Bank of America ordered to pay $250 million for fake accounts, junk fees and withheld credit-card rewards

Wells Fargo paid out billions for similar practices

BY STEVE GELSI

SEE: https://www.marketwatch.com/story/bank-of-america-ordered-to-pay-250-mln-for-fake-accounts-junk-fees-and-withholding-credit-card-rewards;

Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau said Tuesday that Bank of America Corp. would pay a total of $250 million for illegally charging junk fees, withholding credit-card rewards, and opening fake accounts.

The bank BAC, +1.26% will pay more than $100 million to consumers who were harmed by these activities. The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency said the bank’s “double-dipping on fees” was illegal.

Bank of America will pay penalties of $90 million to the CFPB and $60 million to the OCC.

“Bank of America wrongfully withheld credit card rewards, double-dipped on fees, and opened accounts without consent,” said CFPB Director Rohit Chopra. “These practices are illegal and undermine customer trust. The CFPB will be putting an end to these practices across the banking system.”

A Bank of America spokesperson said: “We voluntarily reduced overdraft fees and eliminated all nonsufficient-fund fees in the first half of 2022. As a result of these industry-leading changes, revenue from these fees has dropped more than 90%.”

The spokesperson was referring to a Jan. 11, 2022, announcement about Bank of America reducing its overdraft fees and eliminating nonsufficient-fund fees.

Bank of America’s stock was up 1% in regular trades.

The moves come amid a crackdown by the Biden administration against junk fees.

In December, Wells Fargo & Co. WFC, +0.99% agreed to pay $3.7 billion for wrongdoing and mismanagement, including more than than $2 billion in redress to consumers.

The CFPB said that Wells Fargo had harmed millions of people through wrongful car repossessions, improper denials of mortgage-loan modifications, and surprise overdraft fees that were charged to consumers who in fact had enough funds in their accounts at the time of their transactions.

Eric Schiffer, the chair of the Patriarch Organization, a private-equity firm, said the transgressions by Bank of America appear to be more contained than those of Wells Fargo, but that the bank’s reputation with consumers with be hurt.

“It’s a wake-up call for all financial firms to make sure their compliance is in place to protect the most valuable asset you have, which is the relationship with your customers,” Schiffer said. “Cutting fees is a distraction to balance the hit Bank of America just got on trust. The backdrop is consumers are still skeptical about banks because of a pattern of scams like Wells Fargo or banks not having enough assets to cover withdrawals like what happened at SVB [Silicon Valley Bank].”

Separately on Tuesday, William F. Galvin, secretary of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, ordered Raymond James Financial Services Inc.  RJF, +1.13% to return $8.25 million plus interest to customers who were charged “unreasonably high fees” as part of a settlement, according to a statement.

He also ordered Raymond James to pay $4.2 million in fines and penalties to the six states involved in the probe of the financial firm.

Galvin said an investigation revealed that the broker-dealer had levied “unreasonable commissions” on more than 270,000 equity transactions since 2018.

The broker had applied a $75 minimum commission regardless of the “reasonableness” of the commission. Raymond James’s stock was up 0.6% in recent trades.

From the archives (December 2022): Wells Fargo ordered to pay $3.7 billion for alleged mismanagement of auto loans, mortgages and deposit accounts

Biden Admin Indicts Witness Planning to Testify Against Biden Family

Biden Admin Indicts Witness Planning to Testify Against Biden Family

BY MATT MARGOLIS

SEE: https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/matt-margolis/2023/07/11/biden-admin-indicts-witness-planning-to-testify-against-biden-family-n1709636;

Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

According to an indictment in Manhattan that was unsealed on Monday, Dr. Gal Luft, a key witness in the House Republicans’ investigation into the Biden Crime Family, is now facing federal charges. The charges include arms trafficking, operating as an unregistered lobbyist for China, and conspiring to evade U.S. sanctions on Iran.

“Prosecutors in the Southern District of New York say, Luft, 57, a dual US-Israeli citizen who was arrested in Cyprus this past February and went on the run after being released on bail prior to his extradition, agreed in 2015 to let former Hong Kong official Patrick Ho send $350,000 each year to Luft’s think tank, the Institute for the Analysis of Global Security,” reports the New York Post. “In return, the indictment said, Luft agreed to “recruit and ‘educate’ a former high-ranking US official to ‘make public statements … which were in the interest of China.'”

Luft says the case against him is a political hit job designed to stop him from testifying before the House Oversight Committee over the payments made to the Biden family from people connected to Chinese military intelligence. Luft also says that the Bidens had a mole in the FBI who shared classified information with those Chinese nationals in the CCP-controlled energy company China Energy Fund Committee (CEFC).

“I, who volunteered to inform the US government about a potential security breach and about compromising information about a man vying to be the next president, am now being hunted by the very same people who I informed — and may have to live on the run for the rest of my life,” Luft told the Post last week.

At the time of the alleged arrangement with Luft, [former Hong Kong official Patrick] Ho headed up the China Energy Fund Committee, the non-governmental section of the CEFC China Energy conglomerate which had officers in Hong Kong and Virginia.

Around the same time, in late 2015, CEFC China Energy Chairman Ye Jianming and Executive Director Jianjun Zang are believed to have met then-second son Hunter Biden for the first time.

Their partnership culminated in a little more than $5 million being wired to Biden-controlled accounts in August 2017.

The following month, Ho agreed to pay Hunter Biden a $1 million retainer to act as his legal counsel. During Ho’s trial, claims Luft, prosecutors removed all reference to Hunter and his family members from emails between Ho and Hunter associate Vuk Jeremic, a CEFC advisory board member, former Serbian foreign minister and ex-president of the United Nations General Assembly.

He was convicted on March 25, 2019, and sentenced to three years in prison. Following his prison term, he was deported. “Days later, Luft says, he met with six FBI and Justice Department officials in Brussels and told them the extent of the Biden connection with CEFC,” the Post reports. “Among his claims was that the conglomerate was paying $100,000 a month to Hunter and $65,000 to first brother Jim Biden, in exchange for their FBI connections and use of the Biden name to promote China’s Belt and Road Initiative around the world — and that the money was being funneled through another Biden family associate, Rob Walker.”

Luft also claimed that Joe Biden attended a meeting in early 2017 at the Four Seasons Hotel in Washington, D.C., along with his son Hunter and officials from CEFC. This sighting was later confirmed by Walker. Luft further mentioned that Hunter had an FBI source referred to as “One Eye” who had alerted Chinese businessmen Ho and Ye about being under investigation. However, Ye has been missing since his detention by Chinese authorities in early 2018.

“The DOJ says I caused a payment of $6,000 a month to former CIA Director James Woolsey in order to put his name on an article I had ghostwritten for the China Daily newspaper,” Luft said last week regarding the indictment. “Why am I being indicted … for ghostwriting an innocuous article for which I received no payment, let alone from a foreign government, when the mother of all FARA cases, the Bidens’ systemic influence-peddling on behalf of foreign governments, for which they raked [in] millions, goes unpunished?”

Our Alleged President is a Corrupt Scumbag; and the Ruling Class is OK With That. Is a backlash coming?

BY KURT SCHLICHTER

SEE: https://www.frontpagemag.com/our-alleged-president-is-a-corrupt-scumbag-and-the-ruling-class-is-ok-with-that/?mc_cid=13909b42bc;

Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

It’s undeniable that PINO – President-In-Name-Only – Joe Biden is massively corrupt in every possible way. From leveraging his position as vice-president for cash to covering up for his meth-addled, stripper-banging, scumbag son – who is currently spilling his Bolivian party powder all over the White House – this senile pervert is a one-man crimewave. And the ruling class simply doesn’t care. If anything, its members are happy about it. This is not something they merely excuse. This is something that they find a positive good. Grandpa Badfinger reset the corruption bar for all of them. Now they too can now freely line their own pockets without fear of shame or prosecution while sending us proles an unequivocal message – we can do whatever we want.

As the gang at the Ruthless podcast (who I’m scheduled to visit next month) observe, this is not about hypocrisy. We’re so far past “Imagine the scandal if Trump did that!” This is about hierarchy. This is to show you that they have power and there is nothing you can do about it.

But I’m unconvinced they are thinking this through.

Granted, it’s bad now and will likely get worse before it gets worse – for them. Let’s understand something. Nothing is ever going to happen to Joe Biden regarding his massive criminal enterprise. Nada. Zip. Asa Hutchinson’s chances in the primaries.

Sure, Crusty is probably going to get impeached somewhere down the road, once the Republicans gather all the evidence they can, and there’s a lot of evidence. It’s damning. And it does not matter because Democrats support the PINO’s graft. While the impeachment will barely squeak through the House on a pure party line vote, it’ll go over and die in the Senate. Not a single Democrat – well, maybe election-year Manchin – will vote for it. Understand that to the Democrat Party, power is more important than any of our norms, rules and/or customs. We constantly hear about “Our Democracy,” despite us being a Republic. Well, Our Democracy, Our Butt. It doesn’t mean a nation run by citizens to them. It means the nation run by them.

So, Joe Biden will skate on being impeached, as will that loathsome Stasi clerk Merrick Garland, and whatever that idiot’s name is who runs Homeland Security and left the border wide open. There will be no accountability because there is no accountability. The ruling class figured out that if they just refuse to abide by the rules that used to exist, there’s no cosmic referee out there who will descend from the sky and enforce them. The regime media certainly isn’t going to do it. You just bullSchiff your way through, you commit a bunch of crimes, and you keep your position and your prestige. That’s great for the elite in the short-term. It’s not so great for Our Democracy in the long term. But the elite does not want citizens to have a say in our government. It does not want us to have a saying in anything. It wants us to be disenfranchised, disarmed, defeated, and sometimes deceased.

Look at all the norms and the rules and the guardrails that have been bulldozed away and you might well wonder what the bottom of this slippery slope is going look like. But those of us with a glancing familiarity with history don’t wonder. We know the answer, and the answer is not particularly nice. In the short-term, America will stumble along under the New Corruption for a while, but over time this is unsustainable. These guys are running our country on the fumes of the empty gas tank of American democracy. They keep going because of inertia, running on the power of default. Normal people want to think everything‘s just going along as it always has, but they can sense that something is wrong. They are troubled when they see the persecution of Donald Trump and other dissidents, of pandemic shenanigans, of Wall Street bailouts and endless wars, but it’s comforting for them to assume that everything is working, that the system is fair and just, and that we aren’t living in a dictatorship of the Whole Foods bourgeoise.

Those of us who are based see the reality and accept it, and that’s why we’re not freaking out when we see Hunter using daddy’s name in vain to shake down Chinese crooks for cash. It’s not a shock. We understand the inherent corruption of the ruling class. We understand that the idea that we live under the rule of law is baloney. We understand that the only thing that matters is power. But the normal people are going to figure that out too. How do I know? Because I know history, and this kind of crap cannot go on forever.

The advantage that patriots have over the people running the institutions is that our garbage ruling class is not composed of impressive people. They didn’t build the institutions they are destroying. They inherited them via their Ivy League credentials – often as legacies, which the left will cry about but not actually change because that is how the ruling class perpetuates itself. These are not accomplished people. These are not smart people. These are not brave people, and these are not tough people. They are cruel and ruthless people, willing to use the existing systems of power to defend their societal sinecure, but their problem and their weaknesses that they rely on the proles to do their dirty work.

Can the elite really rely on them? As I’ve discussed before, they can certainly rely on the leadership of the institutions, like the military, to do whatever they were told to do in order to maintain the power of our garbage ruling class. But an institution is not just its leaders. An institution is also its members. The members are largely normals. And remember that the enemy – and you are the enemy – always gets a vote. Crushing us would be no simple task no matter what F-16 advocates like our PINO say.

How is this trend going to turn out? It’s too early to say. But it very likely will get much, much worse. It is not beyond the realm of possibility that Republicans are going to nominate a man for president who the Democrats will throw in jail on trumped up charges – figuratively and literally – before the 2024 election. And then it’s going to occur to even the most unbased people that the rules don’t necessarily apply anymore. Oh, we’re not going to break into some sort of civil war because Trump gets hauled off to Leavenworth. That’s not likely for a number of reasons. But it is going to destroy the illusions of norms for the normals, and the illusion of norms matters. Norms are, in fact, the only real protection those currently engaged in eliminating the norms have.

I’ve often said that Trump is not our last chance but their last chance, and that remains accurate. A backlash is coming. It’s inevitable. Just look at history, which is a giant timeline of rebellions and reformations and revolutions. The idea that the mass of Americans is going to spend the rest of eternity being bullied by a bunch of people with the politics of a divorced Santa Monica wine mom simply goes against everything history teaches us. The question is not if they are stopped but how, and how hard.

Are we going to re-embrace the Constitution? Are we looking at an American Cesar, or an American Franco? These are questions that our ruling class will never ask because they are uninformed of history and uninterested in it. But they’re going to get interested, very interested, in history because history is very interested in them.

White Ethnic Flight from America’s Cities; What Moynihan understood that Sotomayor doesn’t.

BY JACK CASHILL

SEE: https://www.frontpagemag.com/white-ethnic-flight-from-americas-cities/?mc_cid=13909b42bc;

Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

In 1965, then undersecretary of labor Daniel Patrick Moynihan foresaw a problem that was about to undo the promise of Martin Luther King’s 1963 “I have a dream” speech, the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and his boss Lyndon Jonson’s 1965 launch of the “Great Society.”

In reading her dissenting opinion last week on the affirmative action case before the Supreme Court, I got the distinct impression that Justice Sonia Sotomayor never read Moynihan’s The Negro Family: The Case for National Action, likely never heard of it, and certainly had no idea of how prescient it would prove to be.

Despite the “full recognition of their civil rights,” argued Moynihan, black Americans were growing increasingly discontent. They were expecting that equal opportunities would “produce roughly equal results, as compared with other groups,” but, added Moynihan, “This is not going to happen.” Nor did he think it ever would happen “unless a new and special effort is made.”

Nearly sixty years later Moynihan’s warning seems all the more prophetic. Herculean efforts have been made over the years to  achieve “equal results,” but none has addressed the core issue. Wrote Moynihan:

The fundamental problem, in which this is most clearly the case, is that of family structure. The evidence— not final, but powerfully persuasive—is that the Negro family in the urban ghettos is crumbling. A middle class group has managed to save itself, but for vast numbers of the unskilled, poorly educated city working class the fabric of conventional social relationships has all but disintegrated.

In a Father’s Day speech in 2008 then candidate Barack Obama affirmed Moynihan’s worst fears. “Of all the rocks upon which we build our lives, we are reminded today that family is the most important,” Obama told the congregation at a Chicago church.

Here, Obama spoke with a candor not heard since Lyndon Johnson threw Moynihan under the bus. “But if we are honest with ourselves,” he continued, “we’ll admit that what too many fathers also are is missing—missing from too many lives and too many homes. They have abandoned their responsibilities, acting like boys instead of men. And the foundations of our families are weaker because of it.”

Obama started chipping away at the very idea of systemic racism as the cause of Black failure. “We know that more than half of all Black children live in single-parent households, a number that has doubled—doubled—since we were children. We know the statistics—that children who grow up without a father are five times more likely to live in poverty and commit crime; nine times more likely to drop out of schools and twenty times more likely to end up in prison.”

Like Moynihan, Obama came in for a spanking of his own. A hot mic at a Fox News studio picked up Jesse Jackson saying to another Black guest, “See, Barack been, um, talking down to Black people on this faith-based—I wanna cut his nuts out.” Here Jackson made a cutting motion with his hands and added additional commentary that I dare not repeat. Obama got the message. He never spoke forcefully on this subject again.

If nothing else, Jesse Jackson affirmed Moynihan’s prediction:

“The principal challenge of the next phase of the Negro revolution is to make certain that equality of results will now follow. If we do not, there will be no social peace in the United States for generations.”

In her contentious and confused dissenting opinion on the affirmative action case before the Supreme Court, Justice Sonia Sotomayor proved there is no social peace even in the highest court of the land.

“The Court subverts the constitutional guarantee of equal protection,” Sotomayor scolds her colleagues, “by further entrenching racial inequality in education, the very foundation of our democratic government and pluralistic society.”

Where to begin?  For starters, in my new book, Untenable: The True Story of White Ethnic Flight from America’s Cities, I show the futility of any quest to achieve equity among ethnic groups either economically or academically.

Starting with no more “privilege” than any other ethnic group in my native Newark, New Jersey, Jewish students consistently outperformed all others. By mid-twentieth century, Blacks were narrowing the gap between themselves and the city’s two other dominant ethnic groups, Irish and Italian, but none of these groups would ever outperform Jews. Due to the family dissolution of which Moynihan warned, Blacks would fall further behind the other three.

Later in the century, two other ethnic groups emerged in Newark as political blocs, Portuguese and Puerto Rican. The Portuguese had an advantage: they arrived in Newark free from the tentacles of the welfare state. With strong families and minimal public assistance, they created jobs and a harmonious neighborhood that has proved an attractive destination for outsiders. The Puerto Ricans did not.

In her dissent Sotomayor speaks of a society “where opportunity is dispensed along racial lines.” The Puerto Rican Sotomayor was, of course, righter than she knew. Fifty years ago, she was accepted at Princeton despite her admittedly below par test scores. “I am the perfect affirmative action baby,” she has conceded. Her “racial” line was what got her in the front door although, in truth, “Puerto Rican” is no more a race than Mexican or American.

Sotomayor attributes the “achievement gaps” in standardized test scores to “entrenched racial inequality in K–12 education.” Sotomayor, however, attended excellent Catholic schools in New York City K-12. That she would get an affirmative action bump while the Portuguese would not is attributable solely to the political clout of the much larger “Latino” bloc. It has nothing to do with justice.

Fifty years after Sotomayor’s admission to Princeton, Puerto Ricans remain among the “underrepresented groups.” The reason why they are underrepresented, she contends, is that, “for far too long [they] were denied admission through the force of law.” This is nonsense. With logic like this, it was no wonder she tested poorly.

Even if Puerto Ricans as a cultural group were as achievement oriented as Jews and many Asian groups, their rates of fatherlessness would subvert their ambitions. In Puerto Rico, 49 percent of children live in single parent households. For Puerto Ricans in the U.S. the number is likely comparable. This would be two times higher than the rate among blacks that triggered Moynihan’s report.

Writ large, some 42 percent of “Latino” children live in single parent households today. This compares to 24 percent among non-Hispanic whites and 16 percent among Asians. For Black children, the number is 64 percent.

Given the odds at the starting gate, “equity’ will only be achieved if President Biden appoints the equivalent of what satirist Kurt Vonnegut called a “handicapper general.” In his 1961 short story “Harrison Bergeron,” Vonnegut imagined an official with the power to assure that everyone would be “equal every which way” and no one would be “smarter than anybody else.”

Sonia Sotomayor, I think, has just the right amount of imagination to do that job well.

Jack Cashill’s new book, Untenable: The True Story of White Ethnic Flight from America’s Cities, is now widely available.

Alejandro Mayorkas’ Corrupt Legacy How he helped release a major cocaine trafficker from prison.

BY RON KOLB

SEE: https://www.frontpagemag.com/alejandro-mayorkas-corrupt-legacy/?mc_cid=13909b42bc;

Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

When Homeland Security Director Alejandro Mayorkas appeared on The Today Show on May 12th – the same day Title 42 ended – he was in for a rude reception. Anchor Savannah Guthrie asked about the record number of crossings and why the chaos was continuing. Mayorkas, as usual, blamed Congress.

She then asked about migrants being released into the country with no court date and no way to track them and that a Florida Judge had quickly blocked the plan. He attacked the Judge, saying it was harmful, but 23 States have now joined Florida to block it and an appeals court has now upheld Florida’s decision.

Guthrie then asked if Biden bore any responsibility when he said at a Democratic debate in 2019 that, “we’re a nation that says if you want to flee and you’re facing oppression, you should come.” Mayorkas then blamed smugglers and once again, the Congress.

As the number of migrants continue to surge across the border, there has been a continuing effort to impeach Mayorkas. The House Homeland Security Committee has begun hearings on Mayorkas that might lead to impeachment. At the first hearing, former Border Patrol Chief Rodney Scott said that Mayorkas’ agenda was to “find new ways to let more migrants into the U.S.,” and Former Acting Homeland Director Chad Wolf added that “it was by design.”

In reality, his career has long been marred by scandal and corruption. In 2015, the Homeland Security Inspector General found then Deputy Director Mayorkas had showed “favoritism and special access” involving visas and green cards when he was Director of Citizenship and Immigration from 2009 to 2013. Some of those receiving special treatment were then-Nevada Senator Harry Reid, then-Virginia Governor Terry McCauliffe and Hillary Clinton’s brother Tony Rodham.

Even worse, fifteen whistleblowers reported that Mayorkas’ loose standards caused people who committed fraud and money laundering to receive visas. The 99-page report eviscerated Mayorkas, saying he had caused “deep resentment” among the staff, who felt “uncomfortable and pressured” to comply with his wishes, and that Mayorkas had “lowered the morale” of the department.

Mayorkas had been avoiding the press after the report’s release in 2015, and when approached by ABC News, hid behind security and fled. The devastating report from the IG should have ended Mayorkas’ career.

But six years later, before his inaugural in January 2021, president-elect Biden nominated two crucial cabinet members: Xavier Beccera for Health and Human Services and Alejandro Mayorkas for Homeland Security, and both of their pasts made them uniquely unqualified to ever serve the public again in any capacity because they had helped a major cocaine trafficker be released from prison.

In Bill Clinton’s final days in the White House 20 years earlier, his office became a flea market and clearing house for terrorists, drug dealers, con artists and other of societies miscreants and criminals to receive clemencies and pardons, most notably fugitive billionaire and tax cheat Marc Rich. 

Members of the Clinton family would cash in, including Hillary’s brother Tony Rodham, who would receive 240 thousand dollars from two carnival promoters who were convicted of bank fraud, and most notably, her brother Hugh-who would be paid as we shall see-over 400 thousand dollars for his unholy efforts. Hillary herself was involved months earlier with the notorious FALN terrorist pardons, in a blatant attempt to try and secure the substantial Puerto Rican vote in New York during her 2000 Senate campaign. But by 2001, pardon and clemency handouts were a no-holds barred circus. One of them became as noteworthy as the FALN and Rich pardons.

A few years earlier on December 20, 1993, a grand jury in Minneapolis issued a 34-count indictment against Carlos Vignali, Jr. and 29 others in the largest drug investigation in Minnesota history. Vignali, born in 1971, was the ringleader and the group had shipped hundreds of pounds of cocaine from California to Minnesota to be made into crack.

The evidence was overwhelming. On December 12, 1994, all but one of the defendants were convicted or pled guilty. Vignali was convicted of three counts of conspiracy and cocaine distribution and acquitted on a fourth count, and had been caught on audiotape, coming across as a boastful bully. Vignali remained uncooperative and unrepentant.

He was also a fledging rapper calling himself “C-Low” with Brownside, an Hispanic group formed by Eazy-E, and spent some of his proceeds at the tables in Las Vegas with his father, who had set up Carlos in an exclusive condo. The pre-sentencing report had recommended 12-15 years, and on July 17, 1995, Judge David Doty sentenced him to the latter.

His father, Carlos “Horacio” Vignali, Sr., born in 1946, was a wealthy L.A. area real estate owner and had hosted fundraisers and donated to several local political figures. Soon after the conviction of his son, he filed an appeal, and began contacting his political friends to write letters that falsely claimed that Carlos had no criminal record.

But a House Committee investigating the Clinton pardons in 2002 found that Vignali had two prior convictions and two arrests. In 1989, Vignali had been convicted and fined for fighting in a public place, and later for vandalism. He’d also been arrested for reckless driving and later for assaulting a girlfriend. Vignali had also admitted being involved with two different gangs.

After the appeal was unanimously defeated in appellate court, Horacio decided to try for executive clemency with the Clinton White House.

He contacted then-L.A. area Congressman Xavier Becerra, whom he had donated 16 thousand dollars to in three of Becerra’s campaigns. Even though neither of the Vignali’s had resided in his district, Becerra then called Alejandro Mayorkas, who was U.S. Attorney for Central California in Los Angeles, who claimed the sentence was too harsh.

Becerra then contacted Pardon Attorney Roger Adams at the Justice Department and Meredith Cabe at the White House (legal) Counsel Office. Cabe would later say he was pushing for clemency for Vignali, but Becerra later claimed he never explicitly supported clemency for Vignali but had wanted a “review” of the case.

On November 21, 2000, Becerra sent a letter to Bill Clinton, who had less than two months remaining in office. He falsely claimed that Vignali had no previous criminal record, was innocent, and how much it had affected his parents, whom he both knew.

Meanwhile, Mayorkas twice contacted Minnesota U.S. Attorney Todd Jones, who had originally tried Vignali. During the first contact, Jones warned Mayorkas that Vignali was “a major player,” and “don’t go there,” and that Vignali was “bad news.”

Mayorkas also twice contacted Andrew Dunne, who worked with Jones as an Assistant U.S. Attorney. Mayorkas hoped that Jones’ office would actually lobby for clemency for Vignali, but Dunne flat out rejected it, and thought the calls were “highly unusual.”

Mayorkas actually met the elder Vignali and had conversations about clemency for his son. Vignali also brought up executive clemency and asked if Mayorkas would call the White House.

Before Mayorkas made the second call to Jones, he called the Pardon Attorney’s Office and claimed that an unidentified female staffer said it was alright even if the case was not in his jurisdiction, and he claimed he only wanted to vouch for the defendant’s father.

Then Mayorkas made the second call to prosecutor Jones, telling him of his intent to call the White House. Jones once again told Mayorkas he opposed clemency. After the call, Jones was troubled by the lobbying of Mayorkas, because someone from another jurisdiction who had not prosecuted the case was trying to recommend clemency.

In spite of Jones second stern warning, Mayorkas called White House Counsel Bruce Lindsey, who was very close to the Clintons, and then received a return call from Meredith Cabe and Eric Angel, who worked with Lindsey on pardons. Mayorkas told them he was not that familiar with the case and knew his parents well, but afterward would claim he did not recommend clemency. Cabe would later say that Mayorkas had definitely supported clemency. So did Lindsey and White House Chief of Staff John Podesta.

Mayorkas had laid the groundwork for clemency, but there was another major player that Horacio Vignali had reached out to. He had known Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca since 1991. Vignali raised or had contributed a stunning total of over 200 thousand dollars to Baca’s campaigns.

Vignali asked Baca to write Clinton a letter, and he also told Baca that Hillary’s brother Hugh Rodham was helping Carlos receive clemency. Vignali had paid Hugh four thousand dollars, and then another 200 thousand if Carlos was pardoned. Baca at first refused to write a letter, but decided to write one that would praise Horacio and make no mention of Carlos. The senior Vignali didn’t think it would help, and Baca did not send it.

Baca then received a call from Hugh Rodham, but Baca later said he told Rodham he had reservations. Baca then received a call from Dawn Woolen, assistant to Lindsey, and she asked Baca what he thought of Horacio, and Baca spoke favorably. She then asked if Bill Clinton should pardon Carlos. Baca later claimed he didn’t know enough about the case and that it was up to Clinton. Woolen, however said that Baca supported a commutation but did not want to write it in a letter.

White House staff later claimed that Mayorkas and Baca had an impact, even though both men attempted to use the elder Vignali as a backdoor way to pardon Carlos.

Meanwhile, Bruce Lindsey was the point man at the White House for Horacio. He falsely told Lindsey that Vignali was innocent and had no previous criminal record. He mentioned Mayorkas and Baca supported clemency as well as the prosecutor, Todd Jones in Minnesota. However, Jones and his two assistant prosecutors, Andrew Dunne and Denise Reilly both strongly opposed clemency, as did Judge David Doty, who had sentenced Vignali.

But the White House staff, including Lindsey, Cabe and Angel, would soon find out the truth. Pardon Attorney Roger Adams issued a strong report denying clemency, noting Vignali was not a first-time offender, was the leader of the cocaine ring, and that the prosecutors and Judge Doty had strongly opposed any pardon. When his report was sent to the White House, it did not contain Deputy Attorney General Holder’s signature, which would have had much more influence. Adams signed the report opposing clemency for Vignali instead of Holder, thinking the Justice Department should be on record opposing a pardon.

Adams concluded his report writing that “…I recommend that you deny his (Vignali’s) petition.”

Even after learning the truth about Carlos Vignali’s history, the staff later claimed that they considered the support of Sheriff Baca and U.S. Attorney Mayorkas to be significant. And Hugh Rodham continued to contact the White House, including both Lindsey and Cabe. Lindsey, who would soon be president of the tainted Clinton Foundation, later said under oath that he thought the Vignali commutation was an “appropriate one.”

On January 20th, Clinton’s final day in office, he commuted Vignali’s sentence, who had served less than six years (and less than 40 percent) of his fifteen-year sentence. Most of the media coverage focused on the Marc Rich pardon. There was also controversy about Clinton pardoning two Weather Underground terrorists, including the infamous Susan Rosenberg with an assist from Congressman Jerrold Nadler.

On January 24th, Hugh Rodham received 200 thousand dollars from the senior Vignali for helping his son receive clemency. But on February 20, numerous media reports headlined that Hugh Rodham had been paid over 204 thousand dollars by Horacio Vignali and another 230 thousand by Glenn Braswell, who sold miracle medical cures and had been convicted of mail fraud, perjury and tax evasion and was still under investigation. Hillary, who had just been sworn in as a senator, claimed that she was “extremely disappointed,” and “knew nothing” about Hugh taking money for pardons.

Bill Clinton claimed “neither Hillary or I had any knowledge” of the payments, and that Hugh should return any money, but Rodham’s attorney later said that Hugh had not returned more than 150 thousand and had no intent to return anything more. Clinton himself has never explained why he chose to pardon Vignali, a major and unrepentant drug trafficker, to serve less than half of his 15-year sentence.

Even though Pardon Attorney Roger Adams made the White House aware of the facts of the Vignali case, no one ever contacted Minnesota law enforcement, the federal prosecutors there, or Judge David Doty. Todd Jones, the U.S. Attorney and the chief prosecutor, told Roger Adams he was against the pardon because “it was a no-brainer,” and he “did not believe there was any way he was going to be granted (a pardon) in this case.”

Jones’ Assistant U.S. Attorney Denise Reilly told me that she had opposed a pardon, and that it was “bought with money.” Judge Doty sent a letter to the Justice Department opposing clemency because of Vignali’s role in the conspiracy and his lack of remorse.

Gerry Wehr, a retired investigator of the Vignali case in Minnesota, is still outraged. He told me Mayorkas “is either incompetent or a liar,” and Becerra and Mayorkas “were only following the democratic party’s wishes.” His colleague Jeff Burchette, who spent 18 years as a narcotics investigator and also worked the Vignali case, is still furious, telling me that Mayorkas should never have been Homeland Security Director because “he’s so full of “s–t,” and that Becerra should never have been HHS Secretary because he and Mayorkas are both “f–ing clowns.”

Hugh Rodham and Horacio Vignali refused to speak to investigators or go under oath. In 2017, Los Angeles County Sheriff Baca was convicted of obstruction of justice and lying to the FBI because of the abuse of county inmates, including beatings and even rape and trying to cover it up. Other officers were also convicted, and Baca was released from prison in 2022 after serving two years of a three-year sentence.

After Biden nominated Mayorkas and Becerra for their cabinet posts in 2020, they were narrowly confirmed by the Senate on mostly party line votes. Since Mayorkas became Homeland Security Director, the flow of fentanyl, human trafficking and migrants crossing the border remains out of control, even though Mayorkas insists that it is not. His plan to let illegals cross the border without a court date continues to be blocked, and now Mayorkas is refusing to make public the number of migrants on the terror watch list that were stopped at the border.

And the actions of Mayorkas and Baca as well as Xavier Becerra in 2001 gave the Clinton White House an excuse to pardon drug kingpin Carlos Vignali and should have ended all of their careers. Duncan DeVille, who was Assistant U.S. Attorney under Mayorkas, tendered his resignation to him citing his involvement with the Vignali case.

In 2002, a year after Carlos Vignali had received clemency, it was discovered that the DEA and other investigators had found that Horacio Vignali was also involved in the drug trade, even at times with his son. Mayorkas and Baca absurdly claimed that they would not have gotten involved if they’d only known at the time.

Also, for Mayorkas, being slammed by the Inspector General in 2015 for inappropriate behavior in dispensing visas and green cards should have sent him into permanent exile.

And Judge Doty said the Vignali pardon was outrageous. He recently told me he was disappointed with Mayorkas then and now. In 2005, Doty told LA Weekly in referring to the Vignali clemency that, “the whole thing stunk,” and that it had “money and corruption and fraud written all over it.” Specifically referring to Mayorkas, he said, “what the U.S. Attorney in Los Angeles did was beyond the pale.”

Sadly, the legacy of Alejandro Mayorkas is tainted with dishonesty and corruption that has permanently left a soiled mark.

Ron Kolb is a native of Washington, DC and now resides in Corpus Christi, Texas. He’s been published in National Review, America Spectator, Wall Street Journal, American Greatness and American Thinker.

Silencing the ‘Sound of Freedom’-Why is the leftist media targeting a movie about child sex trafficking?

BY MARK TAPSON

SEE: https://www.frontpagemag.com/silencing-the-sound-of-freedom/?mc_cid=13909b42bc;

Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

Arguably no issue is less partisan, and more likely to unite people of every political stripe, even in our current state of hyper-polarization, than child trafficking. How could opposition to the cruel kidnapping of children and their forced recruitment into the international sex trade fail to draw unified support from all corners? And yet when a movie comes along that dares to address this uncomfortable topic, this horrific evil, head-on – a movie aimed not only at raising awareness but at inspiring action – the Left curiously rallies to undermine it with partisan smears and ugly innuendo.

Angel Studios’ Sound of Freedom opened last week, a thriller based on the captivating true story of Tim Ballard, a Homeland Security Special Agent frustrated by the lack of effective rescue strategies and prosecutorial authority to help trafficked children in underdeveloped nations. Ballard decided to circumvent the law enforcement bureaucracy to find a more direct, if dangerous, way to undertake the rescue of missing children. In 2013 he founded Operation Underground Railroad (OUR), a U.S.-based nonprofit dedicated to saving children from sex trafficking and sexual exploitation. The organization reportedly has undertaken more than a dozen sting operations. Actor Jim Caveziel brings his passionate intensity to the portrayal of Ballard in the film.

Caveziel, you will remember, is best known for his astonishing turn as Jesus Christ in the Mel Gibson-directed blockbuster The Passion of the Christ, the movie that opened the eyes of many Hollywood executives who didn’t believe or care that there was a massive audience out there in flyover America hungry for entertainment fare that didn’t trash their faith. Caveziel, openly Christian and conservative in an industry dominated by secular elites, calls Sound of Freedom the most important movie he’s done since Passion.

Now the low-budget film that had been shelved for nearly five years and nearly never saw the light of day has been resurrected and achieved stunning popular success on the Rotten Tomatoes entertainment review site (with a 99% Audience Score) and at the box office.

Just how well is Sound of Freedom doing? John Nolte at Breitbart News writes that “At the close of business Sunday, after only six days in theaters, Sound of Freedom has grossed $40.2 million. Also, over the weekend, it averaged $6,388 per screen, which topped [the latest installment of the Indiana Jones franchise] Dial of Destiny’s per-screen average of $5,760”:

Dial of Destiny might have come in second place with a weekend’s gross box office haul of $26.5 million, and Sound of Freedom might have come in third place with $18.2 million, but Sound of Freedom is doing a better job of packing them in.

Also, Unlike Disney’s Dial of Destiny, which is on track to lose tens if not hundreds of millions, Sound of Freedom is already profitable. Budgeted at just $14.5 million, Sound of Freedom started making millions the moment it crossed $25 to $30 million. And it’s just getting started. With an A+ Cinemascore and the corporate media’s desperate and insulting attacks, word of mouth is all set up to be phenomenal.

So now the Left, which panics when conservatives make inroads into the culture owned by the Left, has determined that Sound of Freedom must be sabotaged with high-profile articles smearing it as linked to the darkest corners of right-wing conspiracy-mongering.

The Washington Post, for example, undermined the movie right in the headline: “‘Sound of Freedom’ is a box office hit whose star embraces QAnon.”

Similarly, the far-Left Guardian put the conspiracy theory smear right up front, calling the “paranoid” movie “the QAnon-adjacent thriller seducing America.” The Guardian writer downplays the film’s success and sniffs about it benefiting from an “unsavory network of astroturfed boosterism among the far-right fringe, a constellation of paranoids now attempting to spin a cause célèbre out of a movie with vaguely simpatico leanings.”

The unhinged harpies at the feminist website Jezebel too, coincidentally, have written off the film as “an Anti-Child Trafficking Fantasy Fit for QAnon.”

What is QAnon? Good question. I’ve heard of it, but neither I nor any conservative I know could tell you anything about it, except that it is a favorite right-wing boogeyman of the Left. According to Wikipedia (which like every other Big Tech site is carefully curated and patroled by leftist activists, with whom I have personally wrestled when trying to correct misinformation on the site), “QAnon conspiracy theory is that a cabal of Satanic, cannibalistic child molesters are operating a global child sex trafficking ring which conspired against former U.S. President Donald Trump during his term in office.”

So now you know. I don’t know about the cannibalism or the Trump parts, but the part about global child sex trafficking is not a conspiracy theory but a demonstrable fact and is taken very seriously by law enforcement and human rights agencies from the FBI to the United Nations and all points in between.

Anyway, Rolling Stone piled on with a sneering hit piece by a keyboard coward named Miles Klee who claims, revealingly, that Caveziel and the other filmmakers have been “fomenting moral panic for years over this grossly exaggerated ‘epidemic’ of child sex trafficking.” Klee too dismisses the movie as a “QAnon-tinged thriller” “designed to appeal to the conscience of a conspiracy-addled boomer,” and slams its “hackneyed white savior narrative” – even though the real-life Ballard is white (unlike Klee, Ballard has actually put his own life on the line to save kidnapped children – does it matter what color he is? It does to the racist Left).

Klee concludes his hate-filled screed with a lament that instead of making movies about police brutality and climate catastrophes, “the far right turns to these sordid fantasies about godless monsters hurting children.” Try to imagine what kind of a person rolls his eyes about the very real sexual enslavement of children worldwide, a person who calls the child sex-trafficking phenomenon a “grossly exaggerated ‘epidemic.’”

“Grossly exaggerated”? Here are a few statistics from the Polaris Project, a movement to end human trafficking:

  • Human trafficking is a $150 billion-a-year criminal enterprise business worldwide
  • 27% of human trafficking victims are children
  • The United States is #1 in the world for sex trafficking
  • More than 500,000 children a year go missing in the U.S. alone
  • Over 500,000 online sexual predators are active each day
  • As of 2021, there are 252,000 websites containing images or videos of children sexually abused

Similar information can be found on many other sites dedicated to rescuing children from this plight. And yet Rolling Stone not only wants you to dismiss Jim Caveziel and the Sound of Freedom filmmakers as conspiracy theorists so that you will shun the movie and its passionate message on behalf of trafficked children but also to believe that child sex trafficking itself is overblown, especially compared to leftist shibboleths like the police genocide of blacks and climate change.

Remember, Rolling Stone is the magazine that glamorized the 2013 Boston Marathon bomber with a sexy come-hither cover shot, a terrorist who murdered 8-year-old Martin William Richard among others, and who would have killed many more with his ball-bearing-and-nail bomb if he had positioned it higher off the ground. Rolling Stone is also the magazine that tried to demonize ivermectin users during the pandemic; suppressed mention of child sexual abuse material in a child pornography investigation because the perpetrator was the friend of a RS editor; that hyped a false story about a University of Virginia fraternity rape in a controversy that nearly destroyed the lives of innocent young men. Rolling Stone is not a serious journalistic outlet; it’s a disgraceful, celebrity-polishing, leftwing activist rag that looks to destroy political opponents first and ask questions later, or preferably not at all.

It’s a magazine that defends pedophiles and child traffickers in order to own “far right” filmmakers. Think about that.

Even before Sound of Freedom hit the big screen, the Left was whitewashing child trafficking. A year ago The Atlantic, another left-wing publication, tried to discredit conservative concerns over child trafficking with a conspiracy fear-mongering piece called “The Great (Fake) Child Sex-Trafficking Epidemic.” “Dispatches from a moral panic” was the tagline.

The Left will hurl paint on priceless works of art, block major traffic arteries, and set themselves on fire to draw attention to their climate change hysteria, but then shrug off concerns about the reality of widespread sexual exploitation of children as a “moral panic.”

The media venom spewed at Sound of Freedom is so vicious and coordinated that one can’t help but wonder: who benefits from targeting the storytellers and heroes who target real-world pedophiles and child traffickers?

Pedophiles and child traffickers, that’s who.

* * *

Send the cultural Marxists protecting child sex traffickers and pedophiles a message: go see Sound of Freedom. Angel Studios has even partnered with a variety of theater ticketing services to provide Pay it Forward tickets to see it. Find instructions HERE for how to claim a free ticket to see the film in theaters.

Angel Studios also has great resources for learning about and joining the fight against child trafficking HERE.

Follow Mark Tapson at Culture Warrior

 

Avatar photo

Mark Tapson

Mark Tapson is the Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, focusing on popular culture. He is also the host of an original podcast on Frontpage, “The Right Take With Mark Tapson.”

One In Three Pfizer Vaccine Shots May Have Been A Placebo

There’s new evidence that many of the batches of the Pfizer [COVID-19] vaccine administered to the public, up to 30 percent, were placebos. And even worse, the evidence points to regulators knowing about it and willingly administering them. Now, either they were actively experimenting on the public or they were covering up for the fact that the vaccines came with numerous side effects.

Meta Review of Autopsies Finds Link Between COVID Shots and Death-The Vaccine Reaction

autopsy

BY BARBARA CACERES

SEE: https://thevaccinereaction.org/2023/07/meta-review-of-autopsies-finds-link-between-covid-shots-and-death/;

Republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, & research purposes.

An independent meta-review of autopsies on people who died after COVID-19 vaccination, published as a preprint in The Lancet online on July 5, 2023, found that 74 percent of the deaths were causally related to the shots. The review included 44 published papers that contained 325 autopsy cases and one necropsy case. According to one of the study’s co-authors, cardiologist Peter McCullough, MD, MPH of the Wellness Company, the review is the “final retort” to, “you cannot prove the vaccine caused the death.”1

Other co-authors of the study include doctors from Alberta (Canada) Health Services, the University of Michigan School of Public Health, Yale University School of Public Health, and the Wellness Company, as well as a former senior COVID pandemic advisor to the U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS).1

The most implicated organ system in COVID vaccine-associated death was the cardiovascular system (53 percent), followed by the hematological (blood) system (17 percent), the respiratory system (8 percent), and multiple organ systems (7 percent). The mean time from vaccination to death was 14.3 days, with most deaths occurring within a week from the last administration of a shot.1

Most of the deaths occurred among individuals who received Pfizer/BioNTech’s Comirnaty COVID shot (41 percent), followed by Sinovac Biotech’s CoronaVac (37 percent), AstraZeneca/Oxford University’s Vaxzevria (13 percent), Moderna/NIAID’s Spikevax (7 percent), Johnson & Johnson/Janssen’s Ad26.COV2.S (1 percent) and Sinopharm’s BBIBP-CorV (1 percent).1

Call for Research to Explain Mechanisms of Deaths Occurring After COVID Shots

The study’s authors suggest there is a high likelihood of a causal link between COVID shots and the deaths that occurred soon afterward in most cases and that “a further urgent investigation is required aimed at confirming our results and further elucidating the mechanisms underlying the described fatal outcomes with the goal of risk mitigation for the large numbers of individuals who have taken one or more COVID-19 vaccines.”1

More than 70 percent of the population of the United States is considered to have been “fully vaccinated” for COVID. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends the shots for anyone over six months old. The agency also recommends COVID shots for pregnant women.2 3

Dr. McCullough stated:

Going forward in response to sudden unexplained deaths reported in the press, it is reasonable to conclude the cause of death is a fatal covid-19 vaccine injury until proven otherwise. Proof the decedent is unvaccinated or an alternative diagnosis is now required for the vaccine to be exonerated. In the absence of this information, medical examiners, coroners, physicians, and government officials should attribute the death to COVID-19 vaccination.4

Sudden Removal of Study by The Lancet ‘Smacks of Raw Censorship’

The preprint of the study was removed from The Lancet less than 24 hours after it was published—prior to the initiation of an anticipated peer review. It was removed with the sole explanation that “the study’s conclusions are not supported by the study methodology.” Dr. McCullough said that the study was removed “after large volume download” from The Lancet’s preprint server.4

Will Jones of The Daily Sceptic wrote:

Without further detail from the Preprints with the Lancet staff who removed the paper it is hard to know what substance the claim that the conclusions are not supported by the methodology really has. A number of the authors of the paper are at the top of their fields so it is hard to imagine that the methodology of their review was really so poor that it warranted removal at initial screening rather than being subject to full critical appraisal. It smacks instead of raw censorship of a paper that failed to toe the official line.5 

Study Methodology is ‘Sound’

Clare Craig, BM, BCh, FRCPath, a diagnostic pathologist and co-chair of the HART (Health Advisory & Recovery Team) pandemic advisory group in the United Kingdom, noted:

It is important that attempts are made to quantify the risk of harm and censorship of these attempts, rather than open scientific critique, does nothing to help reassure people.

The VAERS system [of vaccine adverse event reporting] is designed to alert to potential harms without necessarily being the best way of measuring the extent of those harms. Quantifying the impact of deaths can be done by looking at overall mortality rates in a country, but that is an imperfect system with dubious accuracy.

The alternative approach of auditing deaths through autopsy is sound.5 


If you would like to receive an e-mail notice of the most recent articles published in The Vaccine Reaction each week, click here.

Click here to view References:

1 Hulscher N, Alexander P et.al. A Systematic Review of Autopsy Findings in Deaths After Covid-19 Vaccination. (available at SSRN) July 5, 2023
2 What’s the nation’s progress on vaccinations? USAFacts.org May 10, 2023.
3 U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. COVID-19 Vaccines for People Who Would Like to Have a Baby July 14, 2022.
4 McCullough P. COVID-19 Vaccine is the Culprit in Majority Found Dead after Injection. Substack July 5, 2023.
5 Jones W. Lancet Study on Covid Vaccine Autopsies Finds 74% Were Caused by Vaccine—Journal Removes Study Within 24 Hours. The Daily Sceptic July 6, 2023.