The alternate summit focused on some big questions: Why have patients been denied life-saving medical treatments? Why are we not researching the damage being caused by the injections? Why are medical professionals still being censored by media companies, Big Tech and their own institutions?
The group known as the Global COVID Summit represents 17,000 physicians and medical scientists from all over the world who have signed on to a declaration based on the following ten foundational principles:
1. We declare and the data confirm that the COVID-19 experimental genetic therapy injections must end.
2. We declare doctors should not be blocked from providing life-saving medical treatment.
3. We declare the state of national emergency, which facilitates corruption and extends the pandemic, should be immediately terminated.
4. We declare medical privacy should never again be violated, and all travel and social restrictions must cease.
5. We declare masks are not and have never been effective protection against an airborne respiratory virus in the community setting.
6. We declare funding and research must be established for vaccination damage, death and suffering.
7. We declare no opportunity should be denied, including education, career, military service or medical treatment, over unwillingness to take an injection.
8. We declare that first amendment violations and medical censorship by government, technology and media companies should cease, and the Bill of Rights be upheld.
9. We declare that Pfizer, Moderna, BioNTech, Janssen, Astra Zeneca, and their enablers, withheld and willfully omitted safety and effectiveness information from patients and physicians, and should be immediately indicted for fraud.
10. We declare government and medical agencies must be held accountable.
With dozens of previously healthy young athletes literally dropping dead after getting jabbed, and hundreds of people seriously ill after getting jabbed, the Biden regime has now approved it for children — statistically the LEAST likely to contract Covid-19 — as young as FIVE years old.
Daniel Miranda, 2, with his grandmother, Juana Maria Lara, during a July immigration rights protest in D.C. (Michael Blackshire/The Washington Post)
Visits: 29
The great replacement can be very scary. I myself don’t believe that there’s a movement to get rid of white people. I do believe that some loon politicians and progressives want the undocumented here in order to change the political balance. Over 50% of the people ( 20% Democrats ) believe this.
Last December, the Associated Press and NORC conducted a large national poll examining conspiratorial ideas including this one.
The Arizona Attorney General claims to be on the side of election integrity and even claims that he will prosecute individuals for 2020 election crimes. However, new documents show that AG Mark Brnovich almost indicted pro-Trump electors in Arizona.
Instead of investigating the horrific election crimes that took place on November 3rd to steal the 2020 Presidential Election, RINO Mark Brnovich colluded with the federal government and targeted Arizona patriots who knew their election was stolen.
The full forensic audit of Maricopa County’s 2020 election discovered evidence of hundreds of thousands of fraudulent votes. After seven long months of “investigating” the fraud, Brnovich released a report acknowledging “problematic system-wide issues” and confirming that over 100,000 ballots did not have chain of custody documentation. However, Mark Brnovich has failed to act on any new prosecutions.
NEW DOCUMENTS REVEAL THE ARIZONA VERSION OF BILL BARR COVERTLY WORKED ON PROSECUTING HIS PRO-TRUMP CITIZENS.
Brnovich clamors for Trump’s endorsement and touts himself as a pro-Trump conservative. But explosive new documents prove his office actively considered prosecuting pro-Trump electors in the state who rightfully questioned the dubious official results of the presidential election of 2020.
The Arizona vote was among the most contentious in America, with a mere 0.3 percent, just over 10,000 votes, separating Biden and President Trump in the official tally. Given the highly questionable conduct of the election, including widespread voting by illegal migrants and violations of the 14th Amendment Equal Protection clause, several rival slates of electors formed in Arizona.
Ultimately, the Biden slate was unduly and prematurely certified by Governor Ducey, but with enormous controversy.
Brnovich’s office requested information from the Office of the Federal Register (OFR) about a document they had received from one of the pro-Trump slates, a group known as the Sovereign Citizens of the Great State of Arizona (SCGSA).
Prosecutors in Brnovich’s office gave the OFR specific instructions on how to deliver the documents to Arizona so that Attorney General Brnovich could use them as evidence to prosecute the group.
According to the original report by The Arizona Republic,
The Arizona Attorney General’s Office sought information from the Office of the Federal Register about a document a group of Arizona Republicans sent falsely calling themselves the state’s presidential electors and that used the official state seal, according to documents released Friday.
The request from prosecutors specified exactly how the documents needed to be delivered to the office to be useful in obtaining a conviction, according to emails released to The Arizona Republic from the Federal Register’s Office.
The Sovereign Citizens group met on Dec. 7, 2020, and both sat themselves as electors and cast their votes for Trump and Vice President Mike Pence. According to the documents sent to the Federal Register, and released on Friday, those electors took their position “under the God-given powers held by THE CITIZENS.”
The group sent its documents to the Office of the Federal Register, which oversees the National Archives and Records Administration. The procedure outlined in the U.S. Constitution specifies that office, along with the U.S. Senate, receives each state’s electoral votes.
In addition to the evidence submitted by Maricopa County auditors, over 200,000 ballots were potentially trafficked by Democratic nonprofits in Arizona.
The Gateway Pundit reported on the massive evidence of illegal ballot trafficking and fraud in Arizona’s 2020 election presented by Dinesh D’Souza and True The Vote. Irrefutable proof that the 2020 election was stolen was recently revealed in their new documentary, “2000 Mules.” Why hasn’t Mark Brnovich prosecuted these criminals?
Where has Mark Brnovich been? Is he still investigating Trump supporters who know their vote was stolen?
Contact Mark Brnovich immediately to demand indictments for the criminals who stole the 2020 election.
Mark Brnovich is currently running for the US Senate and pretends to be pro- Trump.
Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas dismissed the idea of pressuring the court for desirable outcomes at a judicial conference Friday.
Thomas spoke at the 11th Circuit judicial conference in Atlanta this week, where he discussed the Supreme Court’s leaked draft opinion for the first time. The opinion would overturn Roe v. Wade if made official, sparking panic among Democrats and protests against the court.
“We can’t be an institution that can be bullied into giving you just the outcomes you want. The events from earlier this week are a symptom of that.,” Thomas said, according to reports.
Chief Justice John Roberts agreed with him:
“A leak of this stature is absolutely appalling,” Roberts said. “If the person behind it thinks that it will affect our work, that’s just foolish.”
Immediately after the leak, Democrats attempted to bully the court into ruling in favor of Roe v Wade.
A far-left group doxxed the addresses of Supreme Court Justices who are votes against Roe v Wade – they have protests planned at their houses.
Plus, Democrat Chuck Schumer announced that a vote would be held attempting to make abortion up to birth a federal law.
Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) on Thursday announced the Senate will vote on abortion legislation, via the Women’s Health Protection Act, Wednesday.
This legislation “would enshrine abortion on demand and up-to-birth in federal law as well as void all state laws aimed at protecting the lives of the unborn.”
The vote is likely to fail bigly. Democrats need 60 Senate votes to pass the legislation. And polling shows that public opinion may be at odds with Schumer: Democrats have failed to secure a majority consensus among voters to enact abortion legislation, a Wednesday Politico/Morning Consult poll revealed. Only 47 percent support codifying Roe v. Wade. Fifty-three percent of the electorate either oppose abortion legislation or have no opinion.
On Wednesday, Joe Biden falsely characterized MAGA Republicans as the “most extremist” political group in U.S. history. Later that day, White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki confirmed that Biden meant what he said.
The name-calling started on Wednesday morning, when Joe Biden sent up a test balloon for a new way to attack conservatives, Republicans and Trump supporters by calling them “ultra MAGAs.”
It isn’t likely his new sobriquet will be echoed by many, but later in his address, he made an even worse attack on half of America’s voters by calling the MAGA movement the “most extremist political organization … in recent American history.”
“What are the next things that are going to be attacked?” Biden said, attacking the idea of eliminating Roe v. Wade. “Because this MAGA crowd is really the most extreme political organization that’s existed in American history — in recent American history,” Biden said.
On Thursday’s “Wake Up America,” @RepTimBurchett (R-TN) blasts President Biden for calling the ‘MAGA crowd’ ‘extremists.’
This is truly an outrageous — not to mention false — claim.
Later, during her White House press conference, Biden spokeswoman Jen Psaki essentially noted that Biden meant what he said. Psaki reiterated that Senator Rick Scott, the Republican from Florida, has offered an extreme economic plan, according to the White House transcript.
When asked directly about his attack on MAGA, Psaki did not back down, and added, “I think he — I answered this a little bit earlier, but I’m happy to reiterate. You know, he has been struck by the hold his predecessor seems to have on far too many members of the party.”
Do you think Biden’s statement reveals what Democrats really think of Americans?
Yes: 98% (1205 Votes)
No: 2% (20 Votes)
“But he is still going to call out where he sees extremist actions and extremist rhetoric,” Psaki exclaimed.
This really is a disgusting calumny. RNC chairwoman Ronna McDaniel had it right when she tweeted in reply to Biden saying, “Outrageous! This is from a man who repeatedly praised segregationists. Biden promised to unite the country, but it’s been smears and lies instead.”
Outrageous! This is from a man who repeatedly praised segregationists.
Biden promised to unite the country, but it’s been smears and lies instead.https://t.co/Q8ZRJ3EwKI
Regardless of whether Biden is serious about his name-calling, it is certainly a serious accusation, one that is outrageously partisan and false. MAGA followers and Trump voters are in no way “extremists.” Indeed, they epitomize a century of conservative policy ideals of low taxes, small government, local control, Christian and family values and rugged individualism.
Further, the MAGA movement has been marked by peaceful protests since it inherited that mantle from the peaceful, non-violent Tea Party movement that preceded it. And that is even if one does blame MAGA for the Jan. 6 Capitol riot.
Contrast the MAGA movement with the two decades of protests spawned by the leftist Occupy Wall Street, Antifa, Defund the Police and Black Lives Matter movements — each of which have resulted in billions in property damage, an erosion of trust in both government and fellow citizens, rapes and even murders. If you want extremism and danger, those currently active groups will give it to you by the handful.
But those political extremist movements are far from the only ones in recent memory that are built on hate, anti-Americanism, property damage, bombings and murder. One must only remember the many outrages of groups like the Weather Underground, the SDS, the Black Panthers, the Animal Liberation Front, the Earth Liberation Front, and the Nation of Islam, to name just a few. And that is not to even mention the ages-old Ku Klux Klan and the American Nazi Party. Each and every one of those groups has real — not figurative — blood on their hands, and all have been plying their extremism in recent memory.
Indeed, if you look throughout U.S. history, at nearly every dangerous extremist group that has been responsible for murders, bombings and mayhem, you will find they are leftists and anarchists. Rarely does one find center-right groups sponsoring violence.
Going back to the 1880s, when the anarchist movement began to spread across Europe and the U.S., bombings, assassinations and militant attacks hit Americans hard. Who now remembers when anarchists destroyed the Los Angeles Times headquarters building in 1919, killing 21 and injuring another 100? Or the 1920 Wall Street bombing that killed 30 and injured 143? If you are interested, a history of these attacks can be seen at Breitbart News.
In light of facts and history, Joe Biden has no historical grounds to call today’s MAGA movement the most extreme in U.S. history. It is simply a lie.
Meanwhile, Biden himself is arguing in support of abortion on demand for any reason at any time during a pregnancy, fostering the creation of a Ministry of Truth that will have police powers to shut down the free speech of Americans, teaching radical sexual identity politics to tiny children, putting an end to American sovereignty and opening the southern border to the entire world, and more.
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., talks to the media about her suspended accounts on Twitter, during a news conference, on Capitol Hill in Washington, Tuesday, July 20, 2021. (AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana)
The Trump impeachment website remains live today, but PFS has moved on from years of seeking to drive the embattled Trump from the Oval Office to now trying to remove four of his strongest congressional supporters from their respective November 2022 ballots.
Although officially a nonpartisan educational nonprofit, PFS’s most notable activities since being organized in the wake of the Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United decision have all been directed at Trump and other Republicans.
Most recently, PFS made headlines with litigation it filed against four House Republicans and one Arizona Republican state representative seeking to have state courts remove the officials’ names from the November ballot.
An Arizona Superior Court judge rejected PFS’s request to remove U.S. Reps. Andy Biggs and Paul Gosar, both Arizona congressmen, and Arizona state Rep. Mark Finchem from the November ballot.The PFS lawsuit stated that the lawmakers’ alleged efforts in support of the January 2021 breach of the U.S. Capitol amounted to participation in an insurrection seeking to bring down the federal government.
Biggs and Gosar are seeking reelection to the U.S. House, while Finchem seeks to be elected as Arizona’s secretary of state.
Judges in North Carolina and Georgia are hearing similar suits brought by PFS-backed plaintiffs seeking the ouster of Rep. Madison Cawthorn (R-N.C.) and Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) from the November ballots in their states.
An analysis by The Epoch Times and the Capital Research Center (CRC) of available public records for PFS reveals a top leadership with deep ties throughout far-left precincts of liberal and progressive nonprofit political activism and funding from numerous well-known and some not-so-familiar liberal foundations.
A total of 91 grants to PFS from left-wing foundations with a value in excess of $7.3 million were found by CRC using the Foundation Search database.
Among the grants received between 2012 and 2019 were these: two grants (totaling $750,000) from the Schumann Media Center in New York; nine grants ($485,000) from the National Philanthropic Trust of Jenkintown, Pennsylvania; four grants ($375,000) from the Gaia Fund of San Francisco; five grants ($365,000) from the Madrona Foundation in Seattle; six grants ($255,000) from the Clements Foundation in Wilmington, Delaware.
Other notable grants during the period included four totaling $249,148 from the Tides Foundation in San Francisco; three grants ($205,000) from the Rockefeller Brothers Fund in New York; two grants ($60,000) from the Rockefeller Family Fund; and four grants ($54,670) from the Fidelity Investments Charitable Gift Fund in Boston.
The funding from the Tides Foundation is notable because, in the 1970s, the San Francisco nonprofit pioneered the dark money fund that first provided a way for liberal donors to send large sums to support favored and oftentimes extremely controversial causes but without their names being publicly linked to the recipients.
The contribution is instead officially credited to Tides.
Such “donor-advised” funds are now common across the ideological and political spectrum.
The PFS 2020 IRS 990 tax return indicated that President John Bonifaz received nearly $217,000 in compensation that year, while legal director Ronald Fein was paid more than $159,000 for the period.
The depth of PFS links throughout the vast network of far-left liberal and progressive political activist nonprofits is seen in this analysis by InfluenceWatch, a CRC publication that specializes in reporting on such connections:
“Free Speech For People is led by a team with strong ties to the political left. John Bonifaz, founder of Free Speech for People, is the founder and former executive director of the National Voting Rights Institute (NVRI), a left-of-center electoral advocacy group.
“Steve Cobble, [former] senior political adviser for Free Speech for People, [was] an assistant fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies, a left-wing think tank.
“Cobble is also a co-founder of Progressive Democrats of America, an organization that aims to support the Democratic Party and advocate for an agenda focused on fighting climate change and expanding public healthcare.”
Other PFS officials have similarly left-wing backgrounds. Alexandra Flores-Quilty, who is PFS’s campaign director, was previously executive director of We the People, an activist group that organizes mass protest marches against Trump.
Kristen Eastlick, CRC vice president, told The Epoch Times that “while this organization [PFS] was founded in the wake of the Citizens United decision, the group’s agenda has expanded beyond generic campaign finance activism into partisan hackery—from their effort to launch ImpeachDonaldTrump.org as soon as he took the oath of office to their efforts to remove individuals from appearing on ballots.”
“Free Speech for People might be the name, but if political speech is the bedrock form of free speech, then eliminating the people’s election options is an assault on that freedom,” she said.
A new report says that White House visitor logs confirm that a business partner of Hunter Biden met with President Joe Biden in the White House while Joe Biden was vice president during the Obama administration.
The president has insisted on multiple occasions that he was never involved in or aware of the business activity of his son, which included contacts in Ukraine, Russia and China.
Eric Schwerin, who at the time was president of the since-dissolved Rosemont Seneca Partners — which Hunter Biden helped found — met with Joe Biden on Nov. 17, 2010, visitor logs document, according to the New York Post.
The logs indicate that Schwerin met with aides of Joe and Jill Biden multiple times between 2009 and 2013.
Republican Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, who has investigated Hunter Biden’s activities, said the president’s claim to have never been involved in his son’s business ventures rings hollow.
”Not everyone gets to meet the Vice President of the United States in the White House. The press should be asking why Hunter Biden’s business associates — like Eric Schwerin — had that privilege and were given access to the Obama White House,” he said.
“This is additional evidence that Joe Biden lied when he said he never discussed Hunter’s foreign business dealings. It’s well past time for the corporate media to demand the truth from Joe Biden. The corruption of Biden Inc. must be exposed,” Johnson said.
In October 2009, Schwerin met with Evan Ryan, then-Vice President Biden’s assistant for intergovernmental affairs and public liaison. Four months later, Hunter Biden was copied in on a request for an appointment to the National Labor Relations Board, which was later made by former President Barack Obama.
Schwerin “did financial stuff for the family but that’s really all I know,” Margaret Campbell, a former Special Assistant to Jill Biden said, adding, “It would make sense if he stopped into the White House.”
Schwerin was involved in Joe Biden’s tax matters, according to the hard drive of the laptop computer that once belonged to Hunter Biden.
“Your Dad just called me (about his mortgage) and mentioned he’d be out a lot soon and not really back until Labor Day … He could use some positive news about his future earnings potential,” Schwerin wrote to Hunter Biden in July of 2010
The evidence is mounting that the full story needs to be told, Republican Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas said.
“It’s increasingly obvious that Hunter Biden’s business revolved around providing access to his father and the highest levers of power. It reeks of pay-to-play. The clear solution is a Special Counsel investigation to fairly investigate the disturbing allegations of Biden family corruption,” Cruz said.
From the start, questions have been raised about Joe Biden’s connections with Hunter Biden’s pals.
When the first reports of the contents of Hunter Biden’s laptop emerged in 2020, a report in the New York Post said that a 2015 email reveals that Hunter Biden introduced his father to a top executive of a Ukrainian energy firm at a time when Joe Biden was vice president.
The email was from Vadym Pozharskyi, an adviser to the board of Burisma Holdings, a Ukrainian energy company that once had Hunter Biden on its board and payroll.
“Dear Hunter, thank you for inviting me to DC and giving an opportunity to meet your father and spent [sic] some time together. It’s realty [sic] an honor and pleasure,” the April 17, 2015, email read.
When asked about the content of the emails, White House deputy press secretary Andrew Bates told Fox News, “We don’t comment on the laptop.”
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.
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.
Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign and the Democratic National Committee (DNC) likely violated federal law by not accurately describing payments made to a law firm that funneled the money to ex-British spy Christopher Steele, federal officials have ruled.
The Federal Election Commission (FEC) determined that there was probable cause to believe that the Clinton campaign and its treasurer, Elizabeth Jones, and the DNC and its treasurer, Virginia McGregor, misreported the purpose of certain spending and violated federal law, according to documents made public on March 30.
The probable violations concern the $1 million payment that the law firm Perkins Coie, retained by the parties to provide legal services ahead of the 2016 election, made in 2016 to the company Fusion GPS.
The Clinton campaign paid $175,000 to Perkins Coie in mid-2016 for what it described in disclosure reports as “legal services.” The DNC paid $849,407 to the law firm at roughly the same time for what it described as “legal and compliance consulting.”
Federal law requires political campaigns to report the name and address of each person that they pay more than $200 per year and define the purpose of the payment.
Complaints lodged with the FEC stated that the Hillary for America campaign (HFA) and the DNC stated in 2018 that the parties made sure to hire operatives through Perkins Coie to shield their conduct from scrutiny.
“By intentionally obscuring their payments through Perkins Coie and failing to publicly disclose the true purpose of those payments, HFA and the DNC were able to avoid publicly reporting on their statutorily required FEC disclosure forms the fact that they were paying Fusion GPS to perform opposition research on Trump with the intent of influencing the outcome of the 2016 presidential election,” the Coolidge-Reagan Foundation stated one complaint.
The foundation released the FEC’s determination on March 30 ahead of the agency’s own release of the documents. An FEC spokesperson didn’t dispute the authenticity of the documents.
“The FEC has up to 30 days following notification of the parties to an enforcement matter to prepare and place the relevant documents on the public record,” the spokesperson told The Epoch Times in an email. “Until then, we cannot provide comment or disclose any information.”
Instead of going toward the purposes listed on disclosure forms, the payments actually went to fund the creation of the infamous dossier compiled by Steele—an ardent opponent of Clinton’s rival Donald Trump—with the assistance of Fusion operatives.
Perkins Coie acknowledged the arrangement in a letter (pdf) sent to Fusion in 2017 and published by media outlets.
The dossier was rife with salacious, unsubstantiated claims, many of which have since been debunked by federal officials, including Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz.
The FEC found probable cause that the payments were misreported. That prompted the Clinton campaign and the DNC to agree to enter into conciliation agreements with the FEC.
The agreements stipulate that the parties will pay penalties—$8,000 for Clinton’s campaign and $105,000 for the DNC—and won’t violate the laws that they appear to have violated in the future.
The commission, upon the request of anyone filing a proper complaint concerning the matters at issue, may review compliance with the laws. If there’s a belief that any of the laws are being violated, a civil action may be started in federal court.
The campaign and the DNC didn’t admit to wrongdoing. The parties didn’t respond to requests for comment.
DNC officials have said before that the party didn’t know about the arrangement between Perkins Coie and Fusion. Brian Fallon, a former spokesman for the Clinton campaign, said he wished he had known about the payments to Steele because he would have volunteered to go help him. Fallon has also said Clinton “may have known” about the research, but “the degree of exactly what she knew is beyond my knowledge.”
The FEC also determined that others didn’t violate federal laws: Steele, Fusion, Perkins Coie, and former Perkins Coie attorney Marc Elias.
The fines aren’t even a slap on the wrist !
As one commenter put it on ET: “Why didn’t the FEC forward criminal charges against her and others? Because they are just another corrupt government entity.”
158
