By Joe Hoft for Gateway Pundit April 14, 2022 at 7:25pm
Judge Napolitano was on The Joe Hoft Show at the Real Talk radio network today. He discussed the Jan 6 incident and the horrors of the abuse taking place in DC.
Judge Napolitano was on The Joe Hoft Show at the Real Talk radio network today. He discussed the Jan 6 incident and the horrors of the abuse taking place in DC.
The judge shared the following about those being held in the DC jail due to their actions on Jan 6.
None of them should be in jail. They should all be out on bail. Most jails are garbage, particularly inner city jails. There’s no political support for spending an nickele in there. Politicians don’t care because the public doesn’t care. So it shouldn’t be a surprise.
But what’s surprising is that they have been attacked violently and that they’ve been subjected to a disgusting environment for more than a few hours and that they’re in jail to begin with. I mean none of these people is a threat to society and all of them would gladly come back at time of trial and most of them shouldn’t be charged anyway because most of them are there to partake in 1st Amemdment protected behavior.
The judge then talked about reading a piece by Roger Stone about the heartbreaking stories in the DC jail and then the Virginia state jail system.
The Feds are trying to wear these people down. They’re way overcharging them so they can get guilty pleas and they’re making their lives miserable so that the defendants will say to their lawyers, ‘get me out of here’, or ‘I’ll agree to testify to anything, just so I can have a decent night sleep and a decent shower and a decent meal.’ It shouldn’t be that way. It is an American Gulag.
Judge Nap went on to say:
Judges don’t like to tell jailers how to do their jails but when it’s a violation of a constitutional right, the judges should. The judges should be releasing these people, like I said. They should be released on a moderate amount of bail because the Constitution prohibits requiring an unreasonable amount of bail…The overwhelming majority are not accused of an act of violence…There’s every indication that these people should be given bail and they’re not…Judges are not doing their job. This stuff should make its way to the Supreme Court of the United States which rarely hears matters involving bail or conditions in prison unless a cause of death. But it needs to be exposed and it needs to be corrected.
Facebook Chairman and CEO Mark Zuckerberg testifies before the House Financial Services Committee on “An Examination of Facebook and Its Impact on the Financial Services and Housing Sectors” in the Rayburn House Office Building in Washington, DC on October 23, 2019. (Photo by Nicholas Kamm / AFP) (Photo by NICHOLAS KAMM/AFP via Getty Images)
By Matthew Vadum for Epoch TimesApril 13, 2022
Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg, who in the 2020 election cycle flooded election offices across the United States with hundreds of millions of dollars in grants, won’t be participating in such grantmaking this year, according to a spokesman.
Zuckerberg and his wife, Priscilla Chan, made $419.5 million in donations to nonprofits—“Zuckerbucks” or “Zuckbucks,” as some have called the money—$350 million of which went to the “Safe Elections” Project of the left-wing Center for Technology and Civic Life (CTCL). The other $69.5 million went to the Center for Election Innovation and Research. The CTCL reportedly distributed grants to upward of 2,500 election offices.
Zuckerberg spokesman Ben LaBolt, who was previously spokesman for Barack Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign, said the donations were a one-time deal.
“As Mark and Priscilla made clear previously, their election infrastructure donation to help ensure that Americans could vote during the height of the pandemic was a one-time donation given the unprecedented nature of the crisis,” LaBolt told The New York Times on April 12. “They have no plans to repeat that donation.”
The money was supposed to be used to buy personal protective equipment and new ballot-counting equipment, train poll workers, and expand mail-in voting.
But critics have a less charitable take on what happened. They say the Zuckerbergs helped buy the presidency for presidential candidate Joe Biden by improperly influencing election officials and artificially driving up turnout in Democrat, but not Republican, strongholds across the nation.
Author J.D. Vance, who’s seeking the Republican nod for the Ohio U.S. Senate seat, said on April 12 on the campaign trail that he believed the 2020 presidential election was stolen through fraud. Illegal ballot harvesting and Zuckerberg putting money into Democratic turnout in battleground states were also key in the election, he said.
The donations spawned a series of lawsuits across the country. For example, last month, the Thomas More Society filed a complaint with the Wisconsin Elections Commission claiming that Milwaukee officials were involved in an election bribery scheme for accepting election-assistance money from CTCL, as The Epoch Times reported.
Grants to election administrators created “a two-tiered election system that treated voters differently depending on whether they lived in Democrat or Republican strongholds,” Phill Kline, director of the Amistad Project of the Thomas More Society, wrote in a report in late 2020.
“This privatization of elections undermines the Help America Vote Act (HAVA), which requires state election plans to be submitted to federal officials and approved, and requires respect for equal protection by making all resources available equally to all voters,” Kline wrote.
Several states, including Florida, subsequently banned private donations to election offices.
In May 2021, Gov. Ron DeSantis, a Republican, signed the state’s new election integrity law, which, in addition to prohibiting the use of private funds to administer elections, also banned ballot harvesting and mass mailing of ballots, and strengthened voter identification requirements.
“Florida took action this legislative session to increase transparency and strengthen the security of our elections,” DeSantis said at the time, as The Epoch Times reported. “Floridians can rest assured that our state will remain a leader in ballot integrity. Elections should be free and fair, and these changes will ensure this continues to be the case in the Sunshine State.”
Public Interest Legal Foundation (PILF) President J. Christian Adams, a former U.S. Justice Department civil rights attorney whose group frequently files election integrity lawsuits, said at the time that the Zuckerbergs’ money had a huge influence on the 2020 elections.
“Zuckbucks were the biggest factor, juicing blue areas in 2020,” Adams said around the time Florida cracked down on private money being used in election administration.
“A private citizen should not be allowed to influence how our elections are run. At the Public Interest Legal Foundation, we are proud to have played a role in ensuring that this money will not be spent to influence the Florida elections in 2022.”
CTCL Executive Director Tiana Epps-Johnson said earlier this week that her group is launching a new five-year, $80 million program called the U.S. Alliance for Election Excellence to assist election offices across the United States.
Bolt said the Zuckerbergs won’t be involved in the new project.
Alabama Governor Kay Ivey dropped the most accurate and succinct campaign ad to date. She’s starting the 2022 election off with fire.
Alabama Governor Kay Ivey shared what she has done for Alabama and what she will continue to do – protect the election process from being stolen like President Trump’s election was stolen in 2020.
The fake news, Big Tech and blue state liberals stole the election from President Trump.”
“But here in Alabama, we are making sure that never happens,” she continues. “We have not, and will not, send absentee ballots to everyone and their brother. We banned corrupt curbside voting, and our results will always be audited. I’m Kay Ivey. The Left is probably offended. So be it. As long as I’m governor, we’re going to protect your vote.”
FILE - This 2018 portrait released by the U.S. Department of Justice shows Connecticut's U.S. Attorney John Durham. Durham, the federal prosecutor tapped to investigate the origins of the Russia investigation, has been presenting evidence before a grand jury as part of his probe, a person familiar with the matter said Friday, Aug. 13, 2021. (U.S. Department of Justice via AP, File)
Views: 31
Crossfire Hurricane
By Zachary Stieber for the Epoch Times April 7, 2022
Special counsel John Durham’s team on April 6 asked a federal judge to force Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign and two other parties to hand over documents they claim are protected by attorney–client privilege.
The campaign, the Democratic National Committee (DNC), and research and intelligence firm Fusion GPS appear to be withholding documents that aren’t actually protected by the privilege, Durham’s team said in the filing, entered in the case against ex-Clinton lawyer Michael Sussmann.
Of the withheld materials, almost all “appear to lack any connection to actual or expected litigation or the provision of legal advice,” prosecutors told U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper, an Obama appointee who is overseeing the case.
In fact, of the 1,455 documents being withheld by Fusion GPS, only 18 emails and attachments are said to involve an attorney.
The Clinton campaign, the DNC, and Fusion didn’t respond to requests for comment.
The documents in question are being sought for the upcoming trial of Sussmann, who was charged with lying to the FBI for going to a bureau lawyer in 2016 and falsely stating he didn’t hand over unsubstantiated claims about then-candidate Donald Trump on behalf of a client.
The claims were compiled with funding from the campaign and the DNC by former British spy Christopher Steele and Fusion GPS, which was founded by former reporters.
Sussmann and his lawyers have been pressing the judge to dismiss the case prior to trial, arguing that the lie about not bringing the information on behalf of a client wasn’t material to the information itself.
Attorney–client privilege protects many communications between a client and their lawyer. Disclosure to third parties usually undercuts privilege claims.
In the new filing, Durham’s team pointed out that Fusion GPS co-founders Glenn Simpson and Peter Fritsch penned a book published in 2019, which means even if a valid privilege did once exist, it might have since been waived.
Prosecutors also noted that Fusion GPS operatives regularly communicated with reporters about their work, resulting in several stories before the 2020 election and a spate of others after voters hit the polls.
Further, the Clinton campaign (HFA) and the DNC have claimed privilege over communications sent between Rodney Joffe, whom Sussmann was also representing at the time, and a Fusion operative, “despite the fact that no one from either the DNC or HFA is copied on certain of these communications,” prosecutors said.
The government subpoenaed information from the parties in 2021.
Many if not most of the actions taken by Fusion GPS employees “do not appear to have been a necessary part of, or even related to” Perkins Coie’s legal advice to the campaign and the DNC, Durham’s team said.
Prosecutors want to examine the communications in a private, in-camera setting “in order to resolve these issues and ensure that only legitimately privileged and/or attorney work product-protected communications and testimony be withheld from the otherwise admissible evidence and testimony that is presented to the jury at trial.”
Another item can be added to the list of those who have concerns about the integrity of the 2020 general election in Arizona.
President Joe Biden won the state by 10,457 votes (0.3 percent of the 3.4 million cast), which was the narrowest margin of any of the swing states that went for him.
Further, it was only the second time in the previous 70 years the state has sided with the Democratic candidate for president.
Last week, Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey signed House Bill 2492 into law, which requires those who are only eligible to vote in federal elections in Arizona to provide documentary proof of citizenship.
“If they do not, they will not be eligible to vote in a presidential election or by mail,” Ducey’s office said in a Wednesday news release. “In 2020, more than 11,600 Federal Only Voters in Arizona participated in the general election without providing proof of citizenship. In Maricopa County alone, there are currently 13,042 active registered voters who have not provided evidence of citizenship to vote through use of the federal form.”
In other words, more people voted without being required to provide proof of citizenship — 11,600 — than the margin of Biden’s win in the Grand Canyon State — 10,457 votes.
In February, state GOP Rep. Jake Hoffman told Courthouse News that HB 2492 was intended to address a concerning trend in the number of “federal only” voters.
“In 2018, there were only 1,700 individuals who didn’t have documentary proof of citizenship on file,” Hoffman said. “In 2020, there were almost 12,000. So clearly, this is a trend that is increasing. This bill ensures that there is maximum flexibility to provide documentary proof of citizenship, but we don’t want foreign interference in our elections.”
And many of those federal-only votes likely came from Maricopa County, which encompasses the Phoenix metropolitan area and accounts for over 60 percent of the voters in the state.
In 2020, it was the only county in the state to flip from red to blue. Biden carried it with about the same 45,000-vote margin Republican Donald Trump did in 2016.
In a letter explaining his support for HB 2492, Ducey said, “Election integrity means counting every lawful vote and prohibiting any attempt to illegally cast a vote.”
This bill “is a balanced approach that honors Arizona’s history of making voting accessible without sacrificing security in our elections,” he added. “Federal law prohibits non-citizens from voting in federal elections. Arizona law prohibits non-citizens from voting for all state and local offices, and requires proof of citizenship.”
Democratic state Sen. Sally Ann Gonzales said the law creates a barrier to vote.
“I think [Republicans] hope is that not everybody is going to jump through those hoops and their hope is that the groups that are going to be impacted more are going to be the groups that are likely to vote against them,” Quezada told Governing.
In 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 7-2 that Arizona could not require proof of citizenship beyond an oath for those seeking to vote in federal elections. However, the state could continue to have ID requirements to register to vote for state and local elections. The Court held that Arizona’s law at the time was pre-empted by the National Voter Registration Act of 1993.
Federal law “precludes Arizona from requiring a Federal Form applicant to submit information beyond that required by the form itself,” then-Justice Antonin Scalia wrote for the majority.
“Arizona may, however, request anew that the [Election Assistance Commission] include such a requirement among the Federal Form’s state-specific instructions, and may seek judicial review of the EAC’s decision under the Administrative Procedure Act,” he added.
The Associated Press reported that two lawsuits had already been filed challenging HB 2492, including one by Democratic election attorney Marc Elias on behalf of Mi Famila Vota.
Elias played a very active role during the 2020 campaign season suing in multiple battleground states to get election procedures changed.
Last month, the Election Systems Integrity Institute released a report concluding that the Maricopa County mail-in ballot signature verification process used during the 2020 general election was deeply flawed.
The study, overseen by systems engineer Shiva Ayyadurai, found that the county allowed approximately 200,000 ballot envelopes with mismatched signatures to be forwarded for counting without adequate additional review.
ESII researchers reported that 11.3 percent of the approximately 1.9 million mail-in ballots should have gone through the curing process, rather than the 1.31 percent — or about 25,000 — that actually did.
Ultimately, only 587 ballots were rejected, or 0.03 percent.
It should be noted that no information has been disclosed regarding whom any of these ballots was cast for. Therefore, even if all 200,000 ballots in question were to be thrown out — a highly unlikely proposition — there is no way to know whether the outcome of the Arizona election would be changed.
Based on the findings of the study, the Arizona Attorney General’s Office sent a letter to the Maricopa County recorder and the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors requesting the voter signature files.
MSM and Conservative media as well as Mueller found that the Steele Dosier was fake. Also Steele got the Phony reports that he copied were Russian documents.
The Democratic National Committee (DNC) and Hillary Clinton’s campaign violated campaign finance laws by failing to accurately disclose payments related to the so-called Trump Dossier, the non-partisan Campaign Legal Center said in a complaint filed today with the Federal Election Commission.
“The purpose of at least some portion of the payments to Perkins Coie was not for legal services; instead, those payments were intended to fund opposition research,” the FEC complaint reads. “This false reporting clearly failed the Commission’s requirements for disclosing the purpose of a disbursement.”
The FEC, in a memo to the Coolidge Reagan Foundation, which filed its complaint over three years ago, said it fined Clinton’s treasurer $8,000 and the DNC’s treasurer $105,000.
The memo, shared with Secrets, is to be made public in a month
The Maryland State Capitol Building in Annapolis, Md., in a file image. By Zachary Stieber for Epoch Times March 26, 2022
A Maryland judge on March 25 threw out a congressional map lawmakers recently enacted, ruling that it was a product of “extreme partisan gerrymandering.”
Anne Arundel County Senior Judge Lynne Battaglia, an appointee of former Democrat Gov. Glendening, found that the map unconstitutionally was aimed at reducing the power of Republican voters because it shifted the only GOP member of Congress representing Maryland, Rep. Andy Harris (R-Md.), into a different district, where he was likely to lose.
The new map, approved by Democrat state lawmakers in Maryland in late 2021, left Democrats with an estimated advantage in every single one of the eight congressional districts, according to the Princeton Gerrymandering Project.
Further, Sean Trende, an elections analyst tapped by plaintiffs, found through voting simulations that Democrats would likely win all eight districts.
Trende testified in the case that the map was drawn “with an intent to hurt the Republican party’s chances of letting anyone in Congress” and “dilutes and diminishes the ability of Republicans to elect candidates of choice.”
Allan Lichtman, another analyst, told the court that Trende’s analysis was lacking and that he believed the map was actually tilted towards Republicans compared to previous maps, which would lead to the GOP gaining seats in the 2022 midterm elections. But he drew criticism from the judge when he falsely said the map did not pit Harris against Rep. Kewisi Mfume (D-Md.) in Maryland’s Seventh Congressional District—Harris moved to Cambridge after the map was enacted so he could defend the seat he holds—and he acknowledged under cross-examination that Democrats did not lose seats during midterm elections during former President Barack Obama’s time in office.
Battaglia said she found Trende’s testimony and analysis compelling and ruled that the map “is an outlier and product of extreme partisan gerrymandering.”
She ordered the General Assembly to develop a new plan “that is constitutional.”
The ruling came after voters represented by Fair Maps Maryland and Judicial Watch sued over the map.
“Judge Battaglia’s ruling confirms what we have all known for years—Maryland is ground zero for gerrymandering, our districts and political reality reek of it, and there is abundant proof that it is occurring,” Doug Mayer, spokesman for Fair Maps Maryland, said in a statement.
“This key court victory against abusive partisan gerrymandering by Democrats in Maryland could set a national precedent,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.
Members of the legislature on the General Assembly commission that was in charge of making the map did not respond to requests for comment.
Maryland Sen. Bill Ferguson and state Del. Adrienne Jones, both Democrats and members of the panel, said in a joint statement after the map was enacted that it “provides cleaner lines and more compact districts while keeping a significant portion of Marylanders in their current districts, ensuring continuity of representation.”
Maryland Attorney General Brian Frosh, a Democrat, has not decided on whether an appeal will be lodged, his office told The Epoch Times in an email.
Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan, a Republican who formed a body that recommended a different map, said the ruling “puts in plain view the partisan, secretive, and rigged process that led to the legislature’s illegal and unconstitutional maps” and called on lawmakers to adopt the map drawn up by the body.
WASHINGTON, DC – JANUARY 06: A large group of pro-Trump protesters stand on the East steps of the Capitol Building on January 6, 2021 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Jon Cherry/Getty Images)
The latest report by Project Veritas is raising questions about possible collusion between the mainstream media and government agencies to discredit Donald Trump and Republican voters. A new investigation by the non-profit journalism enterprise revealed mainstream media knew that FBI informants were inside the capitol during the January 6 protest.
The latest expose features confessions by Pulitzer Prize winning New York Times reporter Matthew Rosenberg who has covered the capitol protest as a “matter on national security.” However, Rosenberg now admits the entire January 6 narrative was greatly exaggerated or even made up.
Over the past year, Rosenberg has written stories painting the capitol protest as a pre-mediated conspiracy by Donald Trump and friends to “subvert” American democracy. For example, on February 1 last year his article claims “a lie the former president had been grooming for years overwhelmed the Republican Party and stoked the assault on the capitol.” However now Rosenberg says nobody was in danger during that protest, including mainstream media reporters who went inside the capitol.
The New York Times reporter also spoke about FBI presence at the January 6 rally, which in the past raised questions by Republican lawmakers. In particular, Rep. Matt Gaetz and Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene have voiced concerns the breach of U.S. Capitol could be a ploy to discredit Republican voters.
Meanwhile, Rosenberg appeared to suggest the New York Times editorial stance on the matter is shifting towards downplaying those events as if it’s no big deal. He went on to suggest slanted January 6 coverage is only part of a greater narrative aimed at attacking and discrediting Donald Trump. This includes attacks on Trump before the 2016 election, during his time in office and beyond.
Rosenberg’s confessions suggest mainstream media is presenting wishful thinking of its writers as factual news, which it is not. Meanwhile, potential efforts by federal agencies to manipulate public opinion may pose a greater concern moving forward.
FILE - Texas Democrat gubernatorial candidate Beto O'Rourke speaks during a campaign event in Fort Worth, Texas Friday, Dec. 3, 2021. O'Rourke said Tuesday, Jan. 18, 2022, that his campaign for Texas governor raised $7.2 million in the first six weeks of a race that could wind up as one of the nation's most expensive in 2022. (AP Photo/LM Otero, File) FILE - Texas Democrat gubernatorial candidate Beto O'Rourke speaks during a campaign event in Fort Worth, Texas Friday, Dec. 3, 2021. O'Rourke said Tuesday, Jan. 18, 2022, that his campaign for Texas governor raised $7.2 million in the first six weeks of a race that could wind up as one of the nation's most expensive in 2022. (AP Photo/LM Otero, File) (AP)
Views: 12
So one of the left wing loons is against CRT being taught in schools. What a better question is this. Do you subscribe to CRT? Texas gubernatorial candidate Beto O’Rourke became one of the first Democratic Party leaders to explicitly come out against critical race theory (CRT) in schools.
A member of the audience asked if O’Rourke supported CRT in schools, to which the gubernatorial candidate said, “No, I don’t think [CRT] should be taught in our schools.”
Beto O'Rourke becomes the first prominent Democrat to flip against critical race theory.
— Christopher F. Rufo ⚔️ (@realchrisrufo) March 12, 2022
Beto says this now, but the fact is that he’s in denial about CRT being taught in the schools. The left has a habit of saying one thing to get elected, but does something different when elected.
Dr. Shiva joined The Joe Hoft Show at Real Talk 93.3 on Tuesday to discuss his recent findings from his analysis of ballots from the 2020 Election in Maricopa County, Arizona. Over 200,000 ballots had signatures that should have been reviewed or ‘cured’ but were not.
Dr. Shiva Ayyaduriai is one of the brightest guys in America. His resume reads as follows:
Dr. V.A. Shiva Ayyadurai, the inventor of email and polymath, holds four degrees from MIT, is a world-renowned systems scientist, inventor and entrepreneur. He is a Fulbright Scholar, Lemelson-MIT Awards Finalist, India’s First Outstanding Scientist and Technologist of Indian Origin, Westinghouse Science Talent Honors Award recipient, and a nominee for the U.S. National Medal of Technology and Innovation.
In late February, Dr. Shiva Ayyaduriai released the results of his study of the ballots counted in the 2020 Election in Maricopa County, Arizona. His results were shocking. He identified that Maricopa County likely had more than 200,000 ballots with signature issues that needed to be ‘cured’ but only 25,000 ‘cured’ ballots were reported in the 2020 Election results.
On Monday night Dr. Shiva Ayyadurai provided findings from the Election Systems Integrity Institute’s updated audit of signatures on 1,911,918 early voting mail ballots in Maricopa County’s 2020 General Election.
• At minimum, 215,856 early voting mail ballots (EVBs) should have been cured in Maricopa versus the ~25,000 cured by the County in the 2020 General Election.
• This updated Extended Study (“the Study”) along with the Pilot Study are the first to calculate signature mismatch rates of EVBs for Experts – Forensic Document Examiners (FDEs), Trained Novices (non-FDEs), and in a Two-Step Review process using non-FDEs and FDEs.
• One constraint of this Study is not having access to the signature files from the County.
• Given the nearly 10x difference in EVBs to be cured between this Study and the County’s actually number cured, if the County were to provide their signature files, an update to this Study can be performed.
• Maricopa County Election Dept. states it has a “rigorous signature verification process.”
• Of the 1,911,918 EVB signatures verified, the County reported only 25,000 were flagged as signature mismatches requiring review – “curing;” and after curing, the County concluded only 587 of the 25,000 (2.3%) to be “Bad Signatures.”
• This Extended Study confirms the findings of the earlier Pilot Study and concludes that the process used for signature verification in Maricopa is a flawed signature verification process.
Dr. Shiva discussed these results and his history leading up to this point on The Joe Hoft Show on Tuesday. Here are some notes from that discussion:
As a 14-year-old kid, Dr. Shiva created the first email system.
In 2017 Dr. Shiva went against Elizabeth Warren under the campaign: “Only the real Indian can beat the fake Indian.”
Dr. Shiva got involved in the Arizona audit at the end of it. He was contracted to audit the ballot images but unfortunately was provided corrupted ballot images by Cyber Ninjas. He didn’t finally receive the uncorrupted ballot images until December.
The Arizona Senate then contracted him to analyze the ballot envelopes and he identified various issues.
He then looked at signatures but the county didn’t provide signatures on file so a group of individuals assisted in obtaining signatures elsewhere. This is how they determined over 200,000 ballots should have been ‘cured’ but were not.
The next step would be to obtain signatures from the county to do a more thorough review if they will provide.
The county actually stated that they cured “up to 25,000” ballots but don’t provide the exact number.
Legislation should be put in place to identify what is an actual vote which currently isn’t in place.
The audit did not include a signature verification review.
149
The Maryland State Capitol Building in Annapolis, Md., in a file image. By 
