Categories
Back Door Power Grab Corruption Elections Faked news Politics The Courts

“None of Them Should Be in Jail. They Should All Be Out On Bail…It Is an American Gulag” – Judge Napolitano

Visits: 16

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.

Original here (includes video)

Loading

119
Categories
Corruption Elections Politics The Courts

Zuckerberg Ends Controversial Grants to Election Offices

Visits: 19

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 Times  April 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.


So why isn’t he in Jail? Answer: $$$$$$$

Loading

157
Categories
Elections Corruption Politics

OUTSTANDING! Alabama Governor Kay Ivey Shares the Greatest Campaign Ad of the Season and the Far-Left Goes Crazy

Visits: 84

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.

Governor Ivey shares:

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.”

See full video below and on Youtube

Loading

147
Categories
COVID Corruption Drugs How sick is this?

FOIA Request Unearths that Pfizer Planned to Hire 1,800 Employees to Deal with Reporting on Adverse Effects from COVID Vaccine

Visits: 23

Pfizer hired 600 employees with a plan to hire a total of 1,800 employees when side effects from its COVID vaccine started showing up.  The employees were hired to address the flood in adverse effects reporting. 

Posted by Jim Holt for The Gateway Pundit April 10, 2022 at 4:00pm

Zerohedge shared a report Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times

Pfizer hired 600 employees in the months after its COVID-19 vaccine was authorized in the United States due to the “large increase” of reports of side effects linked to the vaccine, according to a document prepared by the company.

Pfizer has “taken a multiple actions to help alleviate the large increase of adverse event reports,” according to the document. “This includes significant technology enhancements, and process and workflow solutions, as well as increasing the number of data entry and case processing colleagues.”

At the time when the document—from the first quarter of 2021—was sent to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Pfizer had onboarded about 600 extra full-time workers to deal with the jump.

“More are joining each month with an expected total of more than 1,800 additional resources by the end of June 2021,” Pfizer said.

Pfizer tried to hide the information

In addition, Zerohedge reported:

The analysis of adverse event reports was previously disclosed to the health transparency group, but certain portions were redacted (pdf), including the number of workers Pfizer onboarded to deal with the jump in adverse event reports.

“We asked that the redactions on page 6 of this report be lifted and the FDA agreed without providing an explanation,” Aaron Siri, a lawyer representing the plaintiffs, told The Epoch Times in an email.

After the document was produced, the FDA determined that the three redactions on that page “could be lifted,” an FDA spokesperson told The Epoch Times via email.

The redactions had been made under (b) (4) of the Freedom of Information Act, which lets agencies “withhold trade secrets and commercial or financial information obtained from a person which is privileged or confidential.”

The unredacted version of the document also now shows that approximately 126 million doses of Pfizer were shipped around the world since the company received the first clearance, from U.S. regulators, on Dec. 1, 2020. The shipments took place through Feb. 28, 2021.

It was unclear how many of those doses had been administered as of that date.

As TGP reported previously, after the courts ordered Pfizer to release data on its COVID vaccine, documents showed over 1,200 vaccine deaths in the first 90 days after taking the vaccine.

TGP has reported many additional reports of deaths or injuries caused by the Pfizer vaccine.  The information to date does not look good for the Pfizer vaccine.

Loading

151
Categories
The Courts Corruption Elections Politics

Here’s hoping: Durham Asks Court to Compel Production From Clinton Campaign, DNC

Visits: 31

https://i0.wp.com/nypost.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2020/09/john-durham.jpg?w=580&ssl=1

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.

Fusion GPS was paid by the Democratic entities through Perkins Coie, a law firm. The agreement was introduced as an exhibit in the case.

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.”

The trial is currently set to start on May 16.

Loading

180
Categories
Back Door Power Grab Corruption Elections Politics

Trump Lost AZ by 10,457 Votes but Look at Eerie Number of AZ Federal-Only Voters Who Voted Without ID

Visits: 31

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.

Loading

122
Categories
Corruption Politics Reprints from others. Stupid things people say or do.

Joe Biden’s Teleprompter Is Taking over His Special White House Studio Set

Visits: 44

By Jim Hoft for TGP April 2, 2022 at 12:45pm

It’s alive!

As his dementia worsens Joe Biden is in desperate need of a good visual tool to keep him on topic.

Unfortunately, it didn’t work so well in Europe last weekend where he went off script and nearly started World War III.

The White House is working to resolve this problem.

Biden’s handlers recently added an ENORMOUS teleprompter into his White House look-alike studio.

It’s HUGE.


Of course, he still has to read what is there…….

Loading

152
Categories
Back Door Power Grab Corruption Crime Faked news

Well, DUH! Clinton Campaign, DNC Agree to Pay Fines for Payments of Steele Dossier

Visits: 21

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton speaks during the 2022 New York State Democratic Convention in New York on Feb. 17, 2022. (Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images)

By Zachary Stieber for EPOCH TIMES    March 30, 2022

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.

Trump filed a lawsuit against Clinton and others involved with the dossier on March 24.

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.”

Loading

222
Categories
The Courts Corruption Elections Politics

Judge Tosses Maryland Congressional Map Over ‘Extreme Partisan Gerrymandering’

Visits: 31

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.

Loading

165
Categories
Corruption How sick is this? Progressive Racism

WOKE: NYC’s “Chief Medical Officer” :Mocking Designation for White Moms

Visits: 33

The left’s rhetorical war on women and white people has infested the “objective” field of medicine and is escalating to absurd lengths.

In the latest salvo, the clownish chief medical officer of New York City referred to pregnant women as “birthing people” and specifically marginalized white moms with this dehumanizing designation.

Dr. Michelle Morse is New York’s first “chief medical officer,” and she was specifically chosen for this new post because of her focus on pushing “racial equity.”

That’s PC speak for “whatever helps black people.”

“Dr. Morse’s experience has combined the best of public health, social medicine, anti-racism education, and activism,” Health Commissioner Dr. Dave Chokshi said in a February 2021 news release announcing her appointment.

“Health equity requires leaders who propel change and I am grateful that she has joined the Department to help us create a healthier, more equitable, city,” Chokshi said.

On Wednesday, Morse made the case for taxpayer-funded doulas (that’s like a midwife without the health care training) targeting pregnant black and brown women.

The far-left activist claimed minority women need free doulas because the mortality rate of black mothers in New York is higher than for white moms.

Naturally, Morse blamed this alleged disparity on sham systemic racism and not on the post- and pre-birth health habits of white vs. black mothers.

In her bizarre tweets, she specifically referenced “Black and Puerto Rican mothers” while dismissing white moms as “non-Hispanic White birthing people.”

“Mortality rates of birthing people are too high, and babies born to Black and Puerto Rican mothers in this city are three times more likely to die in their first year of life than babies born to non-Hispanic White birthing people,” Morse said.

Numerous Twitter users slammed Morse for her degrading categorization of pregnant women as “birthing people.”

Many also called Morse out for her shady dig at white moms.

Morse’s racist tweets promoted New York Mayor Eric Adams’ multimillion-dollar, taxpayer-funded program to provide free doulas in 33 minority neighborhoods.

In a news release Wednesday, Adams — who once mocked white cops using the racial slur “crackers” — said the program was part of an effort to help black and Hispanic mothers.

“All three initiatives are part of Mayor Adams’ mission to reduce health inequities in New York City, particularly amongst marginalized Black and Latino/a families and pregnant people,” the release said.

“Maternal and infant health inequities are rooted in generations of structural racism and disinvestment,” it said.

“In New York City, Black women are nine times more likely to die of a pregnancy-related cause than white women, and their rate of infant mortality is more than three times higher. For Puerto Ricans, the infant mortality rate is twice that of white New Yorkers.”

While many Americans are struggling with soaring grocery and gas prices, some of our tax dollars are being used to help only certain groups under racist Democratic leadership.


A birth doula remains with the mother during birth, offering relaxation and breathing technique support, as well as comforting services like massage, and assistance with labor positions; however, doulas are not medically trained, and cannot deliver babies. A doula is not a substitute for having a woman’s partner at the birth. Doulas encourage participation from the partner, and offer support and reassurance to the partner as well.

https://www.medicinenet.com/doula_vs_midwife/article.htm

Comment: so these non-medically trained people are going to lower mortality rates how?

Loading

187
Verified by MonsterInsights