May 14, 2022 at 08:43AM Prominent Transgender Activist Touted by New York Times Arrested and Charged with 16 Felonies for Rape and Sexual Abuse of a Boy
Carlos “Raiza Daniela” Aparicio Hernandez, a prominent transgender (biological male) activist from El Salvador touted by the New York Times, was arrested in Utah for raping a boy.
Hernandez, 36, was charged with 16 felonies for the rape and sexual abuse of a 15-year-old boy.
Hernandez was busted by police in a sting operation after luring in the young boy by posing online as a 15-year-old girl.
transgender Carlos “Raiza” Arturo Aparicio Hernandez
The victim accepted a friend request from Hernandez on Facebook last January believing he was actually a teenage girl.
The victim invited Hernandez to his home and that’s when he realized he was actually chatting online with a 36-year-old transgender child predator.
A prominent trans activist who was highly praised by liberal media outlets and institutions is now facing 16 felony charges for the alleged sexual abuse of a minor following a sextortion investigation.
Carlos Arturo Aparicio Hernandez, 36, of Taylorsville, Utah, a biological male who identifies as a woman named “Raiza”, is accused of the sexual abuse and exploitation of a 15-year-old boy after sending the victim a friend request on Facebook posing as a teenage girl.
According to charging documents, the 15-year-old victim accepted a friend request on Facebook in January of 2021 from someone he was led to believe was a female his own age. After communicating for months, the victim sent nude photos at the request of Hernandez and was later asked to meet in-person, court documents state.
The victim invited Hernandez to his home in West Valley City, Utah where he then discovered that the girl he thought he was talking to was a transgender sexual predator.
Upon arrival, Hernandez forced the boy to engage in “sexual acts” by blackmailing him and threatening to release the minor’s explicit photos if he didn’t comply. Hernandez recorded the assault, charging documents state.
The two met on three separate occasions following repeated threats from Hernandez, according to court documents.
Hernandez was given asylum in the US because of the “anti-LGBT discrimination” in Mexico.
May 13, 2022 at 01:37PM COVID orders violated Pastor Tony Spell’s freedom of religion, Louisiana Supreme Court says
The Louisiana Supreme Court has ruled in favor of Tony Spell, the Central Pastor who continued to hold church services in defiance of restrictions Gov. John Bel Edwards imposed to stop the spread of COVID.
Overruling lower courts, the justices ruled that the restrictions on gatherings and the stay-at-home mandate Edwards imposed were unconstitutional as they applied to Spell. They ordered the charges against him quashed.
Justices John Weimer and Scott Chrichton dissented on the ruling.
Statement from Gov. John Bel Edwards:
“While the Governor disagrees with the Court’s ruling and maintains that his orders were both necessary and lawful, he is accepting of it. Each and every action Gov. Edwards took throughout the COVID pandemic was done with the goal of protecting the public’s health and saving lives.
“Gov. Edwards has always recognized the importance of places of worship during COVID, which is why they were never closed while the public health emergency was in place. The Governor worked closely with faith leaders throughout the pandemic, and all were encouraged to hold services as safely as possible to protect their congregations.
“Fortunately, we have made great strides since then thanks to the safe, effective and widely available vaccines as well as other mitigation measures and therapeutics, but we must never forget the more than 17,000 Louisianans who have died from the virus nor those who were either hospitalized or suffered serious illness as a result of it.”
This is a developing story. See below to read the court’s ruling.
This is a copy of the Louisiana Supreme Court ruling that found Gov. John Bel Edwards’ COVID orders violated pastor Tony Spell’s freedom of religion. Louisiana Supreme Court:
May 13, 2022 at 06:52AM Musk Threatens To Walk Away From Twitter Deal
Twitter deal temporarily on hold pending details supporting calculation that spam/fake accounts do indeed represent less than 5% of usershttps://t.co/Y2t0QMuuyn
There’s been plenty of speculation in recent days about whether Elon Musk’s deal to buy Twitter might collapse, that he might walk away, or hold out for a better price, as the recent ructions in markets – especially for tech stocks – have caused equity valuations to re-rate lower en masse. And now, just days after Hindenburg warned that Musk would try to reprice the deal or walk away, Musk has confirmed just that on Twitter.
Twitter shares were down 19% in pre-market trading in New York.
Musk posted the comments about the deal on Twitter (where else?) along with a report citing Twitter claiming that fake accounts represented less than 5% of users. Musk seemed to imply that this number was off.
Twitter shares were down 19% in pre-market trading in New York, while Tesla shares were up more than 6% on the news as investors hoped that Tesla shares would now no longer be at risk due to their status as collateral.
via www.zerohedge.com
Elon Musk Wants a Candidate ‘Less Divisive’ Than Trump in 2024, Says Biden Won Because People ‘Wanted Less Drama’
Elon Musk said Thursday he believes former President Donald Trump belongs on Twitter, but he would personally prefer someone “less divisive” in 2024.
The billionaire Tesla and SpaceX CEO also said he believes President Joe Biden was only elected in 2020 because people had grown tired of “drama.”
Musk, who is in the process of acquiring the platform for $44 billion, took what appeared to be veiled shots at both men with a pair of tweets.
“Even though I think a less divisive candidate would be better in 2024, I still think Trump should be restored to Twitter,” Musk tweeted.
Even though I think a less divisive candidate would be better in 2024, I still think Trump should be restored to Twitter
Document reveals the FBI labeled Project Veritas as “news media,” and categorized the probe as a “Sensitive Investigative Matter” due to Veritas being journalists. This is a direct contradiction of the U.S. government’s in-court position that Project Veritas are not journalists.
The whistleblower, who has several years of experience as an FBI Special Agent and is still on payroll with the Bureau, came to Project Veritas with the document after seeing what he calls “a number of troubling things that are happening in the FBI.”
The document also shows the federal investigation was launched into Project Veritas the same day Ashley Biden’s Attorney, Roberta Kaplan, said, “This is insane. We should send to SDNY” in response to a request for comment on the contents of Ashley Biden’s abandoned diary.
Additionally, the FBI categorized the investigation into a diary under Threat Band I, which is usually reserved for “threat issues that are likely to cause the greatest damage to national interests or public safety in the coming year.”
The Whistleblower also revealed how the document shows surveillance of Project Veritas included use of CAST tools, an analysis which includes cellular geolocation tracking of phone devices.
FBI Whistleblower: “Tyranny happens incrementally, and it happens by a bunch of people agreeing to small injustices over and over simply to keep their paycheck and their pension…to maintain your paycheck and pension that gives you the Holocaust”
[NEW YORK – May 11, 2022] A source within the Federal Bureau of Investigation has come forward to expose the FBI’s targeting of members of the “news media” including information about what the FBI calls a Special Investigative Matter (“SIM”) regarding their investigation into Project Veritas over Ashley Biden’s abandoned diary.
According to a document obtained and published by Project Veritas, the FBI opened an investigation into Project Veritas knowing full well they were journalists as the document is labeled under a “news media” classification. This classification is a direct contradiction to the government’s court filing where they argued that actions taken by the government to surveil, raid and seize materials from Project Veritas journalists were appropriate. The government’s filing stated, “Project Veritas is not engaged in journalism within any traditional or accepted definition of that word,” because its reporting is “non-consensual.”
The whistleblower, who has several years of experience as an FBI Special Agent, came to Project Veritas because, “The direction that the agency has headed troubles a vast majority of the agents.”
Something else the whistleblower called “alerting” was the fact that the FBI categorized the investigation into Ashley Biden’s diary under Threat Band I, which is usually reserved for “threat issues that are likely to cause the greatest damage to national interests or public safety in the coming year.”
The document, which lacks certain information due to the restricted classification of the file, also shows the investigation was launched the same day Ashley Biden’s Attorney, Roberta Kaplan, said, “This is insane. We should send to SDNY,” in response to a request for comment on the contents of Ashley Biden’s diary.
The FBI also used its Cellular Analysis Survey Team (CAST) tools, which includes cellular geolocation tracking of phone devices, to secretly surveil Project Veritas journalists, according to the whistleblower and as revealed on the leaked document.
The whistleblower, who is still on the Bureau’s payroll, sat down for an interview with Project Veritas CEO and Founder, James O’Keefe. “Tyranny happens incrementally, and it happens by a bunch of people agreeing to small injustices over and over simply to keep their paycheck and their pension,” said the whistleblower, adding, “To maintain your paycheck and pension that gives you the Holocaust.”.
At the time of this writing, the FBI has not yet responded to a request for comment.
James O’Keefe established Project Veritas in 2010 as a non-profit journalism enterprise to continue his undercover reporting work. Today, Project Veritas investigates and exposes corruption, dishonesty, self-dealing, waste, fraud, and other misconduct in both public and private institutions to achieve a more ethical and transparent society and to engage in litigation to: protect, defend and expand human and civil rights secured by law, specifically First Amendment rights including promoting the free exchange of ideas in a digital world; combat and defeat censorship of any ideology; promote truthful reporting; and defend freedom of speech and association issues including the right to anonymity. O’Keefe serves as the CEO and Chairman of the Board so that he can continue to lead and teach his fellow journalists, as well as protect and nurture the Project Veritas culture.
Project Veritas is a registered 501(c)3 organization. Project Veritas does not advocate specific resolutions to the issues raised through its investigations. Donate now to support our mission.
With the globalists hurdling America into a full-blown hot war with Russia – a nuclear power – it’s worth examining Russia’s nuclear capabilities in comparison to the U.S. and how the former Soviet nation could triumph over NATO.
Don’t miss this powerful report breaking down how humanity is facing its final test of courage in this age of potentially nuclear war with Russia:
** Urgent: if this article compels you to want to get involved, please click here and use the online form to communicate directly with your local legislator. **
Under the leadership of a Communist Chinese-backed “former” Marxist terror leader, the UN World Health Organization (WHO) and the Biden administration are plotting an unprecedented power grab to build a planetary bio-medical police state. Think Shanghai during lockdown, but worldwide. Leading experts argue that this is truly the emergence of the “New World Order” discussed by Biden and others.
Already, the WHO claims all sorts of draconian authorities, including powers to work with UN member states in quarantining villages or nations, locking down societies, forcing medical “treatments” such as vaccines, and generally crushing medical freedom. When Ebola was spreading, for instance, the Obama administration sent thousands of U.S. troops to help the UN enforce medical martial law in the Ivory Coast.
Now, under changes proposed to the WHO’s “International Health Regulations” by the Biden administration, the dictator-friendly global “health” body would gain the power to carry out its wishes without even the approval or consent of the targeted nation. Not surprisingly, neither the WHO nor the Biden administration plan to consult the U.S. Senate on the matter.
Despite the enormity of the ongoing usurpation, and the drastic implications for freedom and self-government around the world, the establishment media have been largely silent on the issue. Still, concern is growing quickly as more and more experts and activists speak out. Word is starting to spread. But the first major deadline to stop it will arrive in a matter of weeks at a WHO meeting in Geneva starting May 22.
There are two key routes of attack being pursued by the WHO and its allies. In June, a dangerous “pandemic treaty” is set to be considered giving the WHO new “teeth” to enforce its dictates. But the first and most urgent assault on liberty and self-government involves a series of 13 controversial amendments being proposed to the WHO’s so-called International Health Regulations (IHR). The details of the amendments were only released publicly — and very quietly — about a month ago.
The health regime created under the IHR, which was first approved by the World Health Assembly in 2005, is already draconian in its current state. Indeed, these regulations are what supposedly empowered the disgraced global organization to “recommend” the totalitarian policies it deployed worldwide in response to Covid. Much of the leadership in the global war on freedom over the last two years came from the WHO.
But under the new amendments proposed by the Biden administration last month, it would go from bad to catastrophic. Among other concerns, the WHO would acquire new powers to impose its will on nations and peoples against their will. Indeed, the WHO would be able to declare a “health emergency” in any nation, with virtually no limits, going far beyond even actual pandemics, as long as it “could present significant harm to humans.”
One of the most significant changes would remove language from the WHO’s international health agreement requiring a government to consent to the WHO’s determinations before action is taken. Under the new language, all that would be necessary is for the WHO boss to claim there is “a public health emergency of international concern” (PHEIC). Even a claimed suspicion of such an “emergency” would be enough to get the gears turning.
Once it declares an emergency, the WHO would be authorized to partner with a dizzying array of global agencies and organizations such as the UN and more under the guise of protecting “health.” That includes UN agencies overseeing food, agriculture, aviation, the environment, and much more. In short, a full-on assault on a nation by a range of would-be global government agencies is in the cards for defiance of the WHO.
The amendments would accelerate the process of turning the head of the WHO into a global health dictator, numerous critics say. That is especially troubling considering that WHO chief Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, installed by the regime in Beijing, is a former politburo member of the Tigray People’s Liberation Front, an ethno-Marxist terror group designated a terrorist organization by governments around the world. Countless critics have called for him to be prosecuted for ghastly crimes perpetrated by the terror group he helped lead, and later the brutal Ethiopian regime he served at a high level.
Leading Psychiatrist Speaks Out
“If passed, the Biden administration’s proposed amendments will, by their very existence and their intention, drastically compromise the independence and the sovereignty of the United States,” warned Dr. Peter Breggin, one of the leading medical voices sounding the alarm about this power grab and author of the best-selling new book Covid-19 and the Global Predators: We Are the Prey.
According to Dr. Breggin, a Harvard-trained psychiatrist, the same threat applies to the sovereignty and self-government of all of the UN’s 193 member states, representing virtually the entire global population. In an interview with The New American, Dr. Breggin suggested this was a major step in the direction of global government, led by a global “predator class.” The proposed changes would put “enormous new powers” in the hands of “unelected technocrats” — powers that “would be exercised whether the target nation agreed or not,” he explained.
“The amendments would give WHO the right to take important steps to collaborate with other nations and other organizations worldwide to deal with any nation’s alleged health crisis, even against its stated wishes,” warned Dr. Breggin, adding that these measures could include economic and financial attacks orchestrated by the WHO and its partners.
These attacks would hardly be limited to genuine pandemics. “Under WHO’s approach, it would be difficult to find any important national issue that was not a potential health problem,” warned Dr. Breggin, pointing out that the Communist Chinese regime and Bill Gates were the largest influences at the WHO. “With the imminent passage of the American-sponsored amendments to the International Health Regulations, WHO will have free reign for using these expansive definitions of health to call a crisis over anything it wishes in any nation it desires.”
If the WHO succeeds in advancing its agenda, he added, the most important use of these arbitrary authorities would be against the United States — at least if the American people were ever to elect another anti-globalist government such as the Trump administration. Under Trump, the U.S. government exited and defunded the WHO, though the Biden promptly reversed that upon taking office.
“We need to face that these American-sponsored amendments are a great step toward America voluntarily forfeiting its sovereignty to the New World Order or Great Reset — and that without strong opposition, the ratification of the amendments is a foregone conclusion,” added Dr. Breggin. “Our success or failure in stopping the ratification of these amendments will establish the pattern for the future, including WHO’s ongoing effort to make legally-binding treaties that rob nations of their sovereignty.”
But it is even worse than a loss of sovereignty. Instead, it amounts to handing power over all of humanity to a global class of predatory elites interested not in health, but in power and money, he said.
“In reality; they will be forfeiting their sovereign powers to the global predators who rule the UN and WHO, including the Chinese Communist Party and supporters of the Great Reset, like Bill Gates, Klaus Schwab, and giant foundations and corporations — all of whom benefit from weakening or destroying the sovereignty of the Western nations,” continued Breggin. “Western civilization, and mainly the United States, is all that stands in strong opposition to the globalist takeover of the world, called the New World Order or the Great Reset.”
Already, the WHO and its allies — and the global predators behind the whole machine — have shown their awesome powers. During the Covid crisis, the global agency was the key mechanism for unleashing and coordinating the unprecedented assaults on freedom around the world.
“WHO was highly effective during COVID-19 in implementing the aims of the global predators, led by the groups around Bill Gates and the Chinese Communist Party, in their organized assault and terror campaign against the Western democracies,” Dr. Breggin said. “This purposely resulted in the vast weakening of any potentially anti-globalist, freedom-oriented, patriotic nations, including the U.S., Great Britain, Australia, Canada, and others. That success may explain why the global predators chose WHO to now deliver a major and potentially lethal death blow to the sovereignty of the world’s nations.”
If not stopped, the ongoing power grabs would make all of it orders of magnitude worse, he said.
WHO Insider Speaks Out
In an interview with The New American, Dr. Astrid Stuckelberger, a prominent epidemiologist and international health scientist in Geneva and a former WHO official turned whistleblower, also warned that the WHO was the leading force behind the tyranny that enveloped the globe during Covid. Already, the situation is dire.
In defiance of its own IHR, which Dr. Stuckelberger taught at the university level, the WHO used fear-mongering to “issue directives that were totally not commensurate to the situation,” she said. If the amendments are passed, it would get even worse. It all shows that the WHO and its backers such as Bill Gates “have moved now, clearly, into global governance,” Dr. Stuckelberger said. “The way they are handling WHO is not like coordinating member states that can decide for themselves.”
The global model truly came into view over the last two years. “Before, in the IHR, we trained [students] that everything should be customized to countries,” she said. But now, “they have brought everybody to obey one governance, to obey a single standard.” “WHO is now more and more taking power of the world together as the only organization to be able … to direct any epidemic preparedness plan or pandemic intervention plan,” she added.
The dystopian developments are moving from rhetoric to reality. At the WHO’s extraordinary World Health Assembly meeting late last year, member governments were given a document headlined “A Guide to a Pandemic Treaty.” Member states voted to accept the procedures to develop that treaty, which is now underway. “They are so sneaky,” she said. “They are going to take the instrument that will be adopted the quickest, and the instrument likely to be adopted the quickest is the International Health Regulations.”
The WHO “Constitution” — something governments have — is likely in place to help turn the agency into a true global authority with governmental powers, Stuckelberger said. And the outfit’s constitution purports to enshrine a “fundamental right” to the “highest attainable standard of health.” It also calls for the “fullest cooperation of individuals and States.” This is basically a blank check for intervention in people’s lives.
In Article 21 of the WHO Constitution, the World Health Assembly is empowered to “adopt regulations” on everything from “sanitary and quarantine requirements” to “standards” for diagnosing diseases. This is what made possible the global tyranny that enveloped the world in early 2020, as well as the unreliable PCR Covid tests that fed the narrative, said Dr. Stuckelberger, who served as president of the WHO’s Geneva International Network on Ageing.
“We have to be liberated from the United Nations,” said Stuckelberger before urging everyone to contact their elected officials, attorneys, and others in a bid to derail the WHO power grab.
Seeking Even MORE Powers
Another significant WHO threat to medical freedom, national sovereignty, and self-government comes from the proposed “International Pandemic Treaty” being worked on now behind the scenes. Under the guise of controlling future pandemics, this global agreement would also hand vast new powers to the global “health” organization. Advocates of the treaty are proposing to turn the WHO into a global health ministry with vast powers over every person and government on Earth.
Even actual sanctions on nations whose governments defy their would-be WHO overlords are now being peddled. For instance, WHO boss Tedros claimed that “maybe exploring the sanctions may be important.” Meanwhile, German Health Minister Jens Spahn argued “that countries that fail to follow up on their commitments to the WHO should face sanctions.” This sentiment is widespread among global elites.
Indeed, less than a year ago, an “independent” UN panel of high-level globalists convened by the WHO chief claimed the health agency “needs to be empowered — financially, and politically.” This empowering should include making the WHO more independent, creating new “capacities” (powers) at the global level, and establishing a “new international system for surveillance.”
The UN report, which suggests Covid damage could have been mitigated with more global tyranny, also seeks to bring in the “precautionary principle.” Similar to the “climate” narrative, the precautionary principle involves implementing policies — in this case medical tyranny — as a precaution in response to potential dangers rather than in response to a proven threat.
Offering broad insight into the objectives, the report celebrated regimes such as the Communist Chinese dictatorship for their authoritarian response to COVID. Numerous globalist bigwigs working with the WHO and Beijing such as Gates and Schwab have repeatedly praised the barbaric Covid response by Beijing while condemning jurisdictions that respected individual rights and the rule of law. This was all foreseen as far back as 2010 in the Rockefeller Foundation’s “scenario” dubbed Lockstep involving a hypothetical pandemic.
Even as these battles are raging, totalitarians are already scheming on even more draconian powers over basic rights such as free speech. The WHO itself has been working to silence what it considers “misinformation,” “disinformation,” and “conspiracy theories” for years. “We’re not just battling the virus,” said WHO Director-General Tedros in the summer of 2020. “We’re also battling the trolls and conspiracy theorists that push misinformation and undermine the outbreak response.” The WHO was “working closely” with Big Tech firms to censor the web, it boasted. Ironically, the WHO has urged health professionals to lie to parents in order to peddle vaccines.
Opposition Grows as Legal Questions Swirl
In a memo to the WHO, U.S. Health and Human Services Assistant Secretary for Global Affairs Loyce Pace cited almost 50 other governments that support the Biden administration’s proposal. Those include the member governments of the European Union, along with numerous other governments including those in India, Australia, Japan, Canada, the United Kingdom, and more.
Normally, governments would have 18 months to withdraw from the UN WHO scheme. However, in this case, the time period has been shortened to a mere six months. According to experts on WHO processes, if a majority of member governments consent to the amendments, then they will be considered to be part of “international law.” The amendments to the WHO’s regulations are set to be approved by May 28 of this year if not stopped.
Because of the existing international agreement adopted by member WHO member states almost two decades ago, the UN WHO considers any updates to its International Health Regulations to be binding on all nations and all of humanity, legal experts say. Similar machinations were used to impose UN “climate” schemes on the planet without ratification by the U.S. Senate.
However, there are several constitutional issues at hand as far as the United States is concerned. For one, the states that created the U.S. government never delegated these sorts of powers over “health” to the government they established. If the U.S. government lacks a specific authority or power, it certainly cannot hand a power it does not rightfully possess over to another body — at least not without a constitutional amendment.
In fact, the U.S. Supreme Court confirmed as recently as 1957 in the case Reid v. Covert that the U.S. government could not grant new powers to itself — or delegate those powers to other bodies — merely by adopting international agreements. Thomas Jefferson, a key architect of America’s constitutional system, understood that as well. “I say the same as to the opinion of those who consider the grant of the treaty-making power as boundless,” he explained in 1803. “If it is, then we have no Constitution.”
Neither the WHO nor the Biden administration’s Department of Health and Human Services responded to requests for comment.
In an interview with The New American, journalist and commentator James Rogusky, among the first to sound the alarm on these amendments, called on people to resist while it was still possible. “The time to speak out and stand for your rights is now,” he explained, calling on Americans to share the warnings with those in their sphere of influence and to contact their elected representatives.
In an effort to derail the WHO’s power grab, The John Birch Society, the parent organization of this magazine, recently launched a grassroots effort encouraging lawmakers to nullify the schemes at the state level. “Rather than sitting back and being complacent, state legislators must take bold action to nullify any WHO agreement,” the Society said in a mass email to its national membership.
“Nullification of the WHO’s pandemic treaty wouldn’t be the first time the states have taken such bold action,” the organization’s alert continued. “Among multiple other examples, Alabama in 2012 enacted a strong law banning the implementation of the UN’s Agenda 21 (now Agenda 2030) in the state. Multiple other state legislative chambers passed similar bans.”
Urging activists to contact their lawmakers, the group, which has chapters nationwide, called for strong laws to prohibit implementation and enforcement of the WHO scheme. This could include ensuring that no state or local officials can participate in the enforcement of any actions originating from the WHO or under the authority of its illegitimate agreements.
In an interview with The New American magazine, Representative Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) expressed support for getting out of the UN entirely. “It’s full of dictators, and it’s also something that I don’t think our sovereign government should defer to,” he explained. Legislation to do just that, the American Sovereignty Restoration Act, has been regularly introduced in Congress for decades.
Derailing the WHO’s draconian power grab would be a good step in the direction of neutralizing the ever-increasing threat of globalism and international tyranny. However, over the long term, small victories in battles such as this one will not be enough. A full restoration of sovereignty must be the ultimate objective — and this massive attack on humanity by the WHO may be the perfect catalyst to supercharge the movement to stop globalism for good.
Whoever, with the intent of interfering with, obstructing, or impeding the administration of justice, or with the intent of influencing any judge, juror, witness, or court officer, in the discharge of his duty, pickets or parades in or near a building housing a court of the United States, or in or near a building or residence occupied or used by such judge, juror, witness, or court officer, or with such intent uses any sound-truck or similar device or resorts to any other demonstration in or near any such building or residence, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
Nothing in this section shall interfere with or prevent the exercise by any court of the United States of its power to punish for contempt.
May 12, 2022 at 05:21AM Sen. Durbin: Protests Outside SCOTUS Justices Homes ‘Absolutely Reprehensible’
Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., on Wednesday slammed protests at the homes of Supreme Court justices as “absolutely reprehensible” after Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer downplayed the demonstrations as long as they are “peaceful.”
“I think when it comes to the home of an elected official, that’s over the line. It’s happened to me. And I think it happened to most of us in an elected positions,” Durbin said during an appearance on CNN’s “New Day.” “If we want to bring women and men into this position, and accept the responsibility and sometimes the controversy, we have to have reasonable lines drawn to respect their families.”
Protests have happened at the homes of Chief Justice John Roberts, Justice Brett Kavanaugh, and Justice Samuel Alito after Politico in late April published a draft of an opinion in a major abortion case that was argued in the fall. The document indicates the court could be poised to overturn the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade case that legalized abortion nationwide.
In response to a reporter asking on Tuesday if he is “comfortable with the protests that we saw outside the homes of Supreme Court justices over the weekend,” Schumer said, “If protests are peaceful, yes. My house — there’s protests three, four times a week outside my house. The American way to peacefully protest is OK.”
Durbin said absolutely not.
“Stay away from homes and families of elected officials and members of the court,” he said. “You can express yourself, exercise your First Amendment rights. But to go after them in their homes, to do anything of a threatening nature and certainly anything violent, is absolutely reprehensible.”
May 11, 2022 at 03:28PM Congressional candidate Laura Loomer files RICO lawsuit against Twitter and Facebook
Laura Loomer, a congressional candidate from Florida, has decided to file a federal lawsuit against Facebook and its CEO Mark Zuckerberg, as well as Twitter and former CEO Jack Dorsey, saying that she “relishes the fight to come.”
The lawsuit alleges that the social platforms’ behavior around suppression of free speech has the elements of racketeering and extortion.
That’s why the $10+ billion lawsuit was filed under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act in the US District Court for the Northern District of California.
Loomer’s filing accuses the Silicon Valley companies and their key current and former figures named as defendants of carrying out censorship of free speech under the guise of implementing community rules.
Loomer’s own example includes “canceling” by major platforms owing to her political views, despite the fact that the content she shared was not endorsing violence, terrorism, or revealing individuals’ private information, i.e., doxing them – which would normally fall under the community guidelines these platforms enforce.
This journalist and congressional candidate claims that she has been removed from and prevented further access to what is today the digital equivalent of the town square.
As for how this translates to racketeering, the lawsuit alleges that federal laws have been broken through interference with commerce by threats or violence, interstate and foreign transportation in aid of racketeering enterprises, wire fraud, providing material support or resources to terrorist organizations, advocating overthrow of government.
Loomer further alleges that it was the corporate giant Procter & Gamble, as a huge advertiser, that in 2019 pressured sites like Facebook to ban her as a “divisive” figure that they did not want to associate their brand with.
“Laura Loomer is a passionate and patriotic American who has been a general election candidate for the House of Representatives and who is currently outpacing an incumbent Member of Congress in fundraising for the 2022 primary election,” said her co-counsel John Pierce, adding, “The idea that she can be silenced by Big Tech with the push of a button because she is conservative is absurd, dangerous, and un-American. In this legal action, we will fight to ensure that Ms. Loomer’s voice is not silenced, and that vital constitutionally guaranteed rights are protected in the digital age.”
Former Georgia Congressman Bob Barr, who also represents Loomer in the case, stressed the importance of the robust political debate for America’s democracy, and warned that actions such as those carried out by Facebook and its fact-checking third parties endanger free society by stifling speech in the digital town square.
“The freedom of future generations of Americans depends on standing up to social media giants now, while we still can,” said Barr, accusing them of being unaccountable for carrying out censorship for a long time.
May 11, 2022 at 02:54PM Oath Keepers sharing with January 6 investigators their efforts to find election fraud, communications with Trump allies
(CNN)Top leaders in the Oath Keepers, the far-right extremist group, have been turning over phones and digital files and sitting for interviews with the FBI — and detailing how they worked to benefit Donald Trump’s campaign and communicated with others in the former President’s orbit, according to court records and multiple sources familiar with the federal investigation.
Kellye SoRelle, a lawyer working with the Oath Keepers, told CNN that she has met with the FBI several times and handed over phones.
She declined to say more about what she’s shared with investigators, but her ties to the group have come up in court filings, including a virtual meeting a week after the 2020 presidential election when Oath Keepers talk about heading to Washington, DC, and SoRelle briefs them about the campaign’s legal fight.
“I’ve done interviews. I’ve done everything. I’m helping them,” SoRelle said about her cooperation with investigators. She does not represent any Oath Keepers in their criminal proceedings and has not been charged in the seditious conspiracy case against several members in connection with the January 6, 2021, insurrection.
Investigators also have learned about encrypted messages on the app Signal leading up to January 6, in which the Oath Keepers were messaging high-profile, right-wing political organizers, according to four people familiar with its existence. The Justice Department recently provided records of the chat to defense attorneys in the sedition case, some of the people said.
In court last week, prosecutors also disclosed how the Oath Keepers’ leader Stewart Rhodes called an unnamed person on speakerphone from a hotel suite on the evening of January 6, asking to speak directly to Trump and urging the person to tell Trump to call upon groups like the Oath Keepers to “forcefully oppose the transfer of power.”
Prosecutors have said they expect to bring more charges against people affiliated with extremist groups. Grand jury activity continues apace. And investigators are talking to a wide range of people, including organizers of pro-Trump rallies that preceded the US Capitol attack, while seeking information about attempts to impede the certification of President Joe Biden’s electoral win.
All are signs that the biggest investigation in Justice Department history is expanding beyond the hundreds of alleged rioters and exploring connections with more politically connected players.
“I think it’s self-evident that they are continuing to work their way up the food chain to get to who their grand prize is,” Lee Bright, a defense lawyer for Rhodes, said in an interview, referring to speculation that the Justice Department will eventually target Trump.
Rhodes himself met with the FBI multiple times before his arrest in January and handed over his electronics, his lawyers say. Rhodes has pleaded not guilty and is set to go to trial in July.
Several Trump supporters and operatives also have indicated they are sharing information with prosecutors.
“Stop the Steal” organizer Ali Alexander, who received a grand jury subpoena for information about the pro-Trump rally on January 6, said he would be willing to cooperate and has been responsive to prosecutors’ requests, according to a person familiar with his situation.
Alex Jones, the far-right media figure and conspiracy theorist who spoke at a January 5 pro-Trump rally, has been approached by federal investigators for a meeting, though he hasn’t done one yet, according to his attorney.
The attorney, Federico Andino Reynal, told CNN that Jones is demanding protection from prosecution if he is to talk because he is “suspicious of the government’s motives for seeking an interview given the highly partisan nature of the investigation,” and says he is innocent of any crime.
Jones also was involved in pro-Trump rallies in Washington in November and December in 2020 and received protection from right-wing volunteers while in town. Groups like the Oath Keepers provided security to him, Roger Stone and other prominent pro-Trump rally speakers.
According to the people familiar with the Signal messages that prosecutors have accessed, Jones appeared alongside Roger Stone, a staunch Trump ally and confidant, as well as Alexander and members of the Oath Keepers for what was called a “VIP” chat.
This chat is only one of dozens of Signal threads, with more than 100,000 texts total, related to January 6 from Rhodes’ phone, which has become “key to proving or disproving a conspiracy” case against him, according to recent court filings. It’s not clear if the VIP Signal chat ever expanded beyond discussion of security around the rallies.
Lawyers for Alexander and Jones didn’t respond to questions about the chats. On a social media account last week, Stone posted it was false that he texted with Rhodes, and that “discussion of logistics for a speech at a legally permitted event Jan. 5 proves nothing.” None of the three rally speakers are facing charges.
Robert Caron, another person who says he helped to investigate election fraud allegations, told CNN he was approached by two FBI agents at a hotel in Toronto in December, then sat down to speak with them about key people connected to efforts to overturn the election. Caron says the agents indicated they were working on the investigation into violence on January 6 and the lead-up to the insurrection.
Caron provided the business card of one of the FBI agents, who referred questions to the bureau’s public information office.
Officials from the FBI and DC US Attorney’s Office have declined to comment on the ongoing investigation.
Caron would not say who tapped him to investigate election fraud claims. Caron says he told the FBI that he had cautioned prominent right-wing figures after the election that he hadn’t found evidence of voting machines flipping votes.
‘Pods’ of people looking for ballot fraud
Prosecutors have cited some of the information about the Oath Keepers in court filings as evidence that defendants charged in the conspiracy case engaged in ongoing discussions about how to oppose the lawful transfer of presidential power.
In the case of William Todd Wilson, a leader of the North Carolina chapter of the Oath Keepers who pleaded guilty to seditious conspiracy and agreed to cooperate with investigators last week, prosecutors said in a court filing that he huddled with Rhodes and others in a private suite at a Washington hotel after leaving the Capitol grounds on January 6 and overheard Rhodes on the phone with someone trying to get in touch with Trump.
“This individual denied Rhodes’ request to speak directly with President Trump,” the filing states, without naming the person or indicating if investigators looked into the story further.
Prosecutors also have obtained from an informant a transcript of a GoToMeeting virtual event on November 9, 2020, during which SoRelle, a lawyer from Texas, provided an update to Oath Keepers on legal challenges on behalf of Trump, according to court proceedings. Rhodes also spoke at the meeting.
In the transcript, SoRelle described various “pods” of people working on the “project to try to solve the mystery of the ballots.” She said there was the Republican National Committee pod, the “Back-Channel pod” of QAnon followers, and the Campaign pod that included the “Giuliani pals,” an apparent reference to associates of Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani.
“So I’ve been in communication,” SoRelle is quoted as saying at the virtual event. “I obviously work the RNC version of it, and then I’m in — I like the Q crowd, they’re kind of fun, and then I’ve been meeting with the Campaign crowd.”
In an interview with CNN, SoRelle disputes that she is the speaker but says she did work with the Trump campaign, describing various “teams” searching for voter fraud. She also said she went to Michigan — a swing state where Joe Biden narrowly won — after the election to collect affidavits about supposed fraud to send to the Trump campaign, with some support from the Republican Party, and that the Oath Keepers protected her in that mission.
A spokesperson for the Republican National Committee said it has no connection to the Oath Keepers or any DOJ investigation into them, and spokespeople for Trump didn’t respond to questions from CNN in recent days.
Grand juries meeting daily
Federal grand juries have met every day since mid-April in the downtown Washington courthouse, approving indictments related to January 6 nearly every day. Prosecutors assigned to these cases and law enforcement witnesses frequently pop in and out of the confidential proceedings.
As of last week, prosecutors have signed up more than 10 defendants as cooperators against Oath Keepers and the Proud Boys,whose leaders are charged with separate conspiracy allegations. The case against the Oath Keepers has taken several steps forward in recent days, with two new cooperators against Rhodes and others announced in the past week.
Behind the scenes, defense attorneys continue to receive new information that federal investigators are collecting as part of the discovery process – a sign the conspiracy investigations related to far-right groups aren’t over.
Prosecutors, in feeling out potential conspiracy defendants’ willingness to plead guilty, have asked if some would admit there was a plan to “stop the steal” of the election, an apparent reference to the slogan used by pro-Trump rally organizers, one person familiar with talks told CNN.
Where the Justice Department is headed
Attorney General Merrick Garland has publicly professed the investigation would proceed methodically. In most criminal investigations, that often means prosecutors pursue less significant figures to plead guilty and potentially cooperate as they gradually build evidence for higher-profile cases. Garland specifically noted in January that the federal evidence-collection efforts would dig into both physical and digital evidence and money.
“The facts tell us where to go next,”the attorney general said. As the grand juries working through January 6-related cases stay active, some political figures have sought out criminal defense lawyers, in case the DOJ shows interest in them in the future, according to people familiar with the reach-outs.
“There is criminal exposure for any number of people who were part of the organization and planning that were not storming the Capitol,” Doug Jones, the former Democratic senator and US Attorney in Alabama who is now an attorney in private practice in DC and has been closely following the January 6 investigation. “From the very beginning, the Justice Department has been casting a wide net.”
But, he added: “It’s difficult to assess where they are.”
Jones pointed out that believing false election fraud claims is not a crime. Yet there could still be legal jeopardy for those who understood there was no widespread fraud and still wanted to obstruct Congress by spreading false information to Trump supporters.
“You can espouse these crazy theories, but you’ve got to connect the dots to somebody trying to put something into action,” Jones said.
No advisers working with Trump on the election result have been charged with a crime.
At the Justice Department, officials have deliberated internally how to navigate the thorny issues these cases present, including ensuring prosecutors are not targeting Constitutionally protected political speech, according to sources familiar with the matter.
This could become particularly difficult as investigators examine the activities of people associated with political fundraising and events that preceded the violence.
Federal investigators also have sought to bolster the conspiracy cases by drawing connections to violence that occurred at other rallies in the weeks before January 6, according to the sources and court filings. DOJ officials believe that could help prosecutors show there was a pattern of violence, and that the Capitol riot wasn’t just a spontaneous event, sources say.
In December 2020, weeks before the January 6 attack, some of the same extremist groups that participated in the Capitol riot were part of violent clashes with police and counter protesters in Washington during a weekend of rallies to protest the election results. Police said dozens were arrested and four churches vandalized. A November 2020 protest also broke out in violence.
transgender Carlos “Raiza” Arturo Aparicio Hernandez
