Dershowitz Warns the ‘Useful Idiots’ Now Protesting are Being Groomed for Terrorism

This article originally appeared on WND.com

Guest by post by Bob Unruh 

‘They simply want to be part of current protest movements’

There are hundreds, no thousands, of university-age students participating now in the anti-Israel protests on campuses across the nation.

Most of them have little idea of the reason for their protests, according to longtime liberal lawyer Alan Dershowitz.

He said they’re “useful idiots” to those who have a more nefarious motive behind the protests and the violence.

But the threat is that they are being groomed for future terrorists.

Dershowitz, the Felix Frankfurther Professor of Law, emeritus at Harvard, wrote in a column at the Gatestone Institute, where he is a fellow, that those protesters include university, high school and even middle school students.

They are protesting Israel, the U.S., and Jews.

“Some of the signs say ‘pro-Palestine,’ ‘ceasefire now’ and ‘end the humanitarian crisis in Gaza.’ But these benign statements hide a far more malignant agenda, the end of Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people, the end of America as the world’s leading power and the end of democracy and the free market economy. Even if there were a unilateral ceasefire, accompanied by massive humanitarian assistance to the people of Gaza, many of these protests would continue, because Gaza is merely an excuse for a much wider agenda: to destroy Israel and destroy America,” he warned.

New York protesters, he pointed out, recently called to repeat the atrocities of Hamas’ attack on Israeli civilians on Oct. 7, “a thousand times.”

“There were shouts of ‘We are Hamas,’ ‘Death to America,’ ‘Burn Tel Aviv to the ground,’ ‘Israel go to hell’ and ‘Jews to back to Poland.’ The chant of ‘from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free’ is pervasive. Free of what? Free of Jews,” he said.

Nobody, he said, has been caught with a sign calling for a two-state peace solution.

The calls for “revolution” actually bypass the Middle East issues and aim directly at America, he said.

“As in the 1960s, many of these students are being groomed to be the terrorists of the future – in the manner of Kathy Boudin and Bernardine Dohrn back then – and, in the United States, a fifth column, the aim of which is taking down America,” he said.

The are four players in the protests: Arabs and Muslims who hate Israel and Jews, “old line radicals,” anarchists and America-haters, organizers who handle money and organize violence, and then those “useful idiots.”

They have “little or no knowledge of the substantive issues. They simply want to be part of current protest movements, which are popular on campuses and among many of their peers. It is this last group that is most troubling, because many of its members are good and decent people who are being led into dangerous territory by their elders.”

He said, “That these useful idiots are young does not make them less dangerous. Young students were instrumental in bringing to power tyrants such as Hitler, Stalin, Castro, Pol Pot and Mao.”

He conceded that because they’re young, they still can change ideologies. But he said consequences should accrue to those who are violent.

Those should include “arrest and prosecution – for physically intimidating, blocking and harassing Jews or any minorities. Such actions are not protected by the First Amendment, university disciplinary rules, or employers after graduation.”

Copyright 2024 WND News Center

The post Dershowitz Warns the ‘Useful Idiots’ Now Protesting are Being Groomed for Terrorism appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

OP-ED: Ready to Fight the Good Fight by America First Candidate for Utah Attorney General Trent Christensen

The Utah State GOP Nominating Convention will be held on Saturday, where State GOP Delegates will decide who is eligible for the June primary and the November general election.

Trent Christensen told The Gateway Pundit, “One Day 1, my administration will begin an investigation into every aspect of Utah’s electoral system. We will look into the ballots and the mail-in ballots; we will test the voting machines; we will interview the country clerks and their staffs; we will investigate the voter rolls. We will also work with the State Legislature to change the laws as needed and ensure that Utah’s elections are, in fact, the safest and most secure elections in the country.”

Guest post by Utah Attorney General Candidate Trent Christensen:

The tactics currently being used against President Trump—arresting and indicting him, and his lawyers, and his advisors, and his supporters, etc.—show the desperation of the left.  But it would be a mistake to think those tactics are reserved only for the liberal left in the D.C. Swamp. The cowardly tactics of personal destruction used to win elections at all costs have spread, and are being used now even by those who claim to be on the right.

It’s happening here in “red state” Utah.

Last year, a coordinated attack was made against our Attorney General. It was a two-sided attack, with open, brazen, and spurious legal actions taken against him on the one hand; and,additional threats of ongoing attacks against him and his office being made behind closed doors. Now, after the Attorney General declined to run for re-election, some would want to brush this under the rug and move on. I, for one, believe that the fight is far from over.

The Republican State Convention happens this Saturday, April 27, where the Republican State Delegates will make their voices heard. This will not be a normal convention—it’s impact will have national ramifications. The votes of the delegates will not only decide who advances to the Primary, their voices will demonstrate whether the same tactics being used against our former (and hopefully future) President will be condoned here in Utah.

Will we allow it? The lawfare and the intimidation? Will we bow to the pressure and the propaganda, slick ads paid for by those who prefer the Governor have a hand-picked Attorney General, rather than a check against his power and an ally to President Trump?

Or will we stand up and vote to drain the Salt Lake Swamp, to save both our state and our country?

Make no mistake, our new Attorney General must be willing and ready to stand up and fight alongside President Trump. Utah has critical issues that the next Attorney General must contend with, issues with Utah’s election integrity, supporting law enforcement, securing Utah’s borderfrom the invasion of illegal aliens, crushing the fentanyl trade, fighting to protect and reclaim our lands from the federal government, and many others.

At the same time, President Trump will need the support of those Attorneys General who will actively, and gladly, push back on all the liberal, unconstitutional, and oftentimes insane policies enacted over the last four years. We have several such Attorneys General already around the country. We need more.

President Trump will only have four more years to enact his America First agenda, and to dismantle the liberal policies currently destroying this country. I am ready to fight this fight with him on Day 1.  Sign me up, and let’s Make Utah and America Great Again!

With gratitude,

Trent Christensen

America First Candidate for Utah Attorney General

The post OP-ED: Ready to Fight the Good Fight by America First Candidate for Utah Attorney General Trent Christensen appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Peter Sweden: GOOD NEWS: Swedes REJECT Cashless Agenda

This article was written by Swedish independent journalist Peter Imanuelsen, also known as PeterSweden. You can follow him at PeterSweden.com.

New poll finds that a large majority of Swedish people want to keep physical cash

I have some good news to bring you from my home country of Sweden.

A new poll finds that a whopping 83% of people want to keep using cash as a payment option in the future, a new record high!

Looks like people are beginning to realize that the cashless society is not what we want after all.

The biggest reason that people want to keep cash was for emergency preparedness, with 51% giving that as their main reason. But 29% of people said that freedom of choice was the main reason for wanting to keep cash, and another 19% said that inclusion was their reason.

So it appears one major reason for people wanting to keep cash is because of FREEDOM.

As we all know, going cashless would make it very easy for the state to keep track of everything that people do. Dissidents could easily be locked out from buying and selling.

Sweden has been one of the main countries pushing for a cashless society for many years now.

For example, over 6000 people have already gotten microchip implants in their hands to use for cashless payments. You can read all about that here.

Many shops in Sweden have gone cashless. For example, I visited a Burger King last year that had a sign proudly stating that they were cashless.

But things seem to be changing.

Independent journalist Peter Imanuelsen has dedicated years to reporting the things the mainstream media ignores. You can follow him at https://petersweden.com/

The post Peter Sweden: GOOD NEWS: Swedes REJECT Cashless Agenda appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

‘Grading for Equity’: Promoting Students by Banning Grades of Zero and Leaving No Class Cut-Ups Behind

This story originally was published by Real Clear Wire

Joe Feldman has faced many tough crowds in the course of successfully selling his “Grading for Equity” program to school districts across the nation. During the consultant’s presentations, teachers concerned that his approach lowers standards have rolled their eyes, questioned his understanding of students, and worse.

“A guy in the front row got his stuff together and walked out of the room,” Feldman told RealClearInvestigations.

Despite the frequent resistance from teachers, dozens of districts from California to Massachusetts are giving the consultant’s ambitious project a shot. As schools face a series of crises, including a spike in chronic absenteeism and sharp academic decline, grading for equity offers a path to better grades and higher graduation rates. Its practices include the removal of behavior in calculating grades, the end of penalties for late assignments, allowing students to retake exams, and a ban on zeros as the lowest mark.

Since the pandemic, districts have been lowering standards by making grading more lenient to help struggling students, according to several studies. But Feldman insists that his sweeping overhaul isn’t part of that controversial trend. He says the practices he promotes are a matter of fairness and accuracy in an educational system that’s stacked against blacks, Latinos and other disadvantaged students.

Grading for equity, however, stirs enough dissent among teachers and parents that some districts have dropped the difficult revamp in mid-stream. They say Feldman’s reforms are a form of leniency that brings out the worst in some students, hurting the very kids he wants to help.

“What’s most troubling are the practices that lower expectations, like giving a 50 percent grade instead of a zero even when a student doesn’t attempt the assignment,” said Meredith Coffey, a former teacher and now a researcher at Thomas B. Fordham Institute who co-wrote a report on grading for equity. “If students know that they could do nothing and get 50 percent, why would they work hard? Many would do nothing.”

In some districts, grading for equity is part of the controversial agenda that’s taken hold in urban areas and seeks to wash away perceived “systemic racism” in classrooms in the wake of the George Floyd murder in 2020. In Fairfax County, a district that’s embraced grading for equity, leaders have also pushed “anti-racist” education for students and paid author and crusader Ibram X. Kendi $20,000 to give a one-hour Zoom presentation, telling staff that anti-racism means working to achieve equitable outcomes.

Like critical race theory, cops in schools, and transgender bathrooms, grading for equity is galvanizing divisions in the cultural conflict over public education. Progressives support it as a path to closing the stubborn achievement gap between rich and poor students while conservatives fear it further undermines high expectations that encourage all students to strive to improve.

A savvy promoter, Feldman frequently posts on X, expressing his excitement to schools and conference organizers who tap his expertise. He likes to plug his book, too. “Grading for Equity,” with a second edition in 2023, has sold 175,000 copies, a top-five bestseller from publisher Corwin.

Grading for equity, a term coined by Feldman, isn’t a fringe movement. Some districts adopted pieces of the program before the pandemic undermined the ability of many students to keep up academically. Since then, many more districts have embraced it.

Last year, with Feldman’s help, Boston Public Schools approved a shift to equity grading. In Oregon, Portland Public Schools is making plans to implement similar grading reforms by 2025, and thousands of New York City and Los Angeles teachers have been trained in equitable grading practices. Smaller districts in California, Nevada, New York, and other states have also adopted the program.

A Boon for Education Consultants

Feldman’s program calls for a profound change in grading practices that raises fundamental questions about human motivation. He believes the traditional practice of grading almost everything a student does is antiquated and superficial. It relies on the extrinsic motivation for points, turning students into grade grubbers, rather than the intrinsic desire to learn because the subject is inspiring and meaningful.

The consultant says the pre-eminence of grades disproportionately harms disadvantaged students, who often get dinged for missing homework, late assignments, and misbehavior – issues that can stem from a lack of parental support and resources at home, research shows.

Feldman asserts that schools have a “moral obligation” to close the achievement gap, and his fix is far-reaching: no points for daily homework and classroom behavior, eliminating the distinction in the gradebook between students who lead discussions and those who disrupt them, and no penalties for the late submission of assignments, which shouldn’t be given much weight in grading.

Grades are all about tests. Teachers assess only what really matters – learning – based on a set of well-defined standards and demonstrated on a test at the end of a unit. This summative evaluation doesn’t really count either, because students who don’t ace it get a chance to review their mistakes and take the exam again, and possibly a third time. It’s better to encourage them to master the material, the consultant says, than accept a demoralizing low mark.

Here’s the kicker: Even the student who keeps failing the test, or doesn’t show up to take it, gets 50% credit. On a 100-point scale, Feldman says, a zero is disproportionately punitive for the lowest mark, when a passing grade begins at 60%.

Teachers who support Feldman’s program say it gives them better insight into students’ academic progress and problems, making them more effective. “I have more meaningful conversations with students about the English standards and how grades are not arbitrary points for effort, but directly reflect their knowledge of the skills,” said Savannah Berry, a high school English teacher in the predominately Latino and black San Leandro district in California.

Fewer Students Fail

School districts and their elected boards tout the program’s main result – fewer kids fail – and that plays well politically in many communities. In an examination of four high schools that have embraced grading for equity, non-white students had 37% fewer Ds and Fs at the end of a school year, and white students, no longer benefiting from extra credit and good behavior points, saw a 19% drop in As, according to a report by Feldman’s firm.

In Virginia’s diverse Fairfax County Public Schools, the significant drop in Ds and Fs for blacks and Latinos led to a 4% increase in the graduation rate between 2018 and 2022.

Critics dismiss such progress as a mirage produced by lenient practices that inflate low grades. Students are also getting the wrong message about the importance of meeting expectations, several teachers told RCI, leading some to blow off studying and just coast. With less focus in class, more kids are also misbehaving.

Zenaida Perez says half of the teachers in her Fairfax district, the largest in Virginia, oppose grading for equity but are afraid to speak up because they fear retaliation. “At least 30 percent of my students definitely make less effort,” said Perez, who has taught in the district for 16 years. “Sometimes they do not come to school and I still must give them a 50%. That is absolutely ridiculous.”

In some ways, Feldman’s biggest roadblock are the students, who like all humans procrastinate if given the chance. DePaul University psychologist Joe Ferrari, who has written extensively about the condition, says 20% of people are chronic procrastinators. If schools remove deadlines with penalties, he says most students would likely also delay and delay doing their work. “People will always gravitate to the easiest path,” he said. “Humans seek pleasure and avoid pain.”

The Worth of Consultants

Feldman didn’t come up with the grading practices he tirelessly promotes. He borrowed the ideas from others, including consultant Ken O’Connor, a pioneer in standards-based grading, and reframed them with a lens on equity for disadvantaged kids.

“All of the basic ideas in Feldman’s book are exactly the same as my guidelines,” said O’Connor, who published his first paper on standards-based grading in 1995. “His popularity is probably from having the right idea at the right time. I respect his work.”

Feldman’s boutique shop in Oakland, Calif., operates with seven staffers, including a chief operations officer and a marketer. Education consultants say their fee averages between $5,000 and $10,000 a day. Feldman says he might charge a couple hundred thousand dollars to help a district roll out his program over three years.

“We are not making much money,” he said. “If people think I’m buying a boat, that is not happening. I’m not trying to gouge districts.”

Consultants tap into the big bucket of funds that districts set aside for the professional development of teachers. In a study by education nonprofit TNTP, districts spent about $18,000 per teacher each year, or the equivalent of perhaps a third of their salaries, on “PD,” as it’s known.

The study and other research found that despite spending almost 20 days a year in PD sessions, most teachers don’t become more effective over time because of the training. They learn more from classroom experience and peers than from consultants who often pitch the latest educational gimmicks, says Tim Daly, the president of TNTP when the 2015 study was done.

“Teachers don’t see PD as a primary vehicle for improving,” said Daly, a former teacher and now CEO of EdNavigator. “It’s something for the most part that they tolerate, not something that they look forward to.”

That’s particularly true when consultants push ambitious programs like grading for equity. At its core, it requires a new way of thinking about education for everyone in a school, overturning an embedded tradition that awards points on a frequent basis to keep students on track toward a final goal of a good grade. Since many students have yet to develop executive functioning skills, or the ability to create their own study plan and stick to it, external pressures from deadlines play a key role in education, researchers say.

For students to develop a new mindset about the value of doing work without getting an immediate reward takes a tremendous amount of persistence and encouragement by teachers, says O’Connor, who has consulted with schools in 47 states. He says students must think like athletes, who devote themselves to weeks of hard practice in hopes of later excelling in a competition. One school brought in a football coach to give students pep talks on the importance of practice.

Beyond the students, all the stakeholders in a district have to be willing to change their views on the role of grading. While board members debate the practices for months, and teachers sit in days of training, administrators must sell the plan to families and deal with the inevitable complaints and protests. Even the district’s grading software needs to be updated.

A Report Card on Grading for Equity

The report card on grading for equity is mixed. After districts hire Feldman and start making changes, a “significant number” abandon the project, the consultant says. A lack of follow-through from school leaders to stick with the overhaul and opposition from teachers are often to blame.

New York City made a mess of grading for equity. While suffering an exodus of students in the wake of the pandemic, officials tapped Feldman for help. Teachers in District 6 attended his workshop at the National Museum of the American Indian. They received a copy of Feldman’s book and were urged to bring his ideas back to their schools and lead the effort to implement them.

Janessa Tamayo, a high school math teacher who attended the training session, says she initially saw value in the program for her students from low-income families. But the grading changes she made backfired, with fewer students participating in class and doing homework. When she offered retakes on tests, she was frustrated that many students didn’t bother to take them.

“To participate and turn assignments in on time is a life skill these students need to learn to be successful,” Tamayo said. “Grading for equity works fine for the small percentage of kids who are highly motivated. For the rest, it encouraged them to do the minimum.”

After teachers tested the program for a year, Tamayo says, administrators never followed up to assess its effect. No one collected data and asked for feedback. The program just faded away. Teachers like Tamayo have mostly returned to their old grading practices.

Arlington Public Schools in Virginia had big plans for Feldman, hiring him for what was envisioned to be a three-year project. But teachers at Wakefield High, a school with mostly Latino and black students, sent a letter to the board and superintendent, saying the changes would harm students by removing accountability and high expectations. Early this year, the district backtracked on several of Feldman’s practices, allowing penalties for late work and limiting retakes of exams.

“It’s the politics of the place, whose voices are loud,” Feldman said of the rollback in Arlington. “They could resolve it and continue down the path.”

To be sure, some districts make it to the finish line. Solon, a small, mostly white and high-achieving district near Iowa City, pulled off grading reform, thanks to the devotion of its then leader, Matt Townsley. It took four sometimes rocky years, with a handful of teachers quitting.

Townsley, now a professor of education and consultant, says districts must hang on through the tough times to get through the “implementation dip.” Initially, there’s a big decline in effort, with some districts seeing less than half of the students doing their work. But eventually, the vast majority of students get over the dip, realizing that practice prevents them from bombing the test, and taking it again.

Placer Union, another small and predominately white district in Northern California, also made it work. With Feldman’s support, the high-performing district directly involved teachers in shaping the program – a key to winning their support. For students who used to struggle and give up, retakes on exams gives them hope that they can achieve academically, says Superintendent Jeff Tooker.

“This process takes patience, support, communication, grace, and a lot of time,” he said.

Are Students Learning More?

Even for districts that fully implement grading for equity, a big question looms: Does it result in more learning, the ultimate goal of public education? No one knows for sure. Feldman says he would like to know if his program improves state test scores, the most objective measurement of learning, but researchers haven’t tackled this question.

Several studies, including a peer-reviewed examination by Fordham’s research director Adam Tyner, have looked at what happens with learning when grading standards are lifted – test scores go up too. Tyner says students strive to meet the expectations that teachers set for them, whether high or low.

“The grading for equity advocates don’t have any research showing that their changes lead to greater learning, and that’s very concerning,” said Tyner.

The post ‘Grading for Equity’: Promoting Students by Banning Grades of Zero and Leaving No Class Cut-Ups Behind appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Revealed: Court Document Release Indicates Jack Smith and FBI Were After Obama- and North Korea-Related Documents in Mar-a-Lago Raid

Guest post by Joe Hoft at JoeHoft.com – republished with permission.

Newly unredacted documents in the Mar-a-Lago raid case indicate that Jack Smith was after Obama and North Korea-related documents.

After the raid the DOJ was pleased with their findings and wrote, “I think we are in good shape.”

President Trump said two years after he met Obama before his 2017 Inauguration that Obama was on the brink of starting a war with North Korea. Trump claimed that Obama was “close to starting a big war” with North Korea.

Obama must not have liked this.

The corrupt and criminal Obama/Biden gang was after documents related to North Korea years later when it raided President Trump’s iconic home of Mar-a-Lago and took President Trump’s documents that he legally had possession of per the Presidential Records Act.

Julie Kelly touched upon this in the latest revelations coming out of the corrupt Biden/Obama/Jack Smith classified documents case against President Trump. The latest unredacted documents that Jack Smith argued not to release show that the Obama/Biden gang was working with multiple government organizations to set up President Trump.

Blockbuster News@julie_kelly2 tells of a more than three month battle involving Judge Aileen Cannon, the Department of Justice, Special Counsel Jack Smith, and President Trump’s attorneys and co-defendants. The objective: to unseal and make public documentation and records that… pic.twitter.com/Dh4QE9KGiA

— Real America’s Voice (RAV) (@RealAmVoice) April 23, 2024

But there is more. Per a document released this week after months of fighting to make the documents available to the American Public, there is a clue as to what the corrupt Biden/Obama gang was after in its raid of Mar-a-Lago. Not only did the regime want to take back all documents that President Trump had possession of that highlighted their crimes, but the regime wanted another key document or set of documents as well.

The corrupt and criminal Biden/Obama regime had to conjure up a reason for why they raided President Trump’s home and stole his documents. They apparently had their reason outlined before they raided President Trump’s home and stole documents he legally had in his possession per the Presidential Records Act.

In the document below there is a clue:

MORE NEW INFO from unredacted evidence in classified documents case.

Within 24 hours of receiving 15 boxes from Mar-a-Lago, here is assessment by NARA.

F*cking clown show– pic.twitter.com/yc6RKR7TXg

— Julie Kelly (@julie_kelly2) April 22, 2024

The first document above is a report that was generated after the raid that provides a clue as to what they were after – and it’s not only the accordion folder of Deep State crimes.

“There is one accordian [sp] folder in the mess so it stood out. It contained, among other things, the Obama letter and North Korea correspondence. We need to verify that all of the correspondence is there. But I think we are in good shape.”

The DOJ writes “I think we are in good shape”.

We can guess but based on the corrupt Biden/Obama DOJ’s actions to date, we know that for this regime to believe they were “in good shape”, they were either happy about what they obtained that removed the risk of their crimes being exposed, or they were happy about obtaining documents they were going to use to set up President Trump (North Korea communications), or both.

Why was the DOJ so intent on obtaining Obama and North Korea related documents from President Trump’s home?

The post Revealed: Court Document Release Indicates Jack Smith and FBI Were After Obama- and North Korea-Related Documents in Mar-a-Lago Raid appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

DEBUNKED! Palestinians Caught Red-Handed Blaming Their Own Mass Grave on Israel (VIDEO)

Far-left media outlets have been accusing Israel of digging a mass grave to bury the bodies of dead Palestinians. It’s part of the “big lie” progressive Democrats are pushing that Israel is committing genocide, and it’s just been debunked.

Here are some of the reports accusing Israel:

Al Jazeera: Uncovering of mass grave at Gaza’s Nasser Hospital: What you need to know

CNN: UN demands investigation after mass graves found at Gaza hospitals raided by Israel

Reuters: UN rights chief ‘horrified’ by mass grave reports at Gaza hospitals

Unfortunately for the leftist/Islamist narrative, it’s all fake news.

X account @GeoConfirmed has posted images and video that irrefutably prove the grave was the work of Palestinians themselves!

“Palestinians are exhuming bodies from the grounds of the Nasser Medical Complex hospital complex in Khan Younis, Gaza.”

“This is occurring at the same location where mass graves were dug and burial ceremonies had taken place by Palestinians in recent months. (Proof in this thread)”

GeoConfirmed ISR-PAL Investigation.

Palestinians are exhuming bodies from the grounds of the Nasser Medical Complex hospital complex in Khan Younis, Gaza.
This is occurring at the same location where mass graves were dug and burial ceremonies had taken place by Palestinians in… pic.twitter.com/4UgFcTEpPn

— GeoConfirmed (@GeoConfirmed) April 22, 2024

Here is a video of Palestinians digging the grave. This video was not hidden and could have been found by any of the news agencies repeating the now-debunked claims.

03 FEB 2024 – In this footage you see Palestinians digging a mass grave 50m east, at the other side of the building visible in the footage above. (VID 03)

With this text: “The bodies of thirty martyrs were buried in the Nasser Medical Complex in Khan Yunis.”

03 FEB 2024 – In this footage you see Palestinians digging a mass grave 50m east, at the other side of the building visible in the footage above. (VID 03)

With this text:
“The bodies of thirty martyrs were buried in the Nasser Medical Complex in Khan Yunis.”

31.3457065,…

— GeoConfirmed (@GeoConfirmed) April 22, 2024

Recapping: In February, Hamas created this mass grave and used it for a propaganda narrative about evil Jews not letting Jihadis receive a proper burial.

Now, just 2 months later, Hamas and their lapdog pals in the media are using the SAME grave to blame Jews for genocide.

If Israel was committing “genocide,” would Gazans need to fake mass graves?

The post DEBUNKED! Palestinians Caught Red-Handed Blaming Their Own Mass Grave on Israel (VIDEO) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

DA Bragg’s Attorneys Make Fatal Error When Revealing Underlying Crime in ‘Hush Money’ Case – Trump Attorneys Must Move to Dismiss Now

By Joe Hoft:

The attorneys representing the corrupt DA in New York, Alvin Bragg, in their case against President Trump, have made a serious error in their case. President Trump’s attorneys must move to dismiss.

DA Bragg’s case is in serious trouble. The gang behind the prosecution of President Trump made a serious error that should lead President Trump’s team to move to dismiss.

Prosecutors in New York have revealed what the other crime is that Donald Trump was allegedly trying to conceal when he was falsifying business records and they claim it was to unlawfully promote his candidacy. The fatal error is that the NY Statute they cite only applies to elections within the State of New York and not Federal Elections!

Trump was running for the federal office of President of the United States and not a State Office and therefore the premise of what the prosecution is trying to prove as the second crime used to get around the statute of limitations issue and to elevate this business records case to a felony must fail!

Prosecutors also cannot use a federal law as the second crime and additionally, the FEC, Federal Election Commission, declined on two occasions to prosecute the claim against Trump that the alleged hush money payment was in fact a federal violation.

In this case, Bragg and Colangelo, in an exercise of their legal analysis of the law maintain that Trump, Cohen, and Pecker conspired to get Trump elected to President of the United States. This is the basis for the elevation of charges.

This is enough to end the case but that’s not all.

The case refers to accounting entries “made” by President Trump (which is lunacy) or entries President Trump forced others to make. But these entries were made in 2017. So how could President Trump possibly impact the 2016 election with accounting entries that were made (clearly not by the President but by some entry-level accountant in his multi-billion dollar organization) in 2017?

On top of that, even far-left radical liberals are shaking their heads at this case and the evidence used to “get Trump”.

Trump, who faces 34 counts of falsifying business records in connection to payments made to porn actress Stormy Daniels before the 2016 election, was discussed on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” where legal analyst Lisa Rubin presented a skeptical view of the prosecution’s case.

“The big takeaway is that this is a crime about falsification of business records, and yet, what the government seems to have the most evidence of is the underlying conspiracy,” Rubin explained on the show. She highlighted a lack of direct evidence linking Trump to the specific crimes charged: “What’s still unknown to me is how they’re going to prove Donald Trump’s own involvement in the falsification of the business records.”

President Trump handed over his companies to his sons before his inauguration in January 2017. The accounting entries in question were made after the handover occurred.

President Trump didn’t make any entries because no CEO of any multi-billion dollar company makes entries to the financials.

The accounting discussion in this case doesn’t make sense to anyone who’s ever worked in a large financial reporting operation.

This story appeared on JoeHoft.com

The post DA Bragg’s Attorneys Make Fatal Error When Revealing Underlying Crime in ‘Hush Money’ Case – Trump Attorneys Must Move to Dismiss Now appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Revealed: Group of Prominent Trump-Hating Media Commentators Have Been MEETING WEEKLY for Two Years to Strategize on How to Bring Down Trump

Via Joe Hoft at JoeHoft.com – republished with permission

It’s official – a group of prominent Trump-hating media commentators have been meeting weekly for two years on how to bring down Trump.

Above left to right clockwise:

Bill Krystal – Never-Trumper who’s gone wacko
Andrew Weissmann – enough said – Deep State prince
Lawrence Tribe – member of Biden/Obama tribe and Harvard nutcase
George Conway – arguably the most abusive husband ever
Jeffrey Toobin – CNN commentator caught spanking it during a conference call
John Dean – Deep stater who set up Nixon then testified in Trump impeachment

Trump Attorney Jeffrey Clark nailed this one:

I called it!

A group of leftist legal commentators has been meeting weekly for about two years to strategize about how to bring down Trump using the media.

I even coined a term for the phenomenon: “JournoLawfare” as my followers will be well familiar with.

This Politico article admits it.

Just like the Molly Ball Time article about how they “fortified” the 2020 election, they always have to brag about what they are trying to do to kill off Trump.

Just some of the participants listed here: Tribe, Weismann, Kristol, Conway, John Dean, and Toobin. Not pictured — Luttig.

I called it!

A group of leftist legal commentators has been meeting weekly for about two years to strategize about how to bring down Trump using the media.

I even coined a term for the phenomenon: “JournoLawfare” as my followers will be well familiar with.

This Politico… pic.twitter.com/DspU9oZmHZ

— Jeff Clark (@JeffClarkUS) April 23, 2024

Politico reported that the group started meeting when they were coordinating their January 6 Committee lies to the public:

As the Jan. 6 committee was working on its bombshell investigation into the Capitol riot and President Donald Trump’s efforts to overturn the last election, committee staffers took some time out of their seemingly 24-hour jobs one day in 2022 to brief a group of lawyers and legal pundits on a Zoom call.

The people on the call weren’t affiliated with the investigation or the government. But they would have been familiar to anyone who watches cable news. They were some of the country’s most well-known legal and political commentators, and they were there to get insights into the committee’s work and learn about what to look for at the hearings.

The group’s gathering was not a one-time event, but in fact an installment in an exclusive weekly digital salon, whose existence has not been previously reported, for prominent legal analysts and progressive and conservative anti-Trump lawyers and pundits. Every Friday, they meet on Zoom to hash out the latest twists and turns in the Trump legal saga — and intellectually stress-test the arguments facing Trump on his journey through the American legal system.

This more proof that the media not only lies but coordinates their lies and gaslighting before it reaches their gullible audience.

The post Revealed: Group of Prominent Trump-Hating Media Commentators Have Been MEETING WEEKLY for Two Years to Strategize on How to Bring Down Trump appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Defense Department’s Efforts To Combat AI Bias Don’t Go Far Enough

This story originally was published by Real Clear Wire

By Delaney Duff
Real Clear Wire

Google’s difficulty in mitigating bias from their artificial intelligence systems – even after explicitly going to great lengths to minimize bias – spells trouble for the Department of Defense. Bias can cause AI tools to irrevocably malfunction and derail AI development. Google recently paused Gemini, their largest and most capable AI model, from generating images after it created historically inaccurate and offensive images of people. Google explained that their attempts to design a less biased, more inclusive image generation tool caused the model to malfunction instead.

This is especially concerning as the Defense Department plans to leverage AI at scale, including for training simulations, intelligence analysis, recruiting personnel, translating documents, drafting policy, and even powering autonomous weapons. If the U.S. continues to prioritize the speed of AI development over safety, biased AI systems will ultimately slow the adoption rate, ceding the country’s technical edge to China.

Biased AI systems are ultimately dangerous. They make mistakes or generate inaccurate assessments leading to poor decision making or even system failures that harm people. Unanticipated AI failures could cause problems ranging from erroneous intelligence reporting to inaccurate targeting.

In the Defense Department, the Chief Digital and Artificial Intelligence Office (CDAO) is tasked with accelerating the adoption of artificial intelligence technologies across the national security ecosystem. CDAO’s Responsible AI team is tackling the problem of biased AI models by instituting a “bias bounty” program, which recruits the public to identify instances of bias in its large language models, starting with chat bots, in exchange for a cash prize.

By identifying bias in generative AI tools, the Pentagon hopes to understand the benefits and risks posed by these systems in order to implement safeguards. Mitigating the risks is crucial as the U.S. increasingly relies on AI development to provide warfighters with a competitive edge over its adversaries.

Relying on infrequent, small-scale public participation programs for identifying AI bias is inadequate because it assumes bias is easily detectable and does not account for the way biased outputs morph overtime, even after developers implement “fixes.” Biased AI systems disproportionately disadvantage certain groups especially when AI model training data is under representative of reality or already reflect existing biases.

Even more concerning are failures in AI-powered weapons targeting. AI systems could inadvertently select targets that violate rules of engagement such as women and children noncombatants. Recent reports accuse two IDF artificial intelligence targeting systems of increasing civilian casualties in Gaza by purposefully targeting Hamas operatives at home and erroneously identifying individuals as militants even when they had no or very tenuous links to these groups.

Policymakers, military officials, and private industry increasingly frame AI development as an arms race with China because Beijing hopes to leverage AI to enhance its power and gain a strategic advantage over the U.S. and its allies. Substantial ethical issues and discrimination as a result of AI bias should be enough to give lawmakers pause.

Overfocus on development speed sidelines real concerns over AI safety. Holding AI to high ethical standards is not an impediment to progress. Rather, it ensures greater system success that is essential for broad trust and adoption.

Removing bias requires more than technical solutions alone. In addition to periodic bias testing to ensure the models are operating properly, the Defense Department should provide and expedite clearances for data scientists and others involved in training AI models, so they have access to larger portions of datasets. Greater access allows those most knowledgeable about AI systems to spot instances where the model is producing biased outputs and correct mistakes more easily.

Operators of these tools should receive more extensive training programs that include instruction on identifying biased outputs enshrining the practice of not blindly trusting the system results. These tools are not perfect, and operators must know when and how to question or override a decision suggested by AI. The DoD should mandate their developers follow CDAO’s Responsible AI Toolkit that aligns with the DoD’s AI Ethical Principles and continuously evaluate and update the framework to keep pace with rapid technological advancement.

Finally, the U.S. should invest greater funding into STEM programs for underrepresented groups and communities. Only 26% of people in computing are women, and women only make up 18% of researchers at lead AI conferences. Representation for people of color is even worse, with less than 7% of employees at lead technology companies being Black or Hispanic. Greater access to STEM education creates a more diverse workforce and this diversity is essential for creating less biased AI systems. These new perspectives disrupt organizational group think and echo chambers, foster creative problem solving, and promote innovation.

Short-sighted focus on AI development speed over safety could spell disaster for the Defense Department. If the United States hopes to shape the future of the 21st century, it must make minimizing AI bias a top priority.

Delaney Duff is a Fellow at the Pallas Foundation for National Security Leadership whose mission is to to foster the education and professional development of emerging leaders from traditionally under-represented groups in global and national security. She is a master’s student in the security studies program at Georgetown University.

The post Defense Department’s Efforts To Combat AI Bias Don’t Go Far Enough appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Georgia’s Gabe Sterling Goes Silent and Is “In Hiding” Since Georgia State Election Board Finds Violations in Second 2020 Election Investigation

Guest post by Joe Hoft – republished with permission.

The people were right. The 2020 Election results in Georgia never should have been certified. The 2020 election in Georgia was stolen. It’s a fact.

Georgia’s Gabe Sterling who was involved in the certification of the stolen 2020 Election claimed that there were no issues with the Georgia election results. This was false and is false. Even Governor Kemp agreed that there were issues with the 2020 Election.

Georgia citizen Joe Rossi looked into the 2020 Election and the recounts after the election and he found numerous issues with the election results in Fulton County.

After the 2020 Election, a Risk Limiting Audit (RLA) was carried out by Georgia’s Secretary of State’s (SOS’s) Office that included numerous errors.

Thanks to the efforts of Georgian Joseph Rossi, thirty-six errors were found in the Fulton County data in the RLA report posted on Georgia’s Secretary of State’s website.

As a result of Rossi’s work and Kemp’s team’s investigation, the Georgia State Elections Board (SEB) initiated an investigation into the Fulton County data from the RLA report.  This investigation was labeled SEB2021-181.  Eventually the SEB identified violations and errors in the recounts of the 2020 Election in Fulton County.

Another complaint related to Fulton County was filed that specifically called out 3,125 duplicate ballot counts and 17,852 votes counted without corresponding ballot images.  These ballots should never have been included in the election.  This complaint resulted in the creation of investigation SEB2023-25.  This investigation is complete and the results of this investigation will be presented to the SEB on May 7, 2023 per a letter recently received by Joe Rossi.  This complaint has been categorized by the Board as “violations found.”

Despite numerous issues that should have prevented the 2020 Election from being certified, the election was certified and then the SOS’s office lied about the accuracy of the recounts in Georgia.

[Remember that the 2020 results were certified for Biden three days after the election after he overcame President Trump’s 200,000 vote lead on election night to steal the election by less than 12,000 votes in Georgia. – See The Steal – Volume II: The Impossible Occurs for more information.

Note also that that the investigations noted above were independent of two court cases that occurred in Georgia after the 2020 Election.  At least three individuals involved in a recount that occurred in the state after the election identified 148,000 ballots that appeared to have been created by a machine and to be fraudulent.  Fulton county and others in the state are still preventing access to these ballots even though the Georgia Supreme Court ruled that the plaintiffs have the right to audit these ballots.

In addition, a separate audit of voting machines was initiated after the 2020 Election which was finally released years later which showed that the systems used in Georgia had security issues and bad actors could hack into them and change the results of an election.

And, we recently found out that there was no signature validation for tens of thousands of votes counted in Fulton County.  A Fulton County Commissioner voted not to certify the election based on this issue.]

BREAKING EXCLUSIVE: The Errors, The Lie, and The Cover-Up in Georgia’s 2020 Election – PART II

Since being notified of the second investigation classified as “violations found”, Rossi requested that Gabe Sterling provide an explanation for his comments and email responses where he claimed that there were no issues in the 2020 Election in Georgia.

This is Rossi’s 11th email to Sterling:

After being behind the efforts to certify the uncertifiable election in 2020 and getting caught with not one, but two investigations into the 2020 Election results, and two court cases identifying thousands of issues with election results, and uncovering that no signature validations occurred in Fulton County for over 100,000 votes, Gabe Sterling is nowhere to be found.

Gabe is hiding.

The post Georgia’s Gabe Sterling Goes Silent and Is “In Hiding” Since Georgia State Election Board Finds Violations in Second 2020 Election Investigation appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Huge Chunk of Gen Z: Israel Has No Right to Exist as Nation in Mideast

This article originally appeared on WND.com

Guest by post by Bob Unruh 

‘A large swath of them have become terrorist sympathizers’

In a stunning statement about the intolerance exhibited by members of Gen Z, a new poll shows that fully one in three says Israel does not have a right to exist as a nation in the Middle East.

Israel, of course, was established subsequent to World War II and Adolf Hitler’s determined campaign to exterminate the Jewish community, killing millions in his gas chambers.

The post Huge Chunk of Gen Z: Israel Has No Right to Exist as Nation in Mideast appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Lawsuit Seeks to ‘Ban the Jab’ in Florida — Declares Injections Biological and Technological Weapons

Guest post by Dr. Joseph Sansone

On March 3^rd, 2024, Dr. Joseph Sansone filed a Writ of Mandamus in the Supreme Court of Florida seeking to compel Governor Ron DeSantis to prohibit the distribution of Covid 19 injections (nanoparticle injections/mRNA injections) in the State of Florida.

The mandamus also seeks to compel Attorney General Ashley Moody to confiscate the vials and conduct a forensic analysis of their contents.

Mandamus is a Latin word that means ‘we command.’ The Florida State Constitution grants the Supreme Court of Florida the jurisdiction to force state officers to do their lawful duty.

The Florida Supreme Court, state Appellate, and Circuit Courts, have concurrent jurisdiction. However, on March 20^th the Florida Supreme Court exercised its discretion and transferred the case to the Circuit Court of the Second Judicial Circuit, in and for Leon County, Florida. The Court is located in the state capital of Tallahassee, which is a trial court.

Dr. Sansone’s litigation is the only pending case in the United States, and possibly the world, seeking to prohibit the distribution of the Covid 19 nanoparticle injections.

The 74-page document cites state and federal biological weapons laws, domestic terrorism laws, treason laws, murder, fraud, and informed consent laws, as well as other laws being violated. It even cites Florida’s accessory after a fact law, which makes it a felony to allow a crime to continue to be permitted or shield perpetrators from prosecution.

To date, approximately 10 Florida Republican County Parties have passed ‘Ban the Jab’ resolutions declaring Covid 19 injections biological and technological weapons, also calling on the Governor to prohibit their distribution and the Attorney General to confiscate the vials and conduct a forensic analysis.

Dr. Sansone states that he provided evidence last summer to 67 County Sheriffs, 20 State Attorneys, and to the Governor and Attorney General and received no response.

Sansone also stated that he received no response from the Governor or Attorney General again in October of 2023. In February he sent a final demand letter to the Governor and Attorney General that also went unanswered.

Governor Ron DeSantis or Attorney General Ashley Moody have not publicly responded to the Mandamus. Dr. Sansone stated that he hoped the Governor would be open to signing a settlement agreement now that he was presented with so much evidence.

The Mandamus also cites the fact that the Florida Department of Health has called for the shots to come off the market and also quotes Florida Surgeon General, Dr. Ladapo.

(19) On January 3, 2024, the Florida Department of Health called for the halt of the use of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines in human beings, with Florida Surgeon General Dr. Ladapo, specifically stating, “DNA integration poses a unique and elevated risk to human health and to the integrity of the human genome… If the risks of DNA integration have not been assessed for mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, these vaccines are not appropriate for use in human beings.”

(20) At a minimum this is a clear violation of Florida Drugs and Cosmetic Act § 499.005 (2) Fla. Stat. (2023)—It is unlawful for a person to perform or cause the performance of any of the following acts in this state, “The manufacture, repackaging, sale, delivery, or holding or offering for sale of any drug, device, or cosmetic that is adulterated or misbranded or has otherwise been rendered unfit for human or animal use.”

(21) Dr. Ladapo went on to rebuke the FDA stating, “It is my hope that, in regard to COVID-19, the FDA will one day seriously consider its regulatory responsibility to protect human health, including the integrity of the human genome.” In public statements Dr. Ladapo went as far as calling the Covid mRNA injection the “Anti Christ of drugs” and stated that they are evil.

On April 27^th the Arizona Republican Party is scheduled to vote on a ‘Ban the Jab’ resolution declaring Covid 19 injections biological and technological weapons. Last summer, the Idaho Republican Party passed a similar resolution.

Recently, the Leon County Circuit Court dismissed the case. Dr. Sansone has filed a motion for a rehearing and states that if rejected he will file a notice of appeal in the First District Court of Appeal.

Sansone says that if the evidence is allowed to be heard, he will win. Regardless, he states that he will likely appeal if he does not prevail and said, “If this path gets blocked, we will find another. We will not allow the genocide to continue in the State of Florida”.

Sansone stated, “Nobody is going to save you. You need to take action now to stop this. Call the Governor and Attorney General and tell them to stop this now!”

• Florida Governor Ron DeSantis @ (850) 717-9337

• Attorney General Ashley Moody @ 850-414-3300

Dr. Sansone writes regularly at JosephSansone.Substack.com

PETITION FOR A WRIT OF MANDAMUS

(1) This petition for a writ of mandamus is brought under Article V, § 3(b)(8) Florida Constitution, and under Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure 9.03O(a)(3), 9.100 and other relevant authorities to enforce state and federal laws including, and not limited to Biological Weapons 18 USC § 175; Weapons and Firearms § 790.166 Fla. Stat. (2023); Federal Crime of Treason 18 USC § 2381; Treason § 876.32 Fla. Stat. (2023); Domestic Terrorism, 18 USC § 2331, Terrorism § 775.30 Fla. Stat. (2023); Murder § 782.04 (1)(a) Fla. Stat. (2023); and Genocide 18 USC §1091. Petitioner seeks an order of mandamus, requiring the Respondents to immediately prohibit the distribution, promotion, access and administration of COVID-19 injections, mRNA nanoparticle injections, and all mRNA products in the State of Florida.

Read the full Writ of Mandamus here

The post Lawsuit Seeks to ‘Ban the Jab’ in Florida — Declares Injections Biological and Technological Weapons appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Mandatory Queer Indoctrination at School Causes Huge Uproar

This article originally appeared on WND.com

Guest by post by Bob Unruh 

Mandatory queer indoctrination at school causes huge uproar

Schools across America many times are run by managers who come with baggage from the extreme-left ideologies of higher academia.

Their plans often include spreading those ideals to students – whether or not they or their parents want such indoctrination.

But one such plan, in a school in Minnesota, has been taken down a notch, according to a new report from Mat Staver, chief of Liberty Counsel.

The dispute developed in Osseo, Minnesota, where officials scheduled a “gay pride” indoctrination class for all students, prepared scripts from which teachers were to read word-for-word, under a scenario that required teachers to take part regardless of their religious beliefs and rights, and more.

“And the district went out of their way to make it nearly impossible for parents to review the material or to opt their children out of the indoctrination,” the report said.

The push for the far-left agenda came from “four radical school board members,” Liberty Counsel reported.

“Teachers were not allowed to ‘opt out’ of teaching the ‘LGBTQIA+ History and Culture’ lesson, and the district deliberately made it difficult for parents to review the lesson materials in advance, or opt their children out of the politically charged, nonsensical course.”

Parents, in fact, had to apply for permission to see the materials, had to appear in person at the school, and had to document their identity, the report said.

The actual curriculum conflicted with science and used pop culture to push students to adopt fake pronouns and more.

“The lesson then encouraged students to question their own sexuality, asking the children if they are ‘confused’ about, ‘curious about,’ and ‘questioning’ their sexuality, fitting within at least one of the ‘Q’ categories in its lengthy acronym: ‘LGBTQIA+ (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer & Questioning, Intersex, & Asexual),'” the report said.

Students were to be told failure to “embrace” the ideology risked having their assignments labeled “incorrect.”

But then Liberty Counsel notified the school district of its need to allow students, parents and teachers to exercise their right to opt out of such ideologies.

The district caved, and, “as a result of our work, more than 1,000 students were allowed to opt out of the indoctrination classes at just one school. At another school, over 400 students opted out. In fact, so many parents opted their children out of the lesson that schools had to open their cafeterias and auditoriums to accommodate the teachers and students who refused indoctrination,” Liberty Counsel’s report said.

“In addition, at least 500 other children did not attend school at all on the day of the instruction.”

Copyright 2024 WND News Center

The post Mandatory Queer Indoctrination at School Causes Huge Uproar appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Breaking: Massive Cover-Up of Trans Shooter’s History in Nashville Covenant School Mass Murder Case

This article originally appeared on AbleChild.org and JoeHoft.com and was republished with permission.

The parents of the victims of the Covenant School in Nashville, TN, have begged Davidson County Chancery Court to withhold from the public Audrey Hale’s manifesto and all documents belonging to the shooter, which were legally gifted to the parents of the victims by the shooter’s parents.

Gifting the documents to the parents of the victims is odd. But for the parents of the victims to then assert that they hold some kind of “copyright” on those documents is twisted on its face and one cannot help but wonder what really is behind this enormous effort to withhold information about Audrey Hale.

Let’s think about it for a minute. What we know is that Audrey Hale went to elementary school at Covenant, transferred out to Isaiah T. Creswell Middle School and Nashville School of Arts then on to Nossi College of Arts. Everything was seemingly okay.

At 28 years old, the now transitioning female, was identifying as the male, Aiden and, while living at home with mom and dad, began purchasing seven firearms, including shotguns, rifles, and handguns. It was also at this time that we find Hale being “treated” for an emotional disorder.

On the morning of March 27, 2023, Hale drove to her elementary alma mater and discharged 150 rounds, killing three children and three adults. Why? Why did Hale choose Covenant School for her murderous actions? Why not Middle or High School or how about the local fast-food joint? This was a specific hit. Planned. Hale knew where she was going and why.

The problem is that the public doesn’t know why. The public doesn’t know why Hale decided to take the lives of six innocent people. But the public will have to live with any legislation that comes from her murderous behavior… legislation that may limit its right to own firearms or increases funding for mental health services that may actually be responsible for Hale’s actions.

So now let’s consider what we don’t know. We don’t know the name of the doctor or psychiatrist that was “treating” Hale for the emotional disorder. We don’t know what “treatment” was provided to Hale. Did Hale have talk therapy or was Hale prescribed psychiatric mind-altering drugs? Did Hale’s doctor know whether she was a threat to herself or others? If yes, was this information passed along to law enforcement? Did the doctor know Hale was buying guns and was that information shared with law enforcement?

Moreover, the autopsy explains that there was no positive hit for many different types of prescription drugs, and that doesn’t take into consideration that Hale could have gone off the medications prior to the shooting. Knowing whether Hale had been prescribed any psychiatric medications is imperative because the adverse events associated with going cold turkey off drugs are extremely serious and even deadly, depending on the drug. Furthermore, there still are some questions regarding the therapeutic levels of psychotropic drugs that may have been excluded from the lab report.

Crazier still, let’s also ask why in the world did Hale’s parents think it was a good idea to gift the shooter’s personal writing history to the victim’s families? That’s a first. Why? What did these parents think would come from this bizarre action? Is it possible that Hale’s parents thought this would somehow make it easier for the victims’ families? Or did Hale’s parents believe giving away their daughter’s writings would relieve them of any culpability?

One also must wonder whether the Covenant School’s history of sexual abuse that is widely reported on social media had any role in Hales attack on the school. Was Hale aware of the rumored sexual abuse or, God forbid, was Hale a victim? Who knows? It’s anyone’s guess. And this is the problem with withholding any data that may shed light on what led to Hale’s inexplicable murderous actions.

The conflicts of interest of some of the parents of covenant school are shockingly obvious, having created two cash cows, the Covenant Families for Brighter Tomorrows, and the Covenant Families Action Fund, will surely be used to generate attacks against the second amendment and push for coercive mental health programs of all parents across the State.

In addition, a trustee of the board of the covenant school, Dr. C. Buddy Creech, is a vaccinologist, at Vanderbilt Medical Center, which also happens to be a major stakeholder in the transitioning industry. It would be interesting to know where Hale was seeking guidance for her transition. This is why it is important to release as much information as possible about the school and the shooter.

Keeping the public in the dark about Hale’s motives only leads to speculation and conspiracy theories. The families of the victims say that releasing the manifesto and documents will lead to copycat shootings. Naturally, they could be right, but withholding the information may also lead to more shootings. Keeping Hales motives secret does not get the public to why the murders occurred. Only sunshine on the issue can get the public the information it needs to come up with solutions to these deadly acts of cowardice.

The post Breaking: Massive Cover-Up of Trans Shooter’s History in Nashville Covenant School Mass Murder Case appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

President Biden Must Not Encourage Illegal Mass Migration From Haiti

This story originally was published by Real Clear Wire

By Senator Marco Rubio
Real Clear Wire

“It’s better to be the United States’ enemy than its friend.” Foreign officials tell me this is their perception under the Biden Administration, which has a strange habit of appeasing our adversaries while holding our allies to impossible standards. It’s bad foreign policy, plain and simple. Moreover, it’s encouraging chaos in our region.

Just look at what’s happening in the Dominican Republic. The Caribbean nation is facing extraordinary migratory pressure from neighboring Haiti, which has all but collapsed into anarchy. President Luis Abinader has made it clear he will protect Dominican sovereignty by enforcing deportations. Yet the Biden Administration, influenced by radical left-wing groups like Amnesty International, is pushing him to accept three million Haitians at any moment.

This is unfair to the D.R., which is a developing nation with limited resources, and which is already bearing significant burdens on Haiti’s behalf. Anyone who doubts this should consider the fact that more than a third of all births in the D.R. are currently to Haitian citizens.

But encouraging illegal mass migration is also unfair to our country. The Biden Administration seems unaware that many Haitians view the D.R. as a stepping stone to Puerto Rico—and that a well-established smuggling ring to facilitate that journey already exists. Because our fellow Americans in Puerto Rico have their own fiscal constraints, illegal migrants that reach the U.S. territory would likely move on to the continental United States.

Like most Americans, I recognize that what is happening in Haiti is horrible and tragic. The breakdown of law and order, the displacement of more than 300,000 people, and the need of roughly five million for some form of aid—all of these are matters of grave concern. This is why I support the international peacekeeping mission that Kenya proposes to lead once Haiti has established a provisional government. In addition, I have reintroduced legislation to preserve U.S. trade benefits for Haitian manufacturers, which could prove a lifeline to legitimate Haitian businesses in this time of crisis.

But, like most Americans, I also recognize that no country should experience illegal mass migration—not the D.R., and not the United States. Illegal mass migration does no good for the nation people are migrating from. When all able-bodied, law-abiding citizens leave their homeland, there is no one left to defend it from criminals and tyrants—and no one left to provide for the vulnerable who remain there. On a more fundamental level, though, I cannot support illegal mass migration because the job of elected officials is to protect their citizens first, not anyone else’s.

This is why I have asked the U.S. State Department to prioritize U.S. citizens trapped in Haiti, as well as their adopted Haitian children. Moreover, it’s why we cannot allow Haitian citizens to surge across our borders. As U.S. Senator Rick Scott and I noted in a recent letter to President Biden, Haiti is rife with gangs, and jailbreaks have allegedly released thousands of dangerous criminals. This means illegal mass migration from Haiti would put Americans at risk.

Since President Biden took office, more than eight million people have crossed our insecure southern border, and 90,000 have immigrated from Afghanistan un-vetted. The resultant threats to our national security—from the rise of Tren de Aragua to the infiltration of Islamist terrorists—are severe and out of control. The tragedy in Haiti is great, but it’s no excuse for letting these threats increase.

The post President Biden Must Not Encourage Illegal Mass Migration From Haiti appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

NATO Leaders Making Tracks to Trump

This article originally appeared on WND.com

Guest by post by Bob Unruh 

‘Are anticipating he’s going to win’

President Donald Trump has yet to be named the GOP nominee for president for the fall election. And then there’s the campaigning, debates if Democrats allow the “diminished” Joe Biden to participate, and the election.

But a number of NATO leaders believe they know what will happen: they’re making tracks to Trump.

“These leaders are anticipating that Trump’s gonna win,” Kurt Volker, a former ambassador to NATO, told the Washington Examiner.

“And so, they also want to reestablish relationships.” He also said there’s a lot of concern among European leaders about Biden’s failure so far to orchestrate more American support for Ukraine, which is fighting a war against an invading Russia.

The most recent visitor, the report explained, was Polish President Andrzej Duda, who “joined the list of foreign leaders beating a path to Donald Trump’s door this week.”

“It was a friendly meeting in a very nice atmosphere,” Duda explained to media in his home country.

The report noted Trump also described the visitor as a “friend.”

And he said, “We’re behind Poland all the way.”

That was reassuring, the report explained, to European leaders who watch “with alarm” the declining poll numbers for Biden.

The report noted Duda is “at least the third European leader to travel to the United States to visit Trump, following British Foreign Secretary David Cameron — himself a former prime minister — and Prime Minister Viktor Orban of Hungary.”

Biden’s State Department has been trying to downplay the visits, explaining that foreign governments often “engage with the nominees of major parties.”

And “engage” is what a number have sought.

“We see that the functioning of the U.S. has been paralyzed towards Ukraine, and Trump has influence even if he’s not in power — even if he’s under criminal investigation — he’s influencing what is happening or not happening,” the report explained was the conclusion of a “senior European official.”

The dilemma facing European leaders is their hope that Biden will be able to get something done regarding Ukraine, but their impression that they will need to fall into line behind Trump in the event he is elected.

Ex-NATO strategist Stefanie Babst told the Examiner, “They will try not to upset the Biden administration too much, but their greater concern is that they haven’t even had a chance to speak to Trump to get a personal impression of what the guy is really up to. To me, [the visits are] a sign of despair.”

Babst noted that what Biden has “decided” in dealing with Ukraine and Russia is “not working.”

Copyright 2024 WND News Center

The post NATO Leaders Making Tracks to Trump appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Peter Sweden: FARMERS PROTEST- Norwegian Tractor Convoy

This article was written by Swedish independent journalist Peter Imanuelsen, also known as PeterSweden. You can follow him at PeterSweden.com.

Farmers are now protesting for fairer wages. No farmers = No food.

As you will have heard if you follow my reporting, there has been massive farmers protests all over Europe. I recently reported from Germany where the farmers were protesting.

Now the Norwegian farmers are protesting as well, and I met with them.

In fact, there was a tractor convoy on the E6 motorway and I managed to catch up with them for an interview – And I got some videos and photos as well.

As far as I’m aware, I’m the only journalist that went to this protest and got videos, so please share widely!

They were driving a tractor convoy on the motorway in very slow speed to make their point.

One tractor had a homemade banner saying “Our food – Increase self reliance”.

In other words, NO FARMERS = NO FOOD.

So what is happening is that small farms are having to shut down because they cannot live on the wages they are getting, and it ends up being converted into large farms instead.

Meanwhile, in the Netherlands, the state talked about essentially SEIZING 3000 farms to meet new 2030 emissions goals…

The post Peter Sweden: FARMERS PROTEST- Norwegian Tractor Convoy appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Illinois RINOs Part 3: Weaponizing Law Enforcement

Guest post by Paul Drabik

Terry Newsome and Paul Drabik of Behind Enemy Lines have been fighting back in Illinois.  The Gateway Pundit has been following their stories including reporting on illegal immigrants, Joe Biden, and Mike Lindell.

Throughout their fight against radical leftists Newsome and Drabik have encountered a glaring opposition. Surprisingly, it has not come from the left but the right. 

As discussed in Part 1 and Part 2, the RINO betrayal in Illinois runs deep and starts at the top with figures like the Chairman of the Illinois GOP, Don Tracy. Tracy once ran for Illinois State Senate as a Democrat.

Tracy’s family business, Dot Foods, also donated to both Joe Biden and the DNC. There’s also State Senate Minority Leader John Curran. Curran famously advocated and voted for Amendment 1.

This amendment cemented Illinois State Constitutional powers for public unions effectively making them a fourth branch of government and Illinois a Communist state. 

These leaders are an immense danger to the party and the public who they purport to represent. However, more dangerous are the local level leaders. In a Republic such as ours it is the direct conduits to the public such as County Sheriffs or local Republican leaders who can have the greatest impact on policy. 

In part 2 we saw that the exposure of RINOs donating to Democrats – in a clear pay for play scheme – will get you censored and canceled.

Newsome and Drabik certainly did call out the RINOs in Illinois when they found out that some donated to radical Soros funded prosecutor Kim Foxx. On their podcast, Newsome & Drabik displayed a Nazi meme of the Republican who censored them for criticism of the party.

Soon enough Newsome and Drabik would find that there were no depths to which the RINOs would not sink. Local Republican leadership had supported Sheriff James Mendrick of DuPage County in a previous race.

When Newsome and Drabik became a nuisance for the party the Sheriff was brought in to provide a level of intimidation. The Sheriff engaged both Drabik and Newsome via email and phone conversation.

The Sheriff threatened Newsome through proxy about the rhetoric he’d been using on his podcast. Newsome sent out an email to colleagues as a warning that he was fearful that he would be targeted by law enforcement on Sunday, November 5th.

Coincidently or not, the Illinois State Police showed up on Newsome’s doorstep on Tuesday, November 7th. Their inquiry revolved around comments made by Newsome’s criticism of State Senate Minority Leader John Curran. 

This was not enough to deter Newsome and Drabik however. They went on to discuss these events on their podcast showing these details and expressing concern that the Sheriff was potentially engaging in weaponization of his office for political purposes.

The attacks from the RINO establishment did not stop there. As Behind Enemy Lines and the grassroots movement grew their following, the establishment took measures to discredit Newsome because of a criminal background of 35 years ago.

Prior to a Republican organization meeting they disseminated a packet exposing Newsome’s record but also listing his family’s names and addresses.

The finishing touch was to add sex offenders registered in Newsome’s neighborhood so as to imply that he had some sort of connection with them. It should be noted that Newsome’s criminal background was related to drug and weapons possession.

Subsequently, Newsome approached the private business owner of the venue where this doxxing attack had occurred. That business provided security camera images showing certain Republican leadership had to have been aware of the doxxing attack.

Shockingly, you will see in the video below that the Sheriff admits to being tasked by a political operative to approach a business owner about sharing information with a private citizen.

The Sheriff then seemingly brags about intimidating a private business owner into not sharing information with another private citizen ever again, and training their staff in this manner. 

This was not enough to deter Newsome and Drabik however. They went on to discuss these events on their podcast showing these details and expressing concern that the Sheriff was potentially engaging in weaponization of his office for political purposes.

The attacks from the RINO establishment did not stop there. As Behind Enemy Lines and the grassroots movement grew their following, the establishment took measures to discredit Newsome because of a criminal background of 35 years ago.

Prior to a Republican organization meeting they disseminated a packet exposing Newsome’s record but also listing his family’s names and addresses.

The finishing touch was to add sex offenders registered in Newsome’s neighborhood so as to imply that he had some sort of connection with them. It should be noted that Newsome’s criminal background was related to drug and weapons possession.

Subsequently, Newsome approached the private business owner of the venue where this doxxing attack had occurred. That business provided security camera images showing certain Republican leadership had to have been aware of the doxxing attack.

Shockingly, you will see in the video below that the Sheriff admits to being tasked by a political operative to approach a business owner about sharing information with a private citizen.

The Sheriff then seemingly brags about intimidating a private business owner into not sharing information with another private citizen ever again, and training their staff in this manner.

WATCH:

Mendrick has been touted in years past for being responsible for a low recidivism rate amongst inmates of DuPage County. He has been a proponent for second chances. That is, unless you become a political rival to the Sheriff. Below you can see how he speaks to a concerned citizen labeling Terry Newsome as a “drug dealer,” and to “…leave me alone.”

Denigrating someone for their past seems petty if you are in support of second chances. The real hypocrisy is that Sheriff Mendrick had accepted upwards of $100k from a convicted sex offender. ABC news covered the story in 2018.

Apparently, the Sheriff’s sympathy for offenders is only available to those who donate to his political campaign.

We reached out to the Sheriff for comment on the matter and it appears he is suggesting we are violating an Illinois criminal code – 720 ILCS 5 Article 26.5: Harassing and Obscene Communications – by seeking his comment in a news story.

After a final attempt to let the Sheriff know we were seeking comment for a media story, he repeated the screenshot of the Illinois Criminal code. It’s not entirely clear what was meant by this. The implication of course is that we are harassing him in accordance with this particular Illinois criminal code. Certainly, a journalist reaching out to a public official for comment is covered under the first amendment.

The pressure on the local Republican Party by Behind Enemy Lines and the grassroots movement has pushed the party and Sheriff Mendrick to go full authoritarian.

Mendrick has since become the vice chair of his local organization who lost 40% of their participation since instituting censorship. The Sheriff has intimidated multiple committeemen in the organization, including Drabik, suggesting there are police reports filed for things they’ve said in public.

The danger of people like Sheriff James Mendrick cannot be overstated. Intimidating private businesses and people for exercising their first amendment rights can be expected from the left.

While the Democrats in America have essentially become Communists, it is the people on the right like Sheriff Mendrick who pose the greater threat. They are helping the Democrats by silencing the true opposition to Communism in America: THE PEOPLE.

The post Illinois RINOs Part 3: Weaponizing Law Enforcement appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

State Official Rejects Dems’ Illegal Plan to Sneak Biden’s Name on 2024 Ballot

This article originally appeared on WND.com

Guest by post by Bob Unruh 

Idea ‘is not provided for by law’

A state official in Ohio has rejected Democrats’ illegal plan to sneak Joe Biden’s name onto the 2024 presidential ballot.

A lawyer for the leftist party had wanted the state of accept a “provisional” certification of Biden, and Kamala Harris, as candidates, but Attorney General Dave Yost’s office found the move “simply is not provided for by law.”

“Instead, the law mandates the Democratic Party to actually certify its president and vice-president candidates on or before August 7, 2024. No alternative process is permitted,” the statement said.

The problem is that Democrats, focused for the last few years on trying to exclude President Donald Trump from the 2024 ballot, overlooked state requirements for certification. Their convention, to officially name Biden as the candidate, doesn’t happen until the end of August.

After the deadlines in Ohio and Alabama will have passed by the time their decision is made.

The Ohio state decision said, “Thus, the secretary of state lacks authority to accept ‘provisional certifications’ from the Democratic Party pursuant to [the law]. The Democratic Party must actually certify its presidential candidates on or before August 7, 2024 to be placed on the 2024 general election ballot.”

The state earlier had offered two solutions to the Democrats. One is that the state legislature could change the law, the other is that the Democrats could reschedule their convention for earlier.

A report from Fox News described the Democrat plan as trying to “skirt” the law.

The report said documents show correspondence between Yost and Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose as well as lawyer Donald McTigue, representing Democrats.

McTigue claimed that the state had the authority to take a “provisional certification” to accommodate the Democrats.

The AG shot down the idea.

“The Democratic Party’s notion of providing a ‘provisional certification’ by the statutory deadline simply is not provided for by law,” Yost’s office said. “Instead, the law mandates the Democratic Party to actually certify its president and vice-president candidates on or before August 7, 2024. No alternative process is permitted.”

Biden’s campaign continued to confirm he will be on the ballot in “all 50 states.”

Officials in Alabama also have warned Biden of similar circumstances there.

Alabama Secretary of State Wes Allen said the law requires the nominations by Aug. 15.

“It has recently come to my attention that the Democratic National Convention is currently scheduled to convene on August 19, 2024, which is after the State of Alabama’s statutory deadline for political parties to provide a certificate of nomination for President and Vice President on August 15, 2024,” officials there told Democrats. “The certificate of nomination must be signed by the presiding officer and secretary of the convention and by the chair of the state executive committee of the political party making the nomination.”

The American Center for Law and Justice, which has fought on behalf of election integrity and ballot fairness, pointedly noted, “Remember when the far Left tried to disqualify President Donald Trump from state primary ballots? The ACLJ won at the U.S. Supreme Court to protect your right to vote for the candidate of your choice.”

In fact, Democrats across America have spent months and likely uncounted dollars trying to get President Donald Trump banned from the 2024 presidential ballot.

They’ve pushed the “insurrectionist” talking point over the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the Capitol, ever since those events happened.

They’ve worked at the state level, in Colorado, to obtain a ruling from an all-Democrat state Supreme Court that his name shouldn’t appear. Two other states followed Colorado’s agenda, but that agenda was stopped in its tracks by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Democrats even have assembled a long list of questionable claims against Trump – in court – to try to make sure Americans are not allowed to check his name on the ballot in November.

Copyright 2024 WND News Center

The post State Official Rejects Dems’ Illegal Plan to Sneak Biden’s Name on 2024 Ballot appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

J6 Political Hostage Jeff Sabol Asks Readers to Review Video of His Actions and Decide If He Deserves 5 Years in Prison – Faces $32,000 in Fines – Please Help This Dad Below!

Guest post by Jenn Baker
CondemnedUSAcom

The egregious overcharging and sentencing of January 6th Political Hostages continues to happen daily, over three years later.

53-year-old Jeffery Sabol has spent 3+ years locked up for that day. He was sentenced at the end of March to 63 months (about 5 and 1/4 years), 3 years probation, and over $32,000 in fines and restitution. Sabol, a Geophysicist, is from Colorado. He is a devoted father, son, and partner to his beautiful fiancé.

Sabol has been a friend to many, and probably the most liked and respected guy in the DC Gulag. He has always provided hope, great “Dad” jokes, and advice to those detained in the Gulag as well as to the thousands that tune into the Freedom Corner Vigil. For over 620 nights, www.4Ashli.com has held a vigil outside the DC Gulag. The Hostages get to call in and talk to the world via livestream. Every night over the last year, Jeff would be the last phone call of the night and conduct the “J6 choir” in the National Anthem and then wrap up the call with news of the day.

** Please help Jeff Sabol here.

For more on the vigil: Let J6 Political Prisoners Know They Are Not Alone: Please Help Support the Weekly Livestream of the J6 Political Prisoner Vigil Outside the DC Gulag

Sabol has asked that the readers of the Gateway Pundit see the allocution he provided to his judge, U.S. District Judge, Rudolph Contreras. He has also provided two video exhibits that he’d like you to see as well. While you read and watch all of this, Jeff is enduring a dose of “Diesel Therapy” provided by the Bureau of Prisons and the US Marshals. He has recently been removed from the DC Gulag after 3+ years, and he, along with his family and friends, will know where he’s going when he gets there. For now, he remains strong and has faith that all of this will turn around in the not-too-distant future.

This written allocution is from Jeffrey Sabol and contains the Truth, the whole Truth, and nothing but the Truth, so help me, God.

Your Honor, Thank You for accepting my written allocution. This allocution contains 8
points.

Point 1: I take Full Responsibility for my actions.

Point 2: Please allow me to set the record straight in regard to two items that were
discussed by my previous lawyer during my initial bond hearing that was approximately
three years ago. *

A) I do not recall telling my previous lawyer that I thought that the 2020 election was not
stolen.

B) It is true that my vocation was to use geophysics to locate buried unexploded ordnance (UXO). It is also true that (at times) I have excavated UXO; however, my previous lawyer misspoke when he said that I disarm/diffuse them. This I do not do.

Point 3: Please forgive my indulgence in defining two terms before moving forward. *

Allocution is defined as, “In a criminal procedure, allocution usually refers to the statement of a defendant, made following conviction, and is made prior to sentence. It is the defendant’s opportunity to offer mitigating argument.” * Mitigation is defined as “to make less severe”.

Please help Jeff here.

Point 4: Below is an excerpt from Mr. Tucker Carlson’s interview of Congressman Clay
Higgins that was conducted on January 6, 2024.

Mr. Higgins: “I’m following the evidence and to my end it implicates our FBI, the highest level, and a conspiracy within our government at the highest level to create, to set the stage, for a compromised election cycle in 2020 and then the actions that took place on January 4, 5, 6; and then the criminal investigation, arrest, and prosecution, of Americans that they were able to entrap and document with the thousands of cameras that were operating that day. They used that evidence that they knew they were setting up to investigate, arrest, and prosecute the Americans that they had entrapped.”

* Please note that the text above is from a United States Congressman. I humbly offer this quote as a mitigating argument to support the claim that nefarious elements of a potential Federal nature may have been involved that then had an impact on my actions on January 6. On January 6 I initially followed those that instigated, agitated, and motivated the crowd and as such I became engaged in the situation. I was wrong to follow and to get engaged. For that I apologize.

Point 5: The 1512 charge is titled: Tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant.

Section c2 of this charge is defined as relating to whoever corruptly obstructs,
influences, or impedes any official proceeding or attempts to do so. * per U.S. v Throckmorton (98 U.S. 61 25 L. Ed. 93 – 1878), “There is no question of the general doctrine that fraud vitiates the most solemn contracts, documents, and even judgements.”

Additionally, Gorman v Johnson (46 Ind App. 672, 91 N.E. 971 (Ind App. 1910)), “It is elemental that fraud vitiates all that it touches…” [Vitiates is defined as: legally ineffective; to invalidate] Exhibits 1 and 2 contain evidence that supports that the 2020 election was rife with fraud. I readily admit that this evidence is currently unsubstantiated in a court of law. My mitigating argument for the 1512 c2 charge is that although I am guilty of disrupting an official proceeding; per Exhibits 1 and 2 (and the case law provided above), there is mounting evidence that this was not a valid official proceeding. *

Note that Exhibit F is 281 pages in length and is titled: “The Fingerprints of Fraud”. This document can be found at http://fingerprintsoffraud.com. *

Note that Exhibit G is 32 pages in length and is Titled “Summary of Election Fraud in the 2020
Presidential Election in the Swing States.”

** Please help Jeff Sabol here.

Point 6: In regards to the 2111 charge of robbery in which I was guilty of robbing Officer AW of his baton, Exhibit H (long video) shows that there were multiple bodies on the ground in front of officer AW. My mitigating argument for this charge is that upon seeing bodies on the ground my reflex was to remove the object that I believed was the cause.

Please note that I show no intent to engage with officer AW after the baton is removed. *

Point 7: In regards to the 111B charge in which I was found guilty of assault with a dangerous or deadly weapon on Officer BM, my mitigating arguments are (per Exhibit H):

A) My intent was to help someone pull a body away from the chaos that existed at the tunnel entrance.

B) From my initial angle there is no way that I could know that this was an officer until he was already moving down the stairs.

C) The video shows that I exhibit no malice towards officer BM once he is at the bottom of the stairs.

Please note that I immediately then go to my left to help someone who is unconscious. In the span
of approximately 20 seconds, my mindset was: remove baton, assist with moving person from tunnel entrance, help unconscious person.

Point 8: Please note that the intent of this allocution is not to negate my guilt, nor to
negate any acceptance of responsibility. Per the definition of an allocution, the intent of
this written allocution (and Exhibits) is to solely offer mitigating arguments.

Thank You Your Honor.
Very Respectfully,
Jeffrey Sabol

What you just read was my written allocution that my lawyer submitted to my judge (along with 2 videos) just prior to my sentencing. On March 21, I was sentenced to 63 months for robbing an officer of a baton, assaulting an officer with a dangerous and deadly weapon; and disruption of an official proceeding.

Please watch the 2 videos and you decide if my actions warrant a 5 ¼ year sentence.

Video #1 (10 min)

Video #2 (1 min)

On a different but related topic, I need your help.

Prior to my incarceration, I prided myself on never missing an alimony or child support payment. My alimony payment ended 7 years ago, but my child support payments continued (even though I had 50% custody).

During the past 38 months that I have already been incarcerated (While I awaited sentencing), I have paid a total of $19,000 in child support, all of which came from my GiveSendGo account.

To be blunt, I will not be able to continue to pay child support unless I have your help. I am not asking for a handout; I am asking for your help in supporting my daughter when I can’t.

Please help Jeff here.

Thank you.
God Bless You –and- God Bless America
Jeffrey Sabol

 

The post J6 Political Hostage Jeff Sabol Asks Readers to Review Video of His Actions and Decide If He Deserves 5 Years in Prison – Faces $32,000 in Fines – Please Help This Dad Below! appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Holy War Erupts When Basketball Coach Dares to Voice Christian Faith

This article originally appeared on WND.com

Guest by post by Bob Unruh 

‘If you don’t believe in God, something’s wrong with you, seriously’

A coalition whose goal includes censoring select Christians who make reference to their personal faith has demanded that the University of South Carolina censor its women’s basketball coach.

But officials with the Rutherford Institute have volunteered to help defend the school from the attack by the Freedom From Religion Foundation.

The fight is over comments by Dawn Staley, the coach of the Gamecocks, which came after the team defeated Oregon State last month to advance to the NCAA’s Final Four. The team later won the title.

Staley was interviewed, and was asked, “Since the last two games have been close and tough,…what’s impressed you about this [team]?”

She praised the players’ resilience and added, “I’m giving all the glory to God, though. …The devastating loss that we had last year, to put us back here with a totally different team—if you don’t believe in God, something’s wrong with you, seriously. I’m a believer. I’m a believer because He makes things come true. When you’re at your worst, He’s at His best.”

Within hours, the FFRF had ordered the school to “take action to protect its student athletes and to ensure that Staley understands that she has been hired as a basketball coach and not a pastor.”

It also issued a demand that Staley “be educated as to her constitutional duties under the Establishment Clause.”

The protest group also complained that Staley had posted Bible verses on her own social media accounts and was involved in devotionals.

Rutherford now has advised the school that, “To prohibit Coach Staley from making any reference to biblical passages as a source of motivation and team building, while allowing her to make references to secular writers and stories, would be discriminatory and ‘may evidence hostility to religion…,'” the letter said.

“Coach Staley is tasked with motivating her players as a team to win. After winning the NCAA championship this year, freshman Tessa Johnson credited the team’s success with the environment Staley helped create: ‘We’re unselfish people and that’s how we win it,'” the letter said.

“Indeed, the Bible contains many passages that call for people to be unselfish and work as a team: ‘Do nothing from selfish ambition or conceit, but in humility count others more significant than yourselves. Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interest of others;’ ‘the body is one and has many members,…[i]f one member suffers, all suffer together; if one member is honored, all rejoice together;’ and ‘love your neighbor as yourself.'”

The letter to South Carolina chief Michael Amiridis explained that while the Constitution says the government “may not establish or compel a particular religion, it also may not silence and suppress religious speech merely because others take offense.”

It continued, “People are free to ignore, disagree with, or counter the religious speech of others, but they cannot compel the government to censor such speech.”

So, the letter said, the FFRF “has the right to complain about the actions of the university’s women’s basketball coach Dawn Staley, but it does not have the right to compel the University of South Carolina to suppress the religious speech and expression made by Coach Staley as a private citizen.”

It notes the Supreme Court previously has ruled: “Learning how to tolerate speech or prayer of all kinds is part of learning how to live in a pluralistic society.” The court further has affirmed that while public officials and employees “can act on behalf of the state, they are also private citizens with their own constitutional rights.”

“While the government may not establish or compel a particular religion, it also may not silence and suppress religious speech merely because others take offense,” said constitutional attorney John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute.

Copyright 2024 WND News Center

The post Holy War Erupts When Basketball Coach Dares to Voice Christian Faith appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

‘Blatant State Hostility’: Legal Battle Erupts When Town Tears Down Cross

This article originally appeared on WND.com

Guest by post by Bob Unruh 

City leaders ‘seem to hate what it represents’

A pitched battle has erupted in California over the decision by one city to take an easement away from the Lions Club and remove a Christian cross the organization had illuminated at holidays for years.

The situation has been profiled by CBN, which noted the effort to restore the cross continues.

The cross has been on the site since several owners sold the city 1.1 acres of land in the 1970s, but the Lions retained an easement for the cross, the report said.

Atheists in recent years had complained they didn’t like it, so the city’s solution was to take over the easement and remove the monument.

Now a coalition of Christians is renewing their campaign to have the 28-foot-tall cross restored.

The metal and plexiglass structure had been illuminated on a hill overlooking Albany Hill for decades, CBN said.

It was the East Bay Atheists who began insisting in 2015 that the cross on the private easement be torn down.

They claimed it showed a “preference” for one religion and offended them.

The city’s mayor at the time in 2017 soon joined the campaign. Peggy McQuaid, in office, said the city did not support the “continued presence” of the cross.

Then in 2018 a judge claimed the cross, on a private easement, violated the Establishment Clause of the Constitution, which forbids setting up a state religion.

The city could have sold the plot of ground that was covered by the easement, but instead opted to pursue the destruction of the cross.

The Lions club now has sued to regain its easement, and the cross, the report said.

The complaint notes the court refused to acknowledge that the club had a property right “to display the cross.’

“The First Amendment of the Constitution protects individuals and private entities from such blatant state hostility to those wishing to express symbols of faith and hope,” Brad Dacus, president and founder of Pacific Justice Institute, told CBN.

“We at PJI are committed to defending such constitutionally protected expression.”

Lions Club chief Kevin Pope told the Washington Times in an interview that city leaders “seem to hate what it represents, and rather than take an amount of money for the land … they’ve decided to spend what we think is probably close to $1 million” fighting the cross.

Copyright 2024 WND News Center

The post ‘Blatant State Hostility’: Legal Battle Erupts When Town Tears Down Cross appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Image: World Net Daily

Leo Hohmann: Godfather of AI Says ‘Battle robots’ Will Soon Dominate War-Making Abilities of Major Nations, Posing ‘Existential Threat’

This article originally appeared on Leo Hohmann’s Substack and was republished with permission.

Former Google engineer Geoffrey Hinton warns of ‘very nasty things’ now that AI is being relied on to make battlefield decisions.

The world could experience multiple untold disasters before the use of Artificial Intelligence weapons comes under proper regulation, according to award-winning scientist and tech pioneer Geoffrey Hinton, who is known in tech circles as the Godfather of AI.

Hinton says AI is becoming much more intelligent than people and could soon take over the battlefield. With wars breaking out all over the world, in Ukraine, the Middle East, and potentially the Far East, this is a major concern for humanity.

There has already been speculation that the recent death of aid workers in Israel could have resulted from an AI-powered military decision that would not have been made if actual people had full control of the battlefield strategy.

RT.com reports that Hinton, the former Google engineer who quit the company last year, compared the use of AI for military purposes to chemical weapons deployment – warning that “very nasty things” will occur before the global community arrives at a comprehensive agreement comparable to the Geneva Conventions.

“The threat I spoke out about is the existential threat,” Hinton told Irish broadcaster RTE News on Tuesday, emphasizing that “these things will get much more intelligent than us and they will take over.”

The computer scientist highlighted the impact of AI on disinformation and job displacement, and also on weapons of the future.

“One of the threats is ‘battle robots’ which will make it much easier for rich countries to wage war on smaller, poorer countries and they are going to be very nasty and I think they are inevitably coming,” Hinton warned.

He urged governments to put pressure on tech majors, especially in California, to conduct in-depth research on the safety of AI technology.

“Rather than it being an afterthought, there should be government incentives to ensure companies put a lot of work into safety and some of that is happening now,” Hinton said.

He underscored huge benefits that AI can bring to humanity, particularly in healthcare, adding that he does not regret any of his contributions to the technology.

Of course, one of the “benefits” of AI in healthcare is the ability to rapidly develop genetically modifying “vaccines,” using synthetic mRNA, so even this so-called benefit Hinton refers to is a fraud.

RT goes on to note that “Despite the mounting interest in AI, several high-profile figures in the tech industry have warned of the potential dangers posed by the unregulated adoption of the technology. Hinton has waged a media campaign to warn of the risks. Tesla CEO Elon Musk, Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak and Yoshua Bengio, who is considered an AI pioneer for his work on neural networks, were among the top industry figures to co-sign a letter last year calling for aggressive regulation of the AI sector.”

A paper was published by the U.S. Army War College in 2020 stating that current military research supports the emergence and synchronization of AI and robotics.

So the guys who created AI are now warning of its risks. How rich. They create the beast, then fear-monger the public into believing this beast could take over the world, setting the stage for the beast’s creators to offer an even more frightening solution — total regulation of all information and all human behavior. Classic Hegelianism.

To receive new posts and support Leo Hohmann’s work, consider becoming a paid subscriber if you aren’t yet at leohohmann.substack.com

The post Leo Hohmann: Godfather of AI Says ‘Battle robots’ Will Soon Dominate War-Making Abilities of Major Nations, Posing ‘Existential Threat’ appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Peter Sweden: WHAT? – New EU Rule BANS Garden Bonfires

This article was written by Swedish independent journalist Peter Imanuelsen, also known as PeterSweden. You can follow him at PeterSweden.com.

It’s now gone a few years since the British left the EU, in part because they didn’t like all the restrictions and rules that they were coming up with.

Now there is a new rule.

People will be banned from starting bonfires in their garden to burn garden waste such as grass, leafs and sticks.

This is because the new law requires that food and organic waste be sorted and recycled.

Meaning that people who are tending their garden will have to either compost their garden waster or deliver it in for recycling.

In Scandinavia it is tradition in the spring where homeowners tend their garden and start bonfires to burn up garden waste, which will now be banned.

What’s next, will they ban wood stoves too? Probably sooner or later…

So what if you are grilling and want to use sticks or wood from your garden on to fire up the grill? Looks like that will be illegal now, because garden waste must be recycled.

As far as I’m aware, I’m the only one reporting on this new law in English so far, so if you appreciate my work, please consider helping me out by becoming a paid subscriber.

Independent journalist Peter Imanuelsen has dedicated years to reporting the things the mainstream media ignores. You can follow him at https://petersweden.com/

The post Peter Sweden: WHAT? – New EU Rule BANS Garden Bonfires appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

AI Generated

Euthanasia Campaign Now Admits When People Die it Saves Money!

This article originally appeared on WND.com

Guest by post by Bob Unruh 

‘We have to remove the stigma between life and death’

The campaign for euthanasia has been bathed in altruistic claims for several years already.

It relieves the terminally ill of pain. It allows them to die with dignity. It gives them control over their demise, which they otherwise might not have in a hospital or hospice. It is a right they should be allowed to exercise. And more.

The post Euthanasia Campaign Now Admits When People Die it Saves Money! appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

After Several Days of a Coordinated Media Smear Campaign – Germany’s AfD Foreign Politician Petr Bystron Becomes Target of Death Threat and Blackmail

By Johann Leonhard

After days of agitation in the European mainstream media, the popular AfD politician Petr Bystron has now become the target of a death threat combined with blackmail. As BILD reports, Bystron’s Bundestag office in Berlin received an anonymous letter with the text: “…if you value your life, then you quickly collect €100,000 and call here…”

The blackmailer insulted the AfD foreign politician as an “asshole” and added a collage with Bystron’s photo with a painted Hitler beard. The Bundestag police are taking the matter seriously and have started investigations (file number Vg/949/2024). The AfD politician said to the German Newspaper BILD of the death threat: “These are the fruits of the smear campaign of the last few days. I ask Czech Prime Minister Fiala: ‘Is this what you wanted to achieve?'”

Several insider authorities in Prague are accusing Czech Prime Minister Fiala of being personally responsible for mentioning Bystron’s name in connection with an affair surrounding the news portal “Voice of Europe.” At the beginning of last week, the Czech secret service made it public that it suspected two Ukrainians of covert propaganda for Russia. The accusations of collaborating with the portal and even taking money were directed against six European parties, all of which are against the war in Ukraine.

Bystron told the Czech newspaper BLESK that this was revenge for his appearances at the anti-government demonstrations in Prague, such as the demonstration on Wenceslas Square last year, where hundreds of thousands of Czechs cheered the AfD politician and at the same time loudly demanded the resignation of the hated Fiala government. According to the latest surveys, only 2% of its own citizens trust the Czech government.

Investigative journalists Michael Shellenberger and Gregor Baszak recently reported in the magazine “Public” that during the EU elections, state-financed NGOs such as “Correctiv” were used by the respective governments to create sentiment against the opposition in the run-up to the EU elections the respective countries. On behalf of NATO, they are supposed to publicly discredit the opposition forces fighting against the war in Ukraine with disinformation. In Germany, this particularly affects the AfD. The campaign against Bystron was also carried out in the Czech Republic by the local counterpart to Correctiv, “Dennik N” and the NGO “European Values,” which is financed by the USA and Soros.

The Schellenberg report unmasked the campaign in which Soros-NGOs and Czech intelligence services joined forces to fabricate a news story aimed at six European populist parties. Among them was the only true opposition party in Germany – the AfD (Alternative for Germany), with prominent figures in the line of fire. Our well-known friend Petr Bystron and his colleague Maximilian Krah, two leading candidates on the AfD election list for the European Parliament were named. Since the AfD is expecting to get around 20 seats, both are eager to join the ranks of the conservative movement in Brussels to fight the globalists on their home court.

Nevertheless, those facts don’t stop various German media as Spiegel and BILD from continuing the agitation against Bystron and accusing him of “dubious Kremlin contacts” and calling him a “Putin friend”, in spite of the fact, that Bystron never met Putin once (in contrast to Donald Trump) and did not express any expressions of friendship with Putin and only visited Moscow during an official business trip together with party head Alice Weidel. Bystron commented: “Everyone who has stood up for Germany’s interests in the last two years has been defamed as a Putin hooker. Anyone who advocated for U.S. interests was hailed as the great savior of Ukraine. Both are wrong.” The strategy of the campaign is quite clear: Portray the promising right-wing candidates as “Russian agents” and propaganda-slingshots.

Smear-Campaign presented by NATO?

In his report Shellenberger writes, Soros-funded NGOs like the German “Correctiv” and the “Institute for Strategic Dialogue” are de-facto “military and intelligence front groups spreading disinformation about German farmers and politicians”. He goes on to say: “Government, military and intelligence agencies are engaged in essentially political activities unrelated to national security and thus illegal.”

Particularly interesting for our case is the revelation, that this covert operation aims at German politicians and critical voices against the Ukraine war:

“Both NATO-funded and government-funded NGOs are working with government bodies to interfere in German elections. Their “influence operation” aims to keep Germany in line with American foreign policy objectives and undermine the European peace movement.”

It is in this context that the attacks on AfD-lawmakers Petr Bystron and Maximilian Krah make sense. The narrative is basically this: Bystron, Krah and other conservatives around Europe supposedly took bribes from Russia funnelled through a news-outlet called “Voice of Europe” with its main office in Prague. The evidence? Less than zero!

The agitation has reached its sad climax with the death threat against Bystron. Hopefully, it won’t go as far as the case with party leader Tino Chrupalla. He was stung by Antifa radicals with a syringe containing an unknown substance at an election campaign event,

The post After Several Days of a Coordinated Media Smear Campaign – Germany’s AfD Foreign Politician Petr Bystron Becomes Target of Death Threat and Blackmail appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Petr Bystron

Prosecutors in Trump Cases Being Put Under Microscope in New Documentary

This article originally appeared on WND.com

Guest by post by Bob Unruh 

A new documentary being released by the organization behind the American Greatness website, next week on April 17, is exposing the “four corrupt, political motivated” prosecutors now pursuing cases against President Donald Trump.

The narrator of “Chasing Trump” explains, “They say they’re upholding the law. But a close examination reveals politics of the very worst kind meant to influence the 2024 election.”

He cites, “Four corrupt, politically motivated prosecutors. One target: Donald Trump.”

The trailer:

“Can there be any doubt there’s a sentiment of ‘This is get Trump?'”

The video documentary is coming just as a trial is starting in which leftists are claiming Trump violated business regulations with a non-disclosure agreement, a common practice in business transactions.

In fact, the facts of the case were reviewed, then rejected for lacking evidence of wrongdoing, before it was resurrected and turned into a felony case.

A comment from the Daily Mail said, “Trump allies will step up their attacks on prosecutors investigating the former president next week, with the launch of an online documentary accusing them of political activism and electioneering.”

“‘Chasing Trump’ is an important documentary that exposes the leftwing prosecutors weaponizing the government to target my father,” Donald Trump Jr. told DailyMail.com. “It’s the first documentary to do a deep dive into the backgrounds of the prosecutors behind the four cases against him and is a must watch for anyone who cares about preserving the rule of law and protecting our constitutional rights.”

Among the subjects is Alvin Bragg, the prosecutor in Manhattan, who has created a list of 34 charges against Trump over that non-disclosure agreement.

Another subject is Fani Willis, a Georgia prosecutor who is bringing an organized crime case against Trump and a dozen others for their comments after the 2020 presidential election, which was, in fact, subjected to multiple undue influences that likely benefited Joe Biden. Willis has been accused of racism in the case, and a judge already has confirmed she had the appearance of a conflict of interest for hiring her paramour to work on her anti-Trump allegations.

Then there’s special counsel Jack Smith who is claiming Trump committed crimes by having documents from his presidency in his home after leaving office. Another special counsel found Joe Biden was in essentially the same position, but recommended against charging him because of his obviously “diminished” capacity.

Finally, there’s New York Attorney General Letitia James, who campaigned on the promise to “get Trump,” even without any allegations of wrongdoing. She found a judge who agreed with her agenda and declared Trump guilty of fraud before the trial, which was only to establish damages. The judge, Arthur Engoron, then ordered a penalty of $454 million for Trump in the case that had no victims, no one losing money, and no one making any complaints.

The Mail explains the documentary “makes the case that Trump is being punished for taking on the status quo and echoes his constant refrain that he is subject to a witch hunt.”

Even the judges in the cases cannot escape criticism, and one, Juan Merchan, who is hearing one of the cases, has a daughter to is an activist who benefits financially from her work for Kamala Harris and others who have attacked Trump.

The report said “Chasing Trump” is the first in a series to be produced by American Greatness.

The documentary is to appear on a number of streaming sites, including Rumble and X.

Curt Mercadenta, managing editor of American Greatness, explained to the Mail the video will shock anyone “who believed the legal system was free from partisan political considerations.”

“With the 2024 election starting to heat up, it’s imperative that Americans have the opportunity to learn more about the truth behind the prosecutions targeting President Trump, along with the partisan prosecutors behind the cases,” he explained.

And Mike Davis, of the Article III Project, said, “These four prosecutions against President Trump are nothing more than partisan political activism masquerading as the rule of law.”

Copyright 2024 WND News Center

The post Prosecutors in Trump Cases Being Put Under Microscope in New Documentary appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

This article originally appeared on WND.com Guest by post by Bob Unruh  A new documentary being released by the organization behind the American Greatness website, next week on April 17, is exposing the "four corrupt, political motivated" prosecutors now pursuing cases against President Donald Trump

Image: Wikicommons

Trump Impeachment Manager Threatened with Defamation Charges

This article originally appeared on WND.com

Guest by post by Bob Unruh 

‘I strongly suggest that you do not treat this lightly, congressman’

Comments by members of Congress, even stupid and irrational, mostly are protected by the “speech and debate” clause of the Constitution – as long as the comments are part of the legislative process.

But now a letter from a legal team representing congressional witness Tony Bobulinski is charging that U.S. Rep. Jamie Raskin, the Democrat from Maryland most famous for leading the impeachment case against former President Trump, stepped outside of that authority when he publicly slammed the witness, who has provided key evidence to Congress in its investigation into the evidence for impeaching Joe Biden.

In fact, according to the letter from lawyers Jesse Binnall and John C. Sullivan, representing Bobulinski, Raskin “mocked” various witnesses to Congress and posted a “freeze frame” that shows Bobulinski, with the chyron, “A disgruntled Wannabe Business Partner Turned Trump World Hype man.”

Raskin further publicly described Bobulinski as “a bitterly frustrated would be business partner who collaborated with the Trump campaign” and a “dubious” witness. And he called Bobulinski a “political pawn” and accused him of lying.

The letter warns Raskin, “You are not entitled to any immunity for your defamatory statements. The Speech and Debate Clause comes from Article I, Section 6, Clause 1 of the United States Constitution, and it includes, in relevant part: ‘for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.'”

But that only protects activities “undertaken in the House and Senate,” and provides no immunity “beyond its carefully defined scope,” the lawyers warn. “Anything that is not a legislative activity will not be protected.”

The letter warns Raskin, “Your statements are derogatory falsehoods, rendering them legally actionable. Your pattern of maliciously defaming Mr. Bobulinski is well-established and will not be tolerated.”

The lawyers explain that they will file litigation over Raskin’s public and social media statements “if you fail to delete and publicly retract recent defamatory statements and publications you made about Mr. Bobulinski, including on X (formerly Twitter). Be further advised that you should identify and preserve all hard copy and electronically stored documents, information, and data that relate, in any way, to the subject matter of your incessantly malicious defamatory conduct. It was a mistake to believe that your publications were made without consequence. It must, and will, stop immediately.”

The lawyers also cite “evidence” of Raskin’s “malice,” in that he’s following a “blind adherence to a preconceived narrative.”

Bobulinski, a onetime business associate of Hunter Biden, has provided testimony to Congress that confirms the influence peddling operations run by the Biden family, which generated millions for family members, was focused on access to Joe Biden, who was, in fact, party to those operations.

Bobulinski, during his appearance in Congress, called leftists in the body liars, and a ruling from the committee found that he was not out of order in doing so.

Copyright 2024 WND News Center

The post Trump Impeachment Manager Threatened with Defamation Charges appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Maryland Rep. Jamie Raskin appears on CNN's "State of the Union." (@CNNSOTU / X screen shot)

Illinois RINOS Part 2: How Republicans Help Democrats Become Communists

Guest post by Paul Drabik

In part one The Gateway Pundit highlighted some examples of how Illinois is fast becoming a Communist state based on the style of legislation that is becoming law.

We further showed how Illinois Republicans appear more concerned about aligning with Democrats than promoting conservative policy. To say nothing about the corruption, the political conceptualization of the problem is wholly misinterpreted.

Terry Newsome and Paul Drabik of Behind Enemy Lines podcast attempted to work within the system. However, the system itself is constructed by Democrats and Republicans are just along for the ride.

Illinois suffered, and likely still suffers, from the 40 years of political control under the most powerful state politician in the country, Mike Madigan.

Madigan, representative of the 22nd District and Speaker of the Illinois House for over 30 years un-consecutively, constructed a patronage army that still wields power in Illinois state politics to this day.

Currently under Federal indictment, Madigan was able to patronize many people in the bureaucracy and unions with political favors. However, that power was also wielded within the legislative body. Akin to Nancy Pelosi-style House rules, Madigan was able to institute the following over the years: 

• Power to appoint and remove committee chairs
• Power to give or take away $10K stipends for Committee Chairs
• Ability to substitute members of committees to manipulate voting
• SOLE POWER to dictate when a bill is voted on
• Power to kill a bill before its heard via Rules committee control

These rules are merely a fraction of the totality of his control. Over the years this kind of power has effectively created a “frog in the boiling water” scenario for Illinois Republicans.

Madigan’s shrewd political power plays have shifted ALL politics in Illinois to the left. The current makeup of the legislature favors the Democrats in the House 78 to 40 and the Senate 40 to 19. Governor Pritzker enjoys his second term as of 2022.

Newsome & Drabik of Behind Enemy Lines podcast both became elected precinct committeemen only to find that things are just as bad at the local level of the Township organization.

Drabik worked as a contracted consultant for the local political organization and was told that combating pornography in schools was, “not how to get independent voters.”

Newsome approached State Senate Minority Leader John Curran whose daughter went to school with Newsome’s son. Newsome had asked the Senator to speak out against openly pornographic books like “Gender Queer” and was told that it would be “too political” if the Senator weighed in on the matter.

Here are some images (pixilated) from the porn book for children Gender Queer where they actually show cartoon photos of two boys having oral sex.

Curran’s indifference regarding the pornographic material in the schools should not be surprising to anyone who is aware of the $30K in donations from the Illinois Teachers Union. These donations coincide with Curran’s support for Amendment 1. Amendment 1 is the most sweeping overstep for unions in the country giving unions plenary power through protection to collectively bargain via Illinois Constitutional Amendment.

Newsome and Drabik quickly found how deep the RINO infestation reaches. The podcast duo witnessed a fellow committeeman attempt to put a vote of censure to the Downers Grove Township Republican Organization regarding two County Republicans who donated to radical Soros funded prosecutor Kim Foxx.

The Chairman summarily dismissed the motion while breaking Parliamentary rules which govern the organization. Following standing ovations for Newsome and Drabik who challenged the organization during public comment, the Chairman proceeded to remove the public comment section from future meetings in August of 2023. This CENSORSHIP continues to this day.

Once he had the bully pulpit the chairman denigrated members who have had the courage, for years, to attend school board, village council, or library board meetings to speak out against issues like pornographic books available to children. According to the chairman these people are “radicals” and “anarchists.”

It appears the local hypocrisy is merely an echo of county-level RINOs. DuPage County Chairman, Jim Zay, disseminated a letter in April 2023 addressing the controversy of donations to Democrats from Republicans.

Zay dismissed the concerns of pay-for-play from Republicans to Democrats stating, “A Republican in elected office is better than one of the other party.” Zay also lamented the concerns about elections, “There are many saying our system is rigged but no one has brought any evidence forward.”

Zay is apparently unaware of the reporting by The Gateway Pundit which showed the analysis of the Illinois voter roll by civic group United Sovereign Americans.

The group analyzed a 4 year period where the Illinois population decreased by 150,000 but the voter roll increased by 650,000. In addition the analysis found, “…more than 4 million apparent registration violations…”

The same can be said in townships across Illinois. Grassroots movements are not to be tolerated. And yet, there’s a certain tone-deafness to the Illinois Republican Party. In 2022 the establishment candidate for governor, Mayor Richard Irvin of Aurora, lost the primary by a mind-blowing 43 points. Irvin was backed by a staggering amount of $50 million by Citadel CEO Ken Griffin.

The billionaire has since packed up his toys and pouted off to Florida. All the establishment Republicans pushed Irvin. Why, you ask? The overwhelming response to the peasant voting class was because he had a “better chance at beating Pritzker.”

These so-called Republicans have no conscious awareness of the Overton Window shifting their political perspective to the left through corruption and intimidation. The perception is “Illinois is a blue state.”

Without the industrial level corruption of someone like Mike Madigan would that be true? Are people in Illinois really radical leftists? Perhaps perception has inverted reality. And perhaps, a Republican Senate minority leader voting to give public unions Constitutional power to collectively bargain is just a Democrat in Republican clothing.

The post Illinois RINOS Part 2: How Republicans Help Democrats Become Communists appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

DuPage County Republican Chairman Jim Zay and Illinois Senate Minority Leader John Curran (R)

Former Speaker of the Illinois House Mike Madigan

Government Agencies Illegally Soliciting and Potentially Entrapping Non-Citizens to Register to Vote

This article originally appeared on JoeHoft.com and was republished with permission and edited by The Gateway Pundit.

Government Agencies are illegally soliciting non-citizens to vote and potentially entrapping them.  Government workers who perform these acts are committing felonies.

Joe Hoft previously reported on how Illegals are being registered to vote in Florida.  This is likely the case in many other states.

The path non-citizens who cross our border illegally take to get on voter rolls in Florida is as follows.  There are some loopholes and practices that allow this to happen:

1. Cross the US border illegally
2. Get arrested and get immigration court or asylum application paperwork
3. Use immigration court or asylum application paperwork to get a Florida driver’s license, state ID (per s 322.08), or a social security number
4. Sign up for Florida food or medical assistance using the same immigration court or asylum paperwork.
5. An illegal will then receive a solicitation to register to vote in the mail from the government because they signed up for assistance. Just fill out and mail in the voter registration application provided with the solicitation letter (per interpretation of s 97.058). A solicitation letter from The Department of Children and Family Services to a person that appears to be a non-citizen based on a public records search is attached. The Spanish version is what was mailed.
6. Register to vote using your driver license or social security number.  If you have neither, just check the box for no ID.  No one checks to see if you are a citizen.  They just check to see you checked the box on the application saying you are a citizen (per interpretation of s 98.045).
7. Vote.  If you get caught plead plausible deniability or entrapment because you were solicited by the government to register to vote.

Here is the solicitation letter from Florida noted above:

Translation:

“You have received this voter registration application because you answered “yes” to the voter preference question that was listed on the ACCESS Florida application or Medical Assistance application that asked if you wanted to register to vote, change your address for voting purposes or update your voting records.

Complete the Voter Registration application and submit it to your local county supervisor of elections office (see the addresses provided on the application to find your local county supervisor of elections) or to your local department of children and families office (DCF, for its acronym in English). If you would like assistance completing the voter registration application, please contact your local county Supervisor of Elections office or your local DC office.

Acceptance or rejection of the voter registration application, or assistance in completing the voter registration application, will not affect your eligibility for or the amount of public assistance benefits you may receive. If you believe that someone has unlawfully interfered with or prevented you from exercising your right to register to vote; to refuse to register to vote, to choose a political party, or if you believe that your right to privacy in choosing whether to register to vote or not has been violated, you may file a complaint with the Secretary of State, Florida Department of State, R. A. Building, 500 South Bronough Street, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0250 or by calling 1-877-868-3737.”

In the above situation, which we believe is happening across the country, government officials are committing crimes.   Here is what we know.  (See the related regulations referred to at the end of this article.)

1) If Florida public assistance agencies are soliciting non-citizens to register to vote (as discussed in the above article BREAKING EXCLUSIVE: How Illegals Are Registered to Vote in Florida | Joe Hoft ), they are knowingly soliciting non-citizens to violate both state and federal laws. The DCFS voter registration solicitation letter does not even inform the recipient that it is against state and federal law to register to vote if you are not a U.S. citizen, so why would a recipient of the letter believe otherwise (s 104.011, s 104.041; 18 U.S. Code § 611)?

2) Soliciting non-citizens to register to vote exposes public assistance officials to becoming felons because they are enabling ineligible voter registrations and voting (s 104.91).

3) Soliciting non-citizens to register to vote exposes election officials to becoming felons because current interpretation of s 98.045 is that verifying the citizenship box is checked on applications is sufficient, thus by not verifying citizenship using available DMV data they are enabling ineligible voter registrations and voting (s 104.91)

4) It is likely that multiple government agencies have or are soliciting non-citizens to register to vote, leading non-citizens to believe they are eligible to vote and then unknowingly become felons by unintentionally lying on the voter registration application. Under Florida statutes the following agencies may be conducting voter registrations to non-citizens: public libraries, centers for independent living, offices that serve persons with disabilities, food assistance program, Medicaid program, Special Supplemental Food Program for Women, Infants, and Children, the Temporary Cash Assistance Program, and secondary and post-secondary education institutions.

5) Non-citizens who violate Florida election laws may be able to avoid prosecution by claiming entrapment or that they did not know they are breaking the law (s 777.201, s 104.15)

6) If it is shown that enough non-citizens voted to change the outcome of an election, that election could be challenged based on (s 102.168)

7) It is inconsistent interpretation of state and federal law that the FHSMV (DMV) does not offer voter registration to non-citizens while public service agencies do. Both organizations know based on documentation provided by an applicant if they are a non-citizen.

Related Regulations

The Florida Constitution Article VI, Section 2.

Only a citizen of the United States who is at least eighteen years of age and who is a permanent resident of the state, if registered as provided by law, shall be an elector of the county where registered.

97.041 Qualifications to register or vote.

(1)(a) A person may become a registered voter only if that person:

1. Is at least 18 years of age;

2. Is a citizen of the United States;

3. Is a legal resident of the State of Florida;

4. Is a legal resident of the county in which that person seeks to be registered; and

5. Registers pursuant to the Florida Election Code.

97.051 Oath upon registering.

A person registering to vote must subscribe to the following oath: “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will protect and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Florida, that I am qualified to register as an elector under the Constitution and laws of the State of Florida, and that all information provided in this application is true.”

104.011 False swearing; submission of false voter registration information; prosecution prohibited.

(1) A person who willfully swears or affirms falsely to any oath or affirmation, or willfully procures another person to swear or affirm falsely to an oath or affirmation, in connection with or arising out of voting or elections commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

104.15 Unqualified electors willfully voting.

Whoever, knowing he or she is not a qualified elector, willfully votes at any election is guilty of a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

98.045 Administration of voter registration.

(1) ELIGIBILITY OF APPLICANT.—The supervisor must ensure that any eligible applicant for voter registration is registered to vote and that each application for voter registration is processed in accordance with law. The supervisor shall determine whether a voter registration applicant is ineligible based on any of the following:

(a) The failure to complete a voter registration application as specified in s. 97.053.

(b) The applicant is deceased.

(c) The applicant has been convicted of a felony for which his or her voting rights have not been restored.

(d) The applicant has been adjudicated mentally incapacitated with respect to the right to vote and such right has not been restored.

(e) The applicant does not meet the age requirement pursuant to s. 97.041.

(f) The applicant is not a United States citizen.

(g) The applicant is a fictitious person.

(h) The applicant has provided an address of legal residence that is not his or her legal residence.

(i) The applicant has provided a driver license number, Florida identification card number, or the last four digits of a social security number that is not verifiable by the department.

104.041 Fraud in connection with casting vote.

Any person perpetrating or attempting to perpetrate or aid in the perpetration of any fraud in connection with any vote cast, to be cast, or attempted to be cast, is guilty of a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

104.091 Aiding, abetting, advising, or conspiring in violation of the code.

(1) Any person who knowingly aids, abets, or advises the violation of this code shall be punished in like manner as the principal offender.

777.201 Entrapment.

(1) A law enforcement officer, a person engaged in cooperation with a law enforcement officer, or a person acting as an agent of a law enforcement officer perpetrates an entrapment if, for the purpose of obtaining evidence of the commission of a crime, he or she induces or encourages and, as a direct result, causes another person to engage in conduct constituting such crime by employing methods of persuasion or inducement which create a substantial risk that such crime will be committed by a person other than one who is ready to commit it.

(2) A person prosecuted for a crime shall be acquitted if the person proves by a preponderance of the evidence that his or her criminal conduct occurred as a result of an entrapment. The issue of entrapment shall be tried by the trier of fact.

FEDERAL LAW

18 U.S. Code § 611 – Voting by aliens

(a)It shall be unlawful for any alien to vote in any election held solely or in part for the purpose of electing a candidate for the office of President, Vice President, Presidential elector, Member of the Senate, Member of the House of Representatives, Delegate from the District of Columbia, or Resident Commissioner, unless—

(1) the election is held partly for some other purpose;

(2) aliens are authorized to vote for such other purpose under a State constitution or statute or a local ordinance; and

(3) voting for such other purpose is conducted independently of voting for a candidate for such Federal offices, in such a manner that an alien has the opportunity to vote for such other purpose, but not an opportunity to vote for a candidate for any one or more of such Federal offices.

(b)Any person who violates this section shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

SECTION 7 – VOTER REGISTRATION AGENCIES

Under Section 7 of the NVRA, which offices must offer voter-registration services?

Any office in a covered State that provides either public assistance or state-funded programs primarily engaged in providing services to persons with disabilities must offer voter-registration services. Armed Forces recruitment offices must also provide voter registration services. In addition, a State must designate other offices in the State as voter-registration agencies. (See Question 15 below for a description of these other offices).

What is an office that provides public assistance under Section 7?

“Public assistance” offices that must offer voter-registration services under Section 7 of the NVRA include each agency and office in a State that administers or provides services or assistance under any public assistance programs. This includes any of the following federal public assistance programs: the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, formerly the Food-Stamp Program), the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC), the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) program (formerly the Aid to Families with Dependent Children or AFDC program), the Medicaid program, and the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP). This also includes state public assistance programs.

Other agencies that are required to offer voter registration are described here: Civil Rights Division | The National Voter Registration Act Of 1993 (NVRA) (justice.gov)

645. Entrapment—Elements

Entrapment is a complete defense to a criminal charge, on the theory that “Government agents may not originate a criminal design, implant in an innocent person’s mind the disposition to commit a criminal act, and then induce commission of the crime so that the Government may prosecute.” Jacobson v. United States, 503 U.S. 540, 548 (1992). A valid entrapment defense has two related elements: (1) government inducement of the crime, and (2) the defendant’s lack of predisposition to engage in the criminal conduct. Mathews v. United States, 485 U.S. 58, 63 (1988). Of the two elements, predisposition is by far the more important.

To receive new posts and support Joe Hoft’s work, please visit JoeHoft.com.

The post Government Agencies Illegally Soliciting and Potentially Entrapping Non-Citizens to Register to Vote appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

How Taxpayers Will Heavily Subsidize Democrat Boots on the Ground This Election

This story originally was published by Real Clear Wire

By Ben Weingarten, RealClearInvestigations
Real Clear Wire

Progressives are using legal loopholes and the power of the federal government to maximize Democrat votes in the 2024 election at taxpayers’ expense, RealClearInvestigations has found.

The methods include voter registration and mobilization campaigns by ostensibly nonpartisan charities that target Democrats using demographic data as proxies, and the Biden administration’s unprecedented demand that every federal agency “consider ways to expand citizens’ opportunities to register to vote and to obtain information about, and participate in, the electoral process.”

A dizzying array of overwhelmingly “democracy-focused” entities with ties to the Democratic Party operating as charities and funded with hundreds of millions of dollars from major liberal “dark money” vehicles are engaged in a sprawling campaign to register the voters, deliver them the ballots, and figuratively and sometimes literally harvest the votes necessary to defeat Donald Trump.

These efforts, now buttressed by the federal government, amplify and extend what Time magazine described  as a “well-funded cabal of powerful people ranging across industries and ideologies,” who had worked behind the scenes in 2020 “to influence perceptions, change rules and laws, steer media coverage and control the flow of information” to defeat Trump and other Republicans. The “shadow campaigners,” Time declared, “were not rigging the election; they were fortifying it.”

Heading into 2024, “there is not a ‘shadow’ campaign,” said Mike Howell, executive director of the Heritage Foundation’s Oversight Project. “There is an overt assault on President Trump and those who wish to vote for him occurring at every level of government and with the support of all major institutions.”

By contrast, Republican Party stalwarts lament that no comparable effort exists on their side. The GOP’s turnout and messaging efforts seek to thread a difficult needle by encouraging early and absentee voting and ballot-harvesting – pandemic-era measures that Trump and supporters blame for his 2020 electoral defeat – while the party simultaneously fights the mainly blue-state laws that made the practices possible. The party’s position is further complicated by its standard-bearer’s warnings of a rigged election bigger than in 2020, which some speculate could turn off moderate swing voters.

Electioneering ‘Super-Weapons’

The IRS permits tax-exempt nonprofit groups to engage in voter registration and get-out-the-vote drives so long as they do not “refer to any candidate or political party” nor conduct their activities “in a biased manner that favors (or opposes) one or more candidates prohibited.”

These entities have become magnets for funds not only from wealthy donors, who can contribute without traditional campaign finance limits – and get a tax break to boot – but also abundantly endowed private foundations that are prohibited from engaging in partisan activities.

In recent years, dozens of progressive-oriented 501(c)(3)s, now pulling in upwards of $500 million annually, have engaged in purportedly neutral efforts to impact elections, according to Hayden Ludwig, director of Policy Research at the election integrity-focused advocacy group, Restoration of America.

In practice, critics like Ludwig argue, left-leaning charities flout the law by registering and mobilizing demographics that tend to vote disproportionately Democratic behind a veil of non-partisan democracy promotion.

During the 2020 election, for example, the Voter Participation Center solicited millions of ballot applications in swing states – many of them prefilled for respondents. This nonprofit, like its peers, is clear that it isn’t targeting just any voters, but what it and progressive activists have dubbed a “New American Majority” of “young people, people of color and unmarried women.”

Tom Lopach, a longtime Democratic Party operative and the center’s president and CEO, told RCI in a statement: “We do the work that state election officials typically do not do – seeking out underrepresented voting-eligible Americans Tom Lopach … This is difficult but necessary work that brings democracy to eligible Americans’ doorsteps.”

In 2020, Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg and his wife Priscilla Chan showed how supposedly neutral efforts can have a partisan impact when they funneled some $400 million through two progressive–led but purportedly nonpartisan nonprofits into election offices across the country.

That money disproportionately went to jurisdictions that Joe Biden won in the pivotal battleground states that delivered his victory, often flowing to left-leaning nonprofits to whom election offices outsourced the administration of sometimes critical functions.

In April 2022, a primary conduit of these so-called “Zuckerbucks,” the Center for Tech and Civic Life, announced the launch of a successor to the 2020 effort – the U.S. Alliance for Election Excellence, a five-year $80 million program “to envision, support, and celebrate excellence in U.S. election administration.”

“The left has assembled an impressive ‘election-industrial’ complex of non-profit organizations that is constantly working towards goals like ‘promoting participation’ targeting ‘underrepresented minorities,’” said Jason Snead, executive director of the conservative Honest Elections Project. Such terms, Snead says, “are code for identifying and mobilizing liberal voters.”

Election experts view such activities as potentially decisive.

“‘Nonpartisan’ and ‘charitable’ voter registration and get-out-the-vote groups” are the Democratic Party’s “electioneering super-weapon[s],” said Parker Thayer, an analyst with the conservative-oriented Capital Research Center in Washington, D.C.

‘Everybody Votes’ – But for Whom?

Of these, Thayer sees the Everybody Votes Campaign as of paramount importance.

Born of a plan “commissioned by [Hillary] Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta, funded by the Democratic Party’s biggest donors, and coordinated with cut-throat Democratic consultants,” Thayer writes in an extensive analysis of the group’s efforts, “the Everybody Votes campaign [has] used the guise of civic-minded charity to selectively register millions of ‘non-white’ swing-state voters in the hopes of getting out the Democratic vote.”

It does so by funding and training over 50 community groups to register voters to close “the voter registration gap in communities of color,” which it attributes to “modern forms of Jim Crow laws,” such as voter ID requirements, the group’s executive director, Nellie Sires, said in a January 2024 interview.

From 2016-2021, the Everybody Votes Campaign, doing business as three entities, collected over $190 million from major Democratic Party donors, unions, and environmental activists. Some of the largest donors include the League of Conservation Voters Education Fund; the New Venture and Hopewell Funds, managed by for-profit consulting firm Arabella Advisors; and the George Soros-funded Foundation to Promote Open Society – all 501(c)(3) public charities or private foundations forbidden from supporting “voter education or registration activities with evidence of bias.”

The Everybody Votes Campaign distributed the funds to a slew of left-leaning state-based voter registration organizations largely in eight pivotal states from 2016 to 2019 – Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Ohio, North Carolina, Virginia, and Nevada – and then to Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin in 2021.

According to Thayer’s analysis, the Everybody Votes Campaign’s voter registration push “would have provided Democrats more votes than the total margins of victory in Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, and Pennsylvania,” securing Joe Biden’s victory in the 2020 election.

‘4 to 10 Times More Cost-Effective’

One notable backer of the Everybody Votes Campaign is Mind the Gap, a “Moneyball-style” Silicon Valley Democratic Super PAC founded by Stanford law professor Barbara Fried, and connected to the political activities of her convicted crypto-fraudster son, Sam Bankman-Fried.

The analytics-focused outfit prepared a confidential strategy memo leaked in advance of the 2020 election, noting that “501(c)(3) voter registration focused on underrepresented groups in the electorate” would be the “single most effective tactic for ensuring Democratic victories” – “4 to 10 times more cost-effective” on after-tax basis at “garnering additional Democratic votes” relative to alternatives like “broadcast media and digital buys.”

Mind the Gap recommended that donors contribute to three organizations: the Voter Participation Center and its sister organization, the Center for Voter Information for mail-based registration efforts, and Everybody Votes for site-based registration efforts.

The largest grant recipient, receiving $24 million during the 2016-21 period, was State Voices, which describes itself as a “nonpartisan network of 25 state-based coalitions … that collectively partner with over 1,200 organizations” consisting of “advocates, organizers, and activists … work[ing] together to fight for a healthy democracy and political power for Black, Indigenous, Latinx, Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI), and all people of color (BIPOC).”

Another top recipient, raking in over $10 million, was the Voter Participation Center.

According to the Capital Research Center, the Everybody Votes Campaign would collect and spend over $50 million in connection with the 2022 midterm elections – the most recent period for which financials are available. All told, since its founding in 2015, the Campaign says, its network has registered 5.1 million voters, of whom 76% are people of color; 56% are women; and 47% are under the age of 35.

Last November, the news outlet Puck reported on a secret memo circulated by Mind the Gap regarding its plans for 2024. “Our strategy early in the 2024 presidential race will be to massively scale high-performing voter registration and mobilization programs,” the memo read. The PAC again specifically directed donors to the Everybody Votes Campaign, which did not respond to requests for comment.

Lopach, who has worked in Democratic Party politics his entire career, bristled at RCI’s questions regarding critics’ claims of a partisan bent to its work. “The presumptions baked into the questions … emailed to us are inaccurate and reveal the reporter’s own biases,” he responded, while emphasizing the organization’s targeting of “underrepresented voting-eligible Americans.”

Thayer has dubbed Everybody Votes the “largest and most corrupt ‘charitable’ voter registration drive in American history.”

Of such organizations’ claims of nonpartisanship, Howell told RCI: “If they were truly interested in an informed participatory constitutional Republic, they would have an even-handed approach to registering voters.”

“Call me when they show up to a NASCAR race, Daughters of the American Revolution event, or a gun show,” Howell added. “Then we can pretend for a minute that these are beyond just facial efforts to appear somewhat neutral.”

Challenges for GOP

But NASCAR races have not been hubs for GOP-led voter registration efforts either. Restoration of America’s Ludwig estimates that the right may spend as little as 1% of what the left spends on voter registration efforts.

A recent memo from the Sentinel Action Fund, a super PAC that aims to elect conservatives, noted that in the 2022 election cycle, while $8.9 billion was spent on federal elections, there were zero large independent expenditure organizations on the right focused on get-out-the-vote efforts or “ballot chasing.”

Republican Party vehicles and conservative outfits like grassroots-oriented Turning Point Action, a 501(c)(4), are engaged in such efforts in the 2024 cycle, but the scale and sophistication of their political counterparts’ efforts would appear unrivaled at this point.

Election experts attribute this gap to several factors beyond the GOP’s focus on other tactics to win elections, or ineffectiveness. They note that Democratic voters tend to be more concentrated in urban areas and college campuses, making it easier to run efficient registration drives. As regards early and absentee voting and ballot harvesting, it is not clear if these efforts will substantially grow the pool of Republican voters versus merely enabling the party to “bank” votes earlier.

With respect to the use of 501(c)(3)s to conduct such activities, Ludwig said some conservatives may still be fearful of running afoul of the IRS – through exploiting tax laws to pursue efforts perceived to be partisan effectively on the taxpayers’ dime – in the wake of its targeting of Tea Party groups for extreme scrutiny during the Obama years.

‘Bidenbucks’: ‘Zuckerbucks’ on Steroids

Since the 2020 election, Democrats have opened a second apparent electioneering front that Republicans could not match even if they wanted to: The rise of so-called “Bidenbucks,” which uses the “unlimited funding, resources, and reach” of the federal government and agency offices located nationwide,” to turn out favored voters, according to Stewart Whitson, legal director of the conservative Foundation for Government Accountability.

In March 2021, President Biden introduced Executive Order 14019. The directive on “promoting access to voting” orders every federal agency, more than 600 in all, to register and mobilize voters – particularly “people of color” and others the White House says face “challenges to exercise their fundamental right to vote.” It further directs the agencies to collaborate with ostensibly nonpartisan nonprofits in pursuit of its goals.

As RCI has previously reported, EO 14019 appears to have been designed by left-leaning think tank Demos and implemented in consultation and sometimes coordination with a slew of progressive, labor, and identity-focused groups with the goal of generating up to 3.5 million new or updated voter registrations annually.

The ACLU and Demos have reportedly helped execute the order. RCI additionally found that at least two recipients of grants under the Everybody Votes Campaign, the NAACP and UnidosUS – formerly the National Council of Raza – were also listed on an email as participants in a July 2021 listening session on the executive order convened by the White House and agency officials.

Whitson, whose organization unearthed that email in its fight to expose details about the order, emphasized that “[U]nlike 2020 wherein the shadow campaign was conducted by private citizens seeking to influence government election operations from the outside, the threat we face in 2024 is being launched from within the government itself.”

Facing both congressional scrutiny and litigation, the administration has closely guarded the strategic plans agencies were to develop to carry out the order, how they are implementing them, to what end, and with whom.

Perfunctory press releases, reports from groups supportive of the order, and documents slowly ferreted out via FOIA requests and litigation, however, demonstrate that relevant agencies have sought to drive voter registration via public housing authorities, child nutrition programs, and voluntary tax preparation clinics.

In August 2023, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services issued updated guidance calling for the agency to register voters at naturalization ceremonies.

More recently, the Department of Education did the same, blessing the use of federal work-study funds to pay students for “supporting broad-based get-out-the-vote activities, voter registration,” and other activities. Scott Walter, president of the Capital Research Center, recently told the Epoch Times that the Department had previously threatened schools “that you better be registering students or you could lose your federal funds.”

When asked by RCI to respond to Walter’s claim, the Department of Education would not. Over two dozen Pennsylvania state legislators challenged the order via a lawsuit in January. Citing alleged unlawful attempts by several agencies to register Keystone state voters, the lawmakers asserted:

“By engaging in a targeted voter registration effort of this magnitude, focused specifically on these agencies and the groups of potential voters they interact with, leveraging the resources and reach of the federal government, this effort appears to be a taxpayer-funded get-out-the-vote effort designed to benefit the current President’s political party.”

Echoing this view, Whitson’s Foundation for Government Accountability submitted an amicus briefnoting that “all of the federal agencies FGA has identified as taking active steps to carry out EO 14019 have one thing in common: They provide government welfare benefits and other services to groups of voters the vast majority of which have historically voted Democrat.”

The plaintiffs alleged the executive order violated both Pennsylvania law limiting voter registration efforts to non-federal actors, and constitutional provisions reserving election laws to the states. On March 26, a district court dismissed the case, claiming the plaintiffs lacked standing. Whitson told RCI that others would likely lodge similar lawsuits, building on the Pennsylvania legislators’ case in the wake of the dismissal. Days later, The Federalist reported that the plaintiffs intended to appeal their case to the U.S. Supreme Court. A White House spokesperson did not reply to RCI’s inquiries regarding the executive order.

Opposition and Circumvention

Republicans have had more success opposing the use of Zuckerbucks and other private monies used to finance public elections. More than two dozen states would move to ban or restrict such grants in response to the activities observed during the 2020 election.

Most recently, Wisconsin, where some of the most controversial Zuckerbucks-related efforts took place, was added to that list when, on April 2, voters approved a constitutional amendment barring the private funding of elections.

Despite this crackdown and the feds seemingly stepping into the breach, efforts to privately finance election administration persist. The U.S. Alliance for Election Excellence bills itself as an initiative to bolster “woefully unsupported” election offices to “revitalize American democracy.”

The organization says it services jurisdictions – 11 listed on its website, ranging across states from Arizona to California and Wisconsin – with “training, mentorship, and resources.” Alliance officials did not respond to RCI’s inquiry about whether it would be terminating the relationship with the city of Madison, Wisconsin., in light of the passage of the recent ballot measure that would seem to have barred it. Nor did it respond to RCI’s other inquiries in connection with this article.

Most of these partnerships were initiated with jurisdictions in states that have not banned Zuckerbucks, though it has sought to circumvent such prohibitions in Georgia and Utah. The stated goal of the Alliance for Election Excellence is to support voters via measures like assisting participating centers in “redesigning” forms to make them more intuitive and purchasing infrastructure “to improve election security and accessibility.”

Alliance launch partners include entities such as:

• The Center for Civic Design, which works with election offices “using research, design, accessibility, and plain language to remove barriers in the voter journey and invite participation in democracy;”
• The Elections Group, to “implement new programs or improve processes for voters and stakeholders”; and
• The Center for Secure and Modern Elections to “modernize the voting system, making elections more efficient and secure.”

Critics argue this seemingly more modest effort is, in reality, an ambitious Zuckerbucks rebrand.

Snead’s Honest Elections Project published a report in April 2023, based in part on documents received from FOIA requests, indicating “that the Alliance is a reinvention of CTCL’s scheme to use private funding to strongarm election policy nationwide.”

Among other takeaways, it found that:

• The Alliance offers services that touch every aspect of election administration, ranging from “legal” and “political” consultation to public relations, guidance, and assistance with recruitment and training.
• The Alliance is gathering detailed information on the inner workings of participating election offices and developing “improvement plans” to reshape the way they operate.

The report shows that many of the alliance’s launch partners, starting with the Center for Tech and Civic Life and the Center for Civic Design, are funded by major Democrat-tied, so-called “dark money” groups such as the Democracy Fund and Arabella Advisors’ New Venture Fund and Hopewell Fund.

The Democracy Fund is led by Democrat tech billionaire Pierre Omidyar, which has granted some $275 million to like-minded organizations from publications like Mother Jones and ProPublica to the Voter Registration Project since its founding.

The District of Columbia recently closed a criminal investigation into Arabella, whose fund network reportedly spent nearly $1.2 billion in 2020 alone, after probing it over allegations its fundswere pursuing political ends in violation of their tax-exempt statuses. The Center for Secure and Modern Elections, the Honest Elections Project says, pushes “left-wing priorities like automatic voter registration” and is run by the New Venture Fund. The Elections Group’s CEO and co-founder, Jennifer Morrell, previously served as a consultant at the Democracy Fund.

The Capital Research Center’s Walter uses a football analogy to explain why he sees these efforts as untoward. He told RCI:

“Election offices are the refs in elections; the parties are teams trying to score. You’d be puzzled if you heard Super Bowl refs say they’re trying to boost points scored. You’d be outraged if you learned those refs had received money and training from people who previously worked for one team’s offensive coaching staff. That’s what left-wing political operatives, using left-wing money, are doing, and it’s clearly unfair.”

Non-Trump Lawfare

Democrat-aligned groups continue to engage in litigation, like that brought by chief election lawyer Marc Elias, aimed at loosening election laws to their benefit. Snead told RCI, “There are more than 70 active lawsuits right now targeting voter ID laws, anti-ballot harvesting laws, signature verification, drop box regulations, and more.”

After securing victory in a lawsuit requiring signature verification for mail voting in Pennsylvania, the RNC touted its engagement as well in 81 election integrity cases this cycle. Swing-state Wisconsin is another major battleground for such efforts.

There, Elias’ legal team has challenged witness signature requirements and bans on election clerks filling address information on mail-in ballots. It and others are also working to overturn a state Supreme Court decision finding drop boxes illegal. The Badger State’s now liberal-majority Supreme Court announced in March it would take up the case.

Cutting against these efforts are not only the state’s citizen-approved Zuckerbucks ban, but another Badger-passed April 2 ballot measure amending the state’s constitution to prohibit those other than “an election official designated by law” from carrying out election-related tasks.

Watchdogs like Howell are concerned that left-leaning electioneers and lawfare forces collectively are pursuing an “election ‘dis-integrity’ strategy … to greatly expand the universe of ballots while limiting any ability to ensure that they are fairly cast and counted.”

“It’s a basic recipe for fraud.”

Elias says those seeking to combat such efforts are engaged in “voter suppression and election subversion.”

Democrats also have the federal government working on their side on the litigation front – and in ways extending beyond the veritable lawfare barrage the Biden Justice Department has leveled at Donald Trump.

Speaking in Selma, Ala., on the 59^th anniversary of Bloody Sunday, the 1965 police assault on civil rights marchers, Attorney General Merrick Garland declared that “the right to vote is still under attack.”

Garland vowed the Department of Justice was punching back, including “challenging efforts by states and jurisdictions to implement discriminatory, burdensome, and unnecessary restrictions on access to the ballot, including those related to mail-in voting, the use of drop boxes, and voter ID requirements.”

The post How Taxpayers Will Heavily Subsidize Democrat Boots on the Ground This Election appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

(WGN News / YouTube screen shot)

Faith Groups Protest Biden Plan to Control Their Employment Decisions

This article originally appeared on WND.com

Guest by post by Bob Unruh 

New ‘nondiscrimination’ rule takes aim about ministries’ employees

“Nondiscrimination” schemes under the Joe Biden regime in Washington often have been used to advocate for blatant discrimination against Christians and Christian organizations.

One such situation recently developed when Democrats in Colorado insisted they could force a web designer to promote same-sex weddings if she provided any services to couples getting married.

The Supreme Court slapped down the state for violating the Constitution in its leftist agenda.

But those issues have developed over and over, and now it involves the State Department, which is proposing a new “nondiscrimination” demand that could affect the employment decisions of Christian ministries.

So officials with Samaritan’s Purse, the Christian Legal Society, the Accord Network and other ministries have written to the State Department protesting the agency’s plans.

The new proposal would ban discrimination against beneficiaries of programs that are sometimes given grants by the government “on specified bases.”

But then the State Department bureaucrats also want to demand that those organizations providing benefits on a nondiscriminatory basis also hire employees on a nondiscriminatory basis.

The ministries in a letter to State explain that they “affirm” the idea of not discriminating against any benefit “recipient.”

But the problem is the rules as planned by State threaten their right to hire employees they choose, and possibly could  force them to stop partnering with the government on aid programs.

It’s not a small problem, they explain. “To illustrate the full extent of the potential loss of foreign assistance of USAID’s top 50 largest foreign assistance recipients, religious organizations comprise $613 million in obligated agency funding in FY ’23. They have worked in over 100 countries programming in water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH), displaced persons and refugee support, countertrafficking, and strengthening of civil society structures like health care and justice systems.”

The aid organizations explain that the rule needs to provide that their religious character, affiliation, practices, and expressions of religious beliefs “will not preclude” them from participating in various programs.

They cite the Constitution, the religion clauses of the First Amendment, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act and more to explain that the laws of the land require nondiscrimination rules to provide “overriding protection for religious freedom.”

Without a provision for religious rights, the organizations told State, the proposed rules are “arbitrary and capricious” for failing “to consider a reasonable alternative, specifically, categorical exemption of religious organizations applying for foreign assistance grants and federal acquisition contracts…”

Without changes, the groups warn the Biden administration, “the regulations will infringe statutory and constitutional rights, frustrate the regulations’ stated purpose, impede the delivery of foreign assistance, threaten the U.S. government’s foreign policy objectives, foment expensive litigation and result in the unintended exclusion of religious organizations from being applicants and offerors for the department’s grants and contracts.”

Online, there’s a petition procedure for people to sign up to agree with the comments: “I strongly oppose the U.S. State Department’s consideration of new regulations that will cut off grants and contracts to Christian – and all faith-based – relief organizations that require their employees to share their faith and their religious values.”

The charge to the government came from the Accord Network, Samaritan’s Purse, Christian Legal Society, and the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention and others.

Specifically, the government is warned that there are such things as religious rights protected by the Constitution and the proposal would “not allow [faith-based organizations] to consider sexual orientation and gender identity or expression in the hiring process in order to remain eligible for foreign aid funding.”

The ERLC explained, “Hiring staff members that reflect the religious beliefs of an organization is a long-standing pillar of religious liberty protections.”

Franklin Graham, who heads Samaritan’s Purse, added, “These proposed State Department regulations could be used to force faith-based organizations like Samaritan’s Purse to hire staff who disagree with our core biblical beliefs about God’s design for marriage, sexuality, and gender in order to be eligible for government grants.”

He continued, “Samaritan’s Purse is a Christian organization and we will not compromise on the fundamental principle of hiring like-minded Christians who share our calling, our stand on the authority of God’s Word, and our statement of faith.”

The groups explain in their letter to the government there needs to be a “categorical exemption” from religious belief requirements in the process.

Copyright 2024 WND News Center

The post Faith Groups Protest Biden Plan to Control Their Employment Decisions appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Part 1: Despots, Spooks, and Goons — Unconstitutional Intelligence Gathering Abuses and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA)

Guest post by Endangered Speechies

PART I. America’s Recurring Nightmare: Unconstitutional Intelligence Gathering Abuses and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA)

FISA’s section 702 and other components that permit and govern warrantless intelligence gathering on foreign targets located abroad were originally set to expire on December 23, 2023.

Only months prior, a fresh scandal broke that the FBI had abused the warrantless search tool yet again by weaponizing it against American citizens for their activities while on US soil.

According to the well-established doctrine of the exclusionary rule in this country, this intelligence and all subsequent evidence gathered from these illegal, warrantless searches is tainted and inadmissible.

At least that’s what any reasonable person would think, were it not for the judges in D.C. who have been subverting the rule by repeatedly allowing cases built in this way to proceed.

Per the letter of the current law, any and all incidental data gathered on American citizens anywhere in the world ought to be destroyed and unactionable, whether it was gathered “downstream,” “upstream” or anywhere in between.

Given the FBI’s practice of violating the law with impunity under the Biden DOJ, if FISA 702 were allowed to expire, how naïve do we have to be to believe that they won’t just continue to flout the law and do whatever they want?

FISA section 702 and other amendments were not allowed to sunset last December, and due to Speaker Johnson’s penchant for playing kick the can, the mass, warrantless data gathering, along with other subsections of the 2008 amendments, are set to expire on April 19.

A myriad of intelligence agencies are scheduled to descend upon Congress on Wednesday, April 10 to make their case that, despite rampant abuses that have violated the fourth, fifth, sixth, eighth and fourteenth amendment rights of American citizens en masse, their ability to gather intelligence without a warrant should be extended or even expanded.

A fly on the wall in these upcoming meetings would likely report that the IC reps employed hybrid tactics, resembling both a protection racket and blackmail operation, to coerce Congressional members to grant their collective will. We can’t tell the future, but this is our educated hunch: the probability is high that unscrupulous proverbial arm twisting will take place.

It’s also likely that Speaker Johnson, after postponing the vote on proposed reforms and the sunset from December 23, 2023, will conduct this matter in the same disrespectful manner that he brought the minibus to the floor in March for a vote. (He only allowed 72 hours for members to read the thousand-plus page bill that spent 1.2 trillion dollars while also prohibiting any and all debate and amendments.)

This after the House Rules Committee scheduled consideration of the Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act of 2024 for February 14, only to abruptly and inexplicably cancel the meeting without rescheduling.

So, what is the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (1978,) Section 702 (2008)? You may or may not remember that the 2008 amendments codified Stellar Wind abuses that occurred during George W. Bush’s consecutive terms.

Chances are, you’re not too young to remember when former President Obama and his DOJ illegally and fraudulently abused FISA. They did so in collusion with a myriad of absurd and villainous characters, orgs and law firms which included self-described communist ¹James Comey, diabolical freak show John Podesta and Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign, to spy on then candidate Donald John Trump in a fallacious attempt to set him up as a Russian agent. Yes, that FISA.

Intelligence agencies, although not specifically described in The Constitution, are the purview of the Executive Branch (Article II, Section 2 and 3.) However, these agencies often have been caught acting as rogue entities, violating the constitutional rights of American citizens both without the knowledge of the Commander in Chief or at the direction of the Commander in Chief and his proxies.

It has been at times of such scandals and constitutional crises that Congress sought to balance the power of the Executive by instituting some legal guardrails.

This is how both FISA (1978), born out of the Church Committee hearings, and the FISA Amendments of 2008 came to be. Both are fruit of the poisonous tree as the actual effect of both laws was to codify the abuses but regulate them with a secret court (FISC).

The purpose of this article is not to delve into the specifics of these hearings and the subsequent legislation. For anyone who has read this far that is interested in the history of FISA, there are voluminous writings on this.

Many of them are not worth the time. we reviewed dozens of them so that you don’t have to. The most objective, thorough and well written is from Jeff Clark for the Center for Renewing America.

It’s true that espionage is a filthy affair. At its core, the work of spies is deception which is the devil’s business. However, a nation without “intelligence” agents, aka spies or spooks, won’t remain a nation for very long.

With that in mind, to anyone who believes that Congress intends to just allow FISA section 702 to expire, we’re happy to be the one to inform you that the earth is not flat, Nancy Pelosi is never sober (upon information and belief) and Joe Biden did not get 81 million legitimate votes.

On the other hand, the abuses of the FISA program, particularly section 702 and its betrayal of our Constitutional Republic, have become so widespread and widely known that the American electorate is demanding meaningful reforms and many of our elected officials have lost all patience with being targeted by what has always been a rouge intelligence function.

Rather than serving at the pleasure of the President who serves at the pleasure of We The People, evidence supports that US intelligence agencies serve a permanent, unelected ruling class. Our Republic cannot withstand this constant onslaught from agencies filled with Benedict Arnolds.

The current target of this country’s federal intelligence and law enforcement agencies is turned inward upon the people they have a duty to serve. Where are the FISA 702 cases against the Mexican cartels’ massive human and drug smuggling operations?

Why is the FBI failing to bring cases against the CCP’s standing army sleeper cells or the Caliphate Jihadists imported over our southern border for the past three years? In refusing to serve “the people,” the Biden Regime’s DOJ has lost all legal authority granted to them by our constitutional system. They only rule by unconstitutional fear, coercive mandate and force.

Although Republicans currently hold a small majority in the House, recent analysis portends that Speaker Johnson will again betray his Constitutional duty to the American people and fail to enable meaningful reforms that require the Biden DOJ to heel.

The best hope for relief is coming from the Democrat controlled Senate where senators Mike Lee (R-UT) and Dick Durbin (D-IL) have drafted the SAFE Act. The most hawkish civil rights orgs on the left are dissatisfied with the SAFE Act but at the same time critical of the Biden Regime’s rejection of this draft.

These orgs overwhelmingly prefer the Government Surveillance Reform Act of 2023 by Senators Mike Lee (R-UT) and Ron Wyden (D-OR) which has bipartisan support in both houses of Congress. (Note that the Brennan Center conspicuously omits facts RE weaponization against J6 protestors, as if protesting an obviously stolen election renders them unhuman, or something.)

Regardless of what happens in Congress, Biden is unlikely to sign any reforms into law. The Daily Caller reported back in February that Biden’s DOJ has sought court approval to continue warrantless spying on American citizens until April of 2025.

According to the ACLU, FISC granted Biden’s request and they are not happy. It’s very hard to sympathize with their complaint even though they’re correct. The ACLU sits silent while the Biden Regime holds political prisoners without trial for over three years. They likely voted for him with the knowledge of Biden’s domestic spying legislation that he sponsored in the 1990’s and beyond.

These so-called “Civil Liberties” organizations took no action to challenge the obviously rigged election that installed this pathologically lying despot, who’s been on the take his entire career, into the White House. They are among many complaining now who are complicit in this unconstitutional tyranny.

In part two of this series, we will explore how Joe Biden’s legislative career demonstrates that he has only just begun to live out his long-running authoritarian dream of being a despot in the White House.

The post Part 1: Despots, Spooks, and Goons — Unconstitutional Intelligence Gathering Abuses and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

State Investigation Clears Christian School, But Feds Don’t Drop Case

This article originally appeared on WND.com

Guest by post by Bob Unruh 

‘Zero findings. Not a single one. Not one’

It was all over the headlines only months ago when the Joe Biden administration sued Grand Canyon University, the largest Christian school in the nation, as part of what school officials described as a coordinated attack by Biden.

It was the Federal Trade Commission that filed a lawsuit against the school, making allegations that it didn’t reveal how long it would take for doctoral students to finish its accelerated program and marketed itself as a nonprofit.

The Department of Education, earlier claiming misinformation about the doctoral program, announced a fine of $37.7 million against the school.

Now a report from the Georgia Star News confirms that a state investigation has confirmed there’s no proof of any wrongdoing by the school.

So the federal agencies decided to continue their agenda against the Christian organization anyway.

The post State Investigation Clears Christian School, But Feds Don’t Drop Case appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

The Sullivan Doctrine

This story originally was published by Real Clear Wire

By Carlo J.V. Caro
Real Clear Wire

By prioritizing crisis management in response to escalating tensions, President Biden and his national security team risk inadvertently paving the way for a war between Iran and Israel. The Sullivan doctrine, which appears to avoid taking decisive measures against Iranian aggression, heightens the possibility of a war that could lead to the first-ever use of a nuclear strike in the Middle East.

Historically, Israel has been proactive in preventing its adversaries from acquiring nuclear capabilities, as evidenced by military strikes in Iraq in 1981 (Operation Opera) and Syria in 2007 (Operation Orchard). However, the challenge posed by Iran is notably different in terms of geography and strategy, complicating the application of the Begin Doctrine—Israel’s preemptive strategy to neutralize existential threats.

Iran’s vast geographic expanse, covering approximately 648,195 square miles, significantly surpasses both Iraq (169,235 square miles) and Syria (71,498 square miles). This extensive area allows for the dispersion of nuclear facilities across a broad territory, thereby complicating any potential preemptive strikes. This challenge is intensified by Iran’s daunting terrain, which features significant mountain ranges such as the Elburz, Central and Eastern ranges, and the Zagros Mountains. Many of Iran’s nuclear facilities have been strategically placed to exploit these rugged landscapes for natural fortification. For instance, the Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant is notably entrenched within a mountain near Qom, rendering it a formidable target for aerial attacks. Likewise, the Natanz Fuel Enrichment Plant, although not situated in as mountainous an area, is heavily fortified and partially underground, increasing the complexity of targeting. The Arak Heavy Water Reactor, while not as deeply fortified as Fordow, benefits from a strategic location that utilizes both natural and man-made defenses, enhancing its security.

The logistical challenge posed by the distance from Israel to key Iranian locations significantly complicates potential military operations. Israeli fighter jets, such as the F-16 Fighting Falcon, F-15 Eagle, and the F-35 Lightning II, necessitate in-flight refueling for round-trip missions to Iran—a stark contrast to the shorter distances involved in operations against Iraq and Syria. The need for in-flight refueling, together with the need to secure overflight permissions through the airspace of several countries, some of which do not maintain formal diplomatic relations with Israel, introduces diplomatic and logistical hurdles not present in the operations against Iraq and Syria.

Given the historical context of the Jewish people and the establishment of the state of Israel, the nation perceives every armed conflict as a fight for its very existence. This perspective leads Israel to approach potential or actual conflicts as if it were engaged in total war. Due to Israel’s narrow geographical dimensions, it faces unique strategic limitations in any potential military conflict. For instance, in a scenario involving Iran, the latter could potentially use Syrian territory to retreat and reorganize, trading space for time. This strategy, leveraging the geography to its advantage, is not viable for Israel given its limited size and close proximity to conflict zones. Consequently, Iran’s ability to utilize additional space for military maneuvers presents a strategic advantage that Israel does not possess.

Consequently, Israel has sought to secure buffer zones free from Iranian or its proxies presence, enhancing the effectiveness of its air defense capabilities. Israel has also tried to disrupt the border crossings between Syria and Lebanon, and Syria and Iraq. The success of these objectives is partially contingent upon Russia refraining from extending its anti-aircraft defense coverage. Russia’s deployment of the S-300 and S-400 air defense systems significantly constrained Israel’s freedom of movement in Syrian airspace, effectively undermining its air superiority. This shift became starkly apparent when the Syrian government, utilizing the S-300 system supplied by Russia, downed an Israeli fighter-bomber back in February 2018.

The Biden administration’s adherence to the Sullivan doctrine led to an inadequate response following the killing of three US troops and the missile attacks on ships navigating through the Bab el-Mandeb Strait. This American inaction has forced Israel to adopt more assertive measures. Nonetheless, Israel’s approach to countering Iranian aggression, mainly by targeting key figures within the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), as well as the US’s focus on striking Shiite militia proxies in Iraq and Syria, does not address the broader strategic challenges posed by Iran effectively. This strategy overlooks the pivotal roles of the Islamic Republic of Iran Navy (IRIN) and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy (IRGCN), which are instrumental in executing Iran’s broader strategic objectives of regime stabilization and regional hegemony.

The IRIN, as the conventional naval arm of Iran’s armed forces under Rear Admiral Shahram Irani, operates under the framework of traditional naval doctrine. Conversely, the IRGCN, led by Rear Admiral Alireza Tangsiri, leverages unconventional naval warfare, especially in the geopolitically crucial Strait of Hormuz and the Persian Gulf. This oversight in not directly countering the capabilities and operations of the IRIN and IRGCN, results in the United States and Israel’s measures falling short, thereby permitting Iran to further its regional dominance ambitions with reduced contention.

A major reorganization of these forces occurred under Mahmoud Ahmadinajad, as the IRGCN began receiving more political and resource support than the IRIN. This support facilitated the IRGCN’s acquisition of advanced weapons and equipment, bolstering its capabilities in asymmetric warfare. While the IRIN enhanced its capabilities with the acquisition of three Russian Kilo-class submarines in 1991, it still lacks the comprehensive capabilities of a blue-water navy, largely due to budgetary constraints. In contrast, the IRGCN has achieved significant advancements, most recently with anti-ship Khalij Fars ballistic missiles.

The IRGCN has conducted significant naval exercises, demonstrating its operational capabilities in the Persian Gulf. These activities included a simulated attack on U.S. aircraft carriers and the detention of the MV Maersk Tigris merchant ship in the Strait of Hormuz demonstrating its operational reach. Additionally, the IRGCN has provided extensive support to the Houthis in Yemen. Despite international sanctions, Iran continues to modernize its naval forces, posing a strategic deterrent in key maritime zones. Considering that approximately a quarter of the global oil supply is sourced from the Persian Gulf, Iran’s dominance in this region can have significant impacts on the worldwide economy.

Iran’s maritime defense strategy extends its operational reach to include the Gulf of Aden and Yemeni waters. A strategic reorganization has optimized force deployment by assigning distinct Areas of Responsibility to each naval component: the IRGCN is tasked with operations within the Persian Gulf, while the IRIN assumes command over the Gulf of Oman and the Caspian Sea. Both forces maintain shared operational authority in the Strait of Hormuz. This tactical segmentation has led to differentiated strategic directives, mission profiles, and force compositions for each naval body.

Iran’s naval doctrine has been refined through lessons learned from the Tanker War, during which commercial oil tankers belonging to Kuwait and Saudi Arabia—both key allies of Iraq—were targeted. These attacks aimed to cripple the economic infrastructure that supported Iraq’s war effort. In April 1988, a pivotal moment unfolded when the USS Samuel B. Roberts hit an Iranian mine, suffering significant damage. This incident led to the launch of Operation Praying Mantis by the U.S. Navy, marking the largest naval battle since World War II. The operation saw significant destruction or damage to Iranian naval assets, with American forces experiencing no losses of their vessels.

In World War II, the German navy used U-boat wolf packs to conduct devastating attacks on Allied shipping convoys across the Atlantic Ocean. These tactics relied on the element of surprise, coordination among submarines, and the ability to launch concentrated attacks under cover of darkness. Conversely, Iran’s IRGCN employs swarming tactics using fast, agile boats equipped with missiles, torpedoes, and sometimes explosives for suicide attacks. Unlike the German strategy of aiming for outright destruction, Iran’s tactics are more about asserting control over its nearby waters, harassment and disruption of enemy naval presence, and controlling vital maritime choke points. As Iran acquires missiles with longer ranges and greater precision, its strategic reach could expand to include the Gulf of Oman.

The IRGCN is unlikely to attempt a complete shutdown of the Strait, as such an action would not only severely harm Iran’s economy but also undermine its capability to sustain a prolonged military conflict with the U.S., the United Kingdom, and Gulf Arab states. Instead, Iran would likely employ naval mines and utilize the speed, maneuverability, and stealth of its fast boats in the shallow and narrow waters to challenge and overwhelm the larger and heavier vessels deployed by the United States and its allies in the region. The IRGCN’s approach to asymmetric warfare heavily emphasizes the concepts of jihad and martyrdom, highlighting the strategic depth and ideological commitment behind their tactics.

The IRGCN uniquely merges ideological beliefs with military operations. The foundation of this commitment is deeply rooted in ideological indoctrination that draws inspiration from religious texts, notably Surah Al-Anfal 8:65. This verse instills the belief that a small contingent of devout believers can outmatch a larger force of non-believers, underscoring the power of faith and conviction over sheer numbers and technologically superior adversaries.

At the heart of Iranian military doctrine is a pivotal lesson from history: the defeat of Ali ibn Abu Talib, the first Shiite Imam, at the Battle of Siffin, attributed to a lack of unwavering loyalty among his followers. Similarly, the martyrdom of Hussein, the third Shiite Imam, at the Battle of Karbala, stands as a profound symbol of defiance against tyranny, irrespective of the circumstances. These historical episodes highlight the doctrine’s focus on complete obedience to leadership and the willingness to fight under challenging conditions. As a result, the military depends on fighters who are not only thoroughly indoctrinated with these principles but are also prepared to lay down their lives for their convictions.

The philosophy of seeking martyrdom, deeply rooted in certain beliefs, was vividly demonstrated during the Iran-Iraq War by thousands of Iranian volunteers through suicide attacks. They were motivated by the conviction that dying for their faith was a sacred duty. These same tactics have been witnessed in Palestinian suicide bombings and Al Qaeda. Alongside, Iran has launched significant public recruitment efforts, calling on volunteers ready to embrace martyrdom.

After Hamas’s terrorist attack in October 2023, Iran intensified these recruitment campaigns, aiming to rally its citizens against Israel. The Iranian regime broadcasted appeals on national television, urging viewers to register their willingness to fight in Palestine and introduced an online platform for volunteer registration, showcasing a methodical recruitment strategy. In 2005, more than two hundred individuals volunteered for suicide missions targeting American and Israeli interests, motivated by organizations that honor martyrs of the global Islamic movement.

Carlo J.V. Caro is a political and military analyst. He has a graduate degree from Columbia University.

The post The Sullivan Doctrine appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Mostafameraji, Wikimedia Commons

Leo Hohmann: WHO Coming Down the Home Stretch with Invasive Testing and Vaxxing Requirements for Tourists and Others Traveling Legally Across Borders

This article originally appeared on Leo Hohmann’s Substack and was republished with permission.

Part of a series of amendments being secretly negotiated and set to be put to a vote in late May at the annual World Health Assembly in Geneva, Switzerland.

The United Nations World Health Organization is secretly negotiating a set of amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR) that would impose an invasive testing, vaccination and quarantine regimen on international travelers.

Ongoing negotiations on these amendments were kept secret for more than a year until California researcher and journalist James Rogoski uncovered the latest draft version of the amendments in February.

In a recent interview, Rogoski said these amendments to the International Health Regulations are not so much an attack on national sovereignty as they are a “dangerous expression of national sovereignty.”

Most nations, including the U.S., already claim through various laws to have these invasive powers over their own citizens. What the IHR amendments are about is giving nations these same testing and quarantining powers over foreign nationals who legally enter as a tourist, business traveler or for any other purpose.

Exiting the WHO, as the U.S. did under the presidency of Donald Trump, will also not provide any real answers to this power grab, Rogoski explained, stating that “Unless every nation exited the WHO these rules would still apply.”

That’s because the enforcement powers for these invasive methods are being given to nations not to exercise over their own citizens but over the citizens of every other country who are entering as foreign travelers.

The proposed amendments would include adding the terminology for so-called conveyance operators, which includes operators of planes, trains, subways, cruise lines, buses, etc.

These operators, both public and private, would have to comply with “health measures which may include isolation and quarantine as required, for application on board as well and embarkation and disembarkation.” That means you could be confronted both getting on and getting off of a plane, cruise ship or train, and asked to take a PCR test, or to show proof of vaccination against whatever disease they are looking for.

WATCH 15-MINUTE VIDEO ON RUMBLE: 

Proposed changes to Article 27 of the IHR’s would add the words “and quarantine” to the powers already granted at ports of entry.

“So, the concern is that if you are traveling, they want to be able to make you take a test, and if you want to get off the cruise boat or plane, they may make you go into quarantine…It essentially says they can compel the traveler to undergo vaccination or other prophylaxis.”

The next series of meetings for the IHR working group is April 22-26, where they will continue to negotiate, in secret, these draft amendments. The plan is to have them ready for approval by the WHO’s World Health Assembly in the final week of May.

“In my opinion, adding more authority to nations to quarantine travelers, test and vaccinate people, is very dangerous. Especially with vaccines that don’t work and tests that are fraudulent,” Rogoski said.

He says awareness is key to defeating this power grab.

“Identify your allies, don’t try to convince anyone who doesn’t want to know. It doesn’t take a lot. Become aware, make your own video, share. 99 percent of people are not going to comprehend the issue, and that’s OK. You’re looking for allies and I’m here to tell you there are millions of us who have had enough.

“They’re trying to have secret negotiations to change international law on the right to quarantine people who travel based on vaccines or tests.”

On the surface this might not sound so bad. It might even sound good to some gullible ears. But when you realize we are talking about unsafe and ineffective genetics-based vaccines and fraudulent PCR tests, it becomes a tyrant’s dream, and a freedom-lover’s nightmare.

To receive new posts and support Leo Hohmann’s work, consider becoming a paid subscriber if you aren’t yet at leohohmann.substack.com

The post Leo Hohmann: WHO Coming Down the Home Stretch with Invasive Testing and Vaxxing Requirements for Tourists and Others Traveling Legally Across Borders appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Frank Pavone: President Trump’s Statement on Abortion Policy Paves Way for a Culture of Life in a Divided Nation

Guest Post by Pro-life Leader Frank Pavone, National Director, Priests for Life

President Donald Trump today made his long-awaited statement on how he would pursue abortion policy once he is re-elected.

I was happy with the announcement because it was honest, it clears the way for a frank debate about abortion and I am confident it will ultimately – provided Americans return him to the White House – lead to abortion being abolished.

The statement was consistent with what he has been saying all along and what I have been saying: we will work for policies that will help women have their babies, we will expose the extremism of the Democrats on abortion, and we will continue to work with the American people to use the legislative process to set abortion policy.

As I said in my remarks recently at Mar-a-Lago, President Trump has been, and will be again, the most pro-life president our country has seen. He has not wavered on any of the pro-life positions or executive actions he has taken (including depriving the abortion industry of federal funds), or judges he has appointed, and we will again see such progress in a second term.

President Trump is rightly proud of his role in the reversal of Roe v. Wade. Roe blocked the American people from protecting the unborn. Now, we can protect them again, and are doing so.

By invoking ‘the will of the people,’ President Trump is pointing to the fact that courts are not here to impose a dogma of abortion-on-demand. Rather, the courts should step out of the way so that the people can have an open and honest debate about abortion. That’s what we will continue to do.

President Trump’s announcement today on Truth Social calls to mind the drafting of the U.S. Constitution at a time when slavery was still legal. The Founders understood they could not get the Constitution ratified if it contained an absolute anti-slavery position. They needed to get the nation started.

But with the Constitution they did adopt, they put in place the very mechanism by which slavery was in fact ultimately abolished.

We’re at that same moment now.

President Trump is taking a similar stance to the one taken by the Founders. They had to start a nation; we have to save the nation by winning this election. Right now we have a nation divided on abortion. But by saving the nation itself from destruction by the Democrats – by saving the Constitution, free and fair elections, freedom of speech and religion, and by stopping the extremism of the Democrats on abortion — we will in fact preserve the very mechanism by which we can continue to build a culture of life.

I thank the President for his statement but I don’t expect him to do my job; I expect him to do his. My job and the job of the pro-life movement is to lay out the moral absolute of the right to life, which does not admit of compromise. No abortion can ever be justified.

Pro-life leaders, meeting recently for strategic planning, issued this joint statement that reflects the pro-life work that needs to be done in the next seven months.

We look forward to continuing to work together with President Trump and countless citizens to leading our nation to ever greater fidelity to its founding principle that governments are instituted precisely to preserve the unalienable right to life.

The post Frank Pavone: President Trump’s Statement on Abortion Policy Paves Way for a Culture of Life in a Divided Nation appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Peter Sweden: UNREAL-They Revealed SECRET Geo-Engineering Project

This article was written by Swedish independent journalist Peter Imanuelsen, also known as PeterSweden. You can follow him at PeterSweden.com.

What if I told you that there was an actual CONSPIRACY going on?

A research experiment that they kept hidden from the public because they were afraid of a backlash.

Because that is exactly what has been going on.

And keep reading to the end, because you will never be able to guess who has been involved in this project…

From the deck of a decommissioned aircraft carrier in the San Francisco Bay, researchers from the University of Washington LAUNCHED trillions of salt particles into the atmosphere with the intent of blocking out the sunlight from earth.

This is all being done in the name of stopping global warming of course!

They say that the organizers didn’t widely announce this experiment to “avoid public backlash”.

“The idea of interfering with nature is so contentious, organizers of Tuesday’s test kept the details tightly held, concerned that critics would try to stop them,” the New York Times wrote.

In other words, this isn’t a conspiracy theory. It is by the very definition a conspiracy fact. They conspired to keep this experiment secret.

No wonder they tried to keep it secret, because I think most people wouldn’t be happy to know that people are trying to modify the weather and block the sunlight.

They are using specially built sprayers to shoot trillions of salt crystals into the sky, trying to increase the density and reflective capacity of clouds.

And this isn’t anything new. A company called Make Sunsets launched a weather balloon to release TOXIC sulfur dioxide into the air to block the sun.

The idea is that they will block the sun and thus decrease the temperature on earth. This is a terrible idea.

In Sweden we had the COLDEST January night of the century. It was -48,8C in Arjeplog. I do not really want it to get any colder – Thank you!

The state of Tennessee recently voted to BAN geo-engineering in the state. They were ridiculed by the mainstream media for it, because that was more or less just a “conspiracy theory”.

What kind of unintended consequences could it have if we sprayed chemicals into the air to block the sun? What if it caused a global cooling episode where we got an ice age? This is dangerous.

Even Greenpeace is skeptical of the idea of solar geo-engineering, saying that the consequences of this would be hard to predict.

AND GUESS WHO IS INVOLVED?

The post Peter Sweden: UNREAL-They Revealed SECRET Geo-Engineering Project appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

AI-generated image

American Conservatism Clarifies National Conservatism’s Contribution

This story originally was published by Real Clear Wire

By Peter Berkowitz
Real Clear Wire

Members of moral, political, and religious traditions share basic assumptions, fundamental principles, and central convictions about their associations and institutions. Since human beings are self-interested and fallible, words and concepts are many-sided and ambiguous, and justice makes competing demands, traditions – no matter how noble and good their purposes – naturally divide into rival camps that espouse clashing interpretations of their shared inheritance. Grappling with this diversity and dissent within a framework of overall unity is a mark of a living, breathing tradition.

So understood, American conservatism forms an exemplary tradition.

The most recent battle over the future of conservatism has raged for several years. The aggressor, the new New Right, condemns as moribund the movement conservatism that descends from the old New Right represented most prominently by William F. Buckley, Jr., and Ronald Reagan. The contemporary conservatives seek to overthrow a once-dominant conservative sensibility that they believe is chained to an antiquated agenda and out of touch with the demands of the moment.

In 1955, the 29-year-old Buckley founded National Review. The magazine, which quickly established itself as the flagship publication of the then-fledgling American conservative movement, brought together under one tent traditionalists and libertarians. The traditionalists emphasized preserving ancestral morality and the religious faith that supports it. The libertarians focused on maximizing individual freedom by means of government limited to a few, well-defined, indispensable tasks. The traditionalists and the libertarians tended to see one another as political adversaries.

Despite their mutual antagonism, the traditionalists and the libertarians forged an alliance in the 1950s and 1960s against a growing progressive state at home and an expanding Soviet communism abroad. At the same time, and although they seldom appreciated it, the rival camps supplied a lack in the other.  As National Review senior editor Frank Meyer explained in 1962 in National Review, in a diverse and transcontinental republic, limited government provides an essential protection for traditional morality. And thriving families, communities, and civic life foster virtues and instill dedication to duties that sustain free societies.

This understanding of conservatism, in which the preservation of limited constitutional government and the preservation of traditional morality go hand in hand, has strong roots in America’s founding-era political thinking. It sometimes goes by the name of fusionism.

Fusionism found its foremost political leader in Ronald Reagan. Serving as the 40^th president of the United States from 1981 to 1989, Reagan honed his rhetorical skills in Barry Goldwater’s 1964 presidential campaign and his political acumen from 1967 to 1975 as a two-term governor of California. Reagan’s tax-cutting and deregulation turned around a broken American economy, and his military build-up and his diplomacy – based on his understanding of the Soviet Union as an “evil empire” – led the nation to victory in the Cold War. He defended individual freedom, limited government, traditional morality, and advanced a U.S. foreign policy that sought peace through strength and promoted human rights.

But that was two generations ago. Impatient with its intellectual and political inheritance, the new New Right aims to break free of the conservative movement championed by Buckley and consolidated by Reagan and effect dramatic change in response to what it views as headlong American decline.

The new New Right finds in America disarray and decadence everywhere it looks. It sees a popular culture that caters to the left. It sees an academic world that converts the classroom into a vehicle for the transmission of progressive propaganda and restricts speech that deviates from campus orthodoxy. It sees a deliberate policy of expanding illegal immigration. It sees a weaponization of the federal bureaucracy extending back to the Obama administration IRS’s targeting of Tea Party civic associations. It sees a ramping up of the criminalization of political differences with the FBI’s and Justice Department’s prodigious but failed efforts to show that Donald Trump collaborated with Russia to steal the 2016 election. It sees rank partisan lawfare in prosecution of former President Trump for retaining classified documents while declining to bring charges against President Joe Biden and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for indistinguishable if not arguably more serious mishandling of classified documents. And it sees a foreign policy – conservative as well as progressive – that pursues elusive goals at extravagant expense.

The new New Right, argues Charles Kesler, has a point. But, he believes, it also leads astray. In “National Conservatism vs. American Conservatism,” which appeared in the Winter 2023/24 issue of the Claremont Review, which he also edits, Kesler maintains that the older American conservatism is better suited to American political culture and constitutional government than the new New Right, and more adequate to the full constellation of challenges the nation faces.

What goes by the name of “National Conservatism,” Kesler observes, “is perhaps the most visible, identifiable, and successful part of the New Right.” He admires many of the movement’s intellectual architects but finds “exaggerated and unfair” its judgment that the “former New Right of Buckley and Reagan” was “myopically libertarian and temperamentally unserious about politics and morals.”

National conservatism, it is true, confronts new disorders: social justice warriors; the diversity, equity, and inclusion industry; wokeness; and globalization. Yet the emergence of new disorders, argues Kesler, does not eliminate the old disorders. The challenges to which the conservatism of Buckley and Reagan responded remain: the transformation of the federal bureaucracy into a mechanism for promoting progressive values; the promulgation of the idea of a living Constitution, which gives judges the authority to promiscuously read into America’s charter of government their moral judgments; a welfare state that instead of equipping citizens – assisted by their families and communities – to care for themselves incentivizes dependence on government; and a communist superpower that threatens the free world.

Kesler elaborates on his substantial agreement with the Natcons as well as his considerable unease through a discussion of their 2022 manifesto: “National Conservatism: A Statement of Principles.” National conservatism, he maintains, rightly comes to the defense of the nation at a moment in which it is under attack, “both from above – from international and transnational organizations, laws, and ideological-cum-religious movements, and from below – racial, ethnic, sexual, and tribal-cultural factions asserting claims against national citizenship.” But then again, Kesler points out, the older conservatism of Buckley and Reagan takes as axiomatic that an American statesman’s first duty is to honor the nation’s leading principles and advance its vital interests.

What then sets national conservatism apart? Rather than putting America first, Kesler argues, Natcons give priority to a theory of the nation and of international relations, and then reconfigure the national spirit in America in accordance with their idealized model. According to their statement’s opening paragraphs, the Natcons “emphasize the idea of the nation because we see a world of independent nations – each pursuing its own national interests and upholding national traditions that are its own – as the only genuine alternative to universalist ideologies now seeking to impose a homogenizing, locality-destroying imperium over the entire globe.” That, however, is the sort of political abstraction that Edmund Burke, a founding father of modern conservatism, warned against. The Natcon statement provides not an alternative to the universalist ideologies it decries but an alternative universalist ideology.

With signatories to its statement of principles from not only the United States but also from Austria, Canada, Croatia, France, Hungary, Israel, Italy, Poland, Portugal, and the United Kingdom, national conservatism is proudly international. “How paradoxical,” remarks Kesler, “is an avowedly international movement on behalf of nationalism.”

Furthermore, national conservatism – at least in the writings of its most prominent theorist, Israeli Yoram Hazony – does not merely abstract from the central features of American nationalism. Hazony, who is chairman of the Edmund Burke Foundation, which hosts the Natcon statement of principles, attacks them: His version of national conservatism vilifies America’s enlightenment and classically liberal roots. The self-evident truths of the U.S. Declaration of Independence, not least unalienable rights – the rights shared by all human beings – and government’s primary responsibility to secure them, reflect for Hazony falsehoods that undermine “the idea of the nation.”

Yet, as Kesler stresses, American nationalism is “limited and shaped by equality, liberty, and consent.” In the founding era, all major political camps embraced natural rights, individual freedom, and limited government based on the consent of the governed.

Failure to appreciate this constitutive feature of America produces other errors. Contrary to Hazony, the upsurge of progressivism in post-1960s America was not fueled by confused libertarians and neoconservatives advocating natural rights and limited government. Rather, progressivism was unleashed owing to a failure to adhere to America’s founding principles and to apply them prudently to new circumstances. And contrary to the Natcon ambition to harness the state to uphold Christianity, such an alliance between faith and government, as America’s founding inheritance teaches, would undermine both.

“What the national conservatives are actually offering,” writes Kesler, “is not so much the return of American nationalism – or of a purely traditional form of American conservatism, shorn of neos and libertarians – but a re-writing of American conservatism along new, less brazenly American lines, assimilating it, in effect, to the nationalism of other nations, beginning with Great Britain.”

The problem is not that the Natcons take seriously the American national spirit and the American conservative tradition. The problem is that they do not take them seriously enough.

The post American Conservatism Clarifies National Conservatism’s Contribution appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

The Data Show Israel Is Not Causing a Gazan Famine

This story originally was published by Real Clear Wire

By Awi Federgruen & Ran Kivetz
Real Clear Wire

Israel’s acknowledgement that a drone attack mistakenly killed seven aid workers in Gaza has led to renewed criticism of the Jewish State. The tragic incident came less than three weeks after a report issued by the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) claimed that 1.1 million people – nearly half the population of Gaza – face “catastrophic food insecurity” conditions and that Northern Gaza will face famine by May if hostilities continue.

The European Union’s high representative for foreign affairs and security policy, Josep Borrell, blamed Israel, saying, “Starvation is used as a weapon of war. Israel is provoking famine.” And U.S. officials unveiled a United Nations ceasefire resolution that cited “famine” conditions after the IPC report came out.

But Hamas, which has been hoarding food and stealing from Gazans, is the root cause of Gazans’ suffering. As Congressman Jim Himes, a Connecticut Democrat and ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, stated in a CNN interview: “Hamas has a long history of stealing aid, and needs to stop that in the interest of the people that they purport to represent.”

Israel has tried for years to balance its interests with those of innocent Palestinians. Its maritime blockade did not stop Gaza from being self-sufficient in fruits and vegetables, with enough left over to potentially export.. Despite the war, three-quarters of greenhouse acres were still available as of Feb. 15, according to a United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) report, which has the latest available data. Israel’s Coordination of Government Activities in the Territories (COGAT) indicates that bakeries can still provide “over 2 million breads, rolls, and pita breads a day.”

Since the war began, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) have engaged in what West Point Urban Warfare Studies Chairman John Spencer described as “a remarkable, historic new standard” for wartime treatment of civilians, resulting in a civilian-to-combatant mortality ratio that is “historically low for modern urban warfare.” For example, Israel regularly provides warnings of impending attacks,assists with evacuations, and even stops its attacks on a daily basis to allow humanitarian aid to arrive.

Despite the recent tragedy, the IDF tries to ensure that Gazans don’t starve throughout the war.COGAT data show that 290,000 tons of food and beverages have been delivered to Gaza since October — recently as many as 200 truckloads a day. Full distribution of these supplies would deliver about 1.82 pounds of food daily for each of the 2 million people in Gaza (145 kg per person, during 175 days of war). Based on FAO estimates of the average daily consumption in Asia and Africa (where Gaza is situated), this alone would be enough to supply 50% of Gazans’ daily consumption needs – on top of the food they continue to produce themselves.

Israel has also collaborated with the U.S. to provide further aid. The Biden administration recently announced plans to build an emergency pier that would provide 2 million meals per day.  This idea was first suggested to President Biden by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu last October, just weeks after the war started.

Unfortunately, this is not the first time that leaders have been misled about the data surrounding the Israel-Hamas war. For example, policymakers and news media have repeatedly cited casualty numbers taken from none other than Hamas itself. But Abraham Wyner, a professor of statistics and data science at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School, has stated that “the numbers are not real.” For one thing, he writes, there is little variability in the daily reported casualty numbers, despite variability in the daily numbers of strikes, and the randomness in collateral damage arising from any given strike. Additionally, “the ebbs and flows of the bombings and attacks by Israel should cause the daily counts of men and women to move together. But that is not what the data show. Not only is there not a positive correlation, there is a strong negative correlation.”

Much of the apparent confusion results in criticisms of Israel, as we saw early in the conflict with an alleged hospital bombing that turned out to be a likely terrorist group’s rocket gone awry.  Despite the uproar over the IPC report and the aid workers’ tragic deaths, Israel is not the Palestinians’ enemy. It is their partner for a peaceful future, while Hamas uses civilians as human shields and cannon fodder. Leaders can most help the Palestinians by allowing Israel to completely uproot Hamas, thus giving a fresh start to the Middle East.

The post The Data Show Israel Is Not Causing a Gazan Famine appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

OneArmedMan, Wikimedia Commons

Third Largest Teachers’ Union Faces Demise of Its Own Making

This story originally was published by Real Clear Wire

By Brent Urbanik
Real Clear Wire

In a frantic attempt to preserve its monopoly over the Miami-Dade County Public Schools, attorneys for the union currently representing the district’s 24,000-plus teachers and support staff are relying on a strategy that has the potential to backfire and leave its members without workplace representation altogether.

On March 18, United Teachers of Dade (UTD), using an argument that would invalidate its own petition, asked a hearing officer with Florida’s Public Employee Relations Commission (PERC) to reject a competing union’s bid to participate in a forthcoming election to determine the bargaining representative for the South Florida educators.

The election is the result of a law passed by the state’s legislature last May requiring a recertification vote for government employee unions whose paid membership falls below 60 percent of the total bargaining unit.

The statute stripped dozens of smaller Florida unions of their certification in the ensuing months, and now UTD — one of the country’s largest teacher’s unions — is facing the same fate after an independent audit in December found only 56 percent of the defined bargaining unit were paying dues.

The recertification vote has not yet been scheduled, but in the meantime a startup union, dubbed the Miami-Dade Education Coalition (MDEC), has requested its name appear on the same ballot. On March 11, MDEC arrived at PERC’s headquarters in Tallahassee with 2,564 showing-of-interest cards — far more than needed under the agency’s regulations to ensure the new union a spot on the ballot.

UTD, however, filed a response in which its lawyers argue state laws only permit MDEC to participate in a certification election, not a re-certification election.

The union is flat-out wrong about that.

UTD’s legal argument is fundamentally flawed. According to Fla. Stat. § 447.305(6), the guidelines for certification laid out in Fla. Stat. § 447.307(2) and (3) apply to recertification efforts as well, and therefore permit another employee organization to intervene in the representation election process.

Despite this clarity, UTD attorneys insist MDEC is ineligible to participate in the recertification election, despite MDEC’s compliance with applicable statutes.

Even more puzzling, UTD itself is already using the certification procedures set forth in § 447.307(2) and (3) in its petition for recertification. Yet it asks PERC to selectively permit UTD’s use of the certification process while denying MDEC use of the same process for its motion to intervene.

This creates the possibility of two outcomes:

1. PERC disagrees with UTD and both unions appear on the same election ballot; or,
2. PERC agrees with UTD and has no choice but to apply the same standard to both unions.

To put it mildly, this is an incredibly irresponsible move by UTD because it puts PERC in the position of determining whether Florida law applies to both petitions or neither.

If it applies to both, MDEC is as entitled to participate in the coming election as UTD. If not, PERC lacks any framework to process UTD’s “recertification” petition at all, and the union’s certification would be revoked.

You heard that right. The union would be officially finished of its own doing. Its leaders would have denied MDEC a chance to intervene but destroyed their own union in the process.

As a seasoned educator in Miami, I find myself unsurprised by the predictable reaction of the union to a quandary it directly caused. This incident merely adds to the extensive track record of ineptitude showcased by this union throughout its history.

Time and again UTD faltered when representing the bargaining unit, from failing to contest the school district’s decision to eliminate step raises to refusing to adequately address problematic working conditions.

For this reason, a group of like-minded educators established MDEC — with the objective of maintaining a laser-focus on issues concerning the wages, benefits and working conditions of Miami-Dade teachers and staff.

Under our administration, membership dues will be much lower because MDEC will have no affiliation with the National Education Association or the American Federation of Teachers.  Thus, millions of dollars will not be diverted to national headquarters, nor will MDEC use members’ hard-earned wages to fund political candidates and causes those members may not agree with.

Simply put, MDEC embodies the true vision of what UTD originally should have been, but never lived up to. The whole point of the new recertification requirement is to make public-sector unions more accountable. By its actions, UTD is showing exactly why it was necessary.

Instead of attacking its accusers, UTD should be cleaning up its own act.  It should be taking responsibility for the corruption and incompetence that has cost it nearly half its paid membership.

Its inability or unwillingness to do so unmistakably highlights why UTD’s incompetent rule must end. Miami-Dade educators should seize the chance to vote for a union that embodies the original purpose for unions: prioritizing wages, benefits, and working conditions.

Brent Urbanik is a teacher in the Miami-Dade school district and president of the Miami Dade Education Coalition.

The post Third Largest Teachers’ Union Faces Demise of Its Own Making appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Darklanlan, Wikimedia Commons

State Voters to Decide if ‘Back Alley Abortion Butchers’ Will Be Unregulated

This article originally appeared on WND.com

Guest by post by Bob Unruh 

Proposed amendment would open state wide for industry 

The majority on the Florida Supreme Court has ruled that an amendment that essentially allows for abortion anytime, to anyone, for any reason, will be on this fall’s election ballot.

But Liberty Counsel, which has fought for the pro-life movement for years already, said it is the three justices in the minority who got the issue right.

The post State Voters to Decide if ‘Back Alley Abortion Butchers’ Will Be Unregulated appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Investigation Looking into City’s Decision to Give COVID Cash to Illegal Aliens

This article originally appeared on WND.com

Guest by post by Bob Unruh 

Report confirms recipients ‘not eligible’ for federal aid

There have been reports all across the nation of local jurisdictions misusing COVID-19 impact money distributed by the federal government, but now a report in The Federalist confirms an investigation has begun into a decision by officials in Madison, Wisconsin, to take $700,000 from that distribution and give it to illegal aliens.

The demand is from state Sen. Duey Stroebel, who said, “The decision to use pandemic relief money to assist illegal immigrants at the expense of Wisconsinites reveals the out of touch priorities of Madison politicians.”

He’s begun an open records request to review the city’s “questionable” use of federal funding.

The report explained the issue, “It appears city officials decided to do an end-around with their portion of the nearly $2 trillion in so-called ‘stimulus’ funds that were handed out — and simultaneously dumped onto the untenable U.S. debt — by the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) in response to the Covid pandemic.”

It documented how the Institute for Reforming Government’s Center for Investigative Oversight confirmed the city gave $700,000 from State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds to illegal aliens.

The money reportedly went from the grants to various nonprofits who gave services to illegal aliens, even though they largely were “ineligible” to get direct federal or state aid.

The city had reported its projectss address “the need to support programming, services and outreach for persons in the community who are undocumented. The pandemic has had a profound impact on undocumented residents particularly around employment and housing.”

It admitted, “These residents are not eligible, in some cases, to receive direct assistance provided by federal and state governments, and have been reluctant or unable, in others, to access resources for which they are eligible.”

So, Madison officials said, they were funding agencies to “deliver direct assistance to undocumented individuals and families.”

The intermediaries included, the report said, RISE Wisconsin Inc., the Latino Academy of Workforce Development, and the Community Immigration Law Center, the report said.

The Federalist pointed out that CILC is a known “left-of-center” legal team that works to “prevent deportation of illegal immigrants.”

The city of Madison got more than $42 million plus in relief funding, of which some $24 million was used for government services. Another $22 million was for “communities … most impacted by the pandemic.”

“It is troubling to learn that the city of Madison is funneling taxpayer dollars intended to help Wisconsinites to illegal immigrants. Taxpayers need answers,” charged Jake Curtis, IRG’s general counsel. “Our team at the Center for Investigative Oversight is committed to working with our state and federal partners to bring to light answers for the hardworking taxpayers of our state.”

The report gave evidence that Democrat-led states gave out more than $500 million in COVID cash to illegals, including, sometimes, $1,000 cash handouts.

Stroebel warned, “Communities across this country are grappling with the consequences of the open border policies of the Biden/Harris administration. From the rise in fentanyl seizures at the southern border to the overwhelming of school services in Whitewater to the tragic murder of Laken Riley in Georgia, the immigration crisis is something that is impacting every state, including Wisconsin. The decision to use pandemic relief money to assist illegal immigrants at the expense of Wisconsinites reveals the out of touch priorities of Madison politicians.”

U.S. Rep. Bryan Steil, of Wisconsin, blamed Biden and Democrats.

He said the “massive” spending package failed to include “clear requirements” for spending tax money.

Copyright 2024 WND News Center

The post Investigation Looking into City’s Decision to Give COVID Cash to Illegal Aliens appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Years of Government Censorship Called ‘Potential Health Danger’

This article originally appeared on WND.com

Guest by post by Bob Unruh 

Turley says public’s loss of confidence ‘could prove disastrous’

There’s a real danger coming for Americans should there be another pandemic, which in all probability will happen at some time.

And it’s not necessarily from the actual health danger, it stems from the censorship and misinformation campaigns that the American government launched during the COVID-19 threat.

That’s according to Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University.

Long considered a constitutional expert, he’s testified before Congress on a variety of constitutional disputes, and even represented members in court.

He cited the misinformation delivered by the government during COVID, its crackdown on alternative views about treatments, the mandatory shots, the masks and much, much more.

That all has produced in the American public a distrust of government, as many of the views mandated by the government have since proven wrong, and many of the perspectives censored for being wrong have been documented as being right.

“The loss of public confidence in both the CDC (Centers for Disease Control) and the media could prove disastrous if we face another pandemic,” he explained. “The years of barring and throttling opposing views (including many later vindicated by the science) has left many Americans deeply distrustful of both the government and the media.

“That is the real potential danger. If we want to prepare for the next pandemic, we need to repair that trust,” he warned.

His comments were prompted by a federal judge’s decision to hit out at the CDC for withholding data on adverse vaccine reports.

“The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) continues to resist disclosing information on claimed side effects and problems with its COVID-19 vaccines, including from healthcare workers,” he explained.

“Due to a January order by U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk in a Freedom of Information Act case, the CDC is being forced to turn over hundreds of thousands of ‘free text’ entries from V-safe. The court has scolded the CDC for its continuing efforts to withhold information on these complaints.”

He said the dispute reminds that “we still need to address the conduct of the government – and the reporting of the media – from the last pandemic. Once agency officials were told that they could censor those with opposing views, a culture of speech controls took hold at the CDC and the government narrative was then amplified by the media.”

He pointed out that the two entities, government and media, combined to make even questioning their adopted talking points “a public health threat.”

Turley added, “A lawsuit was filed by Missouri and Louisiana and joined by leading experts, including Drs. Jayanta Bhattacharya (Stanford University) and Martin Kulldorff (Harvard University). Bhattacharya previously objected to the suspension of Dr. Clare Craig after she raised concerns about Pfizer trial documents. Those doctors were the co-authors of the Great Barrington Declaration, which advocated for a more focused Covid response that targeted the most vulnerable population rather than widespread lockdowns and mandates. Many are now questioning the efficacy and cost of the massive lockdown as well as the real value of masks or the rejection of natural immunities as an alternative to vaccination. Yet, these experts and others were attacked for such views just a year ago. Some found themselves censored on social media for challenging claims of Dr. Fauci and others.”

He noted that even those who suggested the virus came out of a Chinese lab that was experimenting on those very diseases, which now is widely accepted as the source, “was denounced as a conspiracy theory.”

California even tried to strip doctors of their medical licenses “for spreading dissenting views.”

He said much still remains to be done to create a culture of transparency at the CDC.

“The surest way to combat this culture of censorship is to pass legislation barring a single dime of taxpayer funds from being used to fund censorship efforts, including third-party groups on removing ‘misinformation, disinformation, and malinformation,'” he said.

“We should get the government out of the business of controlling the speech of citizens and groups. It can rebut critics on its ample platforms without using third parties to silence them as surrogates.”

Copyright 2024 WND News Center

The post Years of Government Censorship Called ‘Potential Health Danger’ appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Waste of the Day: Report Shows Major Cities In Debt

This story originally was published by Real Clear Wire

By Adam Andrzejewski
Real Clear Wire

Topline: The 75 largest cities in America were collectively $288 billion in debt at the end of fiscal year 2022, according to think tank Truth in Accounting.

Key facts: The new “Financial State of the Cities” report found 53 major cities that do not have enough money to pay their bills.

Yet all of them claimed their budgets were balanced, as is required by law. That means lawmakers understated each city’s debt by not including future costs like employee pensions and healthcare, according to Truth in Accounting.

The report ranked cities based on their “taxpayer burden”: the amount each taxpayer would need to spend for the government to pay off all its debt tomorrow.

New York City has a taxpayer burden of $61,800, the largest by far despite being the most populous. The city has only six cents saved up for every dollar it will need to spend on retiree healthcare.

Chicago was the second-worst and would need $42,900 from each taxpayer to pay off its debt. That’s partly because the city’s pension liability increased by $1.7 billion in 2022.

Honolulu, Philadelphia and Portland, Oregon round out the five most burdened cities.

Washington, D.C. was the healthiest of 22 cities with a taxpayer surplus. There would still be $10,700 left over for each taxpayer if the city paid all its debt.

Irvine, California and Plano, Texas are the only other two cities on the list with a taxpayer surplus above $5,000.

Background: The 75 cities owned a total of $307.4 billion of assets to pay $595.3 billion in liabilities.

The debt includes $175.9 billion for upcoming employee pensions and $135.2 billion for other retiree benefits.

Still, the numbers pale in comparison to the $34.6 trillion federal debt, and that held by states.

California, New York and Texas, for example, each have more state debt than the 75 cities combined.

Summary: With the constant magnifying glass on federal spending, it can be easy to forget that local governments are still racking up debt at the same time.

The #WasteOfTheDay is brought to you by the forensic auditors at OpenTheBooks

The post Waste of the Day: Report Shows Major Cities In Debt appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

https://pixabay.com/en/users/PublicDomainPictures-14/, Wikimedia Commons

Stunning Study Confirms ‘Gender-Confused’ Children Mostly ‘Grow Out of It’

This article originally appeared on WND.com

Guest by post by Bob Unruh 

Expert explains that’s why chemicals, surgery are ‘such an outrage’

In direct opposition to the suspect claims of transgender activists that children who are “gender-confused” must have medical “care” that goes up to and includes surgical body mutilations, a new 15-year study confirms that most of those kids, if left alone, “grow out of it.”

A report from the Daily Mail confirms the study results show that “being trans is usually just a phase for kids.”

The report explained, “Researchers in the Netherlands tracked more than 2,700 children from age 11 to their mid-twenties, asking them every three years of feelings about their gender. Results showed at the start of the research, around one-in-10 children (11 percent) expressed ‘gender non-contentedness’ to varying degrees.”

However, by age 25 only 4% said they “often” or even “sometimes” were discontent with gender.

“The results of the current study might help adolescents to realize that it is normal to have some doubts about one’s identity and one’s gender identity during this age period and that this is also relatively common,” the study found.

Under the openly radical push by Joe Biden and his administration, the transgender ideology has exploded in popularity over the last few years.

Multiple federal moves have insisted that transgender “rights” supersede even the U.S. Constitution and that chemicals to alter physical characteristics and even surgical mutilations of healthy bodies is normal, even beneficial.

The study prompted Patrick Brown, of the Ethics and Public Policy Center, to tell the Mail, “This study provides even more reason to be skeptical towards aggressive steps to facilitate gender transition in childhood and adolescence. The fact that rates of satisfaction are lower even just a few years later suggests that for the vast majority of people, prudence and caution, rather than a rush towards permanent surgeries or hormone therapies, will be the best approach for teenagers struggling to make sense of the world and their place in it.”

He noted the evidence suggests policies that ban gender transition for children “make a great deal of sense.”

The researchers, from the University of Groningen, noted their analysis of 2,770 people did not focus specifically on those in treatment for dysphoria.

The study asked participants to respond to: “I wish to be of the opposite sex” at six points over 15 years. The results, documented in the Archives of Sexual Behavior, confirmed 78% had the same feelings about their gender over the 15 years.

Nineteen percent became more content and only 2% were “less comfortable,” the report said.

The study found, too, “Gender non-contentedness, while being relatively common during early adolescence, in general decreases with age and appears to be associated with a poorer self-concept and mental health throughout development.”

The report noted from 2017 to 2021, some 121,880 children from 6-17 were diagnosed, then when Biden took office and started promoting the ideology, in 2021 there were 42,000 such diagnoses.

Likewise, the report noted sex change surgeries are exploding, up 40% in some years, even though sex cannot be changed as it is embedded in the human body down to the DNA level.

Biden recently offended millions in his country when he declared a “Transgender Day of Visibility” on Easter Sunday. The promotion apparently is observed each March 31, which was, in fact, Easter Sunday.

Dr. Jay Richards, of the Richard and Helen DeVos Center for Life, Religion, and Family, told the Daily Mail, “We’ve known for over a decade that most kids who experience distress with their sexed bodies resolve those feelings after they pass through natural puberty.”

He said up to 88% of gender-dysphoric girls and 98% of boys “desisted” while going through puberty.

That is why, he told the publication, “‘Gender-affirming care’ on minors is such an outrage.”

Copyright 2024 WND News Center

The post Stunning Study Confirms ‘Gender-Confused’ Children Mostly ‘Grow Out of It’ appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Medical Students Ordered to Bow to ‘Mama Earth’

This article originally appeared on WND.com

Guest by post by Bob Unruh 

Investigation sought for event that gave extremist UCLA stage

First-year medical students at the University of California Los Angeles have been ordered into a mandatory “structural racism” indoctrination with a guest speaker who has praised Hamas’ Oct. 7 terrorism in Israel and demanded they bow down to “mama earth.”

It is the Washington Free Beacon that obtain a recording of parts of the speech by Lisa Gray Garcia:

She claimed Hamas’ terrorism against Israel actually was “justice,” and led the class in what she called a “non-secular prayer” to “the ancestors,” the report said.

Attendees were ordered to “get on their knees and touch the floor – ‘mama earth,'” the report said.

The activist had been invited to speaking about housing and the “justice” issues involved, and she thanked “tribes” for “what the settlers call L.A.,” the report explained.

She also addressed the needs of “black,” “brown” and even “houseless” people.

“Mama earth,” Gray Garcia told the kneeling students, “was never meant to be bought, sold, pimped, or played.”

The stunt has generated calls for an investigation of why this speaker was given the stage at the “elite medical school,” the report said.

The report said the self-described “poverty scholar” also led students in a “Free, Free Palestine” chant.

The result of the event was that the students were “intimidated” into taking part in a “religious service in derogation of their own personal beliefs,” according to a statement from the Jewish Faculty Resilience group.

The group asked Chancellor Gene Block for a review.

Copyright 2024 WND News Center

The post Medical Students Ordered to Bow to ‘Mama Earth’ appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

This article originally appeared on WND.com Guest by post by Bob Unruh  Investigation sought for event that gave extremist UCLA stage First-year medical students at the University of California Los Angeles have been ordered into a mandatory "structural racism" indoctrination with a guest speaker who

Exclusive: The Shot from the Front that Hit JFK’s Right Temporal Bone by His Ear, Creating a Massive Blow-out Wound in the Occipital Bone at the Right Back of JFK’s Head-Excerpt From the Latest Book by Jerome Corsi and David Mantik

Excerpt from the New Book: David W. Mantik, M.D., Ph.D. and Jerome R. Corsi, Ph.D., The Assassination of John F. Kennedy: The Final Analysis (2024)

Read part one and two.

Dr. Michael Chesser: X-ray Film Evidence of an Oblique Shot

In JFK’s lateral X-ray film, Dr. Michael Chesser spotted a keyhole fracture in the temporal bone, near JFK’s right ear. Such a fracture was described in “Keyhole Fracture of the Skull,” in the December 2008 issue of the Military Medicine Radiology Corner:

A keyhole fracture has a characteristic pattern…of both gunshot entrance and exit trauma. Keyhole fractures can be created by bullets penetrating the skull at an angle, by a bullet yawing off path, or by grazing the skull at a tangential trajectory without penetrating into the intracranium. These fractures exhibit a circular entrance defect and a triangular exit deficit created by bone or bullet fragments propagating from the initial point of impact on external examination or CT imaging.^[1]

Figure 4.1
Keyhole Fracture Resulting from an Oblique Shot.

The source for Figure 4.1 is H.E. Berryman and W.M. Gunther, “Keyhole defect production in tubular bone,” Journal of Forensic Sciences 45, no. 2 (March 1, 2000): 483-487, https://europepmc.org/article/med/10782979. Figures 4.1–4.4 are from Michael Chesser’s presentation: “Reviewing the Autopsy X-Rays,” op. cit.

Chesser also cited a second peer-reviewed article (from the same journal in 1984):

Keyhole lesions of the skull at the site of a gunshot entrance wound have been previously described: common to the lesions are a circular or ovoid component with internal beveling and a triangular portion with external beveling. The circular portion is, in fact, the point of initial impact or entrance, and the triangular portion is the exit. The lesion usually indicates a tangential shot, often with a portion of projectile being shaved off and exiting.^[2]

Chesser identified a triangular wound in JFK’s right temporal bone, near the right ear, as seen in these slides from his 2021 presentation to the Future of Freedom Foundation (Figures 4.2 and 4.3).

The keyhole is indeed a crucial discovery—because the trail of metallic particles across the top of the X-ray films cannot explain the keyhole trauma that lies well inferior to this trail. In other words, the keyhole requires a quite different trajectory (from the trail) and that clearly implies a quite different bullet—and therefore conspiracy. Most likely, it was caused by the bullet that entered near the right ear. After causing the keyhole trauma, the bullet then triggered the large occipital hole associated with the expulsion of the Harper Fragment. To close the case, Chesser confirmed that the premortem X-ray film does not show this keyhole trauma. For the goals of prior investigations then, the appointed radiologists were wise to ignore it. We can only imagine the groans of government lawyers if such a keyhole had been cited by these official radiologists.

Figure 4.2
Keyhole Bullet Entry Wound.
Temporal Bone: JFK Lateral X-ray Film.

Figure 4.3
Temporal Bone: Bullet Entry Produces Keyhole Trauma.
JFK Autopsy X-Ray Films.

In the AP X-ray film, just compare the right temporal region to the left temporal region (Figure 4.4). We see many fractured bones as well as bone fragments in the right temporal region; these are absent on the left.

Figure 4.4
Right (R) Temporal Bone and Left (L) Temporal Bone,
from JFK’s AP Skull X-ray Film.

Dr. Don Curtis, DDS, was a first-year resident at Parkland Hospital in November 1963. Curtis told Chesser about his conversation with his supervisor, Dr. Robert Walker, DDS, a Parkland oral surgeon. Walker was in Trauma Room One. Curtis told Chesser:

I [Curtis] was standing at the other side of the gurney on the left side and Dr. [Kemp] Clark, on the right side, raised [JFK’s] head to describe the wound. I did hear him [Dr. Clark] say cerebellum, which places the wound posterior and inferior. After they [the other physicians] left, I went around to the head of the table, and what I saw, with the head back down on the pillow, was the right wound margin and cranial contents on the pillow. I did not see the right temporal wound, however, my chief, Dr. Robert Walker, told me the following morning that he did see what appeared to be a bullet hole in the right temple. He well knew a bullet hole.^[3]

In 1985, Joseph McBride found a critical FBI memo buried among 98,755 pages of FBI documents released to the public during 1977–1978. Alan Belmont, the assistant director of the FBI, wrote the memo at the FBI’s Washington headquarters after 8:00 p.m. EST on November 22, 1963. Belmont was responsible for directing the FBI investigation of the assassination. He addressed the memo to FBI Associate Director Clyde Tolson, J. Edgar Hoover’s personal assistant, with copies to other top FBI bureaucrats.^[4]

The memo reported Belmont’s telephone conversation with Dallas Special Agent in Charge (SAC) J. Gordon Shanklin, which occurred at 9:18 p.m. EST, i.e., during the autopsy. Here is the first paragraph:

I talked to SAC Shanklin in Dallas. He said arrangements have been made with Carswell Air Force Base to fly one of our Agents up to Washington with the rifle that was recovered by the police together with the fragments of bullet taken from Governor Connally and the cartridge cases. I told SAC Shanklin that Secret Service had one of the bullets that struck President Kennedy and the other is lodged behind the President’s ear and we are arranging to get both of these. ^[5]

McBride immediately recognized the significance of this memo. In his detailed 2013 book, Into the Nightmare, he commented that the Belmont memo “indicates that a bullet was secretly removed from President Kennedy’s head and never placed into evidence.”[6]According to Belmont, the bullet was “lodged behind the president’s ear,” a fact never disclosed by the Warren Commission or the HSCA.”^[7] McBride stressed the importance of this document:

This crucial document invalidates the official version of the assassination that only three bullets were fired, all from behind, and that none was recovered during the autopsy at Bethesda Naval Hospital in Maryland. Other evidence about the fatal crossfire, including a gunshot wound to the president’s right temple, as well as the abundant evidence the president’s body was secretly altered to disguise his wounds and their sources, supports the information in this memo.^[8]

Eyewitnesses: A Grassy Knoll Shot Caused the Temple Wound 

In volume 2 of Inside the ARRB, Douglas Horne listed witnesses who saw JFK’s head struck from the right front. This shot blew out the right rear of JFK’s head and sent tissue debris to the left rear.

The family of Phillip Willis, including his wife Marilyn and daughters Rosemary and Linda, were on the south side of Elm Street (left of the limousine). Willis took one of the famous color photographs as the limousine approached the Stemmons Freeway sign: “As I was about to squeeze my shutter, that is when the first shot rang out and my reflex just took that picture at that moment.”^[9]

In his 1967 book Six Seconds in Dallas, Josiah Thompson reported his interview with Marilyn Sitzman, the receptionist for Abraham Zapruder’s clothing company. She stood with Zapruder on the concrete pedestal of the John Neely Bryan pergola on Elm Street while he filmed. Zapruder and Sitzman were within seventy-five feet of the limousine when the bullet shattered JFK’s head.

Miss Sitzman: And the next thing that I remembered clearly was the shot that hit directly in front of us, or almost directly in front of us, that hit him on the side of his face.

Thompson: Where on the side of the head did that shot appear to hit?

Miss Sitzman: I would say it’d be above the ear and to the front.

Thompson: In other words, if one drew a line vertically upward from the tip of the ear, it would be forward of that line?

Miss Sitzman: Yes.

Thompson: It would then be back of the temple, but on the side of the head?

Miss Sitzman: Between the eye and the ear. And we could see his brains come out, you know, his head opening; it must have been a terrible shot because it exploded his head.^[10]

Nigel Turner, in his five-part 1988 television documentary, The Men Who Killed Kennedy, aired an interview with Marilyn Willis. In episode one, she recalled:

The head shot seemed to come from the right front. It seemed to strike him here [gesturing to her upper right forehead, up high at the hairline], and his head went back, and all of the brain matter went out the back of the head. It was like a red halo, a red circle, with bright matter in the middle of it—it just went like that.^[11]

In episode five, she was asked to recall her most indelible memory. She responded: “[It was] the head shot; seeing his head blow up. I can see it just as pain [today as I could then] … it’s red, it’s very brilliant, it’s cone-shaped, going back—that’s my impression.”^[12]

Thompson also interviewed William Newman (Figure 1.3), who stood on the north curb of Elm Street (right of the limousine), about fifteen feet from JFK, with his wife Gayle Newman and their two small sons:

Thompson: Now could you tell me about the impact on the President’s head, what you saw? There’s a diagram you drew for me where you put it right at the ear.

William Newman: That’s what I saw. The way he was hit, it looked like he had just been hit with a baseball pitch; just like a block of wood fell over his ….

Thompson: You just bobbed your head backwards and over towards the left. The location that you drew is right about the ear.

William Newman: In my opinion the ear went.^[13]

Newman was confident that the shot that detonated JFK’s head came from the Grassy Knoll behind him.

Thompson: Now could I ask you a little more about this, try to get your immediate response? I take it, it was your immediate response—in your affidavit of the 22nd—that the shots were somehow right back of you?

William Newman: That’s right. Well, of course the President’s being shot in the side of the head, by the third shot—I thought the shot was fired from directly above and behind where we were standing. And that’s what scared us, because I thought we were right in the direct path of gunfire.^[14]

Newman never thought the gunfire came from the TSBD.

Thompson: But it’s your feeling that the shots were coming from over your…right behind you, based on (1) the sound of the shots, (2) the impact on the President’s head, and (3) the movement of the President’s head after impact. Would that be a fair statement?

William Newman: Right. Well, I think everybody thought the shots were from where I’m saying—behind us—because everybody went in that direction. Must have.

Thompson: Everyone did run in that direction; I’ve seen the films. This is probably pushing your own recollections too far, but I’ll try it anyway. When you say in back of you, do you have any feeling…say, if I stand here, and I say “in back of me,” do you have any feeling if it was back of me in this direction or back of me in this direction? Did it appear to be back of you towards the Texas School Book Depository or towards the general area of the stockade fence and railroad? Do you have any recollection at all?

William Newman: Well, this is going to sound peculiar, but I was thinking more just the opposite of the building…actually the thought never entered my mind that the shots were coming from the building.^[15]

In his 1966 book Rush to Judgment, Mark Lane interviewed Charles Brehm, who stood with his son near the south curb of Elm Street (left of the limousine). Brehm was within about twenty feet when the bullet “shattered the President’s head.”^[16] He saw a piece of JFK’s skull explode out of the head. “That which appeared to be a portion of the President’s skull went flying slightly to the rear of the President’s car and directly to its left,” Brehm said. “It flew over toward the curb to the left and to the rear.”^[17]

Lane pointed out that Deputy Constable Seymour Weitzman found skull fragments on the south side of Elm Street (left of the limousine), approximately “8 to 12 inches from the curb.” Lane emphasized that this location “was consistent with the bullet having been fired from the north, where the grassy knoll is located, since bone matter tends to follow the trajectory of the bullet.”^[18]

“The Dallas Motorcycle Policemen to the Left Rear of the Limousine Were Covered by Bloody Debris” ^[19]

When a headshot struck Kennedy, Dallas police officer B. J. Martin was on the left outside motorcycle, about five feet to the left and six to eight feet to the rear.^[20] Martin testified that he and his motorcycle were splattered with skull and brain debris. “I noticed that there were blood stains on the windshield on my motor[cycle], and then I pulled off my helmet and I noticed there were blood stains on the left side of my helmet.”^[21] He also noticed “other matter that looked like pieces of flesh.”^[22]

Martin’s partner that day was police officer Bobby W. Hargis, who rode the inside rear motorcycle. Hargis testified to the WC that he was hit by debris from the fatal shot:

Yes; when President Kennedy straightened back up in the car [after the first shot] the bullet hit him in the head, the one that killed him and it seemed like his head exploded, and I was splattered with blood and brain, and kind of a bloody water.^[23]

The debris hit Hargis with such force that he told reporters the next day, “I thought at first I must have been hit.”^[24]

Horne commented:

Hargis was so certain, based upon the impact debris, that the shot that caused it [JFK’s head wound] had come from the right front that he parked his motorcycle at the curb on the south side of Elm and went running across the street to see if he could spot anyone in the grassy knoll area.^[25]

In his testimony to the WC, Hargis made clear that his impression was that shots were coming from the grassy knoll. Hargis explained:

Well, at the time it sounded like the shots were right next to me. There wasn’t any way in the world I could tell where they were coming from, but at the time there was something in my head that said they probably could have been coming from the railroad overpass, because I thought since I had got splattered, with blood—I was just a little back and left of—just a little bit back and left of Mrs. Kennedy, but I don’t know.”^[26]

Hargis testified that after being splattered with Kennedy’s brain matter, he parked his motorcycle on the left side of the motorcade, i.e., the south side of Elm Street. He ran across Elm Street toward the railroad pass, running up the incline on the grassy knoll to see if he could find the shooter. In Richard Trask’s 1994 book Pictures of the Pain, Wilma Bond’s photograph shows Hargis returning to his motorcycle.^[27]

In Six Seconds in Dallas, Thompson discusses police officer James Chaney, who rode the right inside motorcycle and police officer Marrion Baker, who rode the right outside motorcycle. After the shooting, Baker parked his motorcycle on the north curb in front of the TSBD and ran into the building. Baker told the WC that Chaney had said this: “…two shots hit Kennedy first and then the other one hit the Governor [Connally].”^[28]Thompson wanted to know if Chaney had been struck by debris, but the police department blocked Thompson’s efforts to locate Chaney. Thompson commented: “If it turns out that Chaney was not splattered with impact debris, then the [WC] had a double reason for not calling him to testify.”^[29]

In his WC testimony, Baker clarified that the police officers on the left (Martin and Hargis) were hit by impact debris, but he did not cite himself or Chaney (on the right) as hit. Baker described a conversation among the Dallas motorcycle men:

Well, we were just discussing, each one of us had a theory, you know where, how it happened, and really none of us knew how it happened. It just happened, and where they was at in place, you know, in reference to the car, would be about the only thing they could say, and at the time, the first shot they didn’t know where the shot came from. The second shot they still didn’t know, and then the third shot some of them over to the left hand side [of the limousine], the blood, and everything hit their helmets and their windshields and then they knew it had to come from behind.^[30]

WC assistant counsel David Belin pressed Baker regarding officer B. J. Martin:

Mr. Belin: What did he [officer B. J. Martin] say to you about blood or something?

Mr. Baker: Like I say, we were talking about where the shot came from, and he said the first shot he couldn’t figure it out where it came from. He [Officer B. J. Martin] turned his head backward, reflex, you know, and then he turned back and the second shot came off, and then the third shot is when the blood and everything hit his helmet and his windshield.

Mr. Belin: Did it hit the inside or the outside of his windshield, did he say?

Mr. Baker: It hit all this inside. Now, as far as the inside or outside of the windshield. I don’t know about that. But it was all on the right-hand side of his helmet.

Mr. Belin: Of his helmet?

Mr. Baker: On his uniform also.

Mr. Belin: On his uniform[?]

Mr. Baker: That is right.

Mr. Belin: And he was riding to the left of the President and you say ahead of the President?

Mr. Baker: On the left-hand side.

Mr. Belin: But a little ahead of him?

Mr. Baker: Yes, sir. They were immediately in front of the car.^[31]

Multiple photographs clearly show four motorcycle escorts beside the limousine; each one was to the rear of the limousine during the fusillade. The Dallas police soon agreed that the lone assassin was Oswald, so every police officer was forced to toe the line: no frontal shots were allowed.

Baker’s statement clearly implies that Martin and Hargis (on the left rear) had been hit by debris, despite Baker’s obvious attempts to claim that the motorcycle escort had been in front of the limousine. Clearly, Belin wanted Baker to testify that blood and brain matter would have hit the inside of the windshield, so as to position the fatal shot from the rear. This explains Baker’s contorted answer: “It hit all this inside. Now, as far as the inside or outside of the windshield. I don’t know about that. But it was all on the right-hand side of his helmet.”^[32]

Two Frontal Headshots

Douglas Horne (Inside the ARRB) was the first to propose two separate frontal headshots. Before that, no one had seriously considered this option, so Horne had thereby decisively advanced the case. Before Horne, everyone saw an X-ray fragment trail that disintegrated before exiting and a large hole at the right rear of the head (without any associated bullet fragments). These two items did not truly correlate, but no one seriously objected until Horne had his epiphany. Now, over ten years later, the evidence for two separate frontal head shots is formidable. One bullet entered in front of the right ear and exited at the right rear, causing a large hole. The second frontal bullet entered the right forehead at the hairline, consistent with the fragment trail on the X-ray films, but it did not exit. Instead, it merely fragmented. Sadly, most researchers today still cannot distinguish between these two headshots. I have published supporting images in my hardcover book to discriminate between them. Some are shown here in Figure 4.5. For more, see Appendix G. To date, no one has even tried to refute these two different scenarios.

Figure 4.5
JFK: Two Frontal Headshots.
The Vertical Red Arrow Represents the Forehead Shot.
The Oblique Green Arrow Represents the Temple Shot.

The source for Figure 4.5 is David W. Mantik, The JFK Assassination Decoded, op. cit., p. 300.

Figure 4.5 clearly distinguishes the two frontal shots. The vertical (AP) arrow represents the forehead shot, while the oblique arrow represents the temple shot. The forehead bullet does not exit the skull; instead it disintegrated into the particle trail on the X-ray films. The temple bullet is not represented by particles anywhere in the X-ray films, but it is consistent with the large right occipital blowout.^[33]
It is also consistent with many eyewitnesses (in Dealey Plaza, at Parkland Hospital, and at the Bethesda autopsy) who reported an entry site above and slightly in front of the right ear. The tissue debris from the temple bullet exited the skull, as suggested by the large occipital defect. It is also consistent with Dealey Plaza witnesses (especially those to the left of the limousine) who were struck by flying debris from the occipital blowout.

These two shots are also located at two quite different vertical levels (Figure G.2). It is time to stop conflating these two frontal shots, which is precisely what most researchers blindly do. (After all, these two assassins might prefer separate credit.)

Clint Hill and the Oblique Shot That Detonated JFK’s Head 

SS Agent Clint Hill was assigned to Jacqueline Kennedy on November 22, 1963. He jumped from the follow-up car and ran to the rear handhold on the limousine after the first shots. Horne noted that Hill was “the closest reliable witness” to JFK’s head wounds.^[34]

In November 30, 1963, Hill recalled:

As I lay over the top of the back seat I noticed a portion of the President’s head on the right rear side was missing and he was bleeding profusely. Part of his brain was gone. I saw a part of his skull with hair on it lying in the seat.^[35]

Hill described the first lady’s reaction:

Mrs. Kennedy shouted, “They’ve shot his head off;” then turned and raised out of her seat as if she were reaching to her right rear toward the back of the car for something that had blown out.^[36]

In his WC testimony, he also offered a graphic description of the scene at Parkland:

The right rear portion of his head was missing. It was lying in the rear seat of the car. His brain was exposed. There was blood and bits of brain all over the entire rear portion of the car. Mrs. Kennedy was completely covered with blood. There was so much blood you could not tell if there had been any other wound or not, except for the one large gaping wound in the right rear portion of the head.^[37]

Hill testified that Jackie climbed onto the trunk to retrieve skull or brain tissue:

Mr. Specter: You say that it appeared that she [Jacqueline Kennedy] was reaching as if something was coming over to the rear portion of the car, back in the area where you were coming to?

Mr. Hill: Yes, sir.

Mr. Specter: Was there anything back there that you observed, that she might have been reaching for?

Mr. Hill: I thought I saw something come off the back, too, but I cannot say that there was. I do know that the next day we found the portion of the President’s head.

Mr. Specter: Where did you find that portion of the President’s head?

Mr. Hill: It was found in the street. It was turned in, I believe, by a medical student or somebody in Dallas.^[38]

Most likely then, Hill saw the HF blown out of the back of JFK’s head.

At a book signing (available on YouTube.com), Hill described his run from the follow-up car to the limousine:

As I approached the vehicle [JFK’s limousine] there was a third shot. It hit the President in the head, upper right rear of the right ear, causing a gaping hole in his head, which caused brain matter, blood, and bone fragments to spew forth out over the car, over myself. At that point Mrs. Kennedy came up out of the back seat onto the trunk of the car. She was trying to retrieve something that had gone off to the right rear. She did not know I was there. At that point I grabbed Mrs. Kennedy, put her in the back seat. The President fell over into her lap, to his left.

He continued:

The right side of his head was exposed. I could see his eyes were fixed. There was a hole in the upper right rear portion of his head about the size of my palm. Most of the grey matter in that area had been removed, and was scattered throughout the entire car, including on Mrs. Kennedy. I turned and gave the follow-up car crew the thumbs-down, indicating that we were in a very dire situation. The driver accelerated; he got up to the lead car, which was driven by Chief Curry, the Dallas Chief of Police…. ^[39]

On the right side of JFK’s head is a massive bloody wound in Z-331 (Figure 4.11).

Figure 4.11
Z-331.
The right side of JFK’s head explodes.

Z-343 is where the FBI said that Hill first placed his hand on the limousine—thirty frames (nearly two seconds) after Z-313 (Figure 4.12).

Figure 4.12
Z-343.
Hill reaches the limousine nearly two seconds after Z-313.

By Z-346, JFK has collapsed to his left, sinking into the back seat (Figure 4.13).

Figure 4.13
Z-346.
JFK collapses to his left, sinking into the back seat.

By Z-348, Jackie approaches the trunk (Figure 4.14).

Figure 4.14
Z- 348.
Jackie climbs onto the trunk.

According to the FBI, Hill’s foot did not reach the bumper until Z-368; both feet reached at Z-381 (Figure 4.15).

Figure 4.15
Z-381.
Both of Hill’s feet reach the bumper.

By Z-388, Clint Hill appears to be assisting Jackie back into her seat (Figure 4.16).

Figure 4.16
Z-388.
Clint Hill tries to assist Jackie.

In his 2012 book Mrs. Kennedy and Me, Hill offered a similar description. He described running toward the limousine (emphasis in the original):

I’m almost there. Mrs. Kennedy is leaning toward the president. I am almost there. I was almost there. And then I heard the shot. The third shot. The impact was like the sound of something hard hitting something hollow—like the sound of a melon shattering onto cement. In the same instant, blood, brain matter, and bone fragments exploded from the back of the president’s head. The president’s blood, parts of his skull, bits of his brain were splattered all over me—on my face, my clothes, in my hair.^[40]

In his 2010 book, The Kennedy Detail, former SS agent Gerald Blaine confirmed Hill’s memory: “Clint Hill was just feet from his goal, his eyes focused on Mrs. Kennedy, when he heard the third shot and the gruesome thump of President Kennedy’s head exploding.”^[41]

Hill leaves little doubt that the oblique headshot occurred well after Z-313. Most likely, this shot struck just before Hill’s hand reached the limousine. Drs. A. B. Cairns and Jack C. Harper were correct: HF was occipital bone.

Jackie’s Reaction 

At the end of the Zapruder film, just before the Triple Overpass, a frantic Jackie is propping JFK up into a full sitting position, as if he were alive. JFK researcher Gerda Dunckel has produced a remarkable YouTube video using a rarely watched sequence in the Zapruder film, from Z-452 to Z-457.^[42]

In her YouTube video, Dunckel identified the occupants of the limousine as the car approached the triple underpass (Figures 4.17).

Figure 4.17
Gerda Dunckel YouTube Video.
Z-458, Enhanced and Enlarged:
Limousine Occupants,
Just Before the Triple Overpass

A few frames later, Dunckel enhanced and enlarged Z-456 to show the gaping wound at the right rear of JFK’s head (Figure 4.18).

Figure 4.18
Gerda Dunckel YouTube Video.
Z-456, Enhanced and Enlarged:
Exit Wound at Right Rear of JFK’s Head,
Just Before the Triple Overpass

[1] CT = Computed Tomography. The reference is to Second Lt. Aaron M. Jackson, USA, et. al., “Keyhole Fracture of the Skull,” Military Medicine Radiology Corner, vol. 173 (December 2008): 1, https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA528579.pdf.

To illustrate a keyhole fracture, Chesser referenced the 2000 Journal of Forensic Sciences (Figure 4.1).

[2] D.S. Dixon, “Exit keyhole lesion and direction of fire in a gunshot wound of the skull,” Journal of Forensic Sciences 29, no. 1, (January 1, 1984): 336-339, https://europepmc.org/article/med/6699601.

[3] Email from Don Curtis to Mike Chesser, May 19, 2019.

[4] Joseph McBride, Into the Nightmare: My Search for the Killers of President John F. Kennedy and Officer J. D. Tippit (Berkeley, CA: Hightower Press, 2013), pp. 556-568, at p. 556.

[5] A. H. Belmont to Mr. Tolson, FBI memorandum, November 22, 1963, in Inside the ARRB, ed. Douglas Horne, Mary Ferrell Foundation, “Appendix 14: Two controversial FBI documents from November 22, 1963, pertaining to bullets,” https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=145280#relPageId=75.

[6] Joseph McBride, Into the Nightmare, op. cit., p. 556.

[7] Ibid. A subsequent chapter will introduce multiple, mostly intact, bullets into this case, so it is problematic for normal human beings to identify an authentic Magic Bullet. On the contrary, Specter found this to be trivial—he simply ignored all the other bullets. Life is painless when evidence can be disregarded without penalty.

[8] Ibid.

[9] Richard B. Trask, Pictures of the Pain: Photography and the Assassination of President Kennedy (Danvers, MA: Yeoman Press, 1994), pp. 167-182, at p. 171. Trask commented: “Later government research placed this photograph as being taken at about the same time as Zapruder frame #Z202.”

[10] Josiah Thompson, Six Seconds in Dallas, op. cit., p. 102. Thompson taped this interview with Sitzman on November 19, 1966.

[11] Douglas Horne, Inside the ARRB, vol. 4, op. cit., pp. 1138-1139.

[12] Ibid., p. 1139.

[13] Josiah Thompson, Six Seconds in Dallas, op. cit., p. 103-104, at p. 103.

[14] Ibid.

[15] Ibid., p. 104. Emphasis in original.

[16] Mark Lane, Rush to Judgment: A Critique of the Warren Commission’s Inquiry into the Murders of President John F. Kennedy, Officer J. D. Tippit and Lee Harvey Oswald (New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1996), p. 56.

[17] Ibid., p. 56.

[18] Ibid.

[19] Douglas Horne, Inside the ARRB, op. cit., vol. 4, p. 1142.

[20] “Testimony of B. J. Martin,” Hearings before the President’s Commission on the Assassination of President Kennedy, vol. 4, op. cit., pp. 289-293, at p. 290.

[21] Ibid., p. 292.

[22] Ibid.

[23] “Testimony of Bobby W. Hargis,” Hearings before the President’s Commission on the Assassination of President Kennedy, vol. 6, op. cit., pp. 293-296. at p. 294.

[24] Douglas Horne, Inside the ARRB, op. cit., vol. 4, pp. 1142.

[25] Ibid.

[26] Testimony of Bobby W. Hargis,” op. cit., pp. 294-295.

[27] Richard B. Trask, Pictures of the Pain, op. cit., pp. 207-209, at p. 208.

[28] “Testimony of Marrion L. Baker,” Hearings before the President’s Commission on the Assassination of President Kennedy, vol. 3, op. cit., pp. 242-270, at p. 266.

[29] Josiah Thompson, Six Seconds in Dallas, op. cit., footnote 7, pp. 112-113.

[30] “Testimony of Marrion L. Baker,” op. cit., pp. 264-265.

[31] Ibid., p. 265.

[32] Ibid.

[33] However, this temple bullet may well have produced fragments that were visible on the original X-ray films. Several autopsy witnesses support this possibility. It is also striking that the pathologists reported precisely such a trail in their official autopsy report. Their mysterious lower trail is often overlooked, but perhaps it was originally authentic. It is obviously not there now.

[34] Douglas Horne, Inside the ARRB, op. cit., vol. 4, p. 1140.

[35] “Statement of Special Agent Clinton J. Hill, dated Nov. 30, 1963,” in Hearings before the President’s Commission on the Assassination of President Kennedy, CE 1024, op. cit., vol. 18, pp. 740-745, at p. 742.

[36] Ibid.

[37] “Testimony of Clinton J. Hill, Special Agent, Secret Service,” Hearings before the President’s Commission on the Assassination of President Kennedy, op. cit., vol. 2, pp. 132-144, at p. 141.

[38] Ibid., p. 140.

[39] James H. Fetzer, “Who’s telling the truth: Clint Hill or the Zapruder film?” The Education Forum, January 12, 2011, https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/17242-whos-telling-the-truth-clint-hill-or-the-zapruder-film/.

Also see: Warwick’s Books, “Warwick’s Books Presents The Kennedy Detail: JFK’s Secret Service Agents,” December 14, 2010, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYpY8zI_wwA&t=1482s.

[40] Clint Hill with Lisa McCubbin, Mrs. Kennedy and Me (New York: Gallery Books, 2012), p. 290.

[41] Gerald Blaine and Lisa McCubbin, The Kennedy Detail: JFK’s Secret Service Agents Break Their Silence (New York: Gallery Books, 2010), p. 216.

[42] GerdaDunckel, “Dead JFK rising from his seat …(?)” January 9, 2012, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lDCJ3Ndvz9M.

The post Exclusive: The Shot from the Front that Hit JFK’s Right Temporal Bone by His Ear, Creating a Massive Blow-out Wound in the Occipital Bone at the Right Back of JFK’s Head-Excerpt From the Latest Book by Jerome Corsi and David Mantik appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Innocent Jan 6er to Stand Trial for Defending Himself with Bull Horn from Gang Banger with Brass Knuckles

This article originally appeared on JoeHoft.com and was republished with permission and edited by The Gateway Pundit.

A Corrupt Orange County judge pushed forward a case where an innocent man defended himself with a bull horn from a gang banger with brass knuckles.  The innocent man is being charged for defending himself. 

Kim Sorgente attended a pro-Trump rally on December 6, 2020, in Orange County.  The event ended when gang bangers attacked the crowd and one man with brass knuckles attacked Sorgente. Sorgente is now facing charges for defending himself and the government’s star witness is the gang banger with brass knuckles who is currently on the run.

This entire incident, including a video of the event, was reported previously.  At that time, Judge Michael Murray was overseeing the case.  He somehow was removed from the case.

EXCLUSIVE: Corrupt Judge Is Abusing Jan 6 Defendant Kim Sorgente in Case Where Gang Banger Accuser Is a Fugitive

Sorgente was attacked by this gang banger with brass knuckles who has since gone AWOL.

The man above attacking Sorgente has a record. Trinidad Fernando Molina reportedly has pending charges for gang-related vandalism, use of brass knuckles, and driving on a revoked license.

Molina walks free but Sorgente is facing charges.

Last week corrupt Judge Robert Knox ordered that Sorgente stand trial.  The liberal Orange County Register reported:

A 53-year-old man already facing charges related to the Jan. 6 Capitol riot was ordered on Friday, March 29 to stand trial on charges of assaulting two people at a “Stop the Steal” rally and counterprotest outside Santa Ana College three years ago.

Kim Michael Sorgente was bound over for trial following a preliminary hearing by Orange County Superior Court Judge Robert Knox.

Sorgente, who is representing himself, argued he was acting in self-defense when he allegedly slammed a megaphone over the head of one man at the Dec. 6, 2020, protest. Sorgente, who says he lived in his car, has listed Dublin, California, as his mailing address.

Sorgente attempted to have the alleged victim in the case — Trinidad Molina — subpoenaed to testify at the preliminary hearing. During a March 22, Knox was skeptical of the relevance of Sorgente’s claims that Molina had “aggressively come at me brandishing brass knuckles and a knife.” Sorgente is accused of hitting Molina in the head with a bullhorn.

Knox said assuming Sorgente was accurate in his description, “How would that be relevant to self-defense? … I don’t see anyone with a weapon coming at you before you hit someone over the head with a megaphone. … Whatever happened down the street is not relevant.”

Sorgente is scheduled to be arraigned in the Santa Ana case on April 9.

This is another awful case of judicial abuse.  Video shows that Sorgente was attacked but the corrupt prosecutor and judge are working to have him thrown in prison.  This is not America.

To receive new posts and support Joe Hoft’s work, please visit JoeHoft.com.

The post Innocent Jan 6er to Stand Trial for Defending Himself with Bull Horn from Gang Banger with Brass Knuckles appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Underlying Accounting Activities in DA Bragg Case Are Not Crimes – There Are No Crimes, Not Even Adjusting Entries!

This article originally appeared on JoeHoft.com and was republished with permission and edited by The Gateway Pundit.

The case against President Trump in New York is based on accounting activities that are not crimes.  They aren’t even adjusting entries. 

At one point in my corporate career, I oversaw the financial reporting of multimillion and billion-dollar blocks of business for a US Fortune 500 corporation.  I also served as an international corporate executive in Hong Kong.  

In Manhattan DA Bragg’s case against President Trump there are no crimes.  Adjusting entries aren’t even required.

The Bragg case is based on accounting activities that the state of New York says are crimes.  As you will see below, these activities are not crimes and they don’t even make sense.

Corrupt Soros-backed DA in Manhattan, Alvin Bragg, and the Trump-hating gang of former Obama White House and Biden DOJ members like Mike Colangelo, dropped a BS indictment against President Trump in April 2023.

Below is the indictment:

Here are reasons why the indictment is totally false – no crimes exist.

1. The indictment is BS for many reasons but one of the major reasons surrounds the timing of the activities claimed to be crimes in the indictment.

The activities for which President Trump is charged all occurred after President Trump handed his multi-billion dollar organization over to the control of his sons.

President Trump Shares Joe Hoft Article on Truth Social – The Timing of Events in Soros-Backed DA Bragg Indictment of President Trump Invalidates the Entire Case

President Trump was not running his companies at the time of these events.  He had handed over control of these operations to his sons.

2. None of these activities are crimes in the first place, which is why Bragg never lists any crimes.

What a crock.

The indictment doesn’t even say what the crimes are because there are none.  (Note that Twitter will not allow me to embed this tweet).

3. Even if President Trump was running his companies at the time that these accounting entries were reportedly performed, he almost certainly had nothing to do with them in the first place.

I base this on my own experience overseeing the financial reporting for a billion-dollar block of business.  I never discussed any accounting entries with the company’s CEO.  As a matter of fact, I never made entries into the ledger myself.  I had hundreds of individuals around the globe who made entries.  Making entries was their job not mine.

The post Underlying Accounting Activities in DA Bragg Case Are Not Crimes – There Are No Crimes, Not Even Adjusting Entries! appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Screenshot:

Children’s Health Defense Supports the Motion Against U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Alleging Fraud in Omnibus Autism Proceeding

Children’s Health Defense (CHD) Senior Staff Attorney Rolf Hazlehurst filed a motion in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims alleging that the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), representing the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), committed fraud in its representation of HHS in the Omnibus Autism Proceeding (OAP) in the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (NVICP).

The OAP was established to consolidate and adjudicate the approximately 5,400 claims filed on behalf of children who regressed into autism following vaccination.

In 2003, Hazlehurst filed a claim in the program on behalf of his son Yates, diagnosed with autism after suffering adverse reactions following routine childhood vaccines. Hazlehurst’s claim was one of six original “test cases” in 2007 that would decide the fate of all the other claims in the OAP.

According to the newly filed motion, the DOJ attorneys engaged in a series of acts of fraud upon the courts, beginning in the NVICP and ultimately impacting the Supreme Court of the United States.

In the NVICP, DOJ attorneys concealed from the special masters and petitioners that the government’s top expert witness, a world-renowned pediatric neurologist, revised his opinion on whether vaccines can cause autism.

The expert explained to the DOJ attorneys that vaccines can cause autism in a subset of children. The witness had been scheduled to testify in the first test case in the OAP.

However, the DOJ abruptly dismissed him as a witness once they learned of his clarification. Without the witness’s knowledge, DOJ attorneys repeatedly misrepresented his prior case-specific written opinion in the OAP to argue there is no scientific basis that vaccines cause autism.

Ultimately, all of the 5,400 OAP claims were dismissed, leaving vaccine-injured children and their families with no recourse.

“The DOJ’s first act of fraud upon the court snowballed into a massive scheme of deception with far-reaching implications. Their fraudulent scheme denied justice to Yates and the thousands of other children in the OAP,” said Hazlehurst.

“By hiding that their own expert’s opinion had changed to favor Yates and other children in the OAP, the DOJ effectively closed the NVICP’s doors to the injured children with similar claims who have followed.”

“Watching my child regress into autism due to vaccine injury was horrible for me, my family and our son,” said CHD Executive Vice President Laura Bono. “Learning that his claim in vaccine court was fraudulently dismissed literally added insult to injury.

The injustice to the thousands of children in the OAP and those who have been injured since — along with their suffering families — cannot be overstated. Our government needs to finally step up to the plate, tell the truth about what happened to these vaccine-injured children, and dismantle a rogue system that answers to Pharma instead of to the children it’s supposed to protect.”

The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 (“Vaccine Act”) took away parents’ ability to sue vaccine manufacturers for death or injuries to their children following vaccination.

Instead, they must pursue compensation from HHS through the NVICP. Opponents of the compensation program say that it is a one-sided disaster, pitting hard-working and law-abiding parents and their children against a government-adjudicated and well-funded system of attorneys where the children are denied their Seventh Amendment rights of a trial by jury and basic rules of evidence and discovery available in state and federal courts.

“Vaccine makers walk away with billions in profits with no liability for dangerous products, which is bad enough,” said CHD General Counsel Kim Mack Rosenberg.

“But today’s motion goes even further, alleging fraud on the part of government lawyers. Instead of seeking the truth and following the path wherever it led, the government marginalized and ignored witnesses in order to push the ‘vaccines don’t cause autism’ narrative.”

Hazlehurst seeks relief from the Court, including challenging the constitutionality of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 and the validity of the judgment against Yates and the entire OAP. He also asks the Court for further discovery and a hearing.

The post Children’s Health Defense Supports the Motion Against U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Alleging Fraud in Omnibus Autism Proceeding appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Compassionately Communicating Life

This story originally was published by Real Clear Wire

By Kristi Noem
Real Clear Wire

In 2022, the pro-life movement experienced a massive victory: For the first time in 50 years, the Supreme Court returned decision-making about abortion back to the states – to the people.

Immediately after, the left and their allies in the media eagerly continued their half-century-long disinformation campaign to confuse the American people about what the ruling actually meant. Democrats lied to the American people that abortion had now been banned entirely, that mothers receiving abortions would be prosecuted, or that back-alley abortions would suddenly become the norm.

None of that is true.

And in this election cycle, Democrats will once again purposefully deceive the American people on this issue. We cannot allow these blatant lies to spread and must talk about life issues with truth, compassion, and hope.

Every pregnancy involves two lives: a mom and an unborn baby. As South Dakota’s largest healthcare provider testified to our state legislature this past February, “We recognize that each time a mother walks through our doors, we’ve been entrusted with the health of two patients: the mother and the child.”

In my state, we showed moms we are here to help them – that they are never alone. We expanded Paid Family Leave access for state employees; provided pregnancy counseling, resources, and tips on parenting; pointed moms and families towards available financial assistance; and even offered help on adopting a child or giving a child up for adoption. We created Bright Start to match first-time moms to available nursing services during pregnancy and up until their child’s second birthday.

There’s more to do, but South Dakota stepped up and protected mothers and their babies with significant policy prescriptions designed to address many concerns. I’m a pro-life governor, and I’m proud of what we’ve done in my state. But what we support in South Dakota may not have support in South Carolina. That’s what the Supreme Court decision actually did – turn those issues back to the people in each state so they can decide.

I realize many in my own party don’t want to talk about this issue. However, the national conversation about abortion will only increase as we approach the November elections. Republicans should not and cannot be afraid to defend our position to protect mothers and their babies, expose lies from the left, and go on offense to expose the radical left’s extreme position on abortion.

The radical left claims “abortion access is being restricted,” but more abortions took place in 2023 after the Supreme Court decision than in the years prior. The left says pro-life laws will lead to higher maternal mortality, but maternal mortality actually dropped by 60% in South Dakota in the first full year after the Court’s ruling. We have to expose that every Democrat in the U.S. Senate voted to allow abortion at any time, for any reason, right up until the moment of birth, and they demanded that you pay for it. Polling by Rasmussen shows a vast majority, 86% of the American people, reject the Democratic Party’s position.

A majority of the people clearly agree with us on this issue and many others facing America.

It’s bad enough that Democrats can’t define what a “woman” is – they also continue to belittle us by portraying women as single-issue voters who only care about abortion. The fact is only 16% of women in Michigan – a key swing state in the upcoming election – are single-issue abortion voters. While abortion will undoubtedly be an issue in the 2024 elections, polls show women care more about how illegal immigration is making them less safe in their communities, how persistent high gas and food prices cause them to struggle to take care of their families, and how America’s decline on the world stage will shape their kids’ future.

Simply put, the America First Conservative policies are proven to be successful – and represent the best hope for a healthy, happy, and prosperous life for Americans who are born and unborn. This is the fight, and if we’re going to win hearts and minds, we can’t be afraid to enter the ring.

The post Compassionately Communicating Life appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Bill Gates Sponsoring Lessons in How to Cleanse Math of ‘White Supremacy’

This article originally appeared on WND.com

Guest by post by Bob Unruh 

Americans can thank Bill Gates and his foundation for school lessons that teach that there is “white supremacy” in mathematics lessons across the country, that those create “systemic barriers to equity for black, Latinx and multilingual students,” and that the solution is, in fact, “antiracist math education.”

And for that, teachers must examine “the ways in which they perpetuate white supremacy culture in their own classrooms.”

A report from the Washington Examiner notes the lessons come from a plan called “A Pathway to Equitable Math Instruction,” which is promoted online.

“The Pathway offers guidance and resources for educators to use now as they plan their curriculum, while also offering opportunities for ongoing self-reflection as they seek to develop an anti-racist math practice. The toolkit ‘strides’ serve as multiple on-ramps for educators as they navigate the individual and collective journey from equity to anti-racism,” the programming intended for children explains.

And the Examiners notes that the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation “is the only donor listed on a website for a group dedicated to eliminating racism from the nation’s math curriculum, which would be accomplished, in part, by eliminating the need for students to show their work after solving a math problem.”

Condemned in the lessons are the “focus” that insists students get the “right” answer and requiring students to “show their work.”

“White supremacy culture infiltrates math classrooms in everyday teacher actions,” the lessons charge. “Coupled with the beliefs that underlie these actions, they perpetuate educational harm on black, Latinx, and multilingual students, denying them full access to the world of mathematics.”

The lessons inform faculty, “Antiracist math educators deconstruct the ways they have been taught math to learn and teach math differently.”

Subtopics include “ethnomathematics,” “thoughtful scaffolding” and having students “reclaim their mathematical ancestry.”

Also important, it explains, is using math as “resistance,” and that includes teaching “students of color” to “disrupt the disproportionate push-out of people of color” in math and STEM fields.

Copyright 2024 WND News Center

The post Bill Gates Sponsoring Lessons in How to Cleanse Math of ‘White Supremacy’ appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

(unsplash)

Taxpayers Burned by State’s Anti-Christian ‘Non-Discrimination’ Agenda

This article originally appeared on WND.com

Guest by post by Bob Unruh 

Payment required for failed attack on web designer to be determined

Taxpayers in the state of Colorado are getting burned by the leftist agenda, pursued by Democrat Gov. Jared Polis and a Democrat-run legislature, to attack Christians with a so-called “non-discrimination” agenda that actually discriminates against people of faith.

A judge has ruled that the plaintiffs in the 303 Creative lawsuit that was decided recently by the Supreme Court are entitled to costs and attorneys’ fees, and they have 90 days to submit a motion to the court for approval.

Such cases, by the time they are all the way through the high court, can accumulate tens, or even hundreds, of thousands of dollars in lawyers’ time and costs.

The leftist state’s failed attack was on Lorie Smith and her 303 Creative company, through which she intended to create websites for couples being married.

However, the state demanded that should she begin that service, she also must provide the same services to same-sex duos, in violation of her Christian faith.

She sued for the First Amendment violation demanded by the state, and won.

The ADF, which worked on her case, explained the case background: “Lorie Smith is an artist who runs her own design studio, 303 Creative. She specializes in graphic and website design and loves to visually convey messages in every site she creates. Lorie started her own small business in 2012 so she could promote causes consistent with her beliefs and close to her heart, such as supporting children with disabilities, the beauty of marriage, overseas missions, animal shelters, and veterans. She was excited to expand her portfolio to create custom websites that celebrate marriage between a man and a woman, but Colorado made clear she wasn’t welcome in that space. A Colorado law censored what Lorie wanted to say and required her to create designs that violate her beliefs about marriage. Lorie works with people from all walks of life, including those who identify as LGBT. Lorie’s decisions about which projects to design are always based on what message she’s being asked to express, never who requests it. After realizing that Colorado was censoring her—and seeing Colorado use this same law to punish Masterpiece Cakeshop owner Jack Phillips—Lorie challenged the law to protect free speech.”

The state of Colorado lost that case against Jack Phillips and his Masterpiece Cakeshop, too. There, the Supreme Court based its decision on the state’s “hostility” to Christianity.

Now a report from the Volokh Conspiracy explains that the case was moved down from the Supreme Court to the 10th Circuit Court, and from there down to Judge Philip Brimmer in district court.

His order ruled that the plaintiffs are “the prevailing parties” in the case and that means they “are entitled to recover their reasonable attorneys’ fees, costs, and expenses for work related to litigation before the district court.”

He also ruled that the First Amendment prohibits the anti-Christian activists in the state from enforcing their “Accommodations Clause” of the state’s discriminatory “Anti-Discrimination Act.”

Brimmer also ruled that the First Amendment bans Colorado from enforcing that law’s “Communications Clause,” which banned Smith even from stating her Christian beliefs.

That means Smith has permission now to post online the statement:

“I firmly believe that God is calling me to this work. Why? I am personally convicted that He wants me – during these uncertain times for those who believe in biblical marriage – to shine His light and not stay silent. He is calling me to stand up for my faith, to explain His true story about marriage, and to use the talents and business He gave me to publicly proclaim and celebrate His design for marriage as a life-long union between one man and one woman.

“These same religious convictions that motivate me also prevent me from creating websites promoting and celebrating ideas or messages that violate my beliefs. So I will not be able to create websites for same-sex marriages or any other marriage that is not between one man and one woman. Doing that would compromise my Christian witness and tell a story about marriage that contradicts God’s true story of marriage – the very story He is calling me to promote.”

Brimmer’s order also ruled that Colorado’s “defendants, their officers, agents, servants, employees, attorneys, and those acting in active concert or participation with them who receive actual notice of this order are permanently enjoined from enforcing” those discriminatory state provisions.

It was the Daily Caller News Foundation that pointed out the ruling was having a ripple effect immediately.

Because of the 303 Creative decision, a government attack on a Christian wedding photographer was dropped. And it is expected that the ruling will impace the case when the latest attack on Jack Phillips, from a lawyer demanding he violate his faith, reaches the Colorado Supreme Court.

Copyright 2024 WND News Center

The post Taxpayers Burned by State’s Anti-Christian ‘Non-Discrimination’ Agenda appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Lorie Smith

Fulton County (GA) Elections Board Supervisor Voted Against Certifying 2020 Election Because Signature Verifications Were NOT Performed on 147,000 Ballots! (VIDEO)

This article originally appeared on JoeHoft.com and was republished with permission and edited by The Gateway Pundit.

How could this ever happen in America?

A Fulton County, Georgia Elections Board member voted not to certify the 2020 Election results in the county because signature verifications were not performed.

The lying left and Corrupt Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger hid the fact that signature verifications were not performed in Fulton County (where Atlanta is located) on 147,000 ballots in the 2020 Election, yet they certified a Joe Biden “win” by 12,000 votes.

Per Kanekoa The Great on Twitter/X:

Mark Wingate, a Fulton County Elections Board member, testifies that he voted against certifying the 2020 election because the county did not verify the signatures on 147,000 mail-in ballots.

“I asked what did we do for signature verification? And the comment I got back frankly floored me, ‘We didn’t do any.'”

Additionally, the county could not provide any chain of custody documentation or surveillance footage for mail-in ballots or ballot drop boxes.

“I and other board members had requested that we obtain the chain of custody documentation from the department and none of that was ever delivered.”

“There was never any surveillance tape, an inch of footage delivered to the board.”

He also says there were problems with the voter registration rolls that still exist in Fulton County.

Wingate’s testimony was part of the disbarment hearing for Former United States Assistant Attorney General Jeffrey Clark, who is among the 19 defendants facing various charges, including racketeering, by Fani Willis for investigating the 2020 election in Fulton County.

See that tweet below:

NEW: Mark Wingate, a Fulton County Elections Board member, testifies that he voted against certifying the 2020 election because the county did not verify the signatures on 147,000 mail-in ballots.

“I asked what did we do for signature verification? And the comment I got back… pic.twitter.com/pLeoT7WbZ4

— KanekoaTheGreat (@KanekoaTheGreat) April 2, 2024

JoeHoft.com previously reported that at least 148,000 ballots were questioned in Fulton County following the 2020 Election. These ballots were identified as without creases (indicating they were never received in an envelope in the mail) and had several other issues as well.

The ballots have been hung up in the courts since the 2020 Election.

Georgia Courts Continue to Slow Walk 2020 Election Case Regarding 150,000 Reportedly Fraudulent Ballots

Rasmussen Reports shared an affidavit where an individual in Georgia claimed that NO SIGNATURE VERIFICATION was performed for 148,000 ballots in Georgia in the 2020 Election.

Good Morning !

Georgia 2020: Court testimony below (from the REAL Fani Willis RICO case) and this sworn affidavit indicate NO SIGNATURE VERIFICATION was done for 148,000 mail-in ballots. https://t.co/0jMPiwouSm

Joe Biden didn’t ‘win’ Georgia in Nov 2020 https://t.co/vN2qCUsgP9 pic.twitter.com/bTFqtrzkqh

— Rasmussen Reports (@Rasmussen_Poll) March 6, 2024

This information was backed up by CannCon, who shared the video from a recent court case in Georgia where the Fulton County employees claimed that they didn’t use the system put in place to verify signatures on the envelopes that mail-in ballots were received in.

The county, therefore, did not use voter signature records to verify signatures on these envelopes.

It will take forever to check these.

The judge realizes the election in Georgia in 2020 never should have been certified.

Georgia:
We have an electronic verification system, but we didn’t use it.
We have records of voter signatures, but we didn’t use them.
We could check our records for you, but it would take forever.
Aside from that, judge, is there anything else you’d like? https://t.co/s7tgfeXYNU

— Rasmussen Reports (@Rasmussen_Poll) March 2, 2024

Every day we find more information on the stolen 2020 Election. It should never have been certified. President Trump and others are being sued for claiming that the 2020 Election in Georgia was corrupt and stolen.  They were right.

To receive new posts and support Joe Hoft’s work, please visit JoeHoft.com.

The post Fulton County (GA) Elections Board Supervisor Voted Against Certifying 2020 Election Because Signature Verifications Were NOT Performed on 147,000 Ballots! (VIDEO) appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

BREAKING: Citizens Groups Suing to Demand Laws Are Enforced Resulting in Honest Elections

This article originally appeared on JoeHoft.com and was republished with permission and edited by The Gateway Pundit.

Citizen Groups Stepping Up to Demand Honest Elections by Jack Gleason

Political contests, often called “races,” are refereed by election officials who are required to follow very specific federal and state laws. As government has become an ever-increasing force in our daily lives, the results make a huge difference at the local, state and national level.

What will your child be taught in school? Will your state encourage or deny abortion? Will Congress enact laws to raise your taxes? Will the president get us into a war, or try to tell you which kind of car you must drive?

When the irregularities of the 2020 election were ignored by the justice system and the media, average citizens came forward to figure out what might have happened.

New York

In upstate New York, Marly Hornik, a homeschool mom, teamed up with election and cybersecurity expert Harry Haury, and formed New York Citizens Audit to investigate their state voter roll database.

They released peer-reviewed statistical reports that exposed alarming errors in the data for 2020 and 2022. Among their findings for 2022…

1,467,399 illegal duplicate registrations with 449,856 votes cast.

16,623 votes cast by voters with a blank address.

35,312 more votes counted than voters who voted – an impossibility in a properly conducted election.

They founded a nationwide group, United Sovereign Americans, (USA) to share their legal and statistics expertise with over 25 state groups investigating their own databases.

The organization is 100% non-partisan. In elections where Republicans win, the Democrats have suspected foul play, and vice versa. BOTH sides need to be certain that election results are fair and honest.

In a recent interview on Red Pill News with Zak Paine, Hornik explained the necessity of impartial election officials…

“…the only job of an election official is to follow the law. Why? You have an election system that is inherently a zero-trust system. You have naturally adversarial parties, they have no reason to trust each other, and they actually have quite a lot of reasons not to trust each other. And they have all these supporters, they have donors, there’s this whole machine backing each one of these adversaries.

So how is it, that at the end of the day, we maintain domestic tranquility, we maintain continuity of government, and everybody hears the election result and goes home in peace? That’s because the election official has to walk a tightrope between those two adversaries.

That tightrope is the exact procedures required by law for the administration of the election that everyone will end up feeling is fair, and believing in and trusting as fair. If they step off that tightrope, the Supreme Court says there’s only one reason.”

Paine: “Fraud.”

“That’s it, why else would you take all those risks, why would you disrupt the harmony of a nation?”

Without media or congressional action on election validity, citizen groups like the USA are now the only way to demand that elections follow established federal law.

Illinois

USA groups from other states have been completing their analyses – the results are just as alarming as those found in New York. In Illinois, the team found…

Over 300,000 votes from the 2020 election missing or improperly deleted from the Illinois voter data.

Over a four-year period, Illinois population decreased by 150,000, while the voter roll increased by 650,000.

Over 2.5 million people had votes cast prior to their registration dates.

They also conducted an informal study of Illinois voting history with over 1,300 Illinois residents across the state and uncovered over 57% irregularities, including votes cast when the voter did not vote, votes missing when they did vote, voters registered and voting at addresses where they did not live.

Most shockingly, 11% of the voters they interviewed had votes cast in their name for elections they did not participate in.

Ohio

In Ohio, the Ohio team found in the database the day after the 2022 certification…

158,209 voters resided in an apartment or in a mobile home lot but had no unit number as required on their voter registration application. This means mail-in ballots would be undeliverable.

4,143 were older than the oldest person in the US at the time or were too young to legally register.

6,348 had a date of birth that was different in 2022 than it was in 2020.

539,400 voters supposedly registered on days when Ohio boards of elections and state offices are closed.

120,094 had registration dates in the 2022 state voter file changed.

243,583 had state identification numbers that had changed.

34,233 had 2 to 5 registration records with multiple state identification numbers, making it possible for them to vote more than once.

Maryland

On February 27, 2024, United Sovereign Americans joined with Maryland Election Integrity, LLC, in filing a lawsuit in Maryland Federal Court against the Maryland State Board of Elections.

The suit cites multiple federal laws regarding election conduct, including Article 1, Section 2, of the U.S. Constitution, Sections 1 & 2 of the Fourteenth Amendment, the National Voter Registration Act, and the Help America Vote Act.

They allege…

79,392 current apparent registration violations.

1,699 duplicate registrations.

3,366 instances of active registrations without a certified U.S. Post Office mailing address.

5,680 instances of active registrants who moved at least 4 years ago.

605 instances of registrations with no residential address.

296 instances of active registrants with a nonstandard address.

1,218 instances of active registrants who are deceased.

883 instances of “age discrepant registration” (younger than 18 or older than 115).

They seek an injunction forcing the Maryland State Board of Elections to keep accurate voter rolls and enjoining them from certifying any future elections unless voter rolls are updated, registration records are corrected, and the entire voting process is reformed to follow all applicable federal and state laws. They also seek the decertification of the electronic voting system currently in use.

Finally, they ask the court to establish a Special Master to guide the Maryland State Board of Elections, among other things, to ensure changes are implemented prior to the November 2024 election to verify voters are U.S. citizens and the ballot custody process is corrected and auditable.

More State Reports Coming

More state reports are forthcoming and confirm that these issues are substantial and pervasive across the entire country. They involve millions of database errors that can lead to absentee ballots being mailed to undeliverable addresses, only to be picked up by postal workers or nearby residents and filled out and submitted with minimal or zero signature verification. A recent Rasmussen poll revealed that 20% of Americans have filled out a ballot for someone else or voted more than once.

Most local and state Boards of Elections seem unwilling to clean up their data and unafraid of any legal repercussions for failing to follow multiple federal laws that require very specific standards. Improperly certifying an election is perjury and a serious federal crime.

USA will be filing more lawsuits in multiple states and, if the rulings conflict, the Supreme Court will be required to take up the issue.

This strategy is the surest and fastest way to force changes prior to the 2024 election.

**You can help:

The group United Sovereign Americans has completed millions of dollars worth of meticulous research and is now asking for contributions, large and small, for the funds needed to file in multiple states.

To receive new posts and support Joe Hoft’s work, please visit JoeHoft.com.

The post BREAKING: Citizens Groups Suing to Demand Laws Are Enforced Resulting in Honest Elections appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

38 Chaplains Ask Supremes to Stop U.S. Military from Punishing Faith

This article originally appeared on WND.com

Guest by post by Bob Unruh 

‘Department of Defense is hostile to religion’

Dozens of U.S. military chaplains have joined together to challenge what a report in the Federalist describes as the military’s decision to “punish” their faith.

The case, Alvarado v. Austin, how is pending before U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts and concerns the decision by the Department of Defense to continue defying the 2023 National Defense Authorization Act that rescinded the military’s COVID shot mandate.

“The DOD continues to violate the law by failing to rescind its punishments of conscientious objectors such as denied training and deployments required for promotions,” the report explains the petition charges.

“In addition, of course, denying soldiers’ religious exercise violates the First Amendment’s guarantee that all Americans can freely exercise their faith in their everyday lives,” the report said.

Their problem is that abortion component that is deeply embedded in the COVID shot regime.

Many are tested using cells from the kidneys of a baby girl likely aborted many years ago, but whose body parts were used to create a line of cells that scientists have maintained for decades.

Scientists call the girl HEK 293, for “human embryonic kidney” and the individual experiment in a series.

The Federalist notes that COVID-19 vaccines were tested on cells made from HEK 293’s kidney, and some of the shots have HEK 203 cells inside that.

For that, among other reasons, the report explains, Capt. Rob Nelson, an Air Force chaplain, couldn’t accept those treatments despite massive pressure from the military.

He told the Federalist, “I have five [children], and it breaks my heart to think of this. This girl continues to be violated as her cells are replicated over and over again.”

There are 38 military chaplains who have a petition pending that charges the DoD is violating the NDAA law rescinding shot requirements.

Army Col. Brad Lewis, part of the coalition, told the Federalist the chaplains believe military members “have a right to believe what they believe and no one can say otherwise. It’s the same reason we can’t have a religious test for federal positions. As a chaplain, my job is to make sure the free exercise of religion is allowed, that nobody infringes upon that inalienable right.”

The plaintiffs charge that while there are procedures to allow for the religious rights of Norse pagans, turban-wearing Sikhs, kosher Jews and more, the military has refused virtually all requests for shot waivers.

The Department of Defense, under the radically pro-abortion Joe Biden, told the high court it has stopped punishments imposed “solely” for conscientious objectors to vaccines, the report said.

And it claims the shot demands have stopped, so there essentially is no case.

Lewis disagreed, telling the publication, “By denying religious exemptions, what the military has done is set about the removal of people who are willing to stand on conviction.”

His rejection of the experimental shots triggered a retaliation, in that the military left him with no orders on his graduation from the War College, sentencing him to 11 months in student housing without an assignment.

“My career was ended by those 11 months of unrated time,” Lewis charged.

With the military’s refusal to allow him to “use his high-level, taxpayer-provided War College training,” he’s now filed for retirement.

To the Federalist, Army spokeswoman Heather Hagan said, “The Army does not comment on ongoing litigation.”

The shot objectors also have cited, besides the integral component abortion provides in the shots, concerns about “damaging human health and reproductive capacity, ignoring natural immunity, the ethics of allegedly emergency decrees, the lack of informed consent, and heavy-handed manipulation tactics that include refusing to acknowledge any potentially legitimate conscience objections to the shots whatsoever,” the report said.

The report also documented how the military would pressure chaplains, claiming prominent religious leaders supported the shots and mandates.

“The Department of Defense is hostile to religion,” Art Schulcz, the lawyer for the chaplains, told the Federalist.

Copyright 2024 WND News Center

The post 38 Chaplains Ask Supremes to Stop U.S. Military from Punishing Faith appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Peter Sweden: IT HAS BEGUN: Italy Investigating Covid Vaccine Death

This article was written by Swedish independent journalist Peter Imanuelsen, also known as PeterSweden. You can follow him at PeterSweden.com.

Five doctors and medical staff are under investigation after a student died following her Covid vaccination.

Is accountability happening after all?

The Italian public prosecutor put five doctors and medical staff under investigation after an 18 year old girl died after receiving the AstraZeneca covid vaccine.

The student went to an “open day” event near Genoa in Italy on the 25th of May where she got vaccinated. She died shortly afterwards on the 18th of June in 2021.

In the autopsy they found that she did not have any previous medical conditions and she had not taken any medication. They concluded that it was likely that she died from blood clots as a result of getting the covid vaccine.

And now the doctors are under investigation.

Her death sparked outrage in Italy because it was already well known by then that the AstraZeneca covid vaccine could cause blood clots, yet she got the shot anyway.

Already in March, Italy had stopped the AstraZeneca vaccines over concerns of blood clotting side effects, but they resumed the use of them in May with the recommendation that is “preferably” should be used for people aged over 60.

But, the government in Italy at the time was pushing to get as many people vaccinated as possible.

So some Italian regions had so called “open day” events where they gave the AstraZeneca vaccine to anyone over 18, which is where this girl got her shot and later died.

The reason that they held these events might shock you.

It was aimed at preventing AstraZeneca doses from going to waste after many people very understandably cancelled their vaccination appointments after reports of the blood clot side effects came out.

Was it all about the money?

So let’s summarize what happened.

1. It became known that the AstraZeneca vaccine caused blood clots.
2. People didn’t want the shots anymore and cancelled their appointments.
3. The government didn’t want to waster vaccines so they held “open day” events to give the vaccines to people anyway.
4. This 18 year old girl died from blood clots after getting the shot at one of these “open day” events.
5. Five doctors and medical staff were put under investigation by the public prosecutor because of her death. 

It is clear that the whole covid circus with the vaccines was a lie. We were told these shots were safe and effective, but they were neither safe nor effective. People died.

Will we finally begin to see some accountability now?

Independent journalist Peter Imanuelsen has dedicated years to reporting the things the mainstream media ignores. You can follow him at https://petersweden.com/

The post Peter Sweden: IT HAS BEGUN: Italy Investigating Covid Vaccine Death appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Time Is Running Out for Saudi Arabia

This story originally was published by Real Clear Wire

By Eric Bordenkircher
Real Clear Wire

The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia’s foreign ministry issued a statement about the normalization of relations with Israel on February 7. It declared that Saudi Arabia would not establish relations with Israel until the “brotherly Palestinian people obtain their legitimate rights”—the creation and recognition of an independent state with 1967 borders and East Jerusalem as its capital. The statement refined and affirmed comments that Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan made in Davos three weeks earlier.

The announcement leaves Saudi security and interests to chance. The Saudi government is making the realization of relations between two countries, Israel and Saudi Arabia, contingent on the cooperation of a third party, the Palestinians. The need for diplomatic relations between Saud Arabia and Israel grows critical to maintaining security and stability in the Middle East as Iranian aggression escalates and American reliability deteriorates. The longer there are no diplomatic relations, the Saudis become more vulnerable. By conditioning Saudi-Israeli relations, the Kingdom has provided the Palestinians considerable leverage as well as an opportunity to undermine or hold Saudi interests hostage.

The Hamas attacks of October 7 and the subsequent Israeli response froze discussions about Saudi-Israeli diplomatic relations that began during the summer. Realizing relations with Israel is a challenging endeavor for the Kingdom, perceived to be a leader of the Arab and Muslim worlds. Pursuing those relations in the wake of Israel having displaced, maimed, or killed thousands of Palestinians is diplomatic suicide, a public relations nightmare, and a possible source of domestic unrest.

In the short term, the announcement by the Saudi Foreign Ministry is prudent. Calling for a Palestinian state before recognizing Israel demonstrates astuteness. The monarchy reinforces a long-held belief that regional stability begins with a resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Defying that belief would be tantamount to abandoning an Arab brother, especially at a critical time of need; the Kingdom’s image in the Arab and Muslim worlds would be tarnished and its leadership questioned.

The announcement also thwarts potential domestic challenges to the monarchy’s rule. The idea of relations with Israel is not popular. According to polling in late 2023, 96 percent of Saudis believe that “Arab countries should immediately break all diplomatic, political, economic, and any other contacts with Israel, in protest against its military action in Gaza.” In the wake of the war, only 17 percent of the Saudis support the establishment of economic ties with Israel.

While the monarchy has attempted to insulate itself from Arab and Muslim criticism and from possible domestic unrest, conditioning relations with Israel on the establishment and recognition of a Palestinian state exposes Saudi Arabia to risks from Iran and the United States.

Each day without Saudi-Israeli diplomatic relations is a day that witnesses the further empowerment and enablement of Iran. Iran strives toward achieving nuclear weapons capabilities. It projects growing power through an array of militias that exacerbate conflicts, wreak havoc on maritime traffic, worsen economies, facilitate corruption, and defy the rule of law.

An ascendant Iran threatens Saudi Arabia and poses regional challenges. An empowered Iran can project its power into Saudi societal dynamics as it has in other Arab countries—by fomenting tension within the Shia community and between the Shia and Sunni communities. An enabled Iran funds and supports hostile actors on Saudi Arabia’s borders (Yemen and Iraq). A nuclear umbrella would provide regime security for Tehran—further empowering and enabling the aforementioned behaviors. A nuclear Iran also puts the region on a path toward nuclear proliferation.

The challenges do not bode well for Saudi Arabia’s security and interests. Domestic opposition and unrest can be galvanized. Saudi citizens and infrastructure can be targeted by drones and missiles from outside the Kingdom.

The challenges also threaten a primary endeavor of Crown Prince Muhammad bin Salman, Vision 2030. The Crown Prince’s commitments to diversifying the Kingdom’s economy, making the country a global hub, and modernizing other elements rely on foreign investment, global integration, and visitors. Will foreigners want to visit and invest in a project with a nuclear Iran in the neighborhood, nuclear proliferation on the horizon, and Iranian-supported militias fomenting conflict on its borders and throughout the region? In Yemen, the Houthi movement has demonstrated a penchant for disrupting maritime traffic and the global economy, as well as shooting missiles over and at Saudi Arabia. What is the guarantee that those actions will not happen in the future, especially if Iran is empowered and continues to support the Houthis and pursue regional dominance? Houthi disruption of maritime traffic in the Red Sea and their launching of missiles cannot bode well for the crown jewel of Vision 2030—the Red Sea-situated city of NEOM.

For years, the Saudis have largely relied on the United States for protection. The United States sold the Kingdom large weapons packages. The U.S. has placed and continues to place American soldiers on Saudi soil to assist in defending the Kingdom.

Recently, the Saudi-U.S. relationship has experienced considerable strain and scrutiny. U.S. military involvement in the Middle East is exceptional. Calls endure for shrinking the American military footprint in the region, including in Saudi Arabia. Meanwhile, progressive elements in Congress and the Biden administration believe allies should reflect the U.S. in image and likeness. They call on allies like Saudi Arabia to adopt Western values in their societies. The Saudis have not done themselves well in currying favor with these progressive elements, most notably in light of the brutal murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi. The Obama and Biden administrations have also attempted to impose their vision for the region—a sharing of it between Saudi Arabia and Iran— to the alarm and displeasure of the Kingdom.

The Biden administration and members of Congress repeatedly take actions and produce messaging that questions both the U.S. commitment to Saudi security and the notion of constraining and containing Iran. The president and his congressional allies employ rhetoric or draft legislation that challenges the Kingdom’s security and questions the monarchy’s legitimacy. Weapons sales to the Kingdom are contested on the hill. The administration and Congress have worked to reduce America’s support of the Saudi-led intervention in Yemen. Biden seeks to resurrect the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), aka the Iran nuclear deal, a deal opposed by Saudi Arabia. The administration also appeases the militias that Iran backs.

The developments are a cause for concern for the monarchy in Riyadh. Current U.S. behavior gives no assurances that the United States will always come to the aid of the Kingdom and challenge Iranian aggression. Furthermore, the Saudis are unable to effectively confront, contest, and contain Iran on their own. The ineffectiveness of the recent Saudi intervention in Yemen highlights the limitations of their military capabilities.

Saudi-Israeli diplomatic relations become critical and necessary for the current state of Saudi affairs. The countries share the same concerns regarding Iran while their relations with the United States are increasingly tenuous. The realization and fulfillment of those concerns require extensive cooperation that can only be achieved through diplomatic relations. Anything less is insufficient.

The Saudis have made quite the wager on their future well-being by placing the creation and recognition of a Palestinian state ahead of Saudi-Israeli relations. They have placed considerable hope in an outcome, an Israeli-Palestinian resolution, that does not appear likely shortly. What makes the situation even riskier for the Saudis is that they are expecting concessions from Palestinians who historically have been unwilling to compromise, lack effective leadership, and have been captured by the maximalist and confrontational thinking supported by Iran and its scions.

The failed talks at Camp David in 2000 are a glaring example of an unwillingness to make the necessary concessions. The actions or lack thereof by Hamas and the Palestinian Authority demonstrate broken, corrupt, and rudderless leadership in the last few months, let alone the last two decades. The fact that 72 percent of Palestinians (in December) believed the October 7 Hamas attacks were correct demonstrates the relative pervasiveness of maximalist and violent thinking celebrated and supported by Iran, Hezbollah, the Houthis, and others.

History also tells us that countries who attempt to accommodate the Palestinian issue have lived to regret it. Lebanon accommodated the Palestinian cause in 1969 only to witness, six years later, its role in the dissolution of the Lebanese state. Lebanon has never been the same.

The Palestinians—and, to a lesser extent, Iran and its scions—can play the role of the spoiler. They have such an incentive. The Palestinians are not a party to bilateral relations and Saudi-Israeli relations would challenge Iran and its allies. What better way to block Saudi-Israeli relations than by refusing to agree to a two-state solution and making further demands. The Palestinians, Iran, and others have the ability to impede a significant Saudi foreign policy objective while undermining Saudi economic diversification and threatening Saudi security.

Iran’s continued development of a nuclear program and pursuit of regional hegemony, combined with a tenuous American relationship, represents serious challenges to Saudi Arabia. Saudi-Israeli diplomatic relations are becoming obvious and urgent. When does waiting on a Palestinian state do more harm than good for Saudi Arabia? Time is not an ally of the gambit the Kingdom announced on February 7.

Eric Bordenkircher is currently a research fellow at UCLA’s Center for Middle East Development. Formerly a Visiting Assistant Professor in Government at Claremont McKenna College and Pepperdine University, his writing has appeared in National Review, Newsweek, The American Mind, The American Spectator, The National Interest, Middle East Policy, The San Diego Union Tribune, The American Conservative, The Jerusalem Post, The Times of Israel, The Washington Examiner, Review of Middle East Studies,  Middle East Quarterly, 1945, Lobelog, and the Fikra Forum. His Twitter handle is @UCLA_Eagle.

The post Time Is Running Out for Saudi Arabia appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Image: www.cia.gov World fact book, Wikimedia Commons

Waste of the Day: New York Will Multiply Campaign Donations Up To 12 Times

This story originally was published by Real Clear Wire

By Adam Andrzejewski
Real Clear Wire

Topline: A relatively new program in New York State will use $39.5 million of taxpayer funds to match small donations to political campaigns for state offices, expanding them up to 12 times their original value.

Key facts: The Public Campaign Finance Program multiplies campaign contributions of $250 or less. If an individual donates $10 to a legislative candidate, the politician will receive an extra $120 from the government.

Candidates running for governor, lieutenant governor, attorney general or comptroller receive funds at a 6 to 1 ratio.

Politicians running for the state legislature get their donations multiplied between eight and 12 times, depending on the size of the gift.

Only $25 million will be sent to candidates. The remaining $14.5 million is for administrative purposes.

That’s still far less than the $100 million the Public Campaign Finance Board said it needed.

A report from OpenSecrets and the Brennan Center predicts that small donors will now account for 41% of state campaign funds, instead of 6%.

Supporters tout the program as an important step in campaign finance reform because it gives more power to low-income citizens.

Critics argue that similar programs have not significantly changed voter turnout or re-election rates but are vulnerable to fraud.

Background: Thirteen other states already have programs similar to New York’s, as well as some cities like Denver and Washington D.C. Seattle gives voters two free $25 vouchers that they can send to candidates. New York City’s matching funds gives taxpayer-money to candidates running for city office like mayo, city council and comptroller.

New York Gov. Kathy Hochul vetoed a change that would have matched donations as large as $12,000.

The only similar federal program to New York’s is one for presidential candidates that hasn’t been used in the general election since John McCain in 2008.

Supporting quote: “Because the program’s match is limited to small contributions from constituents, it will push back on the toxic influence of big money in our politics and uplift the voices of everyday voters,” Joanna Zdanys of the Brennan Center for Justice said in a statement. “It will give candidates a powerful incentive to engage with their own constituents. And it will open pathways for New Yorkers who aren’t wealthy to participate [in] the political process.”

Critical quote: Election attorney Joseph Burns told Fox News that the law will aid progressive candidates more than other politicians, and that in similar programs, the money “ends up just becoming an unnecessary and wasteful taxpayer subsidy of politicians and political campaigns.”

 Summary: It remains to be seen whether New York’s new law will help candidates opposed to the political establishment or if it is just another failed program that soaks taxpayers for an ever-expanding bureaucracy.

 The #WasteOfTheDay is brought to you by the forensic auditors at OpenTheBooks.com

The post Waste of the Day: New York Will Multiply Campaign Donations Up To 12 Times appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Is Justice Coming For Victims of COVID Wrongful Deaths?

Guest post by Paul S. Gardiner, retired US Army officer, Vietnam veteran

Tens of thousands of American families continue to demand justice for what they believe are the wrongful deaths (murders) of loved ones during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Such justice soon may be coming due in large part to the dedicated efforts of two attorneys in Florida (working pro bono) to thoroughly research the criminal codes of 25 states to identify crimes committed by various high-level officials and organizations prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

One of the attorneys, a former prosecutor, prepared extensive legal briefs (documenting strong evidence of crimes) that have been submitted to the attorneys general of Texas and Florida—the brief was subsequently filed with the Florida Department of Law Enforcement.

In Texas, a total of 22 county district attorneys have received the 27-page brief plus exhibits for review and action. Similar filings soon will be made with the Louisiana and South Carolina attorneys general and perhaps several other state attorneys general. Further information about the Texas brief is here and information about the Florida brief is here.

In the briefs, the alleged crimes are according to each state’s criminal code. The legal briefs/filings request each attorney general to thoroughly investigate the evidence of alleged crimes and if found probable, convene a grand jury, present the evidence, issue criminal indictments, and prosecute the accused to the full extent of the law.

The Texas legal brief, for example, filed at the request of 46 next-of-kin Texas families, lists the following accused persons as subjects of a criminal  investigation:

• Anthony Fauci, ex-Director, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases
• Cliff Lane, Deputy Director, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases
• Francis Collins, ex-Director, National Institutes of Health
• Deborah Birx, ex-White House COVID Response Coordinator & former Director of DOD HIV Research at Walter Reed Army Institute of Research

• Rochelle Walensky, ex-Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
• Stephen Hahn, ex-Commissioner, Federal Drug Administration
• Robert Redfield, ex-Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
• Peter Daszak, President, Eco-Health Alliance
• Rick Bright, Director of the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority
• The Administrators and Healthcare Providers of hospital systems and facilities providing care to patients in Texas, including but not limited to Baylor, Scott, & White Hospital System (“BSW”)

Alleged crimes per Texas penal code include:

• Capital Murder – Tex. Penal Code §19.03(a)(7)
• Murder – Tex. Penal Code §19.02(b)
• Manslaughter – Tex. Penal Code §19.04
• Trafficking of Persons – Tex. Penal Code §20A.02
• Participation in enterprise through racketeering or unlawful debt collection – Tex. Penal Code 72.04 by Engaging in Organized Criminal Activity – Tex. Penal Code §71.02
• Injury to a child, elderly individual, or disabled individual – Tex. Penal Code §22.04
• Abandoning or endangering a child, elderly individual, or disabled individual – Tex. Penal Code §22.041(c)
• Unlawful Restraint – Tex. Penal Code §20.02.

This effort to investigate Anthony Fauci and other accused persons is supported by donations from individuals and organizations such as the Fight Like A Flynn PAC run by former National Security Advisor retired Lieutenant General Mike Flynn.

Based on the strong evidence of crimes presented in the legal briefs prepared by the Florida attorneys, it is indeed time for state attorneys general to conduct their own investigations.

If the evidence supports criminal charges and indictments, the victims of covid wrongful deaths and their suffering families may finally receive accountability and justice for the egregious crimes committed against them.

Further information about this justice seeking effort can be obtained by contacting the Vires Law Group at https://vireslaw.group/

Paul S. Gardiner is a retired US Army officer, Vietnam veteran, and avid lover of America. He has assisted in locating and communicating with next-of-kin family members in different states  who desire accountability and justice for their lost loved ones during the COVID-19 pandemic.   

The post Is Justice Coming For Victims of COVID Wrongful Deaths? appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Leo Hohmann: Biometric ‘Smart Guns’ are About to Become a Thing — Don’t Buy One if You Value Your 2A Freedom

This article originally appeared on Leo Hohmann’s Substack and was republished with permission.

No true-blue Second Amendment advocate would buy into this scheme, which amounts to a backdoor trap to register/verify the ownership and whereabouts of all firearms.

The United States is about to receive its first domestically produced biometric “smart gun.”

These weapons unlock like a smartphone with the owner’s fingerprints or other biometric data.

Biometric Update reports that Colorado-based startup Biofire says it will begin shipping its fingerprint and facial recognition-equipped handguns by the end of March.

Biometric Update goes on to report:

“But the smart weapon maker will still face resistance among gun rights advocates who claim the technology is unreliable and that smart guns are a backdoor to controlling firearm ownership in the U.S.”

The outlet reports that the Biofire Smart Gun, a 9mm handgun pictured below, was designed to prevent unauthorized use by validating user identity, reducing accidental shootings by children, teen suicides, theft and criminal use.

The company’s CEO and founder Kai Kloepfer told NBC News that the complexity of the smart gun is equal to a “small satellite.” The firearm allows up to five authorized users, disabling the trigger mechanism after it leaves their hand. The biometric sensors do not work if the users’ faces or fingerprints are completely covered as it is intended for home use, according to Biofire.

The product has been tested for conditions such as different temperatures and sweaty hands. However, since the U.S. does not have a federal product safety regulation for firearms, there are no industry standards to test biometric weapons. The handgun meets consumer product safety requirements as well as individual states’ handgun safety standards, the firm says.

It’s surprising to me how even some pro-gun websites and publications are promoting smart guns as a positive development that will aid in gun safety. Yeah, but at what price?

Americans have already been blindly led into the surveillance state through their high-tech vehicles, baby monitors, smart TVs, smart meters, smart appliances, and a host of other convenience-based products. Firearms are one of the last remaining non-digital items in modern society. Let’s keep it that way.

To receive new posts and support Leo Hohmann’s work, consider becoming a paid subscriber if you aren’t yet at leohohmann.substack.com

The post Leo Hohmann: Biometric ‘Smart Guns’ are About to Become a Thing — Don’t Buy One if You Value Your 2A Freedom appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Is Something Happening in France?

This story originally was published by Real Clear Wire

By Michael Miklaucic
Real Clear Wire

Paris has joined the ranks of cities hosting international security forums, alongside Munich, Warsaw, Doha, Singapore, and more than a few others. It is a fair assumption that this proliferation of security conferences reflects growing insecurity and widespread fear over the unraveling of the liberal, rules-based global order. But two things about the Paris forum distinguish it from the many others; it was a call to mobilize a complacent France; and a call for the adaptation of professional military education through transformative education to prepare the next generation of security leaders for the challenges of the evolving global security environment.

The Paris Defence and Strategy Forum was held 13-14 March and attended by 2600 participants from 68 countries. In his opening plenary speech Lithuanian President Gitanas NausÄ—da set the sober tone: “Just as Czechoslovakia did not satisfy Hitler; Ukraine will not satisfy Putin. Neither will the Baltic states or Poland… Russia cannot stop; it can only be stopped… (Otherwise) others will learn the lesson that using force against Western interests works… We cannot proceed in a peace-like mode any longer.”

Indeed, there is war in Europe, war in the Middle East, jihadist insurgency throughout Africa, rising tension across the Taiwan Strait, and Iran and North Korea threaten havoc upon their neighbors. It does appear that mere anarchy is loosed upon the world. World leader after world leader has warned that these are the most dangerous times of our lives. The growing uncertainty and fear is not unjustified.

Not surprisingly there was much gnashing of teeth at the Paris Forum about the Russia/Ukraine war. Although Putin’s ultimate victory is far from assured, nor is Russia’s defeat and the prospect of a frozen conflict with Russia in occupation of 20 percent of Ukraine would be a serious blow to Europe and the West. Putin is increasingly brutal at home and bellicose abroad, threatening the Baltics, the Nordics, Moldova, and even Poland, not to mention increasingly frequent Russian threats—both implicit and explicit—of nuclear escalation.

Frontline states including the Baltic and Nordic states, Poland, Romania, and Moldova have been raising constant alarms but leaders of the larger states—particularly France, Germany, and the United States—seem frozen on the back foot—too fearful of escalation to do what is needed to defeat Russia. And their fear of escalation has been completely commandeered by Putin’s “escalate to de-escalate” strategy, leaving the West effectively deterred.

That was the context of the first Paris Defense and Strategy Forum.

But wait! on February 26 President Macron said what no other Western leader wanted to say: NATO boots on the ground in Ukraine cannot be ruled out! Was this just another instance of Macron being Macron? Or has Macron finally realized that Putin cannot be appeased, that Europe is at war with Russia, and that the French people must be prepared for a time of war? Was he riffing off the top of his head, or was he cunningly injecting strategic ambiguity to sow doubt into Putin’s final Ukraine plan? Not to mention that this year France will finally reach the NATO target of 2 percent of GDP on defense spending.

Macron was immediately rebutted by German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, but his inconvenient statement has ignited a lively debate. On March 8 Poland’s foreign minister Radek Sikorski stated that the presence of NATO forces in Ukraine is “not unthinkable” and that he “appreciated” the French president for not ruling out the idea. In a March 10 interview Czech Republic President Petr Pavel stated he is not opposed to the official deployment of alliance troops to Ukraine. Just a few days later Finnish Foreign Minister Elina Valtonen agreed Western countries should not rule out the notion of sending troops to Ukraine. Baltic leaders have long been outspoken about the gravity of the Russian threat. Last month Lithuania’s Foreign Minister Gabrielius Landsbergis said Wednesday he was grateful for the debate that Macron had initiated, adding “nothing can be taken off the table, no option can be rejected out of hand,” while Estonian Prime Minister Kaja Kallas insisted nothing should be ruled out in the effort to ensure that Ukraine wins and Russia loses the war. The ambiguity in the Western position that Macron has introduced should be welcomed. It is not in the West’s interest to limit its own options.

In addition to the topical issues of the day the Paris Defence and Security Forum provided insight into the human requirements for future European security beyond just military alone. According to General Benoit Durieux—Director of the Institute of Higher Studies of National Defence—“We must think in a larger framework—the non-military dimension of national defense…. Including how to counter the narratives of the authoritarian states.” A stream of sessions focused on the need to attract France’s best and brightest to the vocation of national security. A session on coercive negotiation underscored the inconvenient reality that not all conflicts have win/win options. At the Ecole Militaire General Durieux encourages transformative pedagogy in professional military education to cultivate the critical thinking strategists needed to prevail in the 21st century and highlighted the Ecole de Guerre’s leadership in this.

General Thierry Burkhard, Chief of Staff of the French Armed Forces, concluded the forum with a very sober characterization of the current security environment; “The dynamic of force has supplanted the system of law. Using one’s military power has once again become a sign of expression or affirmation of sovereignty… There is a desire to create an alternative order by countries whose common denominator is the rejection of the North, that is to say the West. Russia wants to tear down the edifice of international law put in place after the Second World War.”

Is this apparent ferment in France sufficient to motivate European and American leaders—to wake them up from their sleepwalking stroll toward defeat? Will it wake up European somnambulant publics? Is it possible Macron’s strategic ambiguity and the Paris Defence and Strategy Forum are indicative of a more strategically resolute France? That would be very welcome, but talk is talk; will French defense spending flatline at 2 percent? Will France be the first to station forces on the ground in Ukraine? Is France willing to call Putin’s bluff? Even if France does take the lead, will others follow? We shall see.

Michael Miklaucic is a Senior Fellow at National Defense University and the Editor-in-Chief of the PRISM journal. The opinions expressed in this article are his and are not official statements of policy or opinion National Defense University or the Department of Defense.

The post Is Something Happening in France? appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

Orgio89, Wikimedia Commons