Tag Archive for: DOJ

Appeals Court Rules In Trump’s Favor, Says He Can Fire Two Executive Branch Officials

/in , , , , , , , , , , /by

President Donald Trump is allowed to fire two board members from independent federal agencies after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit voted two to one to remove restrictions on the president’s ability to do so. 

The court agreed to remove orders imposed by two district judges earlier this month that blocked the Trump administration from removing Cathy Harris from the Merit Systems Protection Board and Gwynne Wilcox from the National Labor Relations Board. 

The appellate court, led by Judge Justin Walker, stated that Trump acted constitutionally when he fired the individuals. 

“Article II of the Constitution vests the ‘executive Power’ in ‘a President of the United States’ and requires him to ‘take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.’ ‘To protect individual liberty, the Framers created a President independent from the Legislative Branch,’” Walker wrote in his decision. 

Judge Karen LeCraft Henderson, an H.W. Bush nominee, voted alongside Walker to overturn the lower court’s ruling on the firings. 

The decision from the appellate court came after the Justice Department asked the court to intervene in the orders, which were issued by District Judge Rudolph Contreras and District Judge Beryl. Contreras ruled on March 4 that Trump broke the law when he tried to fire Harris, and two days later, Howell ruled that Trump overreached his authority in attempting to remove Wilcox. 

President Joe Biden nominated Harris to the MSPB in 2022. He nominated Wilcox to the NLRB in 2021, renominated her for a second term in 2023, and then designated her chair in 2024. 

Wilcox and Harris’s attorneys advocated against the appellate court overturning the decision to block their firings, with Wilcox’s attorneys arguing that the Trump administration needed to lobby the Supreme Court if they wanted to “adopt a more expansive view of presidential power,” according to court documents. 

The Trump administration, however, successfully argued that Trump had the authority to fire both board members and that blocking the president from doing so would harm the separation of powers and undermine the president’s constitutional authority.

Biden fired NLRB General Counsel Peter Robb in Jan. 2021 after he refused to resign just hours after Biden was sworn into office. Robb called the move “unprecedented,” writing, “The removal of an incumbent General Counsel of the NLRB prior to the expiration of the term by a President of the United States is unprecedented since the nascence of the National Labor Relation Act (NLRA) and the NLRB,” according to Bloomberg Law.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in Jan. 2023 that Biden had the power to fire Robb because he was in an “at will” position as the general counsel, unlike other NLRB board members who may only be fired due to “neglect of duty or malfeasance in office,” according to the National Labor Relations Act. 

The sole judge that voted against the Trump administration, Judge Patricia Millett, was nominated by Democratic President Barack Obama, She accused her two colleagues of attempting to “rewrite” Supreme Court precedent.

AUTHOR

Pedro Rodriguez

Contributor.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Here’s Where Dozens Of Legal Challenges Against Trump Administration Stand

Biden Fires U.S. Labor Board’s Top Lawyer In Unprecedented Move

House Committee Report Finds Widespread ‘Misconduct’ In Union Elections By Government Labor Board

RELATED VIDEO: Antonio Gracias: How both Social Security fraud and Voter Fraud works in 12 minutes

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

Biden DOJ Poured Over $100,000,000 Into ‘Restorative Justice,’ DEI Efforts For K-12 Students, New Report Finds

/in , , , , , , , , , , , /by

The Department of Justice (DOJ) under President Joe Biden awarded K-12 schools $100,113,942 in grants aimed at increasing diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) efforts since 2021, a new report says.

The DOJ divvied up at least 30 grants that explicitly mentioned DEI or stated an intention to improve outcomes for a specific demographic group. Many more included topics of restorative justice and social emotional learning, according to Parents Defending Education (PDE). A total of 102 grants involving such topics were sent to 946 school districts in 36 states, representing about 3,235,414 students.

Nearly $2 million went to the Minnesota Department of Education to “create safe learning environments where practices of anti-racism and anti-oppression are embedded,” PDE said. The award said the Minnesota department was committed to “supporting LGBTQ inclusion” within all school districts.

Many of the grants mirrored this promise, specifically naming LGBT and nonwhite students as their intended targets.

Pennsylvania State University received $1,785,773 as part of an anti-bullying campaign to help K-12 schools “provide an opportunity to meaningfully advance equity in violence prevention for communities historically underserved, marginalized, adversely affected by inequality, and disproportionately impacted by crime, violence, and victimization (People of Color (POC), women, people with disabilities, and LGBTQIA+ community),” according to the grant document.

The Milwaukee Public Schools was awarded $986,757 for a project meant to “promote racial equity” and “dismantle institutionalized barriers,” documents show. Another program implemented in Pennsylvania school districts received $1,688,668 from the DOJ to teach students “community policing, trauma informed conflict emphasizing racial/historical and intergenerational trauma, impacts of social media on conflict and conflict escalation and management, anti-bias education, restorative practices.”

DEI is being uprooted in many states as governors move to ban such programs. Major companies like Walmart and several universities are also moving to end their employee and student DEI trainings and race-based admission and hiring decisions.

A report released after Texas banned the programs said that schools with DEI policies did not improve learning outcomes for their target groups. Another report said that DEI policies made people much more likely to agree with racist statements from Adolf Hitler.

The DOJ did not immediately respond to the Daily Caller News Foundation’s request for comment.

AUTHOR

Jaryn Crouson

Contributor.

RELATED ARTICLES:

University Considering Dismantling Its DEI Bureaucracy Schedules Workshop On ‘Recognizing Racism In Everyday Life’

DEI Grifter Explains How Republicans’ Anti-DEI Legislation Crippled Her Business

Jill Biden Collected Tens Of Thousands Of Dollars Worth Of Gifts From Foreign Leaders In 2024

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Attorney General Matt Gaetz: The Pitbull We Need

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

“Anyone who is more concerned with the prospect of Gaetz being Attorney General than the deep state’s behavior, is part of the problem.” — Mollie Hemingway

As a victim of the DOJ, Gaetz is the best person to reform it.

WATCH: Attorney General Matt Gaetz: The Pitbull We Need

We Need To Take A Wrecking Ball To The DOJ. Matt Gaetz Is Just The Man For The Job

By: John Daniel Davidson, The Federalist, November 14, 2024

Gaetz isn’t ‘unqualified’ to lead the Justice Department. As a victim of the DOJ, he might be the best person to reform it.

The collective pearl-clutching by the corporate press and Washington establishment on Wednesday after Trump announced he’d chosen Matt Gaetz to be his attorney general was something to behold. The swamp consensus is that the former Florida congressman is “unqualified” to lead the Justice Department.

Never mind that the people making this claim are themselves deeply unqualified to hold their own positions of power. (Consider Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski, who dismissed Gaetz as not a “serious” pick. Murkowski is poster-child for unserious and unqualified Beltway drones. She failed the bar exam four times and only got a Senate seat because her corrupt father, Frank Murkowski, appointed her to his seat after he became a one-term governor of Alaska in 2002.)

But how exactly is Gaetz unqualified to lead the Justice Department? Put another way, what does Trump’s incoming attorney general need to be qualified to do?

Mostly, clean house at the DOJ. Going back at least to 2016, the Justice Department has been a viper’s nest of politically motivated prosecutions, sham investigations, coup-plotting, domestic spying and censorship, entrapment schemes, and the terrorization of law-abiding Americans. From illegally spying on Trump to the political persecution of Jan. 6 defendants, the DOJ has become a cancer on our body politic, and we need someone to go in and cut it out.

Above all, we need a Justice Department that will refrain from trying to undermine or remove the duly elected president. As Will Chamberlain noted on X, “The best way to understand the Gaetz pick is that it’s a statement by Trump that it’s not 2016 anymore and there will be no internal coup against the sitting President.”

What we don’t need, after the plots against Trump during his first term and four years of a totally weaponized DOJ under Attorney General Merrick Garland, is business as usual. We don’t need some career GOP prosecutor to be the “adult in the room” and “restrain Trump from his worst impulses.”

No, we need someone who knows firsthand how corrupt and compromised the Justice Department has become under Garland, and couldn’t care less what’s said about him at Georgetown cocktail parties or on MSNBC.

And since Gaetz himself was one of the more prominent victims of Garland’s politicized DOJ, he might just be the perfect person for the job. Beginning in March 2021, Gaetz was subjected to an 18-month sham DOJ investigation based on nothing more than the publication of an anonymously sourced and frankly outlandish report accusing him of possibly being a child sex trafficker.

He was never convicted and never even charged, but that was never the point. The point was to silence him. Prior to March 2021 Gaetz had been an effective and prominent voice in Congress pushing back against the Washington establishment’s worst impulses and abuses of power. He waged a public relations battle against Democrats and the deep state over the Russia collusion hoax, led a group of Republican congressmen protesting Rep. Adam Schiff’s sham Ukraine impeachment hearings, and raised concerns about Washington’s overreaction to the Jan. 6 riot and the politically motivated prosecutions of those involved. Gaetz frequently appeared on cable news to make his case, and he quickly became one of the most influential conservative congressmen.

But all that changed when Garland’s DOJ targeted him after a series of politically motivated leaks to The New York Times by anonymous DOJ lawyers. The Times dutifully published them, tarring Gaetz’s good name. As my colleague Mollie Hemingway wrote in 2022, the goal was to silence the colorful Florida congressmen by destroying his reputation: “Gaetz couldn’t very well critique the Department of Justice for their political prosecutions if he was a pariah who everyone thought was a pedophile.”

And that’s exactly what happened. The Democrat-run Ethics Committee in the House, which usually waits to launch investigations of sitting members of Congress until after the DOJ concludes its own investigation, immediately launched an ethics probe against Gaetz that was still ongoing when he announced his resignation from the House on Wednesday. Never Trump Republicans with an axe to grind, like then-Rep. Liz Cheney, reveled in the accusations against Gaetz and repeated them nearly as often as the corporate press did.

Eighteen months later, after the media had repeated the pedophile and sex trafficker accusations against Gaetz as often as they could, with Gaetz’s reputation and influence in tatters, the DOJ investigation was quietly dropped. Another anonymously sourced story, this time in The Washington Post, simply said senior career prosecutors recommended no charges.

That’s the kind of thing our Justice Department does now. Together with a corrupt and lawless FBI, it viciously attacks its critics through lies, leaks, and unrelenting lawfare. It gins up fake kidnapping plots like the one against Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer. It looks the other way when assassination plots and violent threats are leveled at Supreme Court justices. It illegally targets members of Congress. Anyone who threatens its power, including the former and soon-to-be president, is fair game.

The last thing Trump needs at DOJ is a Bill Barr-style careerist. The department is rotten to the core and a threat to the American people. Most of the careerists there need to be run out of the place—and then criminally investigated.

That means a willingness, determination, and courage to clean up and reform the Justice Department — or, barring that, dismantle it completely — are the only qualifications necessary to head Trump’s DOJ. So yes, Gaetz is more than qualified for the task at hand. In fact he’s probably just the man for the job.

John Daniel Davidson is a senior editor at The Federalist. His writing has appeared in the Wall Street Journal, the Claremont Review of Books, The New York Post, and elsewhere. He is the author of Pagan America: the Decline of Christianity and the Dark Age to Come. Follow him on Twitter, @johnddavidson.

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLE: President Trump Names RFK Jr Secretary of Health and Human Services

RELATED VIDEO: Trump’s Victory & The Death of the Obama Cult.

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Biden DOJ Perfects ‘Equity’ Blueprint For Destroying Police, Fire Departments

/in , , , , , , , , , , , , , , /by

A recent string of lawsuits by the Department of Justice (DOJ) against police and fire departments could serve as a blueprint for erasing physical and mental standards in the name of equity.

The DOJ settled two lawsuits and filed a third against local departments in October accusing them of discrimination after black applicants disproportionately failed to pass cognitive written tests and female applicants struggled to pass physical tests. The DOJ deemed the tests discriminatory due to the results, despite applicants of all races and both genders being subject to the same standards.

The three lawsuits, all filed within weeks of each other, could be just the start as a Harris administration would accelerate the process “10x,” one expert told the Daily Caller.

Under an early October settlement, Maryland’s State Police (MDSP) will pay previously denied applicants over $2.75 million in backpay after the DOJ launched a probe into “racially discriminatory hiring and promotion practices.”

The DOJ complaint alleges MDSP’s use of a written test called the Police Officer Selection Test (POST) “disproportionately excluded African-American applicants” and that its use of the Functional Fitness Assessment Test (FFAT) “disproportionately excluded female applicants.”

Of the twelve academy classes that MDSP has graduated since 2017, 91% of their white applicants passed the POST compared to only 71 percent of black applicants, according to the DOJ.

This, the DOJ alleges, “has had an adverse impact on African-American applicants for the trooper position.”

Additionally, the FFAT, which consists of push-up and sit-up tests, a 1.5 mile run and a flexibility test, saw a markedly lower pass rate for female applicants. Men passed at an 81 percent clip while women only passed 51 percent of the time since 2017, according to the DOJ.

The tests, the complaint argues, “are not job related or consistent with business necessity.”

Law enforcement officers, however, disagreed.

“It’s important that they have to catch bad guys. It’s important that they’re in good shape, that they have standards,” Klickitat County, Washington, Sheriff Bob Songer told the Daily Caller.

“That keeps them in good health, physical condition, because out on the street there, when you’re a patrol officer or detective, primarily a patrol officer, when you answer those calls, you don’t know from one minute to the next whether you’re going to be in a fight with an individual who is going to take you on because they don’t like what you’re doing, they don’t respect authority,” Songer told the Caller.

Police, Songer noted, need to have standards because they have “an awesome responsibility” working in “the only career I know of, outside of war, where you may be called upon to take a human life under certain circumstances.”

Less than a week after Maryland’s settlement, Durham Fire Department also settled with the DOJ over a similar claim. The DOJ alleged “that the City’s fire department screens applicants with a written test that discriminates against Black candidates.”

Durham’s written test, the Comprehensive Examination Battery (CEB), also “disproportionately excluded African-American applicants from employment,” according to the DOJ complaint.

As a result, Durham will issue $980,000 in backpay to previously denied applicants and use a new test.

The CEB, created by Fire and Police Solutions Inc. (FPSI), consists of basic arithmetic questions.

A practice test circulating on Twitter, which FPSI officials confirmed to the Daily Caller come from their Candidate Orientation Guides, consists of multiple choice questions such as the following:

“What is the total weight of four firefighters who weigh 202 pounds, 186 pounds, 133 pounds and 211 pounds.”

FPSI offers the practice guides online to help potential candidates, “even though no preparation is necessary since the skills and abilities measured on the test have all been identified, by subject-matter experts in the validation study, as skills and abilities that firefighters need to possess first day on the job,” FPSI President Stacy Bell told the Daily Caller.

If Maryland and Durham’s tests are considered racist and sexist, hundreds of other departments across the country could find themselves exposed by the same standard.

Police departments nationwide have used the POST test named in the Maryland State Police lawsuit. Departments in states ranging from California to Tennessee have posted practice POST tests online for incoming applicants to study with. Washington, D.C.’s Capitol Police appear to still use the test, even uploading a practice POST test on their website as recently as 2022.

The DOJ’s lawsuits allege the use of the tests violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act — specifically a standard known as “disparate impact.”

Title VII prohibits employers from engaging in any explicit discrimination. But it also bars employers from hiring practices “that seem neutral but have the effect of discriminating against people because of their race, color, religion, sex (including pregnancy, childbirth, and related conditions, sexual orientation, and gender identity), or national origin.”

In other words, disparate impact is when different groups have different outcomes when being given the same test. Proponents argue the inequal outcomes are evidence of bias even if everyone is taking the same test.

Jeremy Carl, a Senior Fellow at the Claremont Institute and author of “The Unprotected Class” calls disparate impact “an absurd doctrine.”

The doctrine, Carl argues in his book, stems from the 1971 Supreme Court decision in “Griggs vs. Duke Power.”

Duke Power enacted IQ and mechanical aptitude tests for potential employees. While the court found no racial component to the test and did not allege any explicit discrimination, because white applicants passed at a higher rate than black ones, they found it violated Title VII. Thus, Carl says, disparate impact was born.

And while its immediate impacts might be obvious, there are long-term repercussions gurgling beneath the surface.

“Disparate impact is really worse in a lot of the stuff that you’re not seeing. Because what happens is people don’t do the test, or they don’t put in the requirement, because HR is sitting there saying, ‘Well, you could be open to a disparate impact lawsuit.’ So the defenders of this will say, ‘Oh, well, it happens in this relatively small number of cases,’ but there’s a lot of churn under the water that you’re not seeing, a lot of the damage is just in people not doing the right thing.”

Local governments across the country are proving Carl’s point.

In May, the executive director of Denver’s Civil Service Commission Niecy Murray was fired after raising concerns that Mayor Mike Johnston was lowering safety standards in the city’s fire and police departments to hire more officers.

While outfits like Durham and Maryland caved, one city is fighting back.

In Indiana, after the South Bend Police Department learned of the DOJ’s impending lawsuit (through the DOJ’s press release), they vowed to “vigorously defend” against the pending action.

“The South Bend Police Department believes its screening process fairly measures a candidate’s ability to perform the job,” SBPD wrote in an Oct. 11 Facebook post. “Like every other city in Indiana, South Bend must ensure its officers meet certain minimum criteria.”

The Facebook post also noted the department’s written test is administered by a third party, Testing For Public Safety LLC., and is used by other police departments in the state, including Indiana State Police.

Ruszkowski was not the only one to point out the inconsistency,

“Ironic the Justice Department has not said a word about its law enforcement branch – the FBI – and its physical standards,” John H. Ohrnberger, a national trustee for the Fraternal Order of Police of Virginia, told the Daily Caller.

“If you look at the FBI standards and compare it to South Bend, the only difference is the trigger pull and vertical jump requirements. The FBI academy then has to eliminate or wash out recruits who may have passed the entrance physical exam but can not shoot a gun or physically make it through the academy. I think maybe the Justice Department should look within before they engage in these types of lawsuits,” Ohrnberger told the Caller.

The three civil agencies join the gas station Sheetz, who the Biden-Harris Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) sued in April under Title VII because they screened applicants for criminal histories. If Harris wins in November, these suits could be just the beginning.

“With the Biden-Harris radical DOJ, it’s inevitable that you’re going to see an upsurge in these sorts of cases,” Carl told the Caller.

“When Republicans control the White House, the DOJ is liberal. When the Democrats control the White House, it’s radical,” he concluded.

The Daily Caller reached out to the Department of Justice for comment but did not hear back by time of publication.

AUTHOR

Robert McGreevy

Reporter.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Biden-Harris DOJ Makes Maryland Hire Fat Female Cops

‘Serious Problem For Blacks’: Kamala Harris’ Dad Once Warned Against Mass Immigration

Democratic Sen. John Fetterman Calls Trump Support In Pennsylvania ‘Astonishing’

RELATED VIDEO: Pennsylvania officials have BUSTED a large-scale fraudulent voter registration scheme

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

EXCLUSIVE: Lawyer Of ‘J6 Praying Grandma’ Says Potentially Record Fine Could ‘Financially Destroy Her’

/in , , , , , , , , , /by

Rebecca Lavrenz, known as the “J6 praying grandma,” was fined an amount that could “financially destroy her,” her attorney told the Daily Caller.

Lavrenz was sentenced for entering the Capitol building on January 6. Prosecutors stated that the 72-year-old spent about 10 minutes inside the U.S. Capitol Building, The Associated Press (AP) reported. She was reportedly fined $103,000 and sentenced to one year’s probation Monday — the first six months in home confinement with no internet access.

“We believe it’s the largest misdemeanor fine in American history,” John Pierce of the National Constitutional Law Union and Lavrenz’s attorney told the Caller. “It’s going to financially destroy her if she has to pay it.”

The Department of Justice (DOJ) initially sought “10 months’ incarceration, 12 months of supervised release, 60 hours of community service, and $500 in restitution,” according to court documents.

Prosecutors claimed Lavrenz’s “unrepentant promotion of the riot” demonstrated she “pos[es] a threat to future acts of political violence.”

“She’s a great grandmother in her mid-seventies,” Pierce told the Caller, adding that Lavrenz went to the U.S. Capitol to pray.

Rebecca Lavrenz the ‘J6 Praying Grandma’ Facing 3 Years in Jail.

She has a GiveSendGo set up where supporters can donate to help pay her legal fees.

Prosecutors accused Lavrenz of “profiting off the celebrity of her conviction,” according to the court documents

Pierce told the Caller that Lavrenz did not attempt to create her celebrity status. “I think it’s a function of the fact that the Department of Justice is going after great-grandmothers,” he claimed, explaining how her story caught the eye of major figures like former President Donald Trump.

Donald J. Trump Posts From His Truth Social

Rebecca Lavrenz, also known as the “J6 Praying Grandma,” has been unfairly targeted by Crooked Joe Biden’s DOJ, and now faces up to 1 YEAR in prison for peacefully walking around the Capitol, and praying for our Failing Nation on January 6th! Rebecca is a 72-year-old Grandmother and Small Business Owner from Colorado, and now she is one of Joe Biden’s J6 HOSTAGES!!! Crooked Joe Biden spends more time prosecuting Patriots like Rebecca, AND ME, than Violent Criminals, Thugs, Murderers, and ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS who are destroying our Country. THIS IS WHAT WE ARE UP AGAINST. MAGA2024! https://restoringgodlyculture.com

“It got a lot of attention,” he continued. “Not because she was trying to be a celebrity, but because they went after a praying, you know, great-grandmother.”

Pierce told the Caller he had only heard of an internet ban in situations where it’s “incredibly compelling from like, a safety standpoint” such as in child pornography cases.

Pierce’s law firm, John Pierce Law, has represented over 20 Jan. 6 defendants, according to the biography on his website. “We represent lots of people who are misdemeanor defendants who didn’t engage in any kind of violence or property destruction,” he told the Caller.

He told the Caller that his firm has been successful overall in getting those defendants no jail time or a “slap on the wrist.”

“None of them have been fined anywhere near this amount,” Pierce said. “I think before this, the highest fine that we’ve seen in our cases was $20,000, and that was a case that involved felony assault claims and convictions.”

Magistrate Judge Zia Faruqui told Lavrenz that while her case is not as serious as others, “it’s still a grave offense,” the AP reported.

Pierce told the Caller there was “certainly no indication of any kind of threats” from Lavrenz.

“I think these judges are attempting to apply the law fair,” Pierce said. “There’s a certain built in bias with respect to anybody in D.C., including these judges.”

He noted that it can be difficult for these judges to “understand the mindset” of those who traveled from the middle of the country to protest.

AUTHOR

Eireann Van Natta

General assignment reporter.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Thomas Massie Grills J6 Committee Chair Over Pipe Bomb Investigation, Secret Service Scrubbing Phones

Federal Judge Releases Man From Jan. 6-Related Prison Sentence

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

President Trump to Sue DOJ for $100 Million

/in , , , , , , , , , , /by

Go Trump go! For all of us!

Trump to sue DOJ for $100M over Mar-a-Lago raid, alleging ‘political persecution’

Trump attorney says ‘unconstitutional’ raid should never have been approved by Garland, Wray.

By Brooke Singman, Lydia Hu Fox News, August 12, 2024:

EXCLUSIVE: Former President Donald Trump is set to sue the Justice Department for $100 million in damages over the government’s unprecedented 2022 raid on his Mar-a-Lago property in Palm Beach, Florida, with lawyers arguing it was done with “clear intent to engage in political persecution.”

Fox News has obtained Trump’s memo claiming “tortious conduct by the United States against President Trump.”
Republican presidential candidate former President Donald Trump is surrounded by U.S. Secret Service agents at a campaign rally
Trump and his legal team intend to sue the Justice Department for its conduct during the FBI’s raid on Mar-a-Lago on Aug. 8, 2022, amid the federal investigation into his alleged improper retention of classified records.

Judge dismisses Trump’s Florida Classified Documents case

After the raid, Special Counsel Jack Smith was appointed to investigate. Smith ultimately brought 37 felony counts against Trump, including willful retention of national defense information, conspiracy to obstruct justice, and false statements. Trump pleaded not guilty to all counts.

But U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon, last month, dismissed Smith’s case against Trump altogether. Cannon ruled that Smith was unlawfully appointed and funded, citing the Appointments Clause in the Constitution.

Trump attorney Daniel Epstein filed the notice to sue the Justice Department. The Justice Department has 180 days from the date of receipt to respond to Epstein’s notice and come to a resolution. If no resolution is made, Trump’s case will move to federal court in the Southern District of Florida.

“What President Trump is doing here is not just standing up for himself – he is standing up for all Americans who believe in the rule of law and believe that you should hold the government accountable when it wrongs you,” Trump attorney Daniel Epstein told Fox Business’ Lydia Hu.

Continue reading.

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLE: Secret Service Agent Partly Responsible for Security Planning at Butler Rally Under Internal Investigation for Leaking ‘Videos and Photos from Her Protective Assignments’ to Social Media: Report

RELATED VIDEO: Chinese immigrants have seen people like Kamala before in China

POST ON X: Notice of Trump’s intent to file a lawsuit against DOJ for MAL raid in August 2022 contains internal FBI emails expressing shock at the unprecedented event

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

EXCLUSIVE: DOJ Data Confirms Conservative Fears Biden Weaponized Justice System

/in , , , , , , , , , /by

The Biden administration is using a novel application of an 1870 statute to enhance the sentences of peaceful abortion protesters, data provided exclusively to the Daily Caller confirms.

In the 30-year history of the Freedom of Access to Clinics (FACE) Act, the Biden Department of Justice (DOJ) in just over three years has levied over a quarter of the law’s total charges, most of which have carried this novel sentence enhancement, the data also shows.

The data, along with the unprecedented enhancement, provide fuel to criticisms from conservatives that the Biden admin is unfairly targeting pro-lifers and using the DOJ for political ends.

In some instances under previous administrations, threatening to harm or kill a clinic employee carried less severe punishments. Under Biden’s, however, elderly women peacefully protesting an abortion clinic have faced much harsher consequences. After the Supreme Court’s Roe vs Wade decision leak in 2022, hundreds of attacks were waged against pro-life pregnancy centers and churches, but the DOJ has only prosecuted five individuals for such offenses.

From 1994 to 2024, there were 205 cases against pro-life activists and only six against abortion activists, data provided to the Caller by Republican Texas Rep. Chip Roy’s office reveals. Prosecutions of pro-life individuals constitute roughly 97% of all FACE Act cases.

At least 55 of those cases were prosecuted during the Biden administration, only five of which involved attacks on pregnancy resource centers. In less than four years, Biden’s DOJ has accounted for over a quarter of all FACE prosecutions and approximately 24% of cases targeting pro-life activists, the data demonstrates.

The FACE Act became law in 1994 and prohibits “violent, threatening, damaging, and obstructive conduct intended to injure, intimidate, or interfere with the right to seek, obtain or provide reproductive health services,” according to the DOJ. The law also applies to pro-life pregnancy resource centers and places of worship.

Some claim, however, the Biden Administration is weaponizing FACE against individuals who protest abortion. In the past two years, FBI agents raided the homes of pro-life activists Mark Houck and Paul Vaughn (the former being acquitted and the latter escaping prison time) during Biden’s presidency.

FACE “has been politicized and abused to target peaceful pro-life advocates,” while activists “who violently attacked” pro-life clinics walk free, Erin Hawley, Vice President of the Center for Life and Regulatory Practice at the Alliance for Defending Freedom (ADF), told the Daily Caller.

She explained how the DOJ prosecuted at least 26 pro-life individuals in 2022 but zero activists “who obstructed or vandalized pregnancy care centers.”

In 2023, Roy and Republican Utah Sen. Mike Lee introduced legislation to repeal the FACE Act.

“Biden’s Department of Justice has brazenly weaponized the FACE Act against normal, everyday Americans across the political spectrum, simply because they are pro-life,” Roy stated in a press release.

The Caller reached out to the DOJ, but they did not answer questions about FACE directly, instead pointing to its website. The DOJ told the Caller to contact the FBI for more information regarding investigations into attacks on pregnancy centers and churches.

The FBI did not respond in time for publication, although in 2022, the agency told The Daily Signal it was investigating attacks on pregnancy resource centers and churches. The FBI would not share if it had arrested anyone in relation to the attacks.

From May 2022 to March 2024, there were at least 90 attacks on pro-life organizations and pregnancy resource centers, according to CatholicVote, which tracks attacks by abortion activists. The data is gathered from news reports, direct tips and public information the attackers posted online.

Many of the incidents appear to be associated with the pro-abortion groups Jane’s Revenge and Ruth Sent Us. Since May 2020, there have been over 400 attacks on Catholic churches, the website reports.

“Congress ought to repeal [FACE] immediately,” the Thomas More Society’s Senior Counsel, Steve Crampton, told the Caller. Crampton represented Vaughn during his FACE trial.

Crampton stated unequivocally that pro-life protests have not increased in aggression during the post-Roe era.

He said there was a lack of “hardcore” protests by pro-life activists after the Dobbs decision and contrasted that with the hundreds of attacks against churches and pro-life pregnancy centers.

Organizations like the National Abortion Federation (NAF) claimed attacks on abortion clinics increased in 2022. The NAF’s statistics are based on reports from facility members. A NAF report stated there was an increase in “clinic invasions,” or individuals who “fake appointments,” “force their way into the clinic” and “refuse to leave.”

They reported 20 clinic invasions in 2022. From 2020 to 2022, there were zero reported murders, attempted murders and bombings at abortion clinics. There were four reported incidents of arson and 101 acts of vandalism in 2022, though.

The Crime Prevention Center (CPC) also conducted a study in 2022, but it showed pro-life groups experienced over 22 times more violence than pro-choice organizations. CPC identified 135 attacks on pro-life groups from the date of the Supreme Court leak to September 24, 2022. There were only six cases concerning pro-choice groups. CPC said NAF’s 2021 report failed to provide a list of cases to substantiate the data.

Crampton argued there has not been an increase in pro-life protests, nonviolent or otherwise. He stated only a small percentage of pro-life individuals engage in demonstrations at abortion clinics.

He also noted how “for the first time in history,” Biden’s DOJ added underlying charges, specifically the felony Conspiracy Against Rights charge, to FACE Act prosecutions.

The Conspiracy Against Rights law prohibits two or more people from “conspir[ing] to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate” anyone exercising their constitutional rights. A violation of the law is punishable by fines and up to 10 years in prison, providing there is no kidnapping or sexual assault.

Crampton explained how the original purpose of the law – enacted in 1870 – was to protect newly enfranchised African American voters, but the Biden Administration “twisted” it to target peaceful pro-life activists exercising their First Amendment rights. Moreover, after the Dobbs decision, he said there was no constitutional right to an abortion.

President Bill Clinton nominated D.C.-based Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly in 1997. She has sentenced at least nine defendants during Biden’s presidency, each time delivering severe punishments.

The Biden administration charged those defendants in 2022 with allegedly obstructing access to an abortion clinic in Washington, D.C. Each protester faced up to 11 years in prison, three years of supervised release and fines of up to $350,000, according to a DOJ press release.

The demonstrators protested the Washington Surgi-Clinic abortionist, Cesare Santangelo, who was accused of violating federal law by allegedly performing partial-birth abortions. Activists with the group Progressive Anti-Abortion Uprising reportedly found five fetuses — which appeared to be victims of late term abortions — in a box of 115 fetuses outside the clinic.

Pro-life organizations and five House Republicans in 2024 called for investigations into the five abortions.

One demonstrator at the clinic was a 75 year-old woman, Paulette “Paula” Harlow. Kollar-Kotelly sentenced her to 24 months in prison for allegedly violating FACE and the Conspiracy Against Rights law by attending the demonstration, according to a DOJ press release. Another defendant, Lauren Handy, was sentenced to almost five years in prison.

Harlow’s husband expressed concerns about his wife’s health to the judge. The judge told Harlow that she should try to “remain alive” because it’s a “tenet of [her] religion,” according to LiveAction.

Past sentences under previous administrations demonstrate the unprecedented severity of the current punishments. (RELATED: Biden DOJ Hits Five Pro-Life Activists – Three Already Facing Prison For Blocking Abortion Clinic – With New Lawsuit)

During Clinton’s presidency, a self-proclaimed “anti-abortion activist” named J. Fred Hart, Jr. allegedly parked two trucks at an abortion clinic and blocked “vehicular access” to parking in 1997. The trucks were similar to the vehicle used in the 1995 bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah building in Oklahoma City, according to the DOJ. Bomb squads and arson experts investigated the trucks and determined they were empty. Hart was sentenced to four years probation (home detention for the first year), 200 hours of community service, mental health counseling, and a “special assessment” of $50.

In 2010, under President Obama’s DOJ, a man named Donald Hertz allegedly called an abortion clinic and threatened to kill a doctor and his family members. Hertz was sentenced to five years of probation, according to the San Diego Union-Tribune.

Crampton said that without question punishments for violating FACE are harsher under Biden, pointing to the DOJ’s Reproductive Rights Task Force. He observed how the DOJ has yet to establish a Religious Rights Task Force, despite recent attacks on churches.

In July of 2022, shortly after Roe was overturned, the DOJ established the Reproductive Rights Task Force to “protect access to reproductive health care.” The task force aims to keep tabs on legislation and “enforcement actions” that threaten abortion access, according to a press release.

“The ‘Reproductive Rights’ task force is just a name they gave to a group that is pushing a pro-abortion agenda,” Hawley told the Caller.

Hawley linked to the DOJ’s website and noted that enforcing the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA) was one of the purported objectives.

The Biden administration tried to use EMTALA to “force emergency room doctors to perform abortions that are illegal under Idaho law,” according to the ADF’s assessment of the State of Idaho v. The United States of America.

Hawley said the task force’s other objectives include enforcement of FACE and protecting abortion-inducing medication.

“Rather than abusing its power to target pro-life pregnancy centers, the DOJ should be protecting them and ensuring that women have access to real support and real healthcare,” Hawley emphasized.

Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights at the DOJ – Kristen Clarke – spearheads the National Task Force On Violence Against Reproductive Health Care Providers. It was established in 1998 after the shooting of an abortionist. Clark labeled the ADF a “hate group” and characterized Liberty University as a “fundamentalist Christian school” in 2018.

This separate task force coordinates with law enforcement and U.S. Attorneys’ Offices (USAOs) to investigate “incidents of abortion violence,” even though FACE ostensibly provides protections for pregnancy resource centers.

Eleven defendants – including Paul Vaughn – were charged on Oct. 5 2022, with allegedly using “force and physical obstruction” at a clinic in Mount Juliet, Tennessee, according to the DOJ. They faced the same harsh punishments, including up to 10 and half years in prison, $260,000 in fines and three years of supervised release.

Paul Vaughn ultimately escaped prison time, but it was a pyrrhic victory. Vaughn is now a convicted felon stripped of his right to vote and obtain a firearm, according to Crampton. He must answer to his probation officer and is also under house arrest.

The FACE Act applies to places of worship and pregnancy centers. The vast majority of prosecutions under the law, however, have targeted pro-life activists.

This past June, the DOJ sued five people for allegedly violating FACE by obstructing an abortion clinic in Florida.

Crampton said the law was not neutral.

“It was always about abortion.”

AUTHOR

EIREANN VAN NATTA

Contributor.

RELATED ARTICLES:

US Army Base Holds Training Class Calling Pro Life Orgs Terrorist Attacks

While Biden DOJ Locks Up Pro-Lifers, Hundreds Of Pro-Abortion Violent Incidents Still Remain Unprosecuted

RELATED VIDEO: Secret Service counter-sniper is predicting another assassination attempt before November

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

ELECTION INTERFERENCE: Biden’s DOJ Says It Will Intervene in Georgia Election Lawsuit to Ensure Election Integrity

/in , , , , , , , /by

The Democrats are hellbent on corrupt, rigged elections.

DOJ Confirms It Will Intervene in Lawsuit Targeting Georgia Mail Ballot Deadline

The Justice Department confirmed that it will intervene in a lawsuit targeting an 11-day deadline to register for mail-in ballots in Georgia.

By Jack Phillips, The Epoch Times, July 9, 2024:

The Department of Justice (DOJ) confirmed on July 8 that it will intervene in a lawsuit that challenges a Georgia state deadline for absentee ballot applications and whether it is illegal under the Voting Rights Act.

In 2023, a group of theater workers challenged a provision of Georgia state law SB 202, which was passed in 2021 and requires a voter to apply for an absentee ballot 11 days before a presidential election. Their lawsuit argues that Section 202 of the Voting Rights Act mandates that voters be able to cast ballots in presidential elections if they applied seven days before an election, arguing that the Georgia law violates federal law, and requests that a court block the law’s enforcement.

The DOJ’s filing on July 8 did not make any arguments. It was a notice that it would make a filing that “exercises its right to intervene in this proceeding to defend the constitutionality of Section 202 of the Voting Rights Act,” noting that it would “submit a brief regarding the constitutionality and interpretation of Section 202” by July 22.

Earlier this year, the DOJ filed a statement expressing interest in the lawsuit that challenges the state’s 11-day application deadline and “has a substantial interest in ensuring Section 202’s proper interpretation.” The agency also argued that private parties are able to file lawsuits to enforce the section of the Voting Rights Act, which provides a “general remedy for private plaintiffs to redress violations of federal rights committed by state actors.”

Republican state officials have defended the 11-day cutoff deadline, arguing that the group of theater workers lacks the right to sue under the Voting Rights Act.

Mr. Carr said in late 2023 that the theater workers have not “come close to satisfying its burden of establishing standing.”

They instead rely “only on threadbare allegations of injury that are insufficient even at this stage,” his office wrote. “The court should … dismiss the amended complaint because Plaintiff has no private right of action under the [Voting Rights Act].”

The Republican National Committee and the Georgia Republican Party also submitted court filings in the case, arguing that the deadline rules in question should be upheld and that the plaintiffs’ case should be dismissed.
In a separate challenge to the 2021 Georgia law, a federal judge in 2023 ruled against the DOJ and voting rights groups after they claimed that the Republican-backed law intentionally discriminates against black voters by issuing new rules on providing identification for mail-in voting, restricting drop boxes, shortening the absentee ballot request, and other provisions.
Earlier this year, Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp signed legislation—SB 189—that made new changes to Georgia’s voting laws, including defining “probable causes” for removing voters from the rolls when their eligibility is challenged.

The measure lists death, evidence of voting or registering in another jurisdiction, a tax exemption indicating a primary residence elsewhere, or a nonresidential address as probable causes for removing voters from the rolls. It also states that the National Change of Address list can be considered, although not exclusively.

Continue reading.

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLES:

New Face Of Election Integrity Lays Out November Game Plan

PODCAST: Jody Hice on Election Integrity

A Proposed Federal Election Integrity Law

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Has Biden weaponised the Justice Department to pursue a morally bankrupt agenda?

/in , , , , , , , , , , , /by

It is a understatement to observe that the Biden administration’s moral compass is broken beyond repair.

Earlier this month, Biden’s Department of Justice proudly announced that 75-year-old Paula Paulette Harlow will serve two years in prison for taking part in a “conspiracy” to block access to a Washington DC abortion clinic. Harlow is the last of ten protesters to be sentenced for the October 2020 demonstration.

The Biden DOJ is also slated to slap six other pro-life demonstrators with up to 11 years in prison for a separate protest staged in Tennessee in 2021.

Mark Houck is another pro-lifer to have faced the wrath of Biden’s DOJ. Following a scuffle with a Planned Parenthood escort, Houck was ambushed at his home early one morning by a 25-strong SWAT team armed in tactical gear. His wife and seven children watched as their Catholic father was hauled away in humiliation. Fortunately, Houck’s case resulted in an acquittal and he is now suing the Justice Department for the traumatising affair.

But President Joe Biden is not just after pro-lifers.

In October 2021, Biden’s Attorney General Merrick Garland issued a memo directing the FBI and US attorneys to go after school parents who had begun vocally pushing back against gender madness at school board meetings across the country, despite no violence being reported at said meetings.

In November of the same year, Biden used his DOJ and the FBI to raid the homes of two journalists believed to be in possession of a diary belonging to his daughter Ashley Biden. Such extreme use of federal force would hardly be countenanced had its author not been a member of the president’s family.

In more recent times, top Biden DOJ official Matthew Colangelo abruptly quit his DC post to take on a much lesser role in the highly politicised New York lawsuit that successfully indicted Biden’s leading presidential challenger Donald Trump.

If all these events didn’t churn enough stomachs, consider the story of Eithan Haim, a courageous surgeon-turned-whistleblower who alerted the public to transgender surgery taking place at Texas Children’s Hospital.

The hospital was vocally supportive of so-called “gender medicine” until public pressure forced CEO Mark Wallace to shut down the clinic. In secret, however, a band of surgeons continued administering puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones and Frankensteinish surgery to children as young as 11.

Last year, Dr Haim provided an anonymous tip and damning documents to journalist Christopher Rufo, prompting a media firestorm that led Texas lawmakers to ban the practice before the week was out.

Soon, Dr Haim learned that he was being targeted by federal prosecutors for his whistleblowing, at which point he decided to go public, sitting down for an hour-long interview with Rufo in January this year.

Earlier this month, Haim was greeted at his home by US marshals issuing him with a court summons on four felony counts of violating HIPAA (the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act). Dr Haim is yet to learn the extent of the charges he faces, but as reported by the National Review, the case against him seems rather suspect:

Rufo, who reviewed the records himself before publishing the initial article, denies that the documents exposed the personal information of patients. “For my own part, I can confirm that nothing in the information provided to me identified any individual; all the documents were, in fact, carefully redacted,” the journalist wrote in his latest City Journal story, in which he broke the news that Haim had been indicted.

Assistant US attorney for the Southern District of Texas Tina Ansari, whose office is leading the criminal investigation, argues Haim had no right to share the medical records of minor patients with the public.

However, she neglected to mention that the documents disclosed were not patient charts, were redacted to protect sensitive patient information, and complied with HIPAA, which permits anonymized information to be disclosed generally, and even protected information can be publicized if it’s used to stop egregious medical misconduct.

Dr Haim will face court next Monday.

In the meantime, Americans are left to ponder the machinations of a woke White House that is yet to find a norm it won’t violate in pursuit of a morally bankrupt agenda.

Separation of powers be damned, Biden will enjoy full use of his personal police force and continue burning the country to the ground to rule over the ashes — until November at least.

Is this narrative just connecting unconnected dots? Or does it reflect what you think?

AUTHOR

Kurt Mahlburg is a husband, father, freelance writer, and a familiar Australian voice on culture and the Christian faith. He is the Senior Editor at Australia’s largest Christian news site The Daily Declaration and a Contributing Editor at Mercator. His writings can also be found at Intellectual Takeout, The American Spectator and the Spectator Australia. He has authored or co-authored five books, including his breakout title Cross and Culture: Can Jesus Save the West?

RELATED ARTICLES:

Donald Trump Says He’ll Work “Side by Side” With Pro-Life Group

While Biden DOJ Locks Up Pro-Lifers, Hundreds Of Pro-Abortion Violent Incidents Still Remain Unprosecuted

EDITORS NOTE: This Mercator column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

VIDEOS: New Yorkers Call Trump Trial ‘Outrageous!’, President Trump’s Press Conference and more

/in , , , , , , , , , , /by

“What is on full display here is the alternate anti-American reality created when a Prosecutor and Judge are in collusion to inflict political retribution on a defendants, while neither is tethered to the Law, Legal President, or Judeo-Christian Moral Standards.” —

Here are videos of the reaction to President Donald J. Trump’s verdict in a New York City court and his full press conference.

President Donald J. Trump Holds a Press Conference Following “the Verdict” that has Fundamentally Transformed America

President Donald J. Trump held a press conference at Trump Tower in New York. President Trump said his legal team would appeal his conviction, and accused President Biden and his supporters of being responsible for the case against him. President Trump also said his campaign had raised $35 million in 10 hours following his conviction. President Trump talked extensively about the details of the case, maintaining that payments made to adult film actress Stormy Daniels were legal and that his conviction was unfair and unjust.

New Yorkers react to the Trump trial: ‘Outrageous!’

Sean Hannity: This is a disgrace to our system of justice

Ted Cruz: The Trump judge is saying the Constitution does not apply in New York

Alina Habba: We have to be honest about what’s going on here

The only reason why a jury would send out a request to hear instructions again: Jonathan Turley

Americans are fed up with Biden DOJ’s efforts to collapse our justice system

Missouri Attorney General, Lists the Legal Errors Made by NYC DA Bragg

©2024. Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLE: ‘Shameful’: Republicans quickly come to Trump’s defense after his conviction

‘Election Interference’: Bragg Case Gag Order Puts Unprecedented Limitations On Trump Campaign

/in , , , , , , , , /by

Allies close to former President Donald Trump are furious with the gag order imposed on him and his campaign by New York State Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan, telling the Daily Caller it is hamstringing his campaign like no other has been before.

On Tuesday, the start of week three of Trump’s Manhattan trial, Merchan held the 2024 Republican presidential nominee in contempt of court and issued a $9,000 fine for repeatedly violating a gag order. Merchan has also threatened jail time if Trump continues to violate the order.

Trump and his campaign have been barred from speaking about Matthew Colangelo, a lead prosecutor in the case who spent two years serving in the Biden administration’s Department of Justice (DOJ) as acting associate attorney general. After working near the top of the DOJ under Attorney General Merrick Garland, Colangelo joined the Manhattan District Attorney’s office as senior counsel in December 2022.

Many have raised questions about Colangelo’s move from DOJ to work in the Manhattan DA’s office at the same time District Attorney Alvin Bragg was investigating Trump for a $130,000 payment to porn star Stormy Daniels.

Bragg, who ran for office on convicting Trump as Manhattan District Attorney, indicted Trump on 34 counts of falsifying business records, all of which the former president plead not guilty to.

Trump and his campaign are also not allowed to speak about his former lawyer, Michael Cohen, or the jury. Cohen, who is a key witness in the case, has come under fire for discussing the case on TikTok while raising money for himself.

These limitations apply to the entire campaign, tying the hands of the Trump political operation to fight back on a critical issue in the presidential race, one source familiar with the situation told the Caller.

“The gag order says it applies to the president himself, and then it prevents him from instructing or ordering anybody else to do it. So, legally, that basically applies to anybody who works for him. And since he is considered basically the chairman of the campaign or the top dog on the campaign, the campaign applies to everybody who is on campaign staff.”

The source also said they know Democrats are watching Trump’s every move, including his social media posts and campaign website, and described the gag order as “probably the most explicit example of campaign interference, where you’re actually telling your campaign … what they can and can’t say.”

“The Democrats are following very closely, whatever is said on TRUTH social, whatever is posted on the campaign website, and then it’s immediately getting filtered up to Alvin Bragg who has very easy channels of communication, which are pretty firmly established between the Democrats and in his office,” the source familiar said.

The restrictions are unlike any placed on a presidential campaign before in American history and put Trump on the back foot, Mike Davis, founder and president of the Article III Project, told the Daily Caller.

“This unconstitutional and un-American gag order is yet another weapon used by Biden and his henchmen to silence his chief political rival, President Trump. Michael Cohen and others can go make money trashing Trump, yet he can’t respond due to this illegal gag order,” Davis said. “So as a result, all of Trump’s opposition can run roughshod over him without worrying about what Trump will say to counter their arguments. This gag order sets a dangerous precedent moving forward.”

The source familiar echoed that sentiment, stating the order “greatly prohibits” the ability of the campaign to fight back.

“The campaign can’t go out there and defend him from those attacks. The campaign can talk about the case, sure, but they can’t respond to the direct attacks against him, which is totally outrageous,” they said. “So it does not only violate the president’s First Amendment rights, but it’s a direct assault on the campaign and their ability to fight this trial in the middle of the election.”

The source familiar added that the gag order should embolden Trump’s supporters and allies who are not tied to the campaign to stand up for him, since Trump and his campaign legally cannot.

Garrett Ventry, a Republican strategist, said Democrats cannot beat Trump at the polls so they are now interfering with the election instead. He also mentioned that Merchan donated to Biden, and that Bragg campaigned on putting Trump in jail.

“Judge Merchan’s gag order against President Trump is wildly unconstitutional and it is the peak of election interference. The entire campaign they’re running against President Trump has been lawfare. They can’t beat him at the polls,” Ventry said. “Joe Biden’s numbers are tanking and we’re even seeing collusion, with the former number three at Joe Biden’s DOJ being one of the prosecutors on this case in the Manhattan DA’s office.”

“Think about this, too. Alvin Bragg ran his entire entire campaign on putting Donald Trump in jail even before these charges ever happened. So you have an unfair prosecutor, you have a Democrat judge who donated to Joe Biden, you have a pretty much Democrat jury pool all going after President Trump. People who hate him,” he continued. “He can’t expect a fair trial now and now he’s not even allowed to and his campaign is not even allowed to speak back and fight out against the Democrat law fair.”

The source familiar with the situation explained that a key part of the gag order is on the “potential participation” of witnesses, because it’s unclear to the campaign if and when certain witnesses will be called.

Another source told the Caller that it’s “a pretty firm bet” that Cohen is going to be called as a witness, saying “he’s the only ‘eyewitness’ to this entire case. Without him, they don’t have a case.”

“Judge Merchan’s unconstitutional gag order is an egregious violation of President Trump’s First Amendment rights and a direct assault on our campaign in the middle of the election. Unfortunately for Joe Biden and his corrupt Democrat cronies, their unprecedented weaponization of our government is backfiring, Americans see the truth about this sham show trial, and President Trump will ultimately win on November 5th,” Karoline Leavitt, National Press Secretary for the Trump campaign, told the Caller in regards to the gag order.

Ventry also said that Republicans in Congress “need to step up” and “use every tool and measure they have” to defend Trump and hold these “rogue judges and prosecutors accountable for blatant election interference and an unconstitutional gag order.”

House Judiciary Chairman Rep. Jim Jordan sent a letter Tuesday to Attorney General Merrick Garland, regarding Colangelo, requesting documents and communications from Colangelo’s tenure at the Biden DOJ.

The Caller obtained a copy of the letter before it was sent. Jordan demanded a number of personnel files related to Colangelo’s hiring, employment and termination at the DOJ, a number of documents and communications from January 2021 to December 2022, and documents and communications related to Trump or his organization.

AUTHOR

HENRY RODGERS

Chief national correspondent. Follow Henry Rodgers On Twitter

RELATED ARTICLES:

Meet The Former Biden DOJ Official Who Jumped Ship To Prosecute Trump

Prosecutor Paints Trump Manhattan Case As ‘Election Conspiracy’ During Opening Statement

Trump Details Endless Legal Fights In Primetime Mar-A-Lago Address After Indictment

Jordan To Investigate Links Between Biden DOJ, Alvin Bragg’s Lead Prosecutor

RELATED VIDEO: Alina Habba: Trump’s case is ‘all by design’

POST ON X:

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Gun Groups Sound Alarm About New DOJ ‘Red Flag’ Law Center

/in , , , , , , , , /by

Gun groups are sounding the alarm about the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) new center aimed at helping states enforce red flag laws.

The DOJ launched its National Extreme Risk Protection Order (ERPO) Resource Center on Saturday to offer assistance to law enforcement officials, social services providers and others who implement red flag laws, which permit judges to temporarily strip individuals deemed a risk to themselves or others of their ability to possess firearms. The center, which will be run by the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Solutions, was started with a $2 million DOJ grant funded through the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act (BSCA) passed in 2022, according to the White House.

“Red flag laws are inherently a violation of the Second, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Fourteenth Amendments because they allow for the confiscation of legal firearms from law-abiding citizens without due process based on anonymous accusations,” the National Association for Gun Rights (NAGR) said in a statement to the Daily Caller News Foundation. “Thus, they have no place in American Jurisprudence.”

President Joe Biden and the DOJ will use the center to “continue their abuse of the constitutional rights of all Americans,” NAGR said.

Attorney General Merrick B. Garland said in the center’s announcement that it was “the latest example of the Justice Department’s work to use every tool provided by the landmark Bipartisan Safer Communities Act to protect communities from gun violence.”

“The launch of the National Extreme Risk Protection Order Resource Center will provide our partners across the country with valuable resources to keep firearms out of the hands of individuals who pose a threat to themselves or others,” Garland said.

Twenty-one states, along with the District of Columbia, have passed ERPO laws, according to the DOJ’s press release.

NAGR Vice President Ryan Flugaur told the Daily Caller News Foundation his organization blames Texas Sen. John Cornyn, who led Republican negotiations on the bill, for the “mess.” Flugaur said it should stop Cornyn from becoming the next Republican Senate leader.

Fifteen Senate Republicans joined Democrats in voting for the BSCA in 2022.

Gun Owners of America Director of Federal Affairs Aidan Johnston told the DCNF the office was “being created simply to pressure and bribe states into adopting these laws in exchange for more federal money.”

“For example, Michigan enacted a gun confiscation law within a few months of receiving a Cornyn-Murphy ‘grant.’” he said. “The People should demand their state lawmakers push back and never sell out your rights for 30 pieces of silver.”

Democratic Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer signed the state’s red flag bill into law in May 2023. The state was awarded a $7,945,884 DOJ grant in February 2023 “to help combat gun violence and enhance behavioral health and crisis care programs,” which was made possible through the BSCA.

Thirty-three members of Congress, led by Republican Kansas Sen. Roger Marshall and Republican West Virginia Rep. Alex Mooney, alleged in a letter last July that the DOJ illegally gave grant money to states that did not have red flag laws to “create and implement extreme risk protection order programs.”

“Every single ‘red flag’ gun confiscation law in the United States lacks due process because the government can convene a hearing and take your firearms away without you or your attorney ever being present to counter the claims being made,” Johnston told the DCNF.

AUTHOR

KATELYNN RICHARDSON

Contributor.

RELATED ARTICLE: EXCLUSIVE: Gun Owners Of America Comes Out Swinging Against John Cornyn After He Announced Bid For Senate Leader

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

DOJ Creates New Federal ‘Red Flag’ Center To Seize Firearms From Law-Abiding Americans [But Not Illegals]

/in , , , , , , , , , /by

Apparently the Democrat regime’s gun control mania only applies to law abiding American citizens but not illegals. An Obama judge U.S. District Judge Sharon Johnson Coleman recently ruled illegals can carry guns.

This all goes back to the relentless war on our first amendment – free speech. Once you criminalize speech (under the Orwellian ‘hate speech), all of our other rights come crashing down, like dominoes.

DOJ’s Sinister Scheme: Seizing Guns from Law-Abiding Citizens!

President Joe Biden’s Department of Justice (DOJ) made a significant announcement on Saturday with the launch of the National Extreme Risk Protection Order (ERPO) Resource Center, catching some congressional Republicans off guard. Attorney General Merrick Garland emphasized in a press release that the new center aims to equip law enforcement officials and other stakeholders with resources to prevent individuals deemed dangerous from accessing firearms. ERPOs, commonly known as “red flag” laws, enable authorities to confiscate guns from individuals deemed to pose a threat to themselves or others, with provisions to prevent them from purchasing or possessing firearms for the duration of the order.

Garland framed the establishment of the center as a proactive measure in leveraging the tools provided by the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act to address gun violence. The DOJ’s initiative underscores the administration’s commitment to utilizing all available means to enhance public safety and prevent potential tragedies involving firearms.

The newly launched National ERPO Resource Center includes a website offering a plethora of resources and guidance for stakeholders involved in implementing red flag laws. It provides training and technical assistance to various professionals, including law enforcement officers, prosecutors, judges, and mental health professionals, involved in executing laws aimed at curbing access to firearms for individuals deemed risky.

Additionally, the center’s website features a comprehensive state-by-state guide on red flag laws across the country, offering specific information on each state’s ERPO legislation. Currently, 21 states and the District of Columbia have enacted red flag laws, reflecting a growing trend in adopting measures to address concerns related to gun violence and mental health.

Republican lawmakers, however, expressed surprise and concern over the DOJ’s move to establish a federal resource center for red flag laws. Some, like Representative Thomas Massie and Senator Mike Lee, voiced opposition to the initiative, questioning its authorization and raising concerns about potential overreach by the federal government in matters traditionally regulated by states.

Continue reading.

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLES:

Why Red Flag Laws Failed Miserably in the Case of ‘J4TH Mass Murderer’ Robert ‘Bobby’ Crimo, III

Obama Appointed Judge Rules Illegals Can Carry Guns

Google and Meta Function as Extensions of the US Intelligence Community

RELATED VIDEOS:

Why Red Flag Laws are a Violation of the 4th, 5th and 14th Amendments

IN FOCUS: Democrats Vote Against Ban on Flying Illegal Aliens Into U.S. with Emerald Robinson – OAN

POST ON X:

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Department Of Justice Acknowledges Hunter Biden Laptop Content Is Legitimate For First Time

/in , , , , , , , /by

The Department of Justice (DOJ) has acknowledged the legitimacy of Hunter Biden’s infamous laptop data for the first time in a new court filing.

In a Tuesday court filing from DOJ prosecutors, which came in response to Biden’s request to have his federal firearm charges dismissed, investigators acknowledge the legitimacy of data found on Biden’s laptop prior to the 2020 election. The court filings described how IRS and FBI investigators had obtained a search warrant for tax violations on Biden, leading them to “various” backup data accounts.

The documents additionally note that investigators later came into “possession” of the laptop that Biden had previously “left at a computer store,” emphasizing that investigators had “already obtained” a large portion of the data from Apple.

“In August 2019, IRS and FBI investigators obtained a search warrant for tax violations for the defendant’s Apple iCloud account. In response to that warrant, in September 2019, Apple produced backups of data from various of the defendant’s electronic devices that he had backed up to his iCloud account,” the court documents stated.

“Investigators also later came into possession of the defendant’s Apple MacBook Pro, which he had left at a computer store. A search warrant was also obtained for his laptop and the results of the search were largely duplicative of information investigators had already obtained from Apple.”

Following the initial report on Biden’s laptop from the New York Post, backlash from Democratic officials, various media outlets and social media platforms ensued. Democratic operatives and their allies attempted to cast the findings from the laptop as “Russian disinformation” and alleged that reporting on it was a form of pro-Trump election interference.

A letter was soon released by 51 former intelligence officials who falsely claimed that the content on Biden’s laptop was a “Russian information operation.”

The “Russian disinformation” narrative pushed by officials then led to both Facebook and Twitter censoring the NY Post’s reporting, with sites like Politico claiming the story was false by using the former intel officials’ letter. President Joe Biden called the laptop contents “Russia disinformation” during his 2020 campaign, also using the intelligence officials’ letter as support.

However, while the rumors of Russia interference circled, the FBI reportedly knew that the contents within Biden’s laptop were real due to an interview with Biden’s former business associate, Tony Bobulinski. The  agency had previously interviewed Bobulinski on Oct. 23, 2020, after the report broke, in which he confirmed the authenticity of the laptop’s contents, noting that he had additional records on multiple cell phones.

The DOJ and FBI have since shied away from Biden’s laptop contents, with IRS whistleblower Gary Shapley confirming the authenticity of the laptop during testimony to Congress in June 2023, according to the New York Post.

The new filings come as a response to Biden’s investigation for gun charges which his legal team attempted to argue in December should be dismissed. Biden was indicted in September of 2023 on three federal gun charges after he had allegedly illegally purchased a revolver as he was battling a drug addiction.

While Hunter Biden pleaded not guilty to the charges in October of 2023, he could potentially face up to 25 years in prison.

AUTHOR

HAILEY GOMEZ

General assignment reporter.

RELATED ARTICLES:

FBI Investigators Found Cocaine On Firearm Pouch Hunter Biden Used, Prosecutors Say

‘Global’ Gave Hunter Biden Equity Stake For Introductions To Chinese And Indian Contacts, Indictment Shows

POST ON X:

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

POLICE STATE: Staunch Republican Douglas Mackey Sentenced To Prison For Posting Memes Mocking Hillary Clinton

/in , , , , , , , , /by

We no longer have a country when a highly partisan, corrupt judicial system sends people to prison for posting jokes.

Freedom of speech is worth fighting for, worth dying for. Our once-great nation was founded on it, and it’s the hill we must die on.

Freedom of speech is the foundation of a free society. Without it, a tyrant can wreak havoc unopposed, while his opponents are silenced.

Putting up with being offended is essential in a pluralistic society in which people differ on basic truths. If a group will not bear being offended without resorting to violence, that group will rule unopposed while everyone else lives in fear, while other groups curtail their activities to appease the violent group. This results in the violent group being able to tyrannize the others.

Social Media Influencer Sentenced for Election Interference in 2016 Presidential Race

Wednesday, October 18, 2023

Office of Public Affairs

Defendant Attempted to Trick Voters into Believing They Could Vote by Text Message

A social media influencer was sentenced today to seven months in prison and fined $15,000 for his role in a conspiracy to interfere with potential voters’ right to vote in the 2016 presidential election.

According to court documents, by 2016, Douglass Mackey, aka Ricky Vaughn, had established an audience on Twitter with approximately 58,000 followers. A February 2016 analysis by the MIT Media Lab ranked Mackey as one of the most significant influencers of the then-upcoming presidential election. Between September 2016 and November 2016, Mackey conspired with other influential Twitter users and with members of private online groups to use social media platforms, including Twitter, to disseminate fraudulent messages that encouraged supporters of presidential candidate Hillary Clinton to “vote” via text message or social media, which was legally invalid.

For example, on Nov. 1, 2016, in or around the same time that Mackey was sending tweets suggesting the importance of limiting “black turnout,” Mackey tweeted an image depicting an African American woman standing in front of an “African Americans for Hillary” sign. The ad stated: “Avoid the Line. Vote from Home,” “Text ‘Hillary’ to 59925,” and “Vote for Hillary and be a part of history.” The fine print at the bottom of the deceptive image stated: “Must be 18 or older to vote. One vote per person. Must be a legal citizen of the United States. Voting by text not available in Guam, Puerto Rico, Alaska or Hawaii. Paid for by Hillary For President 2016.” The tweet included the typed hashtag “#ImWithHer,” a slogan frequently used by then-presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. On or about and before Election Day 2016, at least 4,900 unique telephone numbers texted “Hillary” or some derivative to the 59925 text number, which had been used in multiple deceptive campaign images that Mackey and his co-conspirators tweeted.

AUTHOR

Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLE: RINOS WIN: Jim Jordan Withdraws, Won’t Seek Third Vote

RELATED TWEET:

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.