortion violence include the 2009 murder of pro-life activist Jim Pouillon and the 2016 arson at a pro-life pregnancy center in New Mexico. 

More than a year after the DNI included “abortion-related domestic violent extremists” on a list of national security threats, abortion has emerged as a flashpoint in American politics following the publication of the draft opinion in the New Mexico case, which is not final.

The attack on the Wisconsin Family Action office is not the only incident of vandalism targeting pro-lifers since the Dobbs draft was leaked last week. Other examples of such violence include the targeting of Catholic churches in Colorado and Texas with graffiti containing pro-abortion messages, the theft of the tabernacle at another and an arson attack at Oregon Right to Life’s headquarters. 

A series of dueling protests are scheduled to take place this weekend, with Planned Parenthood Action Fund, Planned Parenthood Federation of America and the Women’s March collaborating to hold “Bans off our Bodies” events in Washington, D.C. and several other cities Saturday. At the same time, Students for Life of America plans to hold counterprotests in Washington and eight other cities.  

Ryan Foley is a reporter for The Christian Post. He can be reached at: ryan.foley@christianpost.com

Category:

Family, Health, Law, Political

Tagged with:

Illegal immigrants getting ‘pallets’ of baby formula at detention center while shelves are nearly empty in American stores, US congresswoman declares


Reported by DAVE URBANSKI | May 12, 2022

Read more at https://www.theblaze.com/news/illegal-immigrants-baby-formula-congresswoman/

Republican U.S. Rep. Kat Cammack said that “pallets” of baby formula are being delivered to an illegal immigrant detention center in Texas while Americans’ chances of finding formula on supermarket shelves grow more slim by the day. Cammack, a Florida lawmaker who was elected in 2020, indicated in a pair of Facebook videos Wednesday that a Border Patrol agent at the Ursula facility in McAllen sent her photos showing pallets of baby formula and other food for infants that had been delivered to the detention center.

“They are sending pallets — pallets — of baby formula to the border,” Cammack said. “Meanwhile, in our own district at home, we cannot find baby formula.”

“The first photo is from this morning at the Ursula Processing Center at the U.S. border. Shelves and pallets packed with baby formula,” she wrote in a related Twitter post. “The second is from a shelf right here at home. Formula is scarce. This is what America last looks like.”

Cammack added in her first video that “we literally are struggling to find baby formula around the country; moms are struggling, going from store to store to store and then the stores are actually capping the amount of baby formula they will sell them.”

The congresswoman called it “unconscionable” and said the administration of President Joe Biden is responsible for the “open border policy” that is “crushing the middle class.”

“They hate everything about [former President] Donald Trump so much … they’re willing to hurt their own citizens,” Cammack added, saying it’s “absolutely outrageous.”

Cammack posted a second video later Wednesday and was no less outraged, saying the Border Patrol agent told her, “Kat, you would not believe the shipment I just brought in.”

She went on to say that “he has been a Border Patrol agent for 30 years, and he has never seen anything quite like this. He is a grandfather, and he is saying that his own children can’t get … baby formula.”

https://www.facebook.com/watch/RepKatCammack/

While she wasn’t happy that the baby formula was going to “illegals that are crossing into the United States,” Cammack said “it is not the children’s fault at all.”

Rather what is “infuriating” is “that this is another example of the America last agenda that the Biden administration continues to perpetuate,” she added.

“I don’t know about you, but if I am a mother in anywhere, any-town America, and I go to my local Walmart or Target or Publix or Safeway or Kroger or wherever it may be that you shop, and you are seeing their shelves, and you are seeing signs that you are not able to get baby formula, and then you see the American government sending by the pallet thousands and thousands of containers of baby formula to the border, that would make my blood boil,” Cammack also said.

Cammack told her viewers that Republicans in Congress are doing what they can about the issue, but “we have zero leverage.”

The federal Office of the Administration for Children & Families — which oversees the Office of Refugee Resettlement — on Thursday didn’t immediately respond to TheBlaze’s request for comment on Cammack’s claims.

https://www.facebook.com/watch/KatCammack/

(H/T: Washington Examiner)

Category:

Family, Law, Political

Tagged with:

Planned Parenthood Profits Big from Getting Kids Hooked on Transgender Hormones Through The School-To-Clinic Pipeline


REPORTED BY: JARED ECKERT AND EMMA SOFIA MULL | MAY 10, 2022

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/05/10/planned-parenthood-profits-big-from-getting-kids-hooked-on-transgender-hormones-through-the-school-to-clinic-pipeline/

Planned Parenthood building

Long the nation’s chief abortion provider, Planned Parenthood has branched out. Its latest endeavor? Sterilizing America’s youth. Planned Parenthood has quietly been in the gender transition business since at least 2017. Today, more than a third of its offices — 239 clinics in more than 40 states — provide transgender services. And it’s not stopping there.

While those seeking puberty blockers or surgical procedures are referred elsewhere, Planned Parenthood is offering access to cross-sex hormones, promoting gender ideology in sex ed programs, and establishing “well-being centers” in local high schools. The organization is looking to cash in on gender transition for years to come.

Easy Access

Just how readily does Planned Parenthood provide the gender-confused with cross-sex hormones? Consider the case of detransitioner Helena Kirschner. She received testosterone during her first visit — without blood work or a mental health referral.

Sadly, Kirschner is not the exception. Offices guarantee that patients can receive hormones without an evaluation of their mental health. They also promise that, in most cases, patients can expect same-day prescriptions.

Already thousands of kids are getting hormones like candy. Three California regional offices of Planned Parenthood recorded almost 4,000 gender-related visits from July 2019 to June 2021. In one California region, more than 750 cycles of hormones were prescribed in a year. These numbers are not representative for California; other Planned Parenthood offices in the state don’t even bother reporting these services.

Planned Parenthood offices state they only offer hormones to minors aged 16 or older with parental consent, but that is not the whole truth. In California, minors may receive “sensitive care,” like transition services, without parental permission. Given Planned Parenthood’s past deception, there’s no reason to think the organization won’t bend its own rules for profit.

And that’s just California. Thirty-three states plus D.C. have laws that, to some degree, allow minors to obtain routine health care without parental consent. In states where “gender affirming care” is deemed “medically necessary,” minors may be able to transition without parents knowing. And hormones may just be one Planned Parenthood appointment away.

All of this is deeply troubling. Despite Planned Parenthood’s deceptive marketing, transition is not proven to be the best medical practice. We know that 88 to 98 percent of gender dysphoric kids will reconcile with their biological sex if allowed to go through puberty “untreated.” Moreover, those who do transition are estimated to be 19 times more likely to commit suicide than their peers.

Comprehensive Sex-Ed

Even before Planned Parenthood helps minors transition, it teaches them to desire it. Across the country, schools hire Planned Parenthood or its affiliates to lead sex ed. And its reach is not insignificant. Nationally, 1.2 million students receive Planned Parenthood’s affiliate sex ed programming each year, according to the organization’s last annual report.

While curriculum requirements vary by state, these programs promote everything from abortion and the morning-after pill to gender fluidity and transition. By indoctrinating youth, the abortion giant creates the demand it needs to profit from gender services.

Well-Being Centers

But creating demand does not stop with sex ed. Planned Parenthood wants to cement a permanent school-to-clinic pipeline. In 2019, the abortion giant announced it would open 50 “wellbeing centers” in Los Angeles high schools. These centers will offer “health and wellness education services, sexual health services,” and more.  Innocuous as these services appear, they exist to market Planned Parenthood’s services. Handpicked staff will provide transition support and chemical abortion.

Ultimately, Planned Parenthood’s rapid expansion of services should raise alarm. Planned Parenthood is no longer a danger just to the pregnant and the unborn, but to every teen as well.

Legislation Needed

Thankfully, state and federal policymakers can help protect minors from falling prey to these “services.” By enacting bills like Arkansas’ SAFE Act, states could stop Planned Parenthood and others’ efforts to mislead minors. Instead of passing bills that undermine parental rights (as California has done), states should work to ensure parental rights are upheld and respected.

In Congress, members must remain vigilant against the Equality Act, which would make the school-to-surgery pipeline a permanent fixture of American society. Lawmakers should also consider Hyde-like riders to ensure the Biden administration can’t redirect federal dollars to help Planned Parenthood sterilize our kids.

Elected officials who haven’t been bought out by woke corporations can learn from the far-left’s tone deafness. Policies that protect kids and empower parents are popular with voters, especially parents. By championing parents and children, legislators can stop bad actors like Planned Parenthood from preying on the vulnerable.

Jared Eckert is a research assistant in The Heritage Foundation’s DeVos Center for Life, Religion, and Family. Emma Sofia Mull is a graduate of the think tank’s Young Leaders Program.

Author Jared Eckert and Emma Sofia Mull profile

JARED ECKERT AND EMMA SOFIA MULL

MORE ARTICLES

Category:

Education, Health, Law, Political

Tagged with:

The Supreme Court’s Decision on Overturning Roe Will Be an Inflection Point for The Nation


POSTED BY: JOY PULLMANN | MAY 10, 2022

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/05/10/overturning-roe-would-be-a-triumph-that-can-bring-america-back-to-life/

Ronald Reagan and Clarence Thomas

If the Supreme Court does not overturn Roe v. Wade, its legitimacy is finished, and so is the nation the Founders created. The opposite is also true.

Author Joy Pullmann profile

JOY PULLMANN

VISIT ON TWITTER@JOYPULLMANN

MORE ARTICLES

Just as slavery and its lingering effects scarred America for centuries, the national sin of Roe v. Wade has weighed our nation down with the shame and devastation of legalized mass murder. Just as slavery deeply challenged the patriotism of those scarred by that evil regime in America, so has the unconstitutional and morally abhorrent abortion regime in America.

Also, just as slavery plainly contradicted the philosophy and law of the American founders — who wrote “all men are created equal, and… endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, [and] among these are Life” — so does Roe v. Wade, which even leftist “scholars” agree is a garbage decision. Just as slavery created a constitutional crisis that existentially threatened America, so did Roe v. Wade.

The attention on the protesters using violence and intimidation to retain a clearly unconstitutional and clearly immoral court diktat has obscured that if the Supreme Court does not overturn Roe, its legitimacy is finished. At that point, after decades of fruitlessly investing in keeping as many courts as possible closer to constitutionalism, the right will fully agree with the left that the Supreme Court is an illegitimate, utterly politicized institution, as I explained on EWTN last week. That will finish off what was left of the American republic and mark its complete conversion into something entirely different.

For it is highly politicized decisions like Roe, its companion Planned Parenthood v. Casey, and others such as those sanctioning the New Deal starting with West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish, that have undermined the court’s legitimacy. The court maintains legitimacy precisely in doing its job of applying the law faithfully, instead of taking politics into consideration. Just as overturning Plessy v. Ferguson restored the Supreme Court’s legitimacy, so would the overturn of Roe v. Wade.

Besides keeping the Founders’ America alive for “one more season of restraint,” fixing warped Roe v. Wade jurisprudence would also enliven the country, not just literally but also figuratively. It would breathe new life into an America that all of us should be able to admit has been on life support for some time.

Those of us who have been willing to admit what abortion is — the taking of a human life — have for decades been weighed down with the knowledge our own country has been allowing this on a mass scale, and even demanding we participate in and celebrate it. Such a regime not only delegitimizes itself but drains its own lifeblood.

The potential overturn of Roe v. Wade is a massive opportunity to overturn a horrifying evil, and therefore to do great good. The opportunity to do great good is a strong and previously unavailable motivator. It would be a huge energizer for those who have resisted the usurping regime’s massive efforts to get us to stop seeing and talking about what we have seen that regime do to our nation. It would be the fall of a great spiritual Berlin Wall inside our nation.

It would allow us to finally stop talking about “norms” and start talking about whether those norms nourish or destroy life. We could stop talking about marginal tax rates and about whose duty it is, exactly, to provide for those who cannot provide for themselves. In short, we can start making the necessary bold moves to re-seed and water a culture of life. Without Roe, we can start from the beginning and move holistically, from the bottom up instead of merely tinkering around the corners of an entirely corrupt edifice.

That’s the most needed action in this moment, as the political and immoral left has become very clear about its frightening degradation into a death cult. Overturning Roe would show that major, enduring cultural victories are still possible, and that all of the nation’s institutions don’t belong to the left. Perhaps that’s why this poll showed a move to the right after people heard about the leaked majority opinion to overturn Roe.

An outpouring of creative social entrepreneurship and policy could be in the offing as states finally have the opportunity to make good on their voters’ belief that the unborn are people deserving of the best care a civilization can offer. By returning this existential policy to the people again, it could allow them to get involved in more immediate, tangible, and fruitful ways than demonstrating in the streets or on Twitter. People who want to save lives could be more able to adopt a baby now that abortion isn’t killing nearly all of the potential adoptees or help sponsor local children living with their own needy families like many churches do for children in faraway nations. It would be even less tenable to ban Christians from helping with foster care and adoption when the need for connecting children with parents increases through refusing to kill inconvenient children.

We’re so used to losing, who knows what the biggest win in generations could do to energize the American majority that remains committed to families and the rule of the real Constitution, not the murderous “living” one. But I do know that nothing is so energizing and refreshing as a baby. There’s nothing more unifying, more animating, and more lively. A baby is a life, and a baby makes a life. This is true both for us as individuals and for us as a collective.

Children are a reason to get up in the morning, to make a morning at all. Discharging our responsibilities to children is the way to make it “Morning in America” again, both in our homes and in our civic life. Caring for them is the best way forward. It is the only way. Without children, a civilization dies, both spiritually and literally. We are on the cusp of continuing to lose our babies, but there’s a chance we can get them back. And we need to, for our nation’s life is inextricable from theirs.

As every good parent learns, having a child is the way to become human again. Being human means becoming the kind of person who will sacrifice himself to benefit another. A society without enough of such persons is soon not a society at all. The Supreme Court’s decision, therefore, can either mean life or death not only for the unborn, but also for their nation. We must all hope, pray, and prepare.

Joy Pullmann is executive editor of The Federalist, a happy wife, and the mother of six children. Sign up here to get early access to her next ebook, “101 Strategies For Living Well Amid Inflation.” Her bestselling ebook is “Classic Books for Young Children.” Mrs. Pullmann identifies as native American and gender natural. She is also the author of “The Education Invasion: How Common Core Fights Parents for Control of American Kids,” from Encounter Books. In 2013-14 she won a Robert Novak journalism fellowship for in-depth reporting on Common Core national education mandates. Joy is a grateful graduate of the Hillsdale College honors and journalism programs.

Category:

Family, Law, Political, Society, Spiritual

Daniel Horowitz Op-ed: Reversal of Roe will make state courts great again


Commentary by DANIEL HOROWITZ | May 06, 2022

Read more at https://www.conservativereview.com/horowitz-reversal-of-roe-will-make-state-courts-great-again-theblaze-2657292558.html/

Leftists do not like legislative bodies and believe they should wield the least power precisely for the very reason Madison said: “In republican government, the legislative authority necessarily predominates.” Legislators are elected by the people, constantly stand for re-election (most state legislators are in cycle every two years), all the proceedings are publicized, there are several layers of public votes, and the process in every state (except Nebraska) is bicameral. This is why leftists instead love the courts and bureaucracies, because they can achieve their goals without the disinfecting power of public scrutiny and without the deterrent of public reprisal.

Anyone who supports democratic values should embrace the opportunity to steer contentious issues away from the courts and toward legislative bodies. Obviously, state legislatures are the best suited to deal with contentious issues – not only because they are the closest to the people but also because there are 50 states. We have a divided country and can easily sort out our divisions through a degree of political and even physical self-separating. The reality is that not a single Democrat-controlled state will vote to curtail abortions, because the Supreme Court did nothing but reverse the judicial interference in the issue to ensure that legislatures are free to deal with it.

In light of the fallout from the impending reversal of Roe, there is an uncanny and somewhat perverse political dichotomy unfolding between the two parties. Republicans seem to be defending the “independence” of the court and exalting it to this supreme status above the other branches. Democrats, on the other hand, are trying to delegitimize judicial power because of the perception that they will face a long-term conservative majority on the court. However, if both sides really placed democratic values over politics, they would agree to a grand bargain to devolve power on every contentious issue to the states. This would mean that all cases adjudicating novel rights that only leftists believe in would be dealt with in the respective states. But it would also mean that cases dealing with gun rights would be up to the states.

Don’t get me wrong, I fully believe that there is a difference between bogus rights and foundational rights spelled out in the federal Constitution, such as self-defense, and that should be binding on the states. Ideally, we have the right to petition a federal court for redress if our gun rights are infringed upon. But if that is going to allow courts to perpetuate judicial supremacy and use it as a cudgel over red states, I’m more than glad to devolve all these issues to the states.

Such an arrangement would unfortunately cement the status of blue states as incorrigible Marxist dictatorships, but they are already there anyway. The courts – including the so-called conservative Supreme Court – have barely laid a glove on the COVID fascist regime in blue states. And many courts have prevented red states from blocking these tyrannical laws, such as federal courts requiring red states and counties to have mask mandates.

Conservatives would be naive not to push for a grand bargain ending judicial supremacy. We would benefit so much more than we lose. At present, we rarely benefit from judicial oversight when blue states violate foundational rights, yet we get crushed in red states by the courts vitiating every commonsense policy by creating phantom rights. As of now, we have a “conservative” Supreme Court that has prevented red states from cleaning up homeless encampments, from defining marriage, from keeping the sexes separate in private bathrooms and dressing rooms, from keeping sports sperate, from enforcing immigration law, and from many aspects of fighting crime.

However, let us not forget that for those who still like judicial oversight over broadly political issues, it’s not like the state legislatures won’t have competition. Overshadowed in the politics of the U.S. Supreme Court is the fact that all 50 states have their own constitutions and state judiciaries, including courts of last resort. Let’s not forget, it wasn’t until 1875, in the twilight of the Reconstruction era, that Congress transferred authority over most constitutional questions from state courts to lower federal courts, and it wasn’t until 1914 that Congress granted the Supreme Court appellate jurisdiction over all cases heard by state supreme courts.

Thus, all these decisions we see from the federal courts creating phantom rights can still be done on the state level with regard to the state constitutions – for better or worse. If Democrats so fervently want to enshrine their morals and political aspirations into constitutions, they can do so in the states they control.

Except there is one difference. State judiciaries, for the most part, are elected either initially or through retention ballot. There are only seven states where the voters never get a crack at judicial selection: Delaware, Hawaii, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Rhode Island, and Virginia. Most of them are solid blue states, and Rhode Island is the only state that mirrors the federal system, in which the judges are never subject to review by the voters and serve a lifetime tenure. In four of those states, the judges are subject to a specific term and must at least stand for re-nomination before the legislature, and New Hampshire and Massachusetts have an age tenure limit of 70.

Inevitably, given the polarization of our society, we disagree not only on policy but on the Constitution itself. This is why any case implicating a constitutional right will invariably be political. Thus, if we are going to place politics in the courts, it’s better to do it in the bodies that are elected and closer to the people.

Collectively, this will make state judicial elections great again and will make state legislatures more consequential and powerful. If we are going to have the courts decide every political and social issue, let’s at least have this debate at the local level. Yes, there will be times when the labyrinth of state laws and constitutionally protected rights might get confusing and even clash, but I’d rather a patchwork of law than uniformity of tyranny.

This is also a wake-up call to conservatives in red states. Many conservatives focus solely on congressional elections, but they need to pay attention to state judicial races. A lot of red states have non-partisan elections, which allows stealth leftists to glide into office. It might be a good idea to make these elections partisan. Let’s face it: There is nothing in politics that is not partisan, especially as it relates to the most consequential legal questions. Let’s be open about it and sort out our disagreements through the diversity of the 50 states. That is the only way to agree to disagree in an agreeable fashion.

Category:

Health, Law, Political

Tagged with:

Today’s Politically INCORRECT Cartoon by A.F. Branco


A.F. Branco Cartoon – On the Hook

A.F. BRANCO | on May 6, 2022 | https://comicallyincorrect.com/a-f-branco-cartoon-on-the-hook/

Will SCOUTS push abortion rights back to the states based on the leaked opinion?

Roe vs Wade SCOTUS
Political cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2022.

DONATE to A.F.Branco Cartoons – Tips accepted and appreciated – $1.00 – $5.00 – $25.00 – $50.00 – $100 – it all helps to fund this website and keep the cartoons coming. Also Venmo @AFBranco – THANK YOU!

A.F. Branco has taken his two greatest passions, (art and politics) and translated them into cartoons that have been popular all over the country, in various news outlets including “Fox News”, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, and “The Washington Post.” He has been recognized by such personalities as Dinesh D’Souza, James Woods, Sarah Palin, Larry Elder, Lars Larson, Rush Limbaugh, and President Donald Trump.

Category:

Law

Tagged with:

Revealing the abortion industry loophole


Posted By Robert Netzly, Voices Contributor | Thursday, May 05, 2022

Read more at https://www.christianpost.com/voices/revealing-the-abortion-industry-loophole.html/

Pro-life and pro-choice demonstrators gather in front of the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington, D.C., on May 3, 2022. | BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP via Getty Images

At 15 weeks, unborn babies have a heartbeat, can sense pain, respond to physical stimulation, taste, hiccup, move around, and open and close their hands. This is the basis of the Dobbs v. Jackson case that seeks to overturn Roe v. Wade and restrict abortions after 15 weeks.  

While many celebrate this provision for life, others are working diligently to implement policies to keep access to abortions readily available. Examples of Uber and Lyft covering legal fees or companies paying travel expenses for employees to get abortions have been discussed. But one rapidly expanding loophole still lurking in the shadows is the newfound access to abortifacient drugs via direct mail that was made possible in 2021 due to telehealth extensions during the Covid-19 lockdowns.  

Abortifacient drugs, mifepristone, misoprostol, and levonorgestrel, are currently authorized before a baby reaches ten weeks’ gestation. But the question that has not been answered is how a doctor can verify gestational age without seeing their patient in person or how they can provide care for health complications that may arise from the drugs. The adage, “where there is a will, there is a way,” rings true as this loophole protects the profits for drug companies and doctors from the SCOTUS ruling, enabling them to collect their dues without seeing or treating their patients. 

Sadly, we are seeing a significant shift in this direction. According to the pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute, 2020 was the first year that more than half (54%) of all abortions performed in the U.S. were done with drugs instead of instruments.  This reality is alarming, but perhaps even more disturbing is that almost every pro-life investor is profiting from these abortifacient drugs through companies they hold in their portfolios. Meaning that those who are advocating for life are unknowingly profiting from death. Let that sink in… Grieve over this, but do not despair. There is grace and mercy for our unknowing involvement.

However, healthy conviction and accountability come with learning the truth, and action is needed for every Christian to remove their investments and profits from companies that are manufacturing, distributing, and financially supporting the products that are responsible for ending the lives of tens of millions of unborn children.  

So, who are these companies? Meet the Abortion Drug “Dirty Dozen” companies leading the charge in manufacturing and distributing the abortifacient drugs mifepristone, misoprostol, and levonorgestrel.  

  1. Johnson & Johnson
  2. Pfizer
  3. Organon
  4. Novartis
  5. Cooper Companies
  6. Teva Pharmaceutical
  7. Bayer
  8. Perrigo Company
  9. Corcept Therapeutics
  10. Endo International
  11. Amphastar Pharmaceuticals
  12. Antares Pharma 

We cannot allow our influential dollars to remain invested in these companies and profit from their products that end life.  

So what can we do?

1. Invest biblically. Screen your investments with Inspire Insight to find out if your 401k and other investments include any company engaging in the abortion industry. If you need help, Inspire Advisors can help give you a free impact report that will compare your current portfolio with a pro-life, biblically aligned equivalent.  

2.Make connections. The abortion industry is not only found in your portfolios. It’s also in non-profit endowments, church retirement plans, and seminary scholarship funds. Are you an alum, donor, or have a professional relationship with a Christian university or ministry endowment? Please help us connect with the right people to start the conversation in transitioning them out. 

3. Magnify the message. Spread the word to your friends, social media connections, church, and local communities. Too few know and understand the need for our investments to glorify God and align with our values. 

4. Pray! Without the Lord, we labor in vain. We need to invoke the King of Kings to go before us, grant us success, and keep us faithful to His cause for His glory! 

It is a tragedy and horror that pro-life Christians are invested in the abortion industry. But we do not have to be. If pro-lifers want to see an end to abortion in our time, we need to put our money where our mouth is. We need to hold ourselves and our institutions accountable to keep the dollars we invest and donate out of the abortion industry and close the doors to this loophole.  

Robert Netzly is the CEO of Inspire Investing and frequent contributor on The Christian Post, FOX, The Wall Street Journal, Bloomberg, The New York Times and other major media. Read more from Robert in his #1 bestselling book Biblically Responsible Investing, available at Amazon.com and other major retailers.

 Twitter.com/robertnetzly  LinkedIn: @Robert_Netzly

Advisory Services are offered through CWM Advisors, LLC dba Inspire, a Registered Investment Adviser with the SEC.

Category:

Law, Political

Tagged with:

Nicole Russell Op-ed: Protecting imprisoned women from men who say they’re women


Commentary By Nicole Russell, Op-ed contributor | Wednesday, May 04, 2022

Read more at https://www.christianpost.com/voices/protecting-imprisoned-women-from-men-who-say-theyre-women.html/

Unsplash/Emiliano Bar

A male inmate housed in a women’s facility at New York’s Rikers Island jail has been sentenced to seven years for raping a female prisoner. In an apparent plea deal, Ramel Blount, 33, who goes by Diamond Blount, pleaded guilty to attempted rape. Blount was housed in the female section of Rikers Island in February 2021, when a 33-year-old female inmate said she was raped in a bathroom after taking a shower.

On top of the seven-year sentence announced Monday, Blount must register as a sex offender.

It’s true that Rikers Island is notorious for being unusually violent, and that violence escalated in 2021. But this particular sexual assault may not have happened if facilities that house criminals did so based on biological sex, not the gender with which they criminals presumably identify. A female inmate in Illinois says this exact scenario happened to her in 2020.

For the past few years, jail and prison facilities such as Rikers Island have been under tremendous pressure to bend to a vocal minority and house male prisoners who identify as female with women. In New York in 2020, Steuben County officials agreed to “sweeping changes to its jail and prison policies” after settling a discrimination lawsuit filed by a transgender inmate.

At the time, the ACLU in New York hailed the settlement as one that “establishes one of the strongest jail or prison policies in the country protecting the rights of transgender, gender-nonconforming, nonbinary, and intersex people in custody.”

“The policy addresses housing placement, safety, access to medical care, name and pronouns use, search procedures, and grooming standards,” the ACLU said.

This is happening in California, too. In 2020, Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, signed legislation known as SB 132, which allows male prisoners who identify as female to be transferred, by a simple request, to a facility for women. Now, women are pushing back to preserve their right to safety and privacy.

The Women’s Liberation Front, which seeks to protect the privacy and equality of women, filed a lawsuit in federal court arguing that California’s SB 132 is unconstitutional and creates an unsafe environment for women, for whom these single-sex facilities exist. One plaintiff in the suit says she was sexually assaulted by an inmate who transferred from a men’s facility. Another plaintiff says she was inappropriately “grabbed.”

One of the biggest reasons that so many conservatives oppose the Equality Act before Congress is that it would open the door to this, and similar situations, nationwide. And few laws would be left to protect the most vulnerable. Under the Equality Act, any place that receives federal funds, from schools to prisons, would be forced to banish single-sex spaces or be liable to discrimination charges.

It’s important to make clear: Most trans-identifying individuals aren’t perverts or assailants-in-waiting. But under these policies, bad actors need only to identify as the opposite sex to gain access to private spaces.

In Alaska, a man claiming to be a woman tried to enter a shelter for battered women. When he was refused, he sued the organization for discrimination under a local law governing sexual orientation and gender identity.

Women serving time in prison or jail still deserve to be treated humanely and with respect. They still have a right to privacy and safety. But, intimidated by a vocal minority, local politicians and officials have buckled under new definitions of sex and gender, showing they are more worried about being sued for discrimination by criminals trying to take advantage of women, than being sued for an assault such as rape.

Discrimination policies should not trump safety and privacy, whether in school or prison.

Originally published at The Daily Signal. 

Nicole Russell is a contributor to The Daily Signal. Her work has appeared in The Atlantic, The New York Times, National Review, Politico, The Washington Times, The American Spectator, and Parents Magazine.

Category:

Law, Political

Tagged with:

Brandon Straka Joins Tucker Carlson: Describes Horrific Treatment He Suffered for Attending J6 Protests and for Starting Hugely Successful Pro-Trump #WalkAway Movement (VIDEO)


Reported By Jim Hoft | Published May 4, 2022

Read more at https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/05/brandon-straka-joins-tucker-carlson-describes-horrific-treatment-suffered-hands-fbi-bidens-doj-misdemeanor-j6-charge-video/

Brandon Straka, the founder and director of popular, WalkAway Campaign, was arrested by federal agents following the January 6, 2021 protests and riot. Brandon did NOT go inside the US Capitol, did not participate in ANY violence, did not encourage violence, did not plan any violence, yet the corrupt and politicized federal government charged him with TWO felonies and a misdemeanor.  After a year of threats, harassment and abuse, Brandon Straka pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor. Brandon Straka was charged with crimes because Brandon Straka is EXTREMELY EFFECTIVE as a grassroots organizer!

Brandon’s story is amazing. After being a dedicated liberal for years and years he started to do a bit of investigating and decided he could no longer support the viciousness and lies of the left. Today over 600,000 Americans have joined Brandon and the #WalkAway movement and have not looked back! And THAT’S WHY Brandon Straka was targeted by the corrupt federal prosecutors for attending the rally on January 6. Brandon is effective. He leads leftists to the light. And once they Walk Away they DON’T walk back!

On Wednesday, October 6, 2021,  Walk Away founder Brandon Straka pled guilty to a Class B misdemeanor for the crime of disorderly conduct inside the US Capitol Grounds on January 6th. After Brandon’s hearing, the demonic media portrayed this as a victory for their cause by proclaiming – Brandon Straka pled guilty for his ROLE “in the Insurrection.”

Brandon was later sentenced to another three months of home arrest and three years of probation.  The government also demanded he give them access to his social media accounts during his probation.  This is wicked abuse.  The US government today is completely corrupt and broken.

On Tuesday night Brandon Straka sat down with Tucker Carlson for an exclusive one-on-one interview.  Brandon described the horrible abuse he received at the hands of his government.

Jim Hoft

Jim Hoft is the founder and editor of The Gateway Pundit, one of the top conservative news outlets in America. Jim was awarded the Reed Irvine Accuracy in Media Award in 2013 and is the proud recipient of the Breitbart Award for Excellence in Online Journalism from the Americans for Prosperity Foundation in May 2016.

Category:

Law, Political

Tagged with:

REPORT: Justice Roberts ‘Likely’ To Order FBI Investigation Into SCOTUS Leak


Reported by DIANA GLEBOVA | ASSOCIATE EDITOR | May 03, 2022

Read more at https://www.conservativereview.com/report-justice-roberts-likely-to-order-fbi-investigation-into-scotus-leak-2657253222.html/

Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts Speaks At University Of Miami
(Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

Chief Supreme Court Justice John Roberts will likely launch an investigation involving the FBI into the SCOTUS leak from the Dobbs abortion case, according to CBS News’ Elizabeth Campbell. The apparent Feb. 10 draft opinion obtained by Politico published Monday shows that the initial majority opinion of the court is poised to strike down the landmark Roe V. Wade decision granting women the right to an abortion. 

“This is an unprecedented leak from SCOTUS. It raises questions about how the institution will ever recover, and how Chief Justice Roberts will respond,” Campbell tweeted.

“Sources tonight tell  [CBS News’ Jan Crawford] he is likely to order a full-blown investigation, involving the FBI, to determine the source,” Campbell added.

This is an unprecedented leak from #SCOTUS. It raises questions about how the institution will ever recover, and how Chief Justice Roberts will respond. Sources tonight tell @JanCBS he is likely to order a full-blown investigation, involving the FBI, to determine the source.

The draft opinion showed that five justices — Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett — voted to overturn, while three — Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan — dissented, according to Politico. Roberts has reportedly not yet made his decision.

“Roe was egregiously wrong from the start,” Alito wrote in the draft opinion, according to the outlet.

“We hold that Roe and Casey must be overruled,” the opinion reportedly continued. “It is time to heed the Constitution and return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives.”

No draft opinion in modern history has ever been leaked while the case was still pending, according to Politico.

Category:

Law, Political

Tagged with:

Mark Levin says Supreme Court Roe v. Wade leak is ‘grave assault’ and warns US ‘institutions are going to collapse’


Reported by SARAH TAYLOR | May 03, 2022

Read more at https://www.theblaze.com/news/mark-levin-supreme-court-leak/

Political commentator Mark Levin said that Monday’s leak of a draft majority opinion is a “grave assault” on the Supreme Court. During Tuesday’s “Fox & Friends,” Levin addressed Monday’s leak of a Supreme Court draft opinion that could potentially overturn 1973’s Roe v. Wade.

The news on Monday evening sparked heavy conversation across social media.

“When you conduct yourself in an utterly lawless way, attacking the institutions of this country, attacking the founding documents of this country, attacking the history of this country, this is what you get: lawlessness,” he insisted during “Fox & Friends.”

He added, “”It’s just a matter of time. All these institutions are going to collapse. This is a grave assault on the Supreme Court.”

Levin recalled a time when he was an intern to late Chief Justice Warren Burger while attending law school and said that he can’t fathom how the leak occurred after having seen the lengths to which the institution went to preserve the integrity of confidentiality.

“I saw how it operated, and I can tell you this institution takes its confidentiality seriously. Why? That’s the coin of the realm,” he said. “They’ve got to be able to talk about ideas freely. They’ve got to be able to discuss this without political pressure. Why do people think these are lifetime appointments?”

The political commentator later added that the Democratic Party is complicit in “destroying this country” and said that they are fighting Republicans every step of the way.

“Of course, the Democrat Party is destroying this country,” he reasoned. “Look at the confirmation process. It started with Bork. The Democrats targeted him under [Sen. Ted] Kennedy and Biden, and it moves on to others, including Clarence Thomas, including Kavanaugh. Republicans don’t treat Democrat nominees this way. They may object to them. When you say the Supreme Court doesn’t look like America, you’re undermining the credibility of the court.”

Category:

Law, Political

Tagged with:

Supreme Court rules in favor of group banned from flying Christian flag at Boston City Hall


Reported By Michael Gryboski, Mainline Church Editor | Monday, May 02, 2022

Read more at https://www.christianpost.com/news/supreme-court-rules-boston-city-hall-cant-ban-christian-flag.html/

U.S. Supreme Court building | Nicole Alcindor/Christian Post

The United States Supreme Court has ruled that city officials in Boston, Massachusetts, were wrong to prohibit a group from flying a Christian flag at city hall. In an opinion released Monday morning in the case of Harold Shurtleff, et al. v. Boston, MA, et al., the high court unanimously ruled to reverse a lower court decision and remand the case back to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit.

Justice Stephen Breyer delivered the court’s opinion, in which he concluded that “the First Amendment prevents [the government] from discriminating against speakers based on their viewpoint.”

At issue, according to the court’s opinion, was whether Boston’s flag policy represented government speech; if it did, then it had the right to reject the Christian flag.

“We conclude that, on balance, Boston did not make the raising and flying of private groups’ flags a form of government speech,” wrote Breyer.

“That means, in turn, that Boston’s refusal to let Shurtleff and Camp Constitution raise their flag based on its religious viewpoint ‘abridg[ed]’ their ‘freedom of speech.’”

Justice Brett Kavanaugh authored a concurring opinion, in which he wrote that “a government does not violate the Establishment Clause merely because it treats religious persons, organizations, and speech equally with secular persons, organizations, and speech in public programs, benefits, facilities, and the like.”

“Under the Constitution, a government may not treat religious persons, religious organizations, or religious speech as second-class,” he added in his brief concurrence.

In 2017, Harold Shurtleff of Camp Constitution asked to fly the Christian flag (which features a cross) outside of city hall on Constitution Day 2017, but his request was rejected by the city. Shurtleff filed suit against the city in response, with him being represented by the Liberty Counsel, a prominent conservative law firm that has handled many religious liberty cases. In February 2020, U.S. District Judge Denise Casper, an appointee of former President Barack Obama, ruled in favor of Boston, and a three-judge panel of the First Circuit unanimously upheld the lower court ruling in January 2021.

Judge Bruce Selya, an appointee of former President Ronald Reagan, wrote the panel opinion, arguing that the “three flags flying in close proximity communicates the symbolic unity of the three flags,” and therefore, it “strains credulity to believe that an observer would partition such a coordinated three-flag display.”

Shurtleff appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, gaining the support of groups including the ACLU, which filed an amicus brief in his support.

“We have long expressed concern about government endorsement of religion, and have sued often to enforce the Establishment Clause,” stated ACLU National Legal Director David Cole last November. “But when the government opens a forum to private speakers generally, as Boston did here, it can’t turn away a speaker simply because it is religious.”  

Follow Michael Gryboski on Twitter or Facebook

Category:

Law

Tagged with:

Court observers believe Chief Justice Roberts just signaled that abortion rights could be overturned


Reported by CHRIS ENLOE | April 29, 2022

Read more at https://www.theblaze.com/news/court-observers-believe-roberts-signals-major-abortion-decision/

Court observers suggested Thursday that Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts has signaled the court will significantly slash abortion rights. In December, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments for Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. The case is centered on a Mississippi abortion law that prohibits abortion beyond 15 weeks of gestation.

At issue is whether “all pre-viability prohibitions on elective abortions are unconstitutional.” The case ultimately challenges the precedent established by Planned Parenthood v. Casey, which both upheld the right to elective abortions under Roe v. Wade and affirmed the unfettered legality of abortion within the first 24 weeks of pregnancy.

On Thursday, the Supreme Court issued a 6-3 decision in Cummings v. Premier Rehab Keller, ruling that “emotional distress damages are not recoverable in a private action to enforce either the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 or the Affordable Care Act.”

The case is completely unrelated to abortion. But what is interesting, however, is who wrote the majority opinion: Roberts. This matters because the court heard oral arguments for nine cases in December; thus each justice was most likely assigned to write the opinion of one case. Therefore, if Roberts wrote the opinion in this case, it suggests he is not writing the opinion for Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization.

“Roberts’ authorship of this opinion suggests (but does not guarantee) that he is NOT writing the abortion decision. Otherwise, he would have two majority opinions from the December sitting and some other justice would have none,” observed Bloomberg News Supreme Court reporter Greg Stohr.

Michigan Law School assistant professor Leah Litman pointed out the significance of this: Because Roberts supports narrowing abortion access but not overturning Roe v. Wade completely, the fact that he may not have been assigned the Dobbs opinion hints that a consequential ruling is forthcoming, probably a rolling back of abortion rights.

Stohr, however, cautioned against rushing to assumptions, because Justice Neil Gorsuch authored two opinions for cases the court heard in November. Still, the distribution of opinion-writing is normally balanced.

The Wall Street Journal editorial board theorized recently that Roberts may attempt to recruit at least one conservative justice to uphold the Mississippi law without a wholesale nullification of abortion rights. It has happened once, when Gorsuch joined Roberts and the court’s left-leaning justices to protect LGBT rights, but whether it will happen again remains to be seen.

For what it’s worth, the Journal predicted the outcome of Dobbs will be a 5-4 ruling with Roberts joining the court’s left-leaning justices and Justice Samuel Alito writing the majority opinion.

Category:

Law, Political

Tagged with:

Daniel Horowitz Op-ed: TN legislature passes bill to finally lock up violent criminals


Commentary by DANIEL HOROWITZ | April 26, 2022

Read more at https://www.conservativereview.com/horowitz-tn-legislature-passes-bill-to-finally-lock-up-violent-criminals-theblaze-2657222281.html/

In recent years, sentencing for violent criminals has been like common core math. You start out with a sum of 20 years, for example, but somehow even the worst career offenders wind up turning 20 years into 8 years’ time served. Tennessee has become the first state to finally implement truth in sentencing to make sure that a sentence is actually served.

Last week, after a decade of red states promoting the Koch/Soros jailbreak agenda, the Tennessee legislature put victims first and passed true criminal justice reform. HB2656 / SB2248, as amended, requires people convicted of one of nine criminal offense categories to serve 100% of their sentences – no exceptions. This means no good time credits or parole are available for those found guilty of homicide, vehicular homicide, attempted first-degree murder, robbery, aggravated kidnapping, aggravated burglary, or carjacking.

Additionally, those found guilty of 20 slightly lower-level but still significant crimes, such as aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, aggravated robbery, burglary, and arson, would still be eligible for good time credits, but only after serving 85% of the sentence.

This bill has reversed the decade-long tide of weak-on-crime legislation percolating through red-state legislatures. For years, we’ve been told that there is somehow an over-incarceration problem with people serving draconian sentences for nothingburger crimes. The reality is that even the most violent career criminals often serve a few months here and there and constantly get out to reoffend. With the growing crime wave in cities like Nashville and Memphis, the role of the de-incarceration agenda is hard to deny.

To begin with, most of the sentencing these days is very lenient. For example, in 2019, out of 17,355 felony convictions in Minnesota, only 3,612 were fully sentenced in accordance with the sentencing guidelines. Once you add all the parole and good time credit programs to that, even the worst career criminals are only serving a fraction of the sentence. This doesn’t even account for all of the ways they plead down throughout their criminal career, thereby incurring a sentence well below the threat level of their criminal proclivities. At a minimum, this bill ensures that violent and dangerous criminals will at least serve the entire sentence they are given. This bill should serve as a model in every other state, as the crime wave continues to grow.

The American Conservative Union, which hosts the annual CPAC gathering for alleged conservatives, vigorously opposed this bill because it apparently still believes there are too many, rather than too few, criminals behind bars. However, no sane person can believe we need to let more people out of prison.

Those who think we don’t have an under-incarceration problem should consider the following statistics from the FBI in 2019. Just 61.4% of the 14,325 homicides, 32.9% of the 124,817 rapes, 30.5% of the 239,643 armed robberies, and 52.3% of the 726,778 aggravated assaults were “cleared” cases. That means that in 5,529 murder cases, 83,752 rape cases, 166,552 armed robbery cases, and 346,673 aggravated assault cases, there was no arrest. Hence, just in the four violent categories alone, there were over 758,000 violent crime cases that went without a resolution just in one year.

What about duration of incarceration? According to BJS, among the prisoners released from state prison in 2018 – before some of the recent “reform” – they only served, on average, 44% of their sentences. Even for murder, it was only 58% of their sentences. The median length of time served for murder was less than 10 years in 30% of the cases and was more than 20 years in only 42%. The median time served for rape was less than 10 years in 64% of prisoners. In total, 71% of those serving time for a violent crime category served less than five years, and nearly half served less than two years.

In reality, the bromide of “criminal justice reform” for “low-level, nonviolent offenders” was always a ruse. Now groups like the ACU openly admit they oppose even truth in sentencing, much less enhanced sentencing, for the most violent and career criminals.

The truth in sentencing bill passed the Senate 20-6 and the House 86-9 with bipartisan support and now heads to Governor Bill Lee’s desk. The bill was sponsored by House Speaker Cameron Sexton, who made a rare speech from the well of the House chamber to present his bill. This legislation piggybacks on last year’s truth in sentencing law, which closed the early release loopholes for crimes traditionally committed against women and children, such as rape and child abuse.

Reminiscent of some of the debates over COVID, proponents of weak sentencing are demanding to see “studies” showing more jail time leads to less crime. Speaker Sexton believes no such study is needed when common sense dictates fewer criminals on the street equals less crime. “This solution creates the toughest penalties in America for violent criminals; it also establishes a firm line for criminals not to cross,” said the speaker in a statement to TheBlaze. “If they do, punishment will be swift and severe under our new law. I do not need a fancy study to tell me more bad guys in jail with longer sentences reduces crime.”

It is shocking how red-state governors and legislatures have failed to pursue these ideas until now. Even blue-state governors are now vulnerable to defeat because of the growing crime wave. A recent Gallup poll showed that 53% of Americans worry a “great deal” about crime and it ranks as the third most important issue on the minds of voters. A Pew Research poll showed that crime is the number-one issue among black voters.

With surging crime in cities like Memphis and Nashville, Tennessee had the sixth highest murder rate in 2020. In both 2020 and 2021, Memphis set new homicide records and now boasts the ninth highest homicide rate in the country and is ranked the most violent metro area in the country. The homicide rate in Tennessee has gone from a low of 5.2 per 100,000 in 2013 to 9.6 in 2020. Motor vehicle thefts have spiked from 183 per 100,000 to over 300. Even smaller cities like Chattanooga have become increasingly dangerous.

Kudos to the Tennessee legislature for recognizing that weak-on-crime policies plague red states just as much as blue states and need to be rectified. Along with the passage of robust medical freedom bills and a new ivermectin over-the-counter bill, the Tennessee legislature is on its way to forging an agenda of freedom and public safety that should be emulated in every red state. If every GOP supermajority state would use its power to its fullest, we wouldn’t have to wait for ineffective GOP majorities in the irremediably broken federal system to make a difference.

Category:

Law, Political

Tagged with:

Supreme Court debates if football coach’s on-field prayer is religious exercise or ‘coercion’


Reported By Michael Gryboski, Mainline Church Editor | Monday, April 25, 2022

Read more at https://www.christianpost.com/news/supreme-court-debates-right-for-football-coach-to-pray-on-field.html/

Demonstrators gathered to pray outside the Supreme Court in Washington, D.C. in support of football coach Joe Kennedy on April 25, 2022. | The Christian Post/Nicole Alcindor

A high school football coach fired for praying on the field after games had his case argued before the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday, with justices debating whether his religious practices were coercive or constitutionally protected.

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the case of Kennedy v. Bremerton School District, with coach Joe Kennedy being represented by former U.S. Solicitor General Paul Clement.

Coach Joe Kennedy at the Bremerton High School football field. | Courtesy of First Liberty Institute

In 2015, Kennedy, an assistant coach at Bremerton High School in Washington state, was punished and eventually fired by the Bremerton School District for praying on the 50-yard line after games. In his opening argument, Clement said that the coach’s prayers were “doubly protected by the Free Exercise and Free Speech Clauses” of the First Amendment of the Constitution.

“When the school district fired him for that fleeting religious exercise out of endorsement concerns, it not only violated the First Amendment, but it ignored a veritable wall of this court’s precedents that make it clear that a school does not endorse private religious speech just because it fails to censor it,” said Clement, who served as the U.S. solicitor general and later acting attorney general during the George W. Bush administration.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor pressed Clement about when a school official’s religious practices can be considered private and when they are considered public, such as if a teacher is reading the Bible aloud before class begins. 

Clement answered that if a teacher read her Bible “before the bell” or “after the bell” and did so “either silently or barely audibly,” that would be protected as “private speech.”

Sotomayor argued that a teacher is “on duty” while remaining “in the classroom” and their actions could be curtailed by their employer. Sotomayor brought in the example of Kennedy, asking why he should not be considered “on duty” while remaining on the football field after games.

“The school has a fair amount of flexibility to determine what the duties of the coach are,” replied Clement. “Here, they did not say that his duties were an all-encompassing supervisory role.”

“It’s in the record, and I think undisputed, that the coach could do other things, other private things of a comparable amount of time because this is a fleeting religious exercise.”

Justice Elena Kagan expressed concern with Kennedy’s prayers putting “a kind of undue pressure, a kind of coercion on students to participate in religious activities when they may not wish to.” Clement countered that the school district did not cite “coercion concerns” when they punished Kennedy years ago but instead expressed concern over “endorsement” issues.

Justice Neil Gorsuch referenced the 2000 case of Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe. The high court ruled that a Texas town’s practice of having students holding prayers over a loudspeaker before high school football games was unconstitutional. Clement said Kennedy’s practice was “radically different” from the situation in the Santa Fe case, noting that the loudspeaker and the process of determining who gave prayers involved a more blatant example of government speech.

Clement compared Kennedy’s actions to professional athletes who cross themselves before a play or kneel with thanks to God after scoring a touchdown, noting that these were recognized as individual actions.

Richard B. Katskee, legal director at Americans United for Separation of Church and State, presented oral arguments on behalf of the school district.

“No one doubts that public school employees can have quiet prayers by themselves at work, even if students can see,” said Katskee. “If that were the issue, there wouldn’t be a case here because the district allowed that. But that wasn’t good enough for Mr. Kennedy. He insisted on audible prayers at the 50-yard line with students.”

Katskee said that “some of these kids were just 14 years old.”

“Mr. Kennedy’s actions pressured them to pray and also divided the coaching staff, sparked vitriol against school officials, and led to the field being stormed and students getting knocked down.”

Justice Clarence Thomas asked Katskee whether a high school football coach taking a knee during the national anthem to protest racism was also an unacceptable form of government speech. Katskee answered that if, for example, “the coach goes to the center of the field in front of everyone during the national anthem,” then it is “absolutely” constitutes “government speech.”

Thomas asked for a clarification on how it was government speech, with Katskee responding that it was a “public act and public statement” and could not be considered a private action.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh asked Katskee if a coach was allowed to do the sign of the cross before a game, to which Katskee replied that “if the coach is doing it while not making himself the center of attention at the center of the field, it’s perfectly fine.”

“I don’t know how we could write an opinion that would draw a line based on not making yourself the center of attention as the head coach of a game,” Kavanaugh countered.

Demonstrators gathered with signs outside the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington, D.C. in support of football coach Joe Kennedy, who lost his job after kneeling on the field pray. Kennedy’s case was heard by the high court on Monday, April 25, 2022. | Nicole Alcindor/ Christian Post

In 2015, Bremerton officials suspended and then fired Kennedy for his practice of praying on the football field after games, with the coach suing the school district in 2016. A three-judge panel of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against Kennedy in 2017, with the Supreme Court initially refusing to intervene in 2019. In 2020, Judge Ronald Leighton ruled in favor of the school district, concluding that it had a right to restrict religious expression to prevent government endorsement of religion. In March 2021, a 9th Circuit panel again ruled against Kennedy, with Judge Milan D. Smith Jr. authoring the unanimous court opinion in favor of Bremerton.

“BSD’s efforts to prevent the conduct did not violate Kennedy’s constitutional rights, nor his rights under Title VII,” wrote Smith.

“In sum, there is no doubt that an objective observer, familiar with the history of Kennedy’s practice, would view his demonstrations as BSD’s endorsement of a particular faith. For that reason, BSD had adequate justification for its treatment of Kennedy.”

Kennedy again appealed to the Supreme Court, which announced in January that it would hear arguments in the case.

Follow Michael Gryboski on Twitter or Facebook

Category:

Law, Political

Tagged with:

Breaking: Court temporarily blocks Biden admin from dropping Title 42 restrictions at the border


Reported by CARLOS GARCIA | April 25, 2022

Read more at https://www.conservativereview.com/breaking-court-temporarily-blocks-biden-admin-from-dropping-title-42-restrictions-at-the-border-2657212527.html/

Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt said Monday that a court had issued a temporary restraining order against the Biden administration plan to end Title 42 restrictions at the border. The policy had been previously scheduled to end on May 23.

“In a lawsuit originally filed by Missouri, Louisiana, and Arizona, our Office just obtained a temporary restraining order to keep Title 42 in place,” tweeted Schmitt.

“This is a huge victory for border security, but the fight continues on,” he added.

Title 42 prevents those seeking asylum at the border from entering the country to await their documents being processed. The policy was originally implemented under the Trump administration because of the threat posed by migrants carrying coronavirus into the country. Critics of the policy claim it was motived by racism and xenophobia against migrants seeking refugee status.

The Centers for Disease Control announced that the drop in coronavirus cases and hospitalizations no longer necessitated the restrictions. The Biden administration has used the assessment by the CDC to justify ending Title 42 despite criticism that it will almost certainly lead to a massive spike in illegal immigration. In Oct. 2021, Biden administration officials estimated that as many as 400,000 new migrants could attempt to cross the border in a month if Title 42 had been rescinded at that time.

The temporary restraining order prevents the Biden administration from acting before a May 13 hearing about the policy.

Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich also celebrated the order on Monday.“I am so proud of the lawyers from our office who just got a Temporary Restraining Order to keep Title 42 in place,” tweeted Brnovich. “We will continue to fight the Biden administration’s open border policies.”

Here’s more about the order against Biden:

Federal judge plans to block termination of Title 42www.youtube.com

Category:

Law, Political

Tagged with:

Letter: No, Hillary Clinton Can’t Try To Hide 2016 Oppo Research From The Special Counsel


REPORTED BY: MARGOT CLEVELAND | APRIL 25, 2022

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/04/25/letter-no-hillary-clinton-cant-try-to-hide-2016-oppo-research-from-the-special-counsel/

Hillary Clinton

‘The Government should not permit HFA and the DNC to adopt conflicting positions in different proceedings, depending on the federal agency against which they are litigating.’

Author Margot Cleveland profile

MARGOT CLEVELAND

VISIT ON TWITTER@PROFMJCLEVELAND

MORE ARTICLES

The Hillary Clinton campaign and Democratic National Committee’s claims of attorney-client privilege in the Michael Sussmann criminal case may constitute a breach of the settlement agreements they entered with the Federal Election Commission, according to a letter sent to Special Counsel John Durham’s office on Friday. That letter, obtained first by The Federalist, followed the flurry of motions to intervene filed in the special counsel’s pending false statement case against Sussmann. Hillary for America, the DNC, tech executive Rodney Joffe, Sussmann’s former law firm of Perkins and Coie, and the investigative firm Fusion GPS all filed motions last week asking the court for permission to argue against disclosing documents to the special counsel based on their claims of attorney-client privilege.

The special counsel’s office had previously filed a motion arguing that the court should review 38 documents withheld in response to grand jury subpoenas to assess whether the secreted material truly qualified as protected by attorney-client privilege. The day after Sussmann responded to that motion, opposing any such in camera review by the judge, his fellow Spygate hoaxers sought to join in Sussmann’s efforts to keep the documents concealed.

After the Hillary for America and the DNC’s motions to intervene hit the Sussmann docket, The Coolidge Reagan Foundation penned a three-page letter to Durham and Assistant Special Counsel Jonathan Algor. That letter alerted the special counsel’s office to key facts about the FEC’s recent decision to fine the political groups in relation to a complaint the foundation had filed with the FEC. That complaint charged Hillary for America and the DNC with using the “law firm, Perkins Coie, to hire and funnel over $1 million to ‘outside research firms’ such as Fusion GPS ‘to perform potentially sensitive, controversial, or politically embarrassing’ opposition research into Donald Trump.”

The FEC complaint, filed in 2018, alleged that “the research was not ‘for the purpose of assisting Perkins Coie in providing legal advice,’” but to further the “political and campaign-related goals” of the organizations. The foundation also claimed in its FEC complaint that because the work was not “for the purpose of providing legal advice or assisting with impending or potential litigation, it was not covered by attorney-client, work-product, or other privileges.”

Significantly, as the foundation noted in its April 22, 2022 letter to the special counsel’s office, the FEC had “found probable cause to believe” the political organizations had misreported the purpose of certain disbursements. The FEC reached that conclusion based on a memorandum prepared by the FEC’s Office of General Counsel, but under controlling regulations that memorandum “will not be made public for another week,” the letter explained.

Foundation counsel Dan Backer added that while the memorandum is not yet public, the special counsel’s office would likely be able to obtain it directly from the FEC. That memorandum also will provide Durham’s team further details on the FEC’s investigation and fact-finding that may be useful to the special counsel in the Sussmann litigation, noted the letter.

In Friday’s letter, Backer also highlighted Hillary for America and the DNC’s commitment in their settlement agreement with the FEC to “not further contest the Commission’s finding of probable cause to believe” that the political organizations had “falsely reported their payments through Perkins Coie to Fusion GPS as being for legal services.” In contrast, in the Sussmann case, Hillary for America and the DNC “are nevertheless asserting materials generated by Fusion GPS and provided to Perkins Coie are protected by attorney-client privilege and work-product doctrine,” the letter stressed.

“The Government should not permit HFA and the DNC to adopt conflicting positions in different proceedings, depending on the federal agency against which they are litigating,” the foundation’s letter concluded, suggesting the trial court may find those breaches of the settlement agreement “material in ruling on any privilege claims.”

Whether the special counsel will follow the foundation’s suggestion and obtain the memorandum prepared by the FEC’s Office of General Counsel before the judge in the Sussmann case rules on the Clinton campaign and the DNC’s assertions of attorney-client privilege is yet to be seen. But what is clear is that the special counsel’s office intends to ensure the jury knows that both the Clinton campaign and the DNC believe communications relevant to Sussmann’s efforts to peddle the Alfa Bank hoax are protected by attorney-client privilege.

On Friday we also learned just how the special counsel hopes to do that—by having representatives of both the Clinton campaign and DNC testify at trial. That revelation appeared in a response brief Sussmann’s attorneys filed last week, wherein the defense team noted that they had just learned that the special counsel had issued trial subpoenas to both the Clinton campaign and the DNC. According to Sussmann’s legal team, the special counsel requested “the testimony of witnesses” from those political organizations “regarding the assertion of attorney-client privilege in front of the jury.” Sussmann is now also seeking to exclude that testimony and claims that both the Clinton campaign and the DNC will likewise seek to quash the subpoenas.

The irony in all of this, of course, is that the more Sussmann, the Clinton campaign, and the DNC hide behind the claims of attorney-client privilege, the more it appears that, yes, Sussmann pushed the Alfa Bank hoax, including during his meeting with FBI General Counsel James Baker, on behalf of the Clinton campaign. The FEC’s conclusion that probable cause existed to support the finding that the Clinton campaign and DNC had falsely reported fees paid to Fusion GPS as legal fees only further supports that conclusion.

The question Friday’s letter to the special counsel’s office raises, however, is whether the Clinton campaign and the DNC’s settlement agreement with the FEC, in fact, forecloses their claims of privilege in the Sussmann case. Backer believes it does, telling The Federalist, “The Clinton Campaign and the DNC want to have their cake and eat it too, but they cannot simultaneously say they won’t contest the reasoning behind the FEC fine and settlement agreement and also run to federal court and say, ‘No, no, no, everything we do is privileged.’”

That, however, is precisely what Hillary for America and DNC are doing, leading one to wonder if the real issue in play is not attorney-client privilege, but the privilege of being a Democrat.

Margot Cleveland is The Federalist’s senior legal correspondent. She is also a contributor to National Review Online, the Washington Examiner, Aleteia, and Townhall.com, and has been published in the Wall Street Journal and USA Today. Cleveland is a lawyer and a graduate of the Notre Dame Law School, where she earned the Hoynes Prize—the law school’s highest honor. She later served for nearly 25 years as a permanent law clerk for a federal appellate judge on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. Cleveland is a former full-time university faculty member and now teaches as an adjunct from time to time. As a stay-at-home homeschooling mom of a young son with cystic fibrosis, Cleveland frequently writes on cultural issues related to parenting and special-needs children. Cleveland is on Twitter at @ProfMJCleveland. The views expressed here are those of Cleveland in her private capacity.

Category:

Law, Political

15-year-old boy in DC arrested for allegedly committing 3 armed robberies in 8 minutes


Reported by PHIL SHIVER | April 25, 2022

Read more at https://www.theblaze.com/news/15-year-old-3-robberies-8-minutes/

Police in Washington, D.C., have arrested a 15-year-old boy who they say is responsible for going on a violent and extremely rapid crime spree in the nation’s capital earlier this year. The juvenile male, who has not been identified by law enforcement on account of his age, is suspected of committing three armed robberies — including a carjacking — in roughly eight minutes in January. In a news release, the D.C. Metropolitan Police Department claimed the boy didn’t act alone and that detectives are still searching for additional suspects in the crime spree.

In each of the three incidents, the gang of suspected offenders approached victims brandishing handguns and threatening injury before making off with several personal items, which included four iPhones and a Hyundai Sonata sedan. After committing the first two robberies, the suspects fled the scene and quickly moved on to commit another armed robbery.

According to police, the crimes took place on Jan. 23. The first occurred at approximately 1:20 p.m. near 14th and T Street, Northwest; the second at 1:24 p.m. on the 1800 block of 10th Street, Northwest; and the third at 1:28 p.m. on the 1500 block of 8th Street, Northwest.

The juvenile male from southeast D.C. was reportedly arrested and taken into custody on Thursday, April 21. It was not immediately clear what charges he would face. The news comes as juvenile crimes continue to plague Washington, D.C., and many other communities around the country. In the nation’s capital, youth carjackings in particular have been on the rise over the last year.

Last March, a botched carjacking that resulted in the gruesome death of an elderly Uber Eats driver drew national headlines after it was discovered that the culprits were a 13-year-old girl and 15-year-old girl. The girls reportedly used at least one stun gun in attempt to seize the car. They struggled with the victim, 66-year-old Mohammad Anwar, swerving through the streets, but eventually struck a curb, sending Anwar flying from the vehicle. The man’s death was caught on video.

At least on this case, it appears that law enforcement is hoping to clamp down on juvenile perpetrators of violent crimes.

Police have requested the public’s help in identifying additional suspects in the January armed robbery incidents and are offering a reward of up to $10,000 to anyone who provides information that leads to the arrest and conviction of those responsible.

Category:

Law

Tagged with:

Dartmouth College charges Republican club $3,600 security fee for canceled Andy Ngo event



Reported by CHRIS PANDOLFO | April 20, 2022

Read more at https://www.theblaze.com/news/dartmouth-college-charges-republican-club-3600-security-fee-for-canceled-andy-ngo-event/

Three months ago, Dartmouth College in New Hampshire canceled a College Republicans event featuring journalist Andy Ngo in response to violent threats made by Antifa activists and “concerning information” the school claimed it received from Hanover police. Now, the school is insisting that Dartmouth College Republicans pay $3,600 in security fees for the canceled event and warning that failure to pay the fees will result in the club being unable to request further funds from the school.

On Tuesday, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education sent a letter to Dartmouth College demanding that the school “immediately rescind the security fee charge” and permit the College Republicans chapter to request funding to host future events.

“Forcing the group to shoulder these security costs — based on detractors’ disruption at no fault of the College Republicans — and refusing to fund future College Republicans events until these exorbitant fees are paid, infringes the expressive and associational rights Dartmouth promises to its students,” FIRE’s Sabrina Conza wrote to Dartmouth President Philip J. Hanlon.

The planned event with Ngo in January was moved online after his physical visit to campus was canceled. At the time, Dartmouth College claimed that it had received unspecified “concerning information” from Hanover police “regarding safety issues” for the event. In response to requests from FIRE for clarification about why the in-person event was canceled, the school said it was “deeply concerned about the credible threats to participant safety shared by local law enforcement” before the event with Ngo was scheduled to begin.

However, FIRE also requested clarification from the Hanover police, which shared public records and a letter from the police chief stating that law enforcement “did not make a recommendation to Dartmouth College regarding the January 20th event.”

The letter from Chief of Police Charles B. Dennis said that “the information and concerns we had received from student organizers, event organizers, the speaker, open-source information available online referencing the event, and information through law enforcement channels was credible and caused us concern for the safety of those attending the event, protesting the event, as well as our community members.”

“With the information we had, we were operationally prepared as best we could to handle the event and protest,” Dennis said.

In a statement to Inside Higher Ed, a spokesperson for Dartmouth College affirmed the school’s support for “freedom of expression and dissent.”

The school said that student organizations are responsible for event-related security costs and said that “leaders of the college Republican club were aware of their responsibility for security fees for the event and received an estimate in advance, with enough time to submit a funding request for these costs. They did not request this funding. The club was also aware of the possibility that the event might need to be adjusted to address safety concerns expressed by the organizers themselves.”

Category:

Education, Law, Political

Tagged with:

Federal judge throws out CDC’s public transit mask mandate


Reported by CHRIS PANDOLFO | April 18, 2022

Read more at https://www.theblaze.com/news/federal-judge-throws-out-cdcs-public-transit-mask-mandate/

A federal judge in Florida on Monday declared the Biden administration’s mask mandate for public transportation unlawful.

U.S. District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle, who was appointed by former President Donald Trump, ruled that the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention exceeded its statutory authority by imposing masking requirements on airplanes, airports, and other forms of public transportation and transportation hubs. Mizelle wrote in a 59-page opinion that the agency did not follow proper procedure in issuing the masking order and failed to adequately explain its decisions.

“Because ‘our system does not permit agencies to act unlawfully even in pursuit of desirable ends,’ the Court declares unlawful and vacates the Mask Mandate,” the judge wrote.

The decision comes just days after the CDC extended the mask mandate for an additional two weeks, citing concerns over rising coronavirus cases cased by the BA.2 Omicron subvariant of the virus. The mandate is now set to expire May 3.

When the CDC extended the mask mandate for the fifth time last week, the agency said that the BA.2 subvariant is now the dominant coronavirus strain circulating in the U.S.

“Since early April, there have been increases in the 7-day moving average of cases in the U.S. The CDC Mask Order remains in effect while CDC assesses the potential impact of the rise of cases on severe disease, including hospitalizations and deaths, and healthcare system capacity,” the agency said in a news release.

The CDC and the Transportation Security Administration put masking requirements in place in January 2021, in response to an executive order from newly inaugurated President Joe Biden. Before Biden’s order, U.S. airlines and other forms of public transportation had voluntarily adopted masking rules in accordance with COVID-19 pandemic guidance from the CDC.

In recent months, the masking requirements for public transportation have become controversial as pandemic case numbers have fallen and many COVID-19 restrictions on other industries have been lifted. The CDC adjusted its masking guidance in February to permit about 70% of Americans to forgo face masks indoors because they lived in areas where the threat from the virus was low or moderate. As of March, all statewide mask mandates in the country have been lifted, with Hawaii being the last state to do so.

CDC officials have received widespread criticism for permitting indoor workplaces, restaurants, entertainment venues, and other places where large number of people gather to drop masking requirements while keeping restrictions in place for public transportation like airplanes.

The lawsuit to end the mask mandate was brought by the Health Freedom Defense Fund and two other individuals.

Category:

Law, Political

Tagged with:

Democratic mega-donor Ed Buck sentenced to 30 years for injecting gay black men with meth that killed them


Reported by PAUL SACCA | April 15, 2022

Read more at https://www.theblaze.com/news/ed-buck-sentenced-prison-drugs/

Democratic mega-donor Ed Buck was sentenced to 30 years in federal prison for his role in the overdose deaths of two men at his apartment in West Hollywood, California. Last year, Buck was found guilty of plying men with drugs during sexual encounters, which led to the overdose deaths of two black men – Gemelle Moore and Timothy Dean.

Buck, 67, lured vulnerable black men – many suffering from homelessness, addiction, and/or poverty – to his home for sex sessions and to inject them with methamphetamine and drug them with sedatives such as gamma hydroxybutyric acid and clonazepam, federal prosecutors wrote in a sentencing memorandum. Buck reportedly used social media sites, dating websites, escort services, and referrals from prior victims to find new men. Buck allegedly would even pay a finder’s fee for referrals.

“Prosecutors allege that Buck caused the deaths as a result of his ‘fetish’ for injecting men with increasing doses of methamphetamine until they became comatose,” KABC-TV reported.

The Los Angeles Times reported, “For nearly a decade, the wealthy, white Buck lured young black men at the lowest points in their lives — homeless, addicted, resorting to subsistence-level sex work — into what he called ‘party and play’ sessions.”

“Buck used his money and privilege to exploit the wealth and power imbalances between himself and his victims, who were unhoused, destitute, and/or struggling with addiction,” assistant U.S. attorney Chelsea Norell stated in a court filing. “He spent thousands of dollars on drugs and party and play sessions that destroyed lives and bred insidious addictions.”

“Buck’s lack of remorse is aptly captured in one image: As he was hiding out in a hotel, evading arrest for Gemmel Moore’s death, he was injecting Dane Brown, another young black man, with back-to-back slams of methamphetamine,” Norell added. “Brown sat on the couch, resigned to the same fate as Moore and Dean, when he heard his deceased mother cry out to him, ‘Get up, Dane.'”

Gemelle Moore, 26, was found naked on a mattress in the living room with a “male pornography movie playing on the television” on June 27, 2017, according to the coroner’s report. Investigators also discovered sex toys, syringes, and “clear plastic bags with suspected methamphetamine in a tool box roll-cabinet in the living room,” the report stated.

Moore’s mother – LaTisha Nixon – wrote a letter to the court calling for Buck to receive the maximum sentence.

“All I can think about is how my son died naked on a mattress with no love around him,” Nixon said. “No one to hold his hand or tell him good things.”

On Jan. 7, 2019, another black man was found dead at Buck’s home. Timothy Dean, 55, died of a methamphetamine overdose.

“In text conversations with multiple friends in which they discussed Moore’s death, Dean described him as a ‘horrible, horrible man,’ ‘the f***ing devil,’ and mused ‘this might be it for Ed Buck,'” the Daily Mail reported.

“A search of the Internet Adult Film Database shows that Dean worked as a gay porn actor for about a decade between 2007 and 2016, appearing in 26 productions under the pseudonym ‘Hole Hunter,'” according to Pink News.

Buck was a big-dollar donor to the Democratic Party.

The New York Times reported, “Mr. Buck was a longtime activist who had donated at least $116,000 over his lifetime to Democratic candidates and groups.”

Ed Buck sentenced to 30 years in prison for overdose deathswww.youtub

Category:

Law, Political

Tagged with:

Ann Coulter Op-ed: In Historic First, 5’5″, 130-lb Woman Confirmed to Supreme Court


Commentary by Ann Coulter | Posted: Apr 13, 2022

Read more at https://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2022/04/13/in-historic-first-55-130lb-woman-confirmed-to-supreme-court—p–n2605868/

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com, and WhatDidYouSay.org.

In Historic First, 5'5", 130-lb Woman Confirmed to Supreme Court

Source: AP Photo/Andrew Harnik

Weird that the media didn’t cite Ketanji Brown Jackson’s height and weight as her most important characteristics. When it came to THE FIRST BLACK WOMAN ON THE SUPREME COURT, it was all about her race. But after a guy shot up a New York City subway car this week, the last thing the media wanted to tell us was his race. For more than three hours after the attack, we got urgent alerts: Suspect at large! Police request public’s help! Be on the alert for a male, about 5’8″, 160 lbs.”

In this particular case, the media’s rule of never telling us the suspect’s race (unless he’s white) was more deranged than usual. This wasn’t a carjacking. It wasn’t a shooting at a block party. It wasn’t an attack on an Asian or Jew. This crime had all the earmarks of a terror attack — smoke bombs, fireworks, a gas mask, and about a dozen people shot while trapped in a subway car. The police desperately needed the public’s help, but most people were looking for a Middle Easterner.

At least we knew it wasn’t a white guy! If it had been, reporters would have worn out the “W” on their computer keyboards. There would have been rampant speculation that it was a Proud Boy, as top administration officials reminded us that “white supremacy is the most lethal threat to the homeland today. Not ISIS, not al-Qaida — white supremacists.” (President Joe Biden June 2, 2021)

We’re always told “wokeness” is just about being polite and that those who ridicule it are trying to “discredit the claims of traditionally marginalized groups for respect.” (Thomas Zimmer, history professor, Georgetown University) Or they are engaging in “white backlash.” (Seth Cotlar, history professor, Willamette University)

[SIDEBAR: Don’t go to college, kids!]

No, wokeness is real. And it can get us killed — when, for example, off the top of my head, a murderous psychopath is on the run and the media refuse to tell us what he looks like.

At the New York Police Department’s first press conference on the subway attack, Police Commissioner Keechant Sewell came up with an all-new circumlocution to convey the relevant information without saying “black male.” She said: “… we will describe him as an individual, he is being reported as a male black.”

“A male black”! That’s so much better than “black male” when identifying a criminal.

By the time of the evening press conference, Sewell had settled on an even dumber description, calling him “a dark-skinned male.” Great, so now we’re back to looking for a Middle Easterner. Or possibly Hispanic. Maybe South Asian or mixed race. Definitely NOT “black male” (or “male black”).

The NYPD must have spent all day crafting that new euphemism, because “dark-skinned male” was the exact phrase used minutes later by the chief of detectives, James Essig. “Black” is OUT. “Dark-skinned” is IN.

Biden Appoints First Dark-Skinned Woman (whatever the hell that is) to Supreme Court!

No, “black” is fine, provided we’re talking about THE FIRST BLACK FEMALE SUPREME COURT JUSTICE, or THE FIRST BLACK FEMALE POLICE COMMISSIONER. Such as … Commissioner Sewell herself!

— “One of Mr. Adams’ first appointments was to name Keechant Sewell, chief of detectives in Nassau County, as the first Black woman to head the NYPD.” (The Christian Science Monitor)

— “New York’s incoming mayor just made history by appointing a Black woman to run the nation’s largest police department …” (New York Daily News)

— “This is truly historic. We heard that word a lot, but it’s 176 years of the NYPD. You’re the first woman, the first black woman to lead the force.” (CNN’s Jim Sciutto to Sewell)

A black person becoming a Supreme Court justice or police commissioner makes black people feel good about themselves! But a black man being identified as the perpetrator of a heinous crime makes black people feel bad about themselves. Therefore, you can’t say it.

As is well known, the sine qua non of a well-run society is factoring in people’s feelings when reporting important events. And if New York City is not running like a top, then I don’t know what your definition of “running like a top” is.

Instead of subway cameras capturing clear photos of the homicidal brute and being broadcast out within minutes of the attack, hours later, the police were climbing up ladders to physically inspect the cameras. They weren’t working.

New York’s Metropolitan Transportation Authority operates the cameras, but they’ve been VERY busy promoting diversity. Evidently, “Is our equipment working?” has not come up.

Julio Rosas

Here’s the MTA’s summary of the last meeting:

3rd Quarter 2021 Report:

“The Department of Diversity and Civil Rights will present 3rd quarter 2021 update on MTA Agency-wide EEO and M/W/DBE and SDVOB contract compliance activities.

“Status Report on MTA Inter-Agency M/W/DBE and SDVOB Task Force. The Department of Diversity and Civil Rights report will address progress made by the Task Force to improve M/W/DBE and SDVOB participation. Master Page # 6 of 108 — Diversity Committee Meeting 9/15/2021

“2022 Diversity Committee Work Plan. The Department of Diversity and Civil Rights will present an updated Diversity Committee Work Plan for 2022.”

Another confidence-inspiring development: The New York Times reports that immediately after the shooting, “Toward the front of the train, three victims were being attended to by bystanders. A uniformed police officer approached, asking passengers to call 911 because his radio was not working.” (Emphasis added.)

The officer’s radio didn’t work. But on the plus side, he’s been through six diversity training sessions.

To top things off, at the evening press conference, the top brass COULDN’T GET ZOOM TO WORK. Mayor Eric Adams was introduced, whereupon every TV in the land broadcast total silence for a solid 60 seconds, while city officials stood around waiting for the mayor to appear. They finally gave up and patched him in later.

At least the mayor is on top of things. Hours after even MSNBC had admitted the perp was a black male, Adams was on TV, vowing to catch the man — “or woman!” — who perpetrated this attack.

Gosh, that makes me feel validated.

Category:

Law, Opinion, Political

Tagged with:

‘Tired of it’: California dads fight rampant crime by retrieving stolen items, beating up robbers, tracking thefts — but now they’re moving to Texas


Reported by PHIL SHIVER | April 14, 2022

Read more at https://www.theblaze.com/news/california-dads-fight-rampant-crime/

A pair of neighborhood dads in Los Angeles, California, have taken matters into their own hands to fight soaring crime in recent months. But now, they say they’re “tired of it” and have decided to pack their bags with their families and ditch the area. The two neighbors, identified only as Michael and Josh in recent report by local news outlet KTTV-TV, have retrieved a stolen car, fought off robbers, and tracked thieves with AirTags, all within the span of 18 months. Yet still, brazen criminals continue to stalk and harass their Playa Del Rey condo complex time and again.

“The number of instances that have happened in the year and a half that I’ve lived here has been in the half-dozen range, and I’m tired of it,” Michael told the outlet in an interview. “I’m tired of losing our property.”

The latest robbery served as the straw that broke the camel’s back for Michael, who said he plans to move to Texas. Thieves reportedly broke into a locked parking garage and stole his elderly neighbor’s car. Only 12 hours later, another neighbor spotted it about a mile down the road at a homeless RV camp. So, Michael and his neighbor Josh grabbed a spare key and hopped in a car and drove down Jefferson Avenue to retrieve the stolen vehicle. They soon spotted it, and once they figured out how to drive the Toyota Prius, they were off.

“It was nice to get the car back for the owner,” Josh said, smiling. “Win one for the good guys.”

Fed up with LA crime, neighbors take action into their own handswww.youtube.com

But prior to their heroic and blissful win, the neighbors had taken several losses. KTTV reported that thieves had made off with several padlocked bikes stored in the same parking garage.

One time, Michael encountered a thief and decided to confront him. Surveillance video shows the dad tackling the criminal to the ground and ripping the bike from his hands — but even that didn’t stop him. The thief was back a couple days later to steal more property. Josh opted to start tracking the whereabouts of his e-bikes with Apple AirTags, small coin-sized devices that can attach to items and signal their location to a connected Apple phone or computer. Three were taken: one to Marina Del Rey and two others to the homeless RV camp.

“I tracked it to that encampment, called the cops, they came and helped me retrieve it,” Josh said. “It was being disassembled as [we] walked up at a bike chop shop.”

Per Los Angeles rules, authorities stopped towing illegally parked RVs during the COVID-19 pandemic, allowing encampments to rapidly clutter neighborhoods. The moratorium was finally lifted last week following a city council vote. But much damage had already been done. Members of the community claim the encampments quickly became epicenters for crime and debauchery.

“They’re ruining the environment,” said one Playa del Rey resident, Lucy Han, during the council meeting. “They’re defecating, they’re urinating in the area. … There’s human sex trafficking. We’ve had four shootings.”

KTTV said the Jefferson Avenue encampment is even home to a meth lab.

The pervasive crime has reportedly caused “good guys” like Michael and Josh to “hit the road for good,” the outlet noted.

Michael said: “We’re making that move partially because what’s going on but partially because it just feels like L.A. is going backwards, not forwards.”

Category:

Law, Political

Tagged with:

16 missing children recovered in US Marshals’ operation that uncovers sex trafficking allegations


Reported By Leonardo Blair, Senior Features Reporter | Monday, April 11, 2022

Read more at https://www.christianpost.com/news/16-missing-children-recovered-in-us-marshals-operation.html/

Some 16 missing children have been recovered in an operation led by the U.S. Marshals Service Eastern District of Louisiana New Orleans Task Force which also uncovered allegations of sex trafficking in some of the cases, the agency announced. In a news release published Thursday, the agency revealed that through “Operation Fresh Start,” conducted from Jan. 1 to March 31, they made five arrests and are currently pursuing the arrest of four other adults.

“Based on the operation at least four (4) felony warrants exist for adults suspected of involvement with MCU minors and the USMS New Orleans Task Force is actively pursuing these fugitives,” the agency said.

In one of the cases, marshals recovered a 14-year-old female on March 25 from an address in Fayetteville, Georgia, living with several adults. She had run away from her family in New Orleans in January, authorities said.

“The teen had run away from New Orleans in January of 2022 and her family were concerned about her possible involvement in sex trafficking and believed that she was with an older male in Florida. USMS investigation shows the teen may have also traveled to the Jacksonville, Florida area as well before being located in Georgia,” the U.S. Marshals Service said.

A day later, on March 26, marshals also rescued another 14-year-old habitual runaway from a location in Addis, Louisiana. The teenager was described as a “previous victim of sexual assault.” She was returned to St. Tammany Parish after the rescue.

According to the release, New Orleans was one of the original U.S. cities to begin a USMS pilot program for the Missing Child Unit in 2016, and U.S. Marshal for the Eastern District of Louisiana, Scott Illing, said he was proud of the work they have done so far.

“I am very proud of the cooperative work done by all the agencies involved in safeguarding at risk children. Our Office is proud to be a part of a robust MCU program that took root in New Orleans starting in 2016,” Illing said in a statement. “This work is being done with our partners while our office still performs its critical USMS missions (judicial and witness security, managing federal prisoners, violent fugitives’ apprehension, sex offender investigations, and service of federal process).”

Several of the cases also involved custodial disputes between parents, which can sometimes turn deadly. Marshals successfully recovered a 5-year-old female and 7-year-old male who were taken by their mother, who was the non-custodial parent.

“The Jefferson Parish Sheriff’s Office issued a felony warrant for the mother of the children for kidnapping, and she made active attempts to avoid arrest along the way,” the release said. “The non-custodial parent/mother took the children to the Ft. Lauderdale, Florida area and the USMS Florida/Caribbean Regional Fugitive Task Force was able to recover the children and arrest the mother on her Jefferson Parish Sheriff’s Office warrant.”

On Jan. 31, marshals also recovered a 1-year-old male child abducted by his father after the father shot and killed the infant’s grandfather in New Orleans, Louisiana, the agency said. News reports show that the grandfather, the late beloved trumpeter Brian Murray, was babysitting the child at the time he was killed by Edmond Ramee Sr. Ramee is currently in custody on a second degree murder charge.

“New Orleans Police Department Violent Offenders Warrant Squad (VOWS) and USMS New Orleans Task Force immediately began to search for Edmond RAMEE Sr., and he surrendered to NOPD VOWS on the evening of 01/31/2022, with the child being safely located and recovered,” the U.S. Marshals Service said.

Not all custody disagreements end with children being recovered safely. In January, Tennessee Pastor Kenneth Cook died along with his 16-year-old step-daughter, Teagan Welch, and Teagan’s biological father, Christopher Ray Welch, 48, after a domestic-related shooting in White Pine at a Pilot gas station. The Jefferson County Sheriff’s Office told WVLT News that the Jan. 3 event stemmed from a custody drop-off between the pastor’s wife and Teagan’s father, who were meeting to change custody of their child.

Last month, three sisters were fatally shot by their father in another domestic dispute concerning custody. The father also killed himself and their chaperone inside the sanctuary of The Church in Sacramento during a supervised visit in California. All the individuals involved were members of the church. The Sacramento coroner’s office identified the father as David Mora Rojas, 39. His daughters were identified as Samarah Mora Gutierrez, 9; Samantha Mora Gutierrez, 10, and Samia Mora Gutierrez, 13. The late chaperone was identified as Nathaniel Kong, 59. Business records show that he was an executive of the church.

Contact: leonardo.blair@christianpost.com Follow Leonardo Blair on Twitter: @leoblair Follow Leonardo Blair on Facebook: LeoBlairChristianPost

Category:

Law

Tagged with:

Pennsylvania man faces possibility of 1,000 years in prison for list of child sex abuse charges, including rape of girls under 5 years old


Reported by PHIL SHIVER | April 06, 2022

Read more at https://www.theblaze.com/news/pennsylvania-man-charged-with-115-child-sex-abuse-counts/

A 22-year-old man from central Pennsylvania accused of sexually abusing children faces the possibility of a millennium behind bars for his egregious actions. In a press release issued last week, the Newberry Township Police Department reported that officers arrested Isaiah John Metz on March 30 and charged him with a whopping 115 counts related to child sexual abuse. A large majority of the charges filed against Metz are felonies — including three counts of rape of an underaged child, two counts of involuntary deviate sexual intercourse with a child, two counts of aggravated indecent assault, fifty counts of sexual abuse of children, and 50 counts of child pornography.

If convicted on just the 100 counts of sexual abuse of children and child pornography, Metz could face up to 1,000 years in prison, People reported. According to an affidavit of probable cause obtained by Penn Live, Metz stands accused of raping two girls under the age of 5 and posting dozens of photos and videos of the assaults online.

The outlet added that Metz was babysitting one of the victims on July 24, 2021, while her sister went to a doctor’s appointment, when he assaulted her. Court documents stated that the young girl was acting noticeably more emotional than normal when her family returned home from the doctor’s office. During bath time the next day, she reportedly told her parents that her vagina was hurting.

Police then launched an investigation into the incident, during which they collected DNA samples from a pair of underwear and from the chair that the girl and Metz were sitting on when she alleged that the assault occurred.

The outlet reported that representatives from the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children later informed investigators that Metz had uploaded photos and videos of himself sexually assaulting the two girls to the internet. According to the arrest affidavit, 42 photos and eight videos of the girls were found on Metz’s Samsung Galaxy phone in February.

Penn Live did not offer details regarding other incidents of rape or child sexual abuse.

It was not immediately clear based on court records where Metz is being held or whether he had been granted bail. Police or other officials in York County, Pennsylvania, have yet to comment on the case publicly.

Category:

Law

Tagged with:

The Attacks on Clarence and Ginni Thomas Are Merely Latest in a Decades-Long Smear Campaign


REPORTED BY: TRISTAN JUSTICE | MARCH 30, 2022

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/03/30/the-attacks-on-clarence-and-ginni-thomas-are-merely-latest-in-a-decades-long-smear-campaign/

Clarence Thomas

Not only are the attacks on Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and his wife Ginni purely political, they’re deeply hypocritical.

Author Tristan Justice profile

TRISTAN JUSTICE

VISIT ON TWITTER@JUSTICETRISTAN

MORE ARTICLES

While claiming its aggressive collection of confidential information on private citizens is “narrowly tailored” and without a nefarious purpose, Democrats on the Jan. 6 Committee selectively leaked communications of a private citizen to smear political opponents.

Last week, CNN and the Washington Post published text messages between Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas’s wife, Virginia, who goes by “Ginni,” and former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows exchanged in the days leading up to and on the day of the Capitol riot.

“Help This Great President stand firm, Mark!!!” Ginni reportedly urged Meadows days after the 2020 contest when news organizations began to call the race for former Vice President Joe Biden. “You are the leader, with him, who is standing for America’s constitutional governance at the precipice. The majority knows Biden and the Left is attempting the greatest Heist of our History.”

Out of the 29 of more than 2,300 text messages released from Meadows’ vast trove of data handed to the Select Committee, not one, the Washington Post conceded, included a direct reference to the sitting justice as the weaponized probe sought to dox a private citizen for petitioning her government.

“The messages, which do not directly reference Justice Thomas or the Supreme Court, show for the first time how Ginni Thomas used her access to Trump’s inner circle to promote and seek to guide the president’s strategy to overturn the election results,” the Post reported with the paper adopting Pelosi committee’s framing to indict private political views as a blockbuster scandal.

While the committee has made an open point to prosecute those who publicly sought to cast doubt on the fairness of the 2020 election results, the committee’s targeting of Ginni Thomas for privately petitioning government officials on her own marks further escalation of the probe’s assault on civil liberties, and makes Thomas case all the more unique.

CNN reported Monday the committee will now seek an interview with Ginni, who has become the latest to be dragged before lawmakers for exercising dissident views, even in private. But the probe’s latest request is just as much targeted at Ginni, a long-time conservative activist who has never concealed her activism, as it is her husband.

The left’s racist disdain for Justice Thomas has never been a well-kept secret by a virulent left frustrated by the mere existence of a black conservative, let alone one on the high bench. Attacks on Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson’s record on lenient sentencing for child sex crimes are cruel and racist. Baseless criticism of Justice Thomas is warranted, however, for his political heresy, starting with his own confirmation process three decades ago.

Publication of the text messages provoked immediate calls for Justice Thomas to recuse himself from any cases related to the Jan. 6 investigation for the crime of his wife’s public political views raising concerns over an election with record mail-in voting and last-minute rule changes. New York Democrat Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez even demanded Justice Thomas resign or face impeachment.

As outlined Tuesday in The Federalist by former Thomas Law Clerk Wendy Long, however, judges are never asked to recuse themselves over political views, whether their own or their spouse’s.

“Leftists in Congress and the media hyperventilate over every tidbit showing that Justice Thomas’s wife, Ginni, is involved in national conservative politics – most recently, that she pushed for integrity in the 2020 election,” Long wrote. “This isn’t news, and it has nothing to do with Justice Thomas’s ability to be a fair and impartial jurist.”

Instead, Long explained judicial recusal is about “mainly financial, legal, personal, or professional interests of the Justice or a family member.” Not personal politics. The strategy of the modern left, however, has been to intimidate the courts into submission to extremist and anti-Constitution politics. Consider the last three nomination battles: Justice Brett Kavanaugh was slandered as a serial gang rapist, Amy Coney Barrett was depicted as a character in The Handmaid’s Tale, and Stephen Breyer was pressured to retire while Democrats were in power to replace him.

Not only are the attacks on Thomas purely political, they’re hypocritical. Will Democrats calling on Justice Thomas to refrain from his official duties as a jurist similarly demand a probe into House Speaker Nancy Pelosi leveraging her position in Congress to rake in millions? Will journalists married to people in power recuse themselves from coverage on any issues their spouses conduct even minor work on? Probably not. It’s all theater.

Tristan Justice is the western correspondent for The Federalist. He has also written for The Washington Examiner and The Daily Signal. His work has also been featured in Real Clear Politics and Fox News. Tristan graduated from George Washington University where he majored in political science and minored in journalism. Follow him on Twitter at @JusticeTristan or contact him at Tristan@thefederalist.com.

Category:

Law, Political

Tagged with:

Giving Violent Criminals A Free Pass Only Punishes Innocent Americans And Rewards The Left


REPORTED BY: JORDAN BOYD | MARCH 18, 2022

Read more at https://thefederalist.com/2022/03/18/giving-violent-criminals-a-free-pass-only-punishes-innocent-americans-and-rewards-the-left/

crime rewarded by progressives

Gerald Brevard III, a 30-year-old known criminal who was released early from prison because of Democrat criminal justice policies, was arrested this week after he allegedly went on a multi-state shooting spree targeting homeless people.

Brevard faced felony charges in 2020 when he tried to abduct and defile one woman and burgle another in Herndon, Va. Despite the fact that Brevard had “88 prior criminal charges dating back to 2009,” leftist Fairfax County Commonwealth Attorney Steve Descano, a former Obama-era federal prosecutor, reduced the abduction charge to a misdemeanor. This allowed the criminal to return to the streets after serving possibly as few as five months of an 11-month prison sentence.

Because Descano was preoccupied with reducing sentences for violent criminals under his “progressive justice” initiative, Brevard walked free and used his freedom to allegedly attack multiple vulnerable people that social justice preeners such as Descano claim to prioritize.

Brevard was released because a Democrat attorney saw him as his next social justice cause. The criminal’s freedom, however, appears to have cost the lives of several innocent people.

A similar incident happened in Dallas last week when leftist Judge Chika Anyiam lowered violent criminal Julio Guerrero’s bond from $2 million to $500,000, which only requires a $50,000 down payment for release from jail.

Guerrero was arrested last year after allegedly shooting at police officers during an hours-long standoff. He was accused of killing a father of five children after they rubbed elbows at a club, and of shooting a 3-year-old girl in the head in a fit of road rage days later.

Guerro’s attorney Tom Cox, who has donated at least $5,000 to Anyiam since 2015, quickly posted the bail. After backlash from law enforcement and other members of her Texas community, Anyiam, who brags on her website about going soft on crime, raised the bond for the murder chargem but only to $600,000.

“These irresponsible decisions, do not make our cities safer,” Dallas Police Chief Eddie Garcia tweeted.

Unfortunately for innocent, law-abiding, and vulnerable Americans who count on the justice system to keep them safe, anecdotes like these are increasing and will only get worse. Pro-criminal attorneys and judges repeatedly lower penalties for offenders in the name of achieving “equity.”

Why do leftist lawyers and judges repeatedly release criminals who end up harming people? Because they profit from it.

In exchange for their reckless policies, many of these radical legal officials are showered with donations by leftist megadonors such as George Soros, who has poured millions through “pro-criminal justice” PACs into district attorney races across the country. Letting criminals onto the streets is now a lucrative business for leftist politicians, which makes them less likely to change their ways and risk losing funding.

These “criminal bail reform” activists plaguing the American justice system may claim it is humane and just to lower the bar for criminals, but true justice does not include the harm and slaughter of innocent men, women, and children.

Remember when Darrell Brooks Jr. allegedly used his SUV to plow over a crowd in Waukesha, Wis., killing six people and injuring 62 others just days after being let out on bail? That decision wasn’t humane, just, or equitable. Even the Democrat district attorney in Wisconsin admitted that his progressive policies were “guaranteed” to kill someone someday.

Giving violent criminals a free pass only punishes innocent Americans. It’s neither humane nor just to sacrifice law-abiding lives on the premise that releasing creeps from jail is more humane than keeping them locked up. If they truly cared about people, Democrats wouldn’t allow their failed criminal justice experiment which has already cost too many lives to continue.

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 @jordangdavidson.

Category:

Law, Political

Tagged with:

More than 100 arrested during multi-day undercover operation in Florida related to prostitution, child predators


Reported by ALEX NITZBERG | March 16, 2022

Read more at https://www.conservativereview.com/more-than-100-arrested-during-multi-day-undercover-operation-in-florida-related-to-prostitution-child-predators-2656973697.html/

More than 100 people were recently arrested during “Operation March Sadness 2,” a six-day undercover operation that led to the arrest of child predators and people seeking to engage prostitution, according to the Polk County Sheriff’s Office in Florida.

According to a press release, a 27-year-old man named Xavier Jackson was arrested after communicating with an undercover detective who had been pretending to be a 14-year-old girl — he “sent [the detective] sexual images and graphic descriptions of what he wanted to do,” according to the sheriff’s office.

Polk County Sheriff Grady Judd noted during a news conference that Jackson worked as a lifeguard at Disney’s Polynesian Village Resort.

Operation March Sadness II news conference youtu.be

Shannon Johnson, a 41-year-old man who thought he was communicating with a 13-year-old girl, sent a naked picture of himself and went to a home with the plan to engage in sexual activity, according to the press release, which noted that Johnson was arrested.

Also among the 108 people arrested was Daniel Peters, a retired Cook County Illinois judge who was charged with soliciting a prostitute. “He requested an attorney,” Judd said during the news conference. “Well judge, you need an attorney, you got problems.”

“The arrests of a human trafficker and four child predators alone makes this whole operation worthwhile,” Judd said, according to a statement included in the press release. “The on-line prostitution industry enables traffickers and victimizes those who are being trafficked. Our goal is to identify victims, offer them help, and find and arrest those who are profiting from the exploitation of human beings. Johns fuel the trafficking and victimization. Where there is prostitution, there is exploitation, disease, dysfunction, and broken families.”

Category:

Law

Tagged with:

‘Dangerous by design’ metaverse apps allow children to access immersive digital sex clubs


Reported by SAMUEL MANGOLD-LENETT | February 23, 2022

Read more at https://www.theblaze.com/news/metaverse-apps-children-immersive-digital-sex-clubs/

A researcher who went undercover in the metaverse as a 13-year-old girl witnessed grooming, graphic sexual material, and threats of rape. The researcher, the BBC reported, used an app with a minimum age rating of 13 and visited virtual reality rooms where other users’ avatars were simulating explicit acts. The researcher, whose online presence depicted that of a 13-year-old girl, was shown sex toys and condoms and approached by several adult men. One man told the researcher that in the metaverse, users’ avatars can “get naked and do unspeakable things.” Other users approached the researcher while in the metaverse and discussed “erotic role-play.”

The National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, a British charity dedicated to the welfare of Great Britain’s children, warned that some of the apps in the metaverse are “dangerous by design” as there is very little content moderation in the metaverse.

For instance, the app used by the researcher to access the metaverse, VRChat, allows its users to access any number of immersive chatrooms. Some of these rooms are as innocuous as digital McDonald’s, while others allow users to watch and participate in pole dancing or even attend digitally immersive strip clubs.

Mr. Burrows of the NSPCC said, “It’s children being exposed to entirely inappropriate, really incredibly harmful experiences. This is a product that is dangerous by design, because of oversight and neglect. We are seeing products rolled out without any suggestion that safety has been considered.”

Jess Sherwood, the researcher who went under cover, said, “I was surprised how totally immersed in the spaces you are. I started to feel like a child again. So, when grown men were asking why I wasn’t in school and encouraging me to engage in VR sex acts, it felt all the more disturbing.”

She said, “VRChat definitely felt more like an adult’s playground than a child’s. A lot of the rooms were overtly sexualized in pink neon, similar to what you might see in the red-light district in Amsterdam or in the seedier parts of London’s Soho at night. Inside, sex toys were on display.”

Catherine Allen, founder of a UK-based augmented and digital reality consulting firm, said that while VR can be “fun and surreal,” it also tends to be “quite traumatic and disturbing.” She described an incident in a Meta-owned app where she and a 7-year-old girl were surrounded by a group of men who joked about raping them.

VRChat said that it was “working hard to make itself a safe and welcoming place for everyone” and that “predatory and toxic behavior has no place on the platform.”

Category:

Business, Family, Law, Political

Tagged with:

Republican pursuing election in AOC’s congressional district wants to ‘federally mandate the death penalty for cop killers’


Reported by ALEX NITZBERG | January 27, 2022

Read more at https://www.conservativereview.com/republican-pursuing-election-in-aoc-s-congressional-district-wants-to-federally-mandate-the-death-penalty-for-cop-killers-2656497634.html/

Desi Cuellar, a Republican running to represent New York’s 14th Congressional District, says that as a member of Congress he would put forward legislation to require capital punishment for those who kill police officers.

Progressive Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez currently represents the Empire State’s 14th Congressional District.

“So-called progressives like @AOC have created a culture where it’s okay for criminals to run the streets and even kill cops. When I’m elected to Congress, I will introduce a bill to federally mandate the death penalty for cop killers,” Cuellar tweeted.

The tweet is accompanied by a video in which Cuellar declares that “Crime is rampant in this country because our spineless politicians don’t have the guts to stand up to the criminal underworld.”

Two NYPD police officers who were fired upon last Friday have died — one of the officers was killed on Friday and the other officer passed away days later.

“Nobody in politics on the left cares about holding back the criminals, all they care about is holding back the police,” Cuellar said, according to Fox News.

“The problem we face today is that the mindset of the modern criminal is one that understands that they will not face severe consequences for their violent actions,” he said, according to the outlet “And honestly, it feels like we are getting a lack of action on this crisis from both sides of the aisle. Everyone needs to wake up.”

Category:

Law, Political

Tagged with:

New Video: Ashli Babbitt Tries to Stop Violent Capitol Agitator Seconds Before Being Fatally Shot


Reported By Jared Harris | January 26, 2022

Read more at https://www.westernjournal.com/new-video-ashli-babbitt-tries-stop-violent-capitol-agitator-seconds-fatally-shot/

A newly released video appears to show Ashli Babbitt attempting to stop a violent rioter inside the U.S. Capitol during the Jan. 6, 2021, incursion. Moments after the scene was filmed, Babbitt would be fatally shot by Capitol Police Lt. Michael Byrd.

Despite several instances of violence, including the one where Babbitt intervened, the young Air Force veteran was the only person shot during the riot. But newly released footage puts an even bigger question mark on the shooting, the investigation of which appears to have lost many of the facts while being fast-tracked.

Independent journalist Tayler Hanson released the 25-second video clip on Tuesday. In the footage, a man identified as Zachary Alam punched through a window in the Capitol as nearby police did nothing to stop him. Babbitt appeared to grab Alam’s backpack, causing him to turn and look at the 35-year-old veteran right before she delivered a punch to the middle of his face. As the impact sent his glasses falling, the camera shifted away from the encounter. According to Hansen, this was only seven seconds before Babbitt was fatally shot by Byrd while seemingly attempting to scale a hastily assembled police barricade. Footage of the encounter that preceded the shooting can be seen below.

WARNING: The following video contains graphic language that some viewers will find offensive.

The Department of Justice arrested Alam on Jan. 30, 2021. A case document from the DOJ shows a mountain of charges against him, including several related to alleged assaults on police. While Alam is presumed innocent until proved guilty, video of the encounter likely will not do him any favors in court.

While Babbitt has been vilified by liberals and mainstream media hit pieces, this bombshell video appears to prove that the young veteran was not there to cause violence and chaos and instead actively attempted to stop the destruction. She did not back down when the crowd grew more amped but instead appeared to be in disbelief that police were failing to intervene.

“I believe she saw their inaction as odd or off, and was ultimately confused as to what was happening,” husband Aaron Babbitt told The Epoch Times.

“She was a take-charge kind of person,” Babbitt continued. “Her frustrations show that the cops who should’ve been taking charge — weren’t.”

Although Democrats and the Capitol Police appear to consider this case closed, emerging evidence shows the public has not been given a clear and complete picture of this year-old killing.

Jared Harris, Assignment Editor

Jared has written more than 200 articles and assigned hundreds more since he joined The Western Journal in February 2017. He was an infantryman in the Arkansas and Georgia National Guard and is a husband, dad and aspiring farmer.

Category:

Law, Political

Tagged with:

Obama Official Pleads Guilty to Theft of Government Property, Wire Fraud and Scheme to Defraud US Govt


Reported By Cristina Laila | Published January 17, 2022

Read more at https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/01/obama-admin-homeland-security-ig-pleads-guilty-theft-government-property-wire-fraud-scheme-defraud-us-govt/

Obama’s Acting Homeland Security Inspector General Charles Edwards pleaded guilty to conspiring to defraud the US government. Charles Edwards and his subordinate were indicted on 16 counts of theft and fraud, the Justice Department announced in March 2020.

“The indictment charges Charles K. Edwards, 59, of Sandy Spring, Maryland, and Murali Yamazula Venkata, 54, of Aldie, Virginia, with conspiracy to commit theft of government property and to defraud the United States, theft of government property, wire fraud, and aggravated identity theft. The indictment also charges Venkata with destruction of records.”

The charges alleged that in addition to stealing government software and databases, Venkata helped Edwards by reconfiguring his laptop so that he could upload the stolen software.

“The indictment further alleges that, in addition to stealing DHS-OIG’s software and the sensitive government databases, Venkata and others also assisted Edwards by reconfiguring his laptop so that he could properly upload the stolen software and databases, provided troubleshooting support whenever Edwards required it, and helped him build a testing server at his residence with the stolen software and databases,” the Department of Justice said in a press release announcing the indictments. “As further part of the alleged scheme, Edwards retained software developers in India for the purpose of developing his commercial alternative of DHS-OIG’s software.”

Although Edwards left the DHS in 2013, according to the indictment he leveraged his relationship with Venkata to carry out the scheme which began in October of 2014 and continued to April of 2017.

Law & Crime reported:

The ex-watchdog who oversaw the Department of Homeland Security pleaded guilty on Friday to stealing propriety software and sensitive databases from his old job for his private business.

Charles K. Edwards, 61, served in the Obama administration as the Acting Inspector General for the Department of Homeland Security between February 2008 until December 2013. He served before that time as the inspector general for the U.S. Postal Service.

During a federal court hearing on Friday morning, Edwards pleaded guilty before U.S. District Judge Randolph Moss to conspiracy to defraud the United States and theft of government property. Edwards’s sentencing date has not yet been set.

His attorney Courtney Roberts Forrest, from the firm Kaiser Dillon, did not immediately respond to an email requesting comment.

Cristina Laila

Cristina began writing for The Gateway Pundit in 2016 and she is currently the Associate Editor.

Category:

Law

Tagged with:

Tag Cloud