Categories
Back Door Power Grab Corruption Elections How sick is this?

The Media (and McConnell and Romney) Are Distorting Republican Censure of Cheney, Kinzinger (A twofer)

Views: 30

 

Ronna McDaniel Posted: Feb 08, 2022 (RNC Chairman)

If corporate news media wants to know why Americans don’t trust it anymore, they should look no further than the shameful, outrageous, and patently false coverage of the resolution adopted by the RNC to censure Reps. Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger.

Let me be abundantly clear: as Chairman of the RNC, I have repeatedly condemned the violence that occurred at the Capitol on January 6th and do so again today. On January 6, 2021 , the members of the RNC released a statement that read, “These violent scenes we have witnessed do not represent acts of patriotism, but an attack on our country and its founding principles.” I tweeted that the violence was “shameful” and condemned it in the strongest possible terms.

The events of that day are deeply personal to me and our team as the FBI found a bomb outside of RNC headquarters that afternoon, and I will never forget what it felt like to know that my staff was in immediate danger. Violence has no place in our political discourse, period, and those who engaged in violence on January 6th and committed crimes should be held accountable with due process by the appropriate law enforcement authorities and prosecutors.

But the awful events of that day do not justify Cheney or Kinzinger enabling a partisan committee whose real purpose seems to be helping Democrats’ electoral prospects at the cost of potentially ruining innocent people’s lives. From the outset, the committee has lacked the legitimacy of past independent, bipartisan efforts investigating events of national importance. For starters, Republican leadership was not allowed to freely appoint a single Republican to the committee.  Instead, Cheney and Kinzinger were hand-picked by Nancy Pelosi. 

The January 6 Committee predictably has now vastly exceeded its original purpose and morphed into something else entirely, investigating Republicans who had nothing to do with January 6 for the apparent offense of being Republican. Under the Committee’s approach, almost anything related to the 2020 election is within the scope of its jurisdiction, to include harassing citizens who were not even in Washington, DC that day.

Nancy Pelosi’s committee – which the New York Times says “is employing techniques more common in criminal cases than in congressional inquiries” – has no authority to pursue criminal charges, is not respecting the rights of private citizens and has disregarded due process and checks and balances. Last month, reports showed that 90 percent of the committee’s subpoenas have been delivered to people who weren’t even at the Capitol on January 6th. That is political posturing, not pursuing justice. Even an individual on trial has the right to face a jury of his peers, but those being called in front of the committee are faced with a hostile kangaroo court that reached a conclusion long before even asking a question.

This includes individuals like one of the RNC’s members who was subpoenaed because, weeks before January 6th, she served as an alternate elector pending the outcome of ongoing lawsuits – an action with clear legal precedent which Democrats themselves have done in the past. Now she could face costly legal bills even though she was nowhere near the Capitol on January 6th and had nothing to do with the violence that occurred.

Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger are cheapening the events of January 6th by participating in Nancy Pelosi’s partisan committee. The Senate has already completed one investigation into January 6th, and there are multiple ongoing active law enforcement investigations into what happened that day. These are the correct avenues for investigation.

I firmly believe we are the big tent party, and that disagreement amongst Republicans is welcome and can make us stronger. But what Cheney and Kinzinger are engaged in goes much further than any policy disagreement. These two have permitted their party affiliation to be weaponized to allow the Democrats gross overreach and abuse of power. In short, they never should have agreed to be part of a committee where Republicans were denied representation.

As I have repeatedly stated, violence is not legitimate political discourse – whether in the U.S. Capitol or in Democrat-run cities across the country – and neither is abusing Congress’ investigatory powers for political gain. Media outlets pretending that the RNC believes otherwise are doing so in bad faith, and their lies should be called out for the cheap political stunts they are.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/02/mcconnell-calls-jan-6-violent-insurrection-says-rnc-shouldnt-censured-cheney-kinzinger-video/


Last week the RNC voted to censure RINO Reps Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger for sitting on the January 6 panel.

The censure resolution alleged Cheney and Kinzinger were “participating in a Democrat-led persecution of ordinary citizens engaged in legitimate political discourse.”

Mitt Romney threw a fit last week after the RNC censured the two RINOs.

On Tuesday, McConnell joined Romney and said the RNC had no business “singling out members of our party who may have different views from the majority.”

McConnell also took issue with the RNC’s claim January 6 was “legitimate political discourse.”

“We all were here. We saw what happened,” McConnell said in response to a question from CNN’s Manu Raju. “It was a violent insurrection for the purpose of trying to prevent the peaceful transfer of power after a legitimately certified election, from one administration to the next. That’s what it was.”

Loading

128
Categories
Back Door Power Grab Corruption Crime How sick is this? Politics

Bill introduced to side step budgets, fund CDC to conduct anti-gun research

Views: 24

By John Petrolino | Feb 08, 2022 

 

Ed. NOTE: I  am not a rabid gun-freak. For many years the only gun I owed was an heirloom .22 revolver that had belonged to my grandfather. That changed several years ago when a lunatic with a felony record, and who knew where I lived, threatened to kill me — and several others. I now have a 9mm. I generally don’t carry, although I do have a CCW.  This article drew my ire. And it should yours, too. TPR

One of the fun myths we keep getting fed is that the gun industry is the only industry that cannot be sued for damages. Those of us who are keenly aware of what the law is and how it reads, knows that’s not true. Firearm manufacturers can’t be sued for the misuse of their products, just as Ford can’t be sued if their vehicle was involved in a drunk driving incident (or Johnnie Walker for that matter). Another fantastic false fact that flies out of the mouths of the anti-freedom caucus members is that the CDC is cut off from funding on studying so-called “gun violence”. This is a little prestidigitation being  played with words, as the facts get shoved up the pinko sleeves’ of our “honest” congresscritters. A newly reintroduced bill seeks to address this “problem”. On February 2, 2022 H.R. 6575: Protecting Americans from Gun Violence Act of 2022 was reintroduced by Congresswoman Nydia Velázquez from New York.

What does the bill aim to do? In essence it will levy a one dollar fee for every NICS check completed, with the first $10,000,000 going directly to the CDC for the purposes of “…carrying out subsection (a), the Secretary shall conduct or support research described in such subsection relating to gun violence.”

From the bill text:

(1)When, pursuant to section 922(t) of this title, a licensee under this chapter is first required to contact the national instant criminal background check system established under section 103 of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act about a person with respect to a transaction involving one or more firearms, but before contacting the system, the licensee shall—

(A)charge and collect from the person a fee in an amount equal to $1, regardless of the number of firearms involved in the transaction;

(B)provide the person with a timestamped receipt acknowledging receipt of the fee from the person; and

(C)maintain a written or electronic record of the transaction and the timestamped receipt for 3 years.

(2)Not later than the end of the calendar quarter in which a licensee collects a fee under paragraph (1), the licensee shall transmit the amount of the fee to the Attorney General, who shall remit the amount to the Secretary of the Treasury.

 

[…]

 

(1)The first $10,000,000 shall be available, without further appropriation, to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to carry out section 391(c) of the Public Health Service Act, as added by section 3.

(2)The next $5,000,000 shall be available, without further appropriation, to the Attorney General, for the operation and maintenance of the national instant criminal background check system established under section 103 of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act.

(3)The remainder shall be available, without further appropriation, to the Attorney General for such activities of the Office for Victim Assistance of the Federal Bureau of Investigation as the Attorney General deems appropriate.

There’s also a section with further enhanced penalties involving lost or stolen firearms involved in interstate commerce etc. People will be subjected to the following penalty:

…shall be fined $10,000, imprisoned not more than 1 year, or both, with respect to each firearm involved in the violation.

There was not a whole lot of information on this bill being newly reintroduced. A prior version of it was introduced by Velázquez  on November 7, 2017. From that press release:

“The repeated lack of action on sensible gun control following mass shootings is unconscionable,” said Velázquez. “Last month, a deranged gunman in Las Vegas stole the lives from 59 innocent concert goers and injured hundreds of others. This weekend, 26 of our fellow citizens – ranging from children to seniors – lost their lives. Our collective outrage cannot be lost in the days following these shootings. Instead, we must take real, concrete action to crack down on illegal sales of guns. For this reason, I have introduced two new bills that take modest but meaningful steps to reduce the scourge of gun violence.”

Velázquez’s first bill, the Protecting Americans from Gun Violence Act of 2017, establishes a new fee on gun sales. The Act requires that a $1 fee be collected following every registered background check. In turn, revenue from this tax will help fund research to prevent gun violence and to preserve the operation of background checks. Specifically, the first $10 million collected through the tax would go to fund gun research at the Center for Disease Control (CDC).

The National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) is a vital part of preventing those that should not have access to guns from obtaining them. However, as seen in the recent Texas shooting, there are gaps in the system. In Texas, the gunman’s past criminal record should have prohibited him from passing a background check. To help address these gaps, the Act would provide $5 million to explore these deficiencies and strengthen the NICS system.

“For two decades, the NRA and their weapons manufacturing patrons have suppressed funding to study gun violence like the public health epidemic that it is,” said Velázquez. “While much more is needed beyond studies, closing the gap in data on gun violence will be an important step toward addressing the overarching problem. Equally important, under this bill, the research will be funded by the purchasers and sellers of firearms.  Those who buy and sell these instruments of death should pay for the research examining their impact.”

The press release is oozing with that quality bogeyman allegations casting the NRA as an enemy of the state. What Velázquez and the other lying ilk in her camp continually leave out is that the subject of so-called “gun violence” can be studied by the CDC, however that research is not to be used to enact any freedom squishing “gun control” laws. The progressives are kind of tipping their hand on this one. They’re basically saying “We don’t want the money unless we can use it to strip away peoples’ rights.” The NRA advocating for this would be like a turkey donating resources to someone finding the best Thanksgiving day recipe to use.

What will come of this bill? Probably not a whole lot. However, we can see the workarounds that those in power are willing to utilize in order to disarm Americans.

Loading

158
Categories
Corruption How sick is this? Politics

Here we go again: Biden DHS Declares Heightened Terrorism Threat

Views: 33

FILE PHOTO: U.S. Department of Homeland Security emblem is pictured at the National Cybersecurity & Communications Integration Center (NCCIC) located just outside Washington in Arlington, Virginia September 24, 2010. REUTERS/Hyungwon Kang
By Jack Phillips for EPOCH TIMES  February 8, 2022

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) on Feb. 7 declared a heightened terrorism threat due to “false and misleading narratives,” misinformation, and “conspiracy theories.”

“The United States remains in a heightened threat environment fueled by several factors, including an online environment filled with false or misleading narratives and conspiracy theories, and other forms of mis- dis- and mal-information introduced and/or amplified by foreign and domestic threat actors,” the DHS bulletin said.

The agency did not say what foreign or domestic actors are responsible for the alleged proliferation of misinformation or disinformation.

“Mass casualty attacks and other acts of targeted violence conducted by lone offenders and small groups acting in furtherance of ideological beliefs and/or personal grievances pose an ongoing threat to the nation,” the DHS continued, adding that some individuals are seeking to “sow discord or undermine public trust in U.S. government institutions.”

Some individuals, the bulletin alleged, are calling for violence against critical infrastructure, faith-based institutions like churches or synagogues, colleges, government personnel or facilities, and other targets.

As an example of key factors that allegedly contribute to the heightened threat environment, the DHS said there are misleading narratives surrounding COVID-19 and claimed that some individuals have used COVID-19 mandates or vaccines to carry out attacks since 2020. The agency did not elaborate or provide additional evidence for its allegations. The DHS also listed online claims of election fraud as a contributor, and it also did not provide additional details or evidence.

The agency said that “foreign terrorist organizations and domestic threat actors continue to amplify pre-existing false or misleading narratives online to sow discord and undermine public trust in government institutions. It said violent extremists, including the individual who recently launched an attack against the synagogue in Texas, highlight “the continuing threat of violence based upon racial or religious motivations, as well as threats against faith-based organizations.”

The ISIS terrorist group and its affiliates “may issue public calls for retaliation due to the strike that recently killed ISIS leader Abu Ibrahim al-Hashimi al-Qurayshi,” the bulletin said. The Biden administration announced last week that al-Qurayshi was killed during a raid in northern Syria.

The bulletin also made note of alleged recent threats to black colleges and universities across the United States.

“Domestic violent extremists have also viewed attacks against U.S. critical infrastructure as a means to create chaos and advance ideological goals, and have recently aspired to disrupt U.S. electric and communications critical infrastructure, including by spreading false or misleading narratives about 5G cellular technology,” the bulletin continued.

The DHS said the heightened threat alert will expire on June 7, 2022.

Loading

127
Categories
Corruption Drugs How sick is this? Science

More Outrage: Congress Investigating Claims of NIH Funding Cruel Experiments Injecting Puppies with Cocaine

Views: 19

 

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) is facing a congressional probe after reports emerged alleging the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) spent millions of taxpayer dollars on a cruel experiment, injecting beagle puppies with cocaine.

The non-profit watchdog organization White Coat Waste Project (WCW) reported on another cruel experiment allegedly funded by taxpayers. According to WCW’s findings, via a Freedom of Information Act [FOIA] request, “seven 6-month-old beagle puppies were trained to wear a jacket” which “served a cruel purpose: to inject the animal wearing it with drugs.” Puppies were then dosed with cocaine repeatedly “for months” with what WCW described as an “‘experimental compound,’ to see how the two drugs interacted”:

The experiment, which ran from September 2020 to September 2021 (with a report due May 2022), was filmed, so experimenters could see if the puppies had any “adverse reactions” to the drugs. Prior to being drugged, the dogs were also forced to undergo surgery, where they were implanted with a “telemetry unit” to monitor their vital signs throughout the experiment.

That was not the only experiment, either:

A second experiment, which ran from March 2020 until March 2021, also used special jackets to inject beagles with cocaine. Six puppies were used in these experiments.

Why do the same experiment twice? Why even do it once? We don’t know — but what we do know is that you’re footing the bill. These two experiments cost taxpayers over $2.3 million dollars.

According to WCW, researchers either killed the “coke hounds” after the experiment or shipped them away to be used for other experiments:

A bipartisan group of lawmakers is now leading the investigation into these allegations, sending a letter to Nora D. Volkow, director of NIDA, informing her of their concerns.

“The documents state that the supposed purpose of these cocaine experiments on puppies was to generate a report that ‘may be submitted by NIDA to the FDA [U.S. Food and Drug Administration].’ However, the FDA itself has recently indicated that it ‘does not mandate that human drugs be studied in dogs,’” they wrote, citing the reporting from WCW as well as the revelations made by the FOIA requests.

“Nevertheless, despite the FDA’s assertion, these NIDA documents state that, ‘this study is required by a relevant government regulatory agency,’” the lawmakers, led by Reps. Nancy Mace (R-SC) and Brendan Boyle (D-PA), continued.

“We are concerned that NIDA is spending tax dollars on dog testing that is cruel, costly, outdated and that the FDA has claimed is unnecessary,” they wrote, requesting her answers to the following questions by February 16, 2022:

  • How much taxpayer money has been spent on dog testing under contract number HHSN271201800019I to date?
  • Has all dog testing being conducted under contract HHSN271201800019I been completed? If so, on what date? If not, what dog tests are still ongoing or scheduled?
  • Since the FDA has stated that it does not require dog testing for new drugs, why did NIDA commission testing on puppies specifically?
  • What, if anything, did NIDA do to work with the FDA to explore non-animal alternatives to meet data requirements? Please describe in detail.

This is far from the first time the NIH has come under scrutiny for cruel puppy experiments. In October, reports surfaced accusing Dr. Anthony Fauci’s division of the NIH, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), of partially funding an experiment allowing hungry, diseased sandflies to eat beagle puppies alive. However, the Washington Post later stated that researchers “mistakenly listed NIAID as a funder when they published a paper in a scientific journal in late July,” prompting the journal to issue a correction October 26. WCW spokesman Justin Goodman, however, referred to the explanation as all “too convenient.”

WCW also obtained FOIA documents which found the NIAID funding an experiment “which involved injecting puppies with a mutant bacteria and allowing hundreds of ticks to feast upon them,” as Breitbart News detailed.

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/02/07/congress-investigating-claims-nih-funding-cruel-experiments-injecting-puppies-cocaine/

 

Loading

161
Categories
COVID Corruption Drugs Politics Science

Coming to a country near you: Austria Signs Law Requiring Compulsory Vaccination for All Adults

Views: 29

By Jack Phillips for Epoch Times  February 4, 2022

Austrian President Alexander Van der Bellen on Friday signed a controversial law introducing a national COVID-19 vaccine mandate for adults that includes fines.

Those without proof of vaccination or exemption face an initial fine of 600 euros ($680) and additional fines up to 3,600 euros ($4,100). Individuals can be fined up to four times per year, and the law will last until January 2024.

Van der Bellen signed the law after parliament approved it on Thursday, according to his office in a statement to media outlets. The law will come into force on Saturday, his office said.

Pregnant women and those who can’t be inoculated because it could harm their health are exempt from the mandate. People who recently recovered from COVID-19, caused by the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus, within 180 days are also exempt, according to details of the law.

According to the law, anyone aged 18 and older has to get the vaccine. They also have to receive boosters when eligible.

“The vaccine mandate won’t immediately help us break the Omicron wave, but that wasn’t the goal of this law,” Austrian Health Minister Wolfgang Mueckstein said Thursday before Parliament’s upper chamber approved the plan. “The vaccine mandate should help protect us from the next waves, and above all from the next variants.”

Epoch Times Photo
Demonstrators hold flags and placards as they march to protest against the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) restrictions and the mandatory vaccination in Vienna, Austria, on Dec. 4, 2021. (Lisi Niesner/Reuters)

In March, Austrian police will start checking people’s vaccination status during traffic stops and checks on COVID-19 restrictions, according to the law. People who can’t produce proof of vaccination will be asked in writing to do so and will face fines.

Opposition politicians, including Freedom Party of Austria leader Herbert Kickl, said the rule represents “an inglorious era for the rule of law and the fundamental rights and freedoms of Austrians,” according to Die Presse.

“I don’t really see the added value of the vaccine mandate at this point,” said Gerald Gartlehner, an epidemiologist at the Danube University Krems. The Omicron variant’s highly infectious nature and milder symptoms have proven to be a pandemic game-changer, he said, adding that much of the population already has immunity via a previous infection or vaccination.

Meanwhile, in Germany, members of Parliament are debating on whether to also consider a compulsory vaccine for all adults.

But elsewhere in Europe, some countries have started to drop COVID-19 rules, including vaccine mandates. Denmark, for example, lifted all its COVID-19 restrictions on Tuesday and Sweden will follow on Feb. 9.

“At the same time as infections are skyrocketing, [the number of] patients admitted to intensive care [is] actually going down,” Soren Brostrom, director-general of Denmark’s Health Authority, said in a CNN interview. “It’s around 30 people in ICU beds right now with a COVID-19 diagnosis, out of a population of 6 million.”

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Loading

153
Categories
Corruption Crime The Courts

Another Secret Postal Service Program Spies on Citizens by Hacking Cell Phones

Views: 43

Months after Judicial Watch sued the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) for information about a secret program that tracks and collects Americans’ social media posts, more of the agency’s controversial spy mechanisms are being exposed. The newly uncovered tools are sophisticated hacking devices that can breach cell phones and the USPS’s law enforcement arm, U.S. Postal Inspection Service (USPIS), has utilized them hundreds of times in the last few years, according to a news story that cites USPIS data buried in a lengthy agency report. The questionable surveillance schemes appear to indicate that the government is weaponizing the nation’s postal service to improperly spy on the citizens who fund it.

The social media surveillance program was uncovered early last year by an online news outlet that revealed the USPS has been quietly tracking and collecting the social media posts of Americans, including notes about planned protests. It is known as Internet Covert Operations Program (ICOP). Analysts dig through social media sites searching for “inflammatory” postings, which are shared across government agencies. Civil liberties experts quoted in the story questioned the legal authority of the USPS to monitor social media activity and one asked a logical question: Why would the government depend on the postal service to examine the internet for security reasons? “If the individuals they’re monitoring are carrying out or planning criminal activity that should be the purview of the FBI,” said one civil liberties authority in the piece, adding “if they’re simply engaging in lawfully protected speech, even if it’s odious or objectionable, then monitoring them on that basis raises serious constitutional concerns.”

Judicial Watch quickly launched an investigation, filing a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request with the USPS for information relating to ICOP. As the government often does with FOIA requests, it failed to meet the federally mandated deadline for providing the records and Judicial Watch was forced to file a lawsuit in early July. Among the things Judicial Watch asks for in the federal complaint is all records from January 1, 2020 to the present identifying criteria for flagging social media posts as “inflammatory” or otherwise worthy of further scrutiny by other government agencies. It also asks for records relating to ICOP’s database of social media posts, communications between USPIS and FBI or Homeland Security regarding the program and an analysis outlining the authority of the USPIS to monitor, track and collect Americans’ social media posts. Judicial Watch will provide updates as the case evolves.

In the meantime, Judicial Watch is filing a FOIA request with the USPS for information on the devices used by the agency to hack cell phones. The news agency that exposed the alarming operation this week discovered its existence in the USPIS’s 2019 and 2020 annual reports. “Altogether, the records suggest that the USPIS has cracked hundreds of iPhones—generally thought to be one of the most secure commercial phones on the market—as well as other devices,” the article states. The hacking tools are known as Cellebrite and GrayKey and they were used by the agency to extract previously unattainable information from seized mobile devices. In fiscal year 2020, 331 devices were processed and 242 were unlocked and/or extracted, according to information obtained from the USPIS reports. The 2020 document discloses an increase in phone cracking from the previous year.

These clandestine operations within the nation’s postal service should create concern, especially for a troubled agency that has failed miserably to fulfill its mission. The USPS has long been a bastion of mismanagement and frivolous spending that has fleeced American taxpayers out of billions in the last few years alone. In 2021, the USPS reported a net loss of $4.9 billion and in 2020 a net loss of $9.2 billion. One federal audit slammed the USPS for blowing the opportunity to save nearly $22 million had it bothered to maintain its fleet of vehicles more efficiently.

A few years before that the USPS blew hundreds of thousands of dollars on professional sports tickets, booze and fancy meals while it claimed to be crippled by an $8.3 billion deficit. The items were purchased by USPS managers and employees with special charge cards issued to U.S. government agencies. The USPS’s top executives have also been found to receive illegally high salary and compensation packages that should outrage the public. Several years ago, a federal audit found that at least three USPS officers made more than the legal compensation limit for their respective work category while the agency was billions in the red.

Loading

178
Categories
Corruption Elections Politics

Pelosi Congress Claims Sovereign Immunity in Federal Court to Keep Secret January 6 Videos and Emails

Views: 35

(Washington, DC)Judicial Watch announced that it filed an opposition to the U.S. Capitol Police’s (USCP) effort to shut down Judicial Watch’s federal lawsuit for January 6 videos and emails. Through its police department, Congress argues that the videos and emails are not public records, there is no public interest in their release, and that “sovereign immunity” prevents citizens from suing for their release.

Judicial Watch filed a lawsuit under the common law right of access after the Capitol Police refused to provide any records in response to a January 21, 2021, request (Judicial Watch v. United States Capitol Police (No. 1:21-cv-00401)). Judicial Watch asks for:

  • Email communications between the U.S. Capitol Police Executive Team and the Capitol Police Board concerning the security of the Capitol on January 6, 2021. The timeframe of this request is from January 1, 2021 through January 10, 2021.
  • Email communications of the Capitol Police Board with the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the U.S. Department of Justice, and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security concerning the security of the Capitol on January 6, 2021. The timeframe of this request is from January 1, 2021through January 10, 2021.
  • All video footage from within the Capitol between 12 pm and 9 pm on January 6, 2021

Congress exempts itself from the Freedom of Information Act. Judicial Watch, therefore, brought its lawsuit under the common law right of access to public records. In opposing the broad assertion of secrecy, Judicial Watch details Supreme Court and other precedent that upholds the public’s right to know what “their government is up to:”

“In ‘the courts of this country’— including the federal courts—the common law bestows upon the public a right of access to public records and documents” … “the Supreme Court was unequivocal in stating that there is a federal common law right of access ‘to inspect and copy public records and documents.’” … “[T]he general rule is that all three branches of government, legislative, executive, and judicial, are subject to the common law right.” The right of access is “a precious common law right . . . that predates the Constitution itself.”

The Court of Appeals for this circuit has recognized that “openness in government has always been thought crucial to ensuring that the people remain in control of their government….” “Neither our elected nor our appointed representatives may abridge the free flow of information simply to protect their own activities from public scrutiny. An official policy of secrecy must be supported by some legitimate justification that serves the interest of the public office.”

“The Pelosi Congress (and its police department) is telling a federal court it is immune from all transparency under law and is trying to hide every second of its January 6 videos and countless emails,” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “The hypocrisy is rich, as this is the same Congress that is trying to jail witnesses who, citing privileges, object to providing documents to the Pelosi rump January 6 committee.”

In November 2021, Judicial Watch revealed multiple audio, visual and photo records from the DC Metropolitan Police Department about the shooting death of Ashli Babbitt on January 6, 2021, in the U.S. Capitol Building.  The records include a cell phone video of the shooting and an audio of a brief police interview of the shooter, Lt. Michael Byrd.

In October, Judicial Watch released records, showing that multiple officers claimed they didn’t see a weapon in Babbitt’s hand before Byrd shot her, and that Byrd was visibly distraught afterward. One officer attested that he didn’t hear any verbal commands before Byrd shot Babbitt.

Also in November, Judicial Watch filed a response in opposition to the Department of Justice’s effort to block Judicial Watch’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit asking for records of communication between the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and several financial institutions about the reported transfer of financial transaction records of people in DC, Maryland, and Virginia on January 5 and January 6, 2021. Judicial Watch argues that Justice Department should not be allowed to shield “improper activity.”

——————————————————————————

The laws are for thee, not for me!

Loading

188
Categories
Corruption Crime Drugs Politics Reprints from others.

No surprise: Afghan Opium Production Skyrockets Under Taliban

Views: 21

February 2, 2022

Afghanistan’s opium production skyrocketed in 2021, potentially providing the Taliban government a source of revenue between $1.8 billion and $2.7 billion. This according to a new report from the Special Inspector General for Afghan Reconstruction (SIGAR).

The war-torn nation’s illegal production ranked as the third-highest recorded since the United Nations began reporting it in 1994. It comprised between 9 and 14 percent of Afghanistan’s GDP and exceeded the value of all of the country’s officially recorded legal exports in 2020.

The surge in opium production comes as the U.S. government allocates millions to combat the spread of illicit drugs in the country, according to SIGAR’s latest report, released on Wednesday.

While the Taliban has vowed to combat opium production—even though it could serve as a lucrative source of revenue for them —SIGAR says it “has seen no evidence that the Taliban are enforcing or can enforce such a ban. On the contrary, the opium trade in Afghanistan appears to be flourishing.”

In fact, opium dealers, who once operated in the shadows while the U.S.-backed government was in power, are now selling their drugs from “stalls in village markets,” according to SIGAR’s report. “Opium poppy farmers, a key constituency for the Taliban, are likely to resist a ban,” the watchdog said.

The report quoted one opium seller as saying that the Taliban have “achieved what they have thanks to opium. None of us will let them ban opium unless the international community helps the Afghan people.”

The Biden administration, meanwhile, has renewed its efforts to inject millions of dollars in U.S. aid into the country without formal ties with the Taliban or officially recognizing its rule.

The State Department reported last year that the U.S. Agency for International Development had “suspended all contact with the Afghan government, and terminated, suspended, or paused all on-budget assistance.” The latest report, however, discloses that USAID has “resumed some off-budget,” U.S.-managed activities in Afghanistan.

The White House announced last month it sent an additional $308 million in humanitarian aid to Afghanistan, where poverty and hunger has run rampant since the Taliban in August 2021 retook control of the country amid a bungled evacuation of U.S. forces.

Afghanistan’s citizens are starving. More than half face a “tsunami of hunger,” according to the United Nations. This is the result of “record drought, rising food prices, internal displacement, and the severe economic downturn and collapse of public services following the Taliban’s return to power in August.”

Around 22.8 million Afghans will be at “potentially life-threatening levels of hunger this winter,” with around 8.7 million facing “near-famine conditions.” Another one million are at risk of dying, according to SIGAR, which cites statistics from a recent Integrated Food Security Phase Classification study.

Up to 97 percent of Afghanistan’s population is now at risk of slipping below the poverty line by mid-2022 “as a result of the worsening political and economic crises,” according to the report.

Additionally, the Biden administration’s failure to evacuate skilled Afghan soldiers who worked for the country’s former fighting force has likely led to them joining the ISIS terrorist group, according to the SIGAR report.

In an interview with former Afghan general Sami Sadat, SIGAR learned that “Afghan fighters, especially commandos and intelligence officers, could lead to IS-K’s resurgence. Sadat said these people would be especially vulnerable to IS-K recruitment. Sadat added that this issue needs to be addressed more systematically, noting that IS-K may have the capability to take eastern Afghanistan quickly and establish itself in Kabul within a year.”

The post: Afghan Opium Production Skyrockets Under Taliban appeared first on Washington Free Beacon.

Loading

199
Categories
Corruption Elections Politics The Courts

SHOCKER: ‘Someone Opened the Doors From the Inside,’ Jan. 6 Defense Attorney Says

Views: 81

 

By Joseph M. Hanneman for Epoch Times
January 28, 2022 Updated: January 29, 2022

Kelly Meggs and other Oath Keepers could not do one of the major things federal prosecutors accuse them of – force their way into the U.S. Capitol Rotunda on Jan. 6, 2021, through the famous Columbus Doors.

The two sets of historic doors that lead into the Rotunda were opened by someone on the inside, and not his client, says defense attorney Jonathon Moseley.

Department of Justice video widely circulated on Twitter this week shows a man trying to open the inner doors by leaning against them, before turning around as if listening to someone, then returning to the entrance and opening the left door for protesters.

“The outer doors cast from solid bronze would require a bazooka, an artillery shell or C4 military-grade explosives to breach,” Moseley wrote in a letter to federal prosecutors. “That of course did not happen. You would sooner break into a bank vault than to break the bronze outer Columbus Doors.”

The 20,000-pound Columbus Doors that lead into the Rotunda on the east side of the U.S. Capitol are secured by magnetic locks that can only be opened from the inside using a security code controlled by Capitol Police, Moseley wrote in an eight-page memo.

‘Impossible and Cannot Be Done’

“Imagine how the prosecution will prove at trial what cannot be proven because it is not true,” Moseley wrote to prosecutors Jeffrey S. Nestler and Kathryn Leigh Rakoczy of the U.S. Attorney’s Office.

“Who is going to testify that the defendants entered the Columbus Doors when the U.S. Capitol Police will begrudgingly testify that that is impossible and cannot be done?”

In a superseding indictment on Jan. 12, 2022, Meggs and 10 other members of the Oath Keepers were charged with seditious conspiracy, destruction of government property, obstruction of an official proceeding, civil disorder, tampering with documents, and other counts related to rioting on Jan. 6.

The indictment charges that Meggs led a “stack formation” up the Capitol steps to the entrance at the Columbus Doors. At 2:39 p.m., the doors were breached, and Stack One entered the Capitol with the mob, the indictment said.

Moseley said there’s one big problem with that accusation: it’s impossible to force entry from the outside. Only someone with the security code could release the locks—from the inside.

Video evidence submitted in the case showed the glass panes in the inner doors were cracked but intact, so no one accessed the building through the windows or by reaching for the inside door handles, he said.

“Therefore,” Moseley wrote. “Nobody opened the Rotunda doors from the outside. Someone opened the doors from the inside.”

Video shot by multimedia journalist Michael Nigro shows the outer bronze doors were partially retracted before a large crowd gathered outside the entrance.

The inner doors were closed and U.S. Capitol Police were stationed outside. Protesters sprayed police with pepper spray, threw items at them, and hit them with flagpoles.

A short time later, the inner doors were opened and hundreds of protesters streamed into the Rotunda, the video shows. A protester in the Rotunda is heard shouting, “Don’t vandalize the property!”

Capitol Tour Confirms Door Security

American sculptor Randolph Rogers designed the solid-bronze doors to depict scenes from the life of explorer Christopher Columbus. The doors were first installed in 1863, moved in 1871 to the central east entrance, and moved to the current location in 1961.

The doors are 17 feet high and weigh 20,000 pounds, according to the Architect of the Capitol. Once opened, the giant doors retract into pockets in the walls via built-in tracks.

Epoch Times Photo
First installed in 1863, the historic Columbus Doors depict scenes from the life of explorer Christopher Columbus. (Architect of the Capitol)

Moseley asked federal prosecutors for “any and all specifications, details and operational information about the so-called Columbus Doors.”

Moseley said he and an assistant took a tour of the Capitol on Jan. 22, along with other attorneys and investigators. The U.S. Capitol Police officers on duty were emphatic, he said, that the doors could not be opened from the outside.

“These are facts that in the supposedly largest nationwide investigation in the history of the U.S. since the kidnapping of the Charles Lindbergh baby or the search for Al Capone could easily have been investigated, check(ed), and determined before the U.S. Attorney’s Office presented false information to the grand jury,” Moseley wrote.

“For these purposes, I don’t care who opened the Columbus Doors from the inside, or why, or who they worked for. History will reveal all of that,” Moseley wrote. “History will care very much. But all I care about is that it wasn’t my client or any of these defendants, and the U.S. Attorney’s Office knows that or should have discovered it upon reasonable investigation.”

The Epoch Times asked the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia for comment on Moseley’s letter but received no reply.

The superseding indictment said Meggs and four other Oath Keepers became part of a mob that “aggressively advanced toward the Rotunda Doors, assaulted the law enforcement officers guarding the doors, threw objects, and sprayed chemicals toward the officers and the doors and pulled violently on the doors.”

The ‘mob’ breached the Rotunda entrance around 2:39 p.m., the indictment alleges.

Nigro’s video from outside the entrance shows a group of Oath Keepers near the Columbus Doors, which are clearly open at the time the men got near the threshold. By the time they entered the Capitol, dozens if not more than 100 people had flowed into the building, the video shows.

‘Baseless Prosecution’

Moseley accused prosecutors of crafting a case against the Oath Keepers that is “false and reprehensible.”

“This baseless prosecution is the greatest threat to the Republic since 1812. This prosecution is not about an attack on our Republic. This prosecution IS the attack on our Republic,” Moseley wrote, “seeking to criminalize political dissent, free speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of political association, and the right to petition the government for the redress of grievances.”

Moseley rapped federal authorities for “dishonestly trying to deceive the public” for eight months by concealing the fact that six demonstration permits had been issued for the Capitol grounds on Jan. 6. Implicit in those permits is the permission for people to have ingress and egress across the grounds to reach each event, he said.

This baseless prosecution is the greatest threat to the Republic since 1812.
— Jonathon Moseley

Moseley proposed a stipulation that both sides in the case agree none of the demonstrators or the defendants opened the Columbus Doors on Jan. 6 and that the government strike three paragraphs of the indictment that refer to defendants entering the Capitol because they are “untrue and withdrawn.”

Prosecutors refused that proposal.

News of the Columbus Doors issue comes as more video was released from the protective court seal. It shows large groups of Jan. 6 protesters peacefully streaming into the U.S. Capitol through wide-open doors. Among them was Rabbi Mike Stepakoff, who spent about five minutes inside the Capitol, doing nothing more than looking around and taking photos.

On his way out, Stepakoff stopped to shake hands with a police officer, and told him “Thank you for your service, we love you, and God bless you,” according to his attorney, Marina Medvin.

Rabbi Stepakoff was charged with entering and remaining in a restricted building, disorderly and disruptive conduct in a restricted building, violent entry and disorderly conduct in a Capitol building, and parading, demonstrating, or picketing in a Capitol building, all misdemeanors.

Stepakoff pleaded guilty to the parading charge and received 12 months of probation. The other charges were dismissed. The government sought to punish him with a jail term “for events he did not partake in, for destruction and violence he did not witness, for severity he did not experience, and for an effect he did not cause nor could foresee,” Medvin said.

———————————————————————————-

There is so much hyperbole in the indictment that the DOJ’s own video refutes it’s not funny –Phoenix.

Loading

469
Categories
Corruption Reprints from others. Stupid things people say or do. The Courts

Just got booted. Alabama Judge Who Called Colleagues ‘Uncle Tom,’ ‘Heifer,’ and ‘Fat B****’ Booted from Office

Views: 33

Law and Crime article is here.

An elected judge was removed from the bench in Alabama by the state’s judicial oversight authority late last week over a series of unprofessional comments and other unbecoming actions.

Recently former judge Nakita Blocton of Jefferson County, Ala. was relieved of her duties and ordered to pay the costs of the proceedings that eventually ousted her from the court, according to a Dec. 10 special court order that resulted from a May complaint that was filed by the Yellowhammer State’s Judicial Inquiry Commission.

Noting a pattern and practice of “making inappropriate comments,” the nine judges on the panel highlighted instances in which Blocton referred to one judge as an “Uncle Tom,” called another judge a “fat bitch” and called an employee who worked for her a “heifer.”

Some of the former judge’s comments, the panel said, actually constituted “a pattern of abuse” directed towards her staff, attorneys who appeared before her and litigants in her courtroom. The “heifer” remark was cited again in this context, and the report says she also “belittled another employee” — without going into details.

And, when faced with the prospect of discipline over her behavior, Blocton apparently attempted to cover it up — albeit unsuccessfully.

“Judge Blocton also ordered employees to allow her to see their private cellphones so that information that might be relevant to the Commission’s investigation could be deleted and she instructed them to provide to her their private login information to their work computers,” the findings section of the order says.


 

Loading

219
Verified by MonsterInsights