POLICE STATE: Three Christians Charged in NJ for ‘Intimidating’ Homosexual Salon Owner by Preaching ‘Homophobic Rhetoric’

BY MICHAEL MARCAVAGE

SEE: https://christiannews.net/2021/02/24/three-christians-charged-in-nj-for-intimidating-homosexual-salon-employee-by-preaching-homophobic-rhetoric/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Three Christians in New Jersey were charged with violating the state’s anti-bias intimidation statute, specifically for “shouting homophobic rhetoric directly in front of Allure Salon,” based on the citing officer’s wording, after the trio preached to the salon owner and an employee who are both openly homosexual.

Kombe Sefelino, Daniel Stephen Courney and Lydia Ortiz were all charged under two different sections of the state’s “bias intimidation” statute during an outreach outside of the notorious Metropolitan Medical Associates abortion facility, also known as “The Englewood Center for Women,” in Englewood, NJ.

The Allure Salon is nearby Metropolitan Medical Associates—a facility where late-term abortions occur. In an expose published by Priests for Life in 2018, the facility was caught on tape explaining how they will murder healthy babies “up until 24 [weeks]” if it is “something that you want.”

Christians, as well as others, have been gathering outside of the facility for years to oppose abortion and to engage in other speech activities. In January, Sefelino, Courney and Ortiz had spread out on the sidewalks nearby to effectively communicate the word of God and gospel of Jesus Christ to as many people as possible in the area which happened to be outside of the salon.

According to one of the citing officer’s summons’, the Christians “targeted … the owner, Rogelio Molina, who is homosexual” by preaching against homosexuality. On another citation, a salon employee, John Cacella, was written as the “target” of “homophobic rhetoric.”

N.J. attorney Demetrios Stratis, who is representing the Christians in the proceedings, told Christian News Network that his clients were there to be a voice for the voiceless and to preach the word of God to all, not just homosexuals. He explained that his clients’ delivered “a message of love” for Molina and Cacella’s souls and that only by repentance and faith can men be saved from the wrath to come, and he also cited that their actions were legally protected First Amendment activity.

The charging Englewood police officer, marked as “P. O Layne” on one of the summonses wrote:

“Within the jurisdiction of this court, with the purpose to intimidate an individual or group of individuals because of race, color, religion, gender, disability, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, national origin, or ethnicity, specifically by, on numerous separate occasions, shouting homophobic rhetoric directly in front of Allure Salon, targeted at the owner, Rogelio Molina, who is homosexual, in violation of N.J.S. 2C:16-1A(1), a crime of the fourth degree,” a summons reviewed by Christian News reads.

According to Stratis, if they are convicted of this fourth-degree charge, they can each be sentenced up to 18 months in prison.

The citation further documented N.J.S. 2C:33-4A under New Jersey’s harassment law, which is what enabled the anti-bias charge.

“Within the jurisdiction of this court of this court, with the purpose to harass another, make or cause to be made a communication or communications in a manner likely to cause annoyance or alarm, specifically by, on numerous separate occasions, shouting homophobic rhetoric directly in front of Allure Salon, targeted at the owner, Rogelio Molina, who is homosexual, in violation of N.J.S. 2C:33-4A, a petty disorderly person offense,” the summons states.

Bergen County Assistant Prosecutor & Bias Officer Vered Adoni

Stratis said that he spoke to the prosecutor assigned to the case—identifying her as “the head of the Bias Crimes Unit in the Bergen County Prosecutor’s Office”—and attempted to reason with her by explaining that his clients do not solely focus on homosexual sin. Stratis said that he told her that all sin “prevents us from having a relationship with Jesus Christ.” However, according to Stratis, the prosecutor fully intends on moving forward with the charges as homosexuals are a “protected class” under the statute.

In a call to the Bergen County Prosecutor’s Office, a representative stated that Vered Adoni is in charge of the “Bias Unit” and is an assistant prosecutor. Christian News Network, however, was unable to reach anyone for comment by press time.

A hearing date has been set for March 4.

 

Do We Have the Courage of this Jailed Canadian Pastor Who Refuses to Be Silent?

BY MARK TAPSCOTT

SEE: https://pjmedia.com/culture/marktapscott/2021/02/23/do-we-have-the-courage-of-this-jailed-canadian-pastor-who-refuses-to-be-silent-n1427600;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Not long after Jesus was crucified and buried, two of his disciples, Peter and John, were jailed by the Jerusalem authorities for telling people that He had been resurrected from the dead after three days in the tomb, that He had talked multiple times with the disciples, and that He had ascended to Heaven.

Peter and John were preaching these things from Solomon’s Colonnade in the Temple, according to Acts 3:11, and in course of the incident, they healed a man who was lame, and claimed the healing was done “by the name of Jesus Christ the Nazarene — whom you crucified and whom God raised from the dead — by Him this man is standing before you healthy.”

And then they made the claim that began to change the world in the most radical ways possible: “There is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven give to people by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12).

The authorities who had Peter and John arrested realized that they had put themselves between a rock (pun intended) and a hard place, saying, “What should we do with these men? For an obvious sign, evident to all who live in Jerusalem, has been done through them and we cannot deny it.”

So they did what governments have been doing to dissidents ever since: They ordered them to shut up, to stop preaching Jesus resurrected, on pain of further, likely much more severe, punishments. Since Jerusalem had no First Amendment, Peter and John were faced with a profoundly serious choice.

Acts 4:19-20 tells us the choice they made: “But Peter and John answered them, ‘whether it’s right in the sight of God for us to listen to you rather than God, you decide; for we are unable to stop speaking about what we have seen and heard.”

So Peter and John kept right on proclaiming Jesus as the resurrected savior of all who would accept Him, defying the very authorities who had murdered Him with a cross and held the same power over His disciples who now refused to shut up.

A remarkably similar scene has just happened in our neighbor to the North. Pastor James Coates of Edmonton, Canada, Grace Life Church, was jailed earlier this month for preaching to an assembly of unmasked congregants whose numbers exceeded the 15 percent of building capacity permitted by the authorities during the Covid pandemic.

Coates was tried in secret and sentenced to prison, according to his wife, but on the condition that he can be a free man if he agrees not to again violate the Covid restrictions by preaching to his congregation assembled illegally for worship. Coates, like Peter and John, refuses to be silent. Unlike Peter and John in Acts, Coates remains in jail.

Coates is the first Canadian pastor to be so jailed. No American pastor has been jailed, yet, but many of them, especially in California, face fines that in some cases approach millions of dollars. And the prospect of going to jail is very much on their minds.

Canadians are guaranteed freedom of worship. Americans have the First Amendment to the Constitution, with its guarantee of freedom of worship and assembly.

The U.S. Supreme Court, unlike those in Canada, is steadily striking down and limiting the actions of presumptuous officials threatening church congregations and their pastors with fines and imprisonment for their obedience to God’s command at Hebrews 10:25 “to not neglect the assembling together [for worship].”

But why are these battles having to be fought in the first place if governments are bound by their chartering documents to respect freedom of assembly and worship?

Lawyer James Kitchen of Canada’s Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms suggests that a major part of the answer to that question is the fact we let officials trample on our rights:

“More people need to stop self-censoring. They’re scared to speak up. They’re scared of getting in trouble at work, they’re scared of losing their friends, they’re scared of what people are going to say, they’re scared of dirty looks, this is what I hear, they’re scared of other people.

“And unfortunately, the more influence people have, the more they’re scared to use it, to say ‘You know, this is wrong. Count me in, I disagree with this. This has to stop.’ People with their words and with peaceful actions need to say, stop, enough is enough.”

“Democracy is governing by consent. This is the whole underlying philosophical purpose of elections, You choose who governs you. … It is time for people to say, ‘I am removing my consent to be policed and governed this way,’” said Kitchen.

That advice holds true on both sides of the U.S./Canadian border, and it is a challenge to each and every one of us.

Mark Tapscott is an award-winning investigative journalist who covers Congress for The Epoch Times, and he is founder and editor of HillFaith, an apologetics ministry sharing the Gospel of Jesus Christ with congressional aides on Capitol Hill.

CANADIAN Pastor Defies Church Lockdowns: “Our responsibility is to open our doors.”

Preached by Pastor James Coates of Gracelife Church of Edmonton Watch the full sermon here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QBzbv...

FULL SERMON - GraceLife Church - Feb 14, 2021 (Romans 13:1-4) "Directing Government to its Duty"

This is an upload of the February 14, 2021 recorded sermon in its entirety. The original recording of the sermon stream is missing content due to a loss of internet connection at roughly the 47 minute mark in the original file.

Romans 13 and James Coates

What should the government do? Alberta Pastor James Coates arrested and says this to government.

What should politicians do when faced with the choice of ruining their political careers or doing the right thing? Pastor James Coates addressed this when preaching on Romans 13 and the God ordained limits and purpose of governmental authority.

Lawyer for arrested Pastor James Coates speaks out: GraceLife Church leader broke COVID rules

Wife of Pastor Jailed in Canada Shares Their Story

This past week Pastor James Coates was jailed for breaking health protocols while leading his church service (Grace Life). His official statement is here: https://gracelife.ca/ His wife, Erin Coates, joins me to share the story from her perspective and give a personal update.

 

Gay Mafia Strikes German Pastor

A court in Bremen (Germany) has condemned a well-known and controversial Protestant pastor for hate speech against homosexuals.

Olaf Latzel, pastor of the mainline Evangelical Church Germany (EKD) church St. Martini in Bremen, has been sentenced to a fine of 8,100 euros. Latzel will appeal the sentence.

February 12, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — In a stunning sentence late last year, a court in Bremen, Germany, sentenced Rev. Olaf Latzel of St. Martini (part of the Evangelical Church in Germany: EKD) to a fine of €8,100 for “inciting hatred” against homosexuals in private remarks made to church couples. During the seminar, Latzel defended the biblical definitions of gender and sexuality, condemning the Berlin Pride March and referring to gender ideology as “an attack against God’s order of Creation.”

Pastor Olaf Latzel speaking at the St. Martini Church in Bremen. / Photo: <a target="_blank" href="https://www.facebook.com/martinibremen/">Facebook St. Martini Church</a>,

A Christian preacher in Germany, Olaf Latzel, has been fined in a sham trial that literally took place in a theater instead of a court. His "crime" was preaching Biblical truths about homosexuality. Religious persecution against Christians is spreading, and it will continue until Christians find courage. Get reliable notification options and further information at Sarah's home site: https://SarahCorriher.com/

American Thought Leaders: Democrats May Try 14th Amendment to Disqualify Trump With Simple Majority~Rick Green on Impeachment

Rumble — What does the U.S. Constitution have to say about the current impeachment trial in the U.S. Senate? What does historical precedent say?

In this episode, we sit down with constitutional attorney Rick Green, a former Texas state representative and co-founder of the Patriot Academy.

It’s unlikely that the impeachment managers will persuade sixty-seven senators to convict former president Donald Trump. But separate from the attempt to convict, Rick Green expects they are exploring other means to disqualify Trump from running for office again.

“By raising the 14th Amendment issue, they are looking for an opportunity to get a vote that does not require two-thirds,” Green argues. How would this scenario work exactly?

This is American Thought Leaders, and I’m Jan Jekielek.

RZIM Board-Ordered Investigation Confirms ‘Significant Evidence’ Ravi Zacharias Engaged in Sexual Misconduct

THIS WICKED "APOLOGIST" DECEIVED & ABUSED MANY WITH LITTLE OR NO DISCERNMENT

Ravi Zacharias speaks to 40,000 18- to 25-year-olds during the annual Passion conference in Atlanta, in 2016. Photo courtesy of Ravi Zacharias International Ministries (RZIM)

"Remembered during a May 29 memorial service as a “gentle giant of our faith” and the “C.S. Lewis of our day.”"

Full Report On Ravi Zacharias 'Inappropriate Dealings' Released Is HORRIFYING 11th Feb, 2021

SEE: https://www.rzim.org/read/rzim-updates/board-statement

AND: https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/rzimmedia.rzim.org/assets/downloads/Report-of-Investigation.pdf

SEE: https://christiannews.net/2021/02/12/rzim-board-ordered-investigation-confirms-significant-evidence-ravi-zacharias-engaged-in-sexual-misconduct/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

An independent report by a firm hired by Ravi Zacharias International Ministries (“RZIM”) to investigate claims of their founder’s alleged sexual misconduct has recently been published by RZIM on its website. The 12-page report, which found “significant evidence” of sexual misconduct by the late apologist Ravi Zacharias, along with “evidence of text- and email-based relationships with women who were not his wife” and “over 200 ‘selfie’-style photographs of women” on Zacharias’ electronic devices, followed an open letter by RZIM’s International Board of Directors which cited the leadership’s desire to “help the victims of Ravi’s abuse” and to take steps to ensure “nothing like this happens again.”

“It is with shattered hearts that we issue this statement about the allegations against RZIM’s Founder, Ravi Zacharias,” the open letter linked on the front page of the RZIM site states.

“Following allegations made in late August of 2020 that Ravi had engaged in sexual misconduct and abuse in connection with two-day spas, we commissioned Miller & Martin PLLC, a law firm with experience in corporate and sex crimes investigations, to conduct an independent investigation. We gave Miller & Martin a broad scope to pursue any avenues that they judged to be relevant to the accusations, and we emphasized that our only purpose for the investigation was to ascertain the full truth,” the board statement reads.

“Having received the results of the investigation, we are publicly releasing the investigation report in the exact form that we received it. We have been waiting to make an extended statement in the hope that the full findings of the investigation would allow us to speak more accurately and meaningfully. We also wanted to ensure Miller & Martin’s independence in their investigation, assessments, and reporting of the findings,” it continues.

According to the Miller & Martin report, which can be read in full here, the investigators “confirmed one of the three accounts described in the Christianity Today article,” which gave rise to the concerns, “and found significant evidence of sexual misconduct involving additional massage therapists.” Additionally, the report states that they “also reviewed Mr. Zacharias’s electronic devices and found evidence of text- and email-based relationships with women who were not his wife, as well as over 200 ‘selfie’-style photographs of women.”

RZIM stated that as a result of the new report they are now seeking the Lord’s will on the “future of the ministry.”

“Our prayer has been that the truth would be known. For this answer to prayer, we are thankful, even though we express this gratitude through tears. The humbling process of seeking counsel from survivors and advocates and of writing this statement has made us profoundly aware that even what we say now is vastly insufficient and merely a starting point for all that needs to be said and done in the days ahead,” the board expressed in its open letter published on the RZIM site.

“In light of the findings of the investigation and the ongoing evaluation, we are seeking the Lord’s will regarding the future of this ministry. We are learning much through this time and hope to have the chance to apply these lessons in the future. We remain passionate about seeing the gospel preached through the questions of culture. We will be spending focused time praying and fasting as we discern how God is leading, and we will speak to this in the near future,” the board statement reads in part.

Read full “Report of Independent Investigation into Sexual Misconduct of Ravi Zacharias”

___________________________________________________________________________

Ravi Zacharias Sexual Misconduct Report Released, It's Worse Than We Thought

SEE: https://reformationcharlotte.org/2021/02/12/ravi-zacharias-sexual-misconduct-report-released-its-worse-than-we-thought/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

The late Ravi Zacharias, who passed away last year after a long battle with cancer, has been scrutinized for several years by discerning Christians for allegations made against him for sexual misconduct. The allegations came to light in 2018 when we received copies of text messages between Zacharias and one of his victims. Unsurprisingly, the vast majority of Evangelicalism did not take the allegations seriously, save a few discernment blogs.

In 2018, it became public that Zacharias had been involved in a years-long “sexting” scandal and an emotional affair with another woman other than his wife. Zacharias admitted that he was caught up in the emotional aspect, privately in conversation with another woman who had been sending him nude pics of himself, but denied that it ever went any further than that.

Other allegations were made against Zacharias by a retired Detective Constable from the Ontario Provincial Police after 34 years of service that Zacharias, while a minister, pressured a teenage girl to have an abortion “if our careers are to survive.” To our knowledge, Zacharias never addressed these allegations.

During his recent years in ministry, Zacharias turned his ministry largely in the direction of social justice and wokeness — following the trends of the culture and the world. In 2019, Zacharias invited gay Anglican priest, Sam Allberry, to speak at one of his events where he allowed Allberry to say that Jesus had “body dysphoria,” therefore, he was able to identify with transgender people who experience “gender dysphoria.”

Therefore, it is unsurprising to us that an independent investigation into the sexual misconduct of Ravi Zacharias has revealed that all of these allegations against him are true and that Zacharias used his ministry as a launching pad to gain sexual favors from women other than his wife.

To the ministry’s (RZIM) credit, those involved do seem to be genuinely repentant and serious about making amends with the victims. However, at this time, it is unclear who sits on the board and who exactly is responsible for the cover-up.

Several key points are made in the 12-page report which was conducted by the investigative firm Miller & Martin PLLC as follows:

  • “We also reviewed Mr. Zacharias’s electronic devices and found evidence of text- and email-based relationships with women who were not his wife, as well as over 200 ‘selfie’-style photographs of women.”
  • “There were over 200 massage therapist contacts in Mr. Zacharias’s phones, including many overseas.”
  • “Several massage therapists confirmed Mr. Zacharias’s frequent efforts to ‘try for more than a massage,’ as one therapist put it. Eight therapists reported that Mr. Zacharias would start the massage either completely nude or would remove the sheets during the massage. Six therapists reported that he always or almost always had an erection during the massage. Four therapists reported that he would either touch his genitals or ask them to touch his genitals. And five therapists reported that he touched or rubbed them inappropriately.”
  • “Only one of the witnesses we interviewed said that Mr. Zacharias engaged in sexual intercourse. This witness reported details of many encounters over a period of years that she described as rape. To protect her identity, this report does not disclose many of the details she shared with us. She reported that after he arranged for the ministry to provide her with financial support, he required sex from her. According to this witness, Mr. Zacharias used religious expressions to gain compliance, as she was raised to be a person of faith. She reported that he made her pray with him to thank God for the ‘opportunity’ they both received. She said he called her his ‘reward’ for living a life of service to God, and he referenced the ‘godly men’ in the Bible with more than one wife. She said he warned her not ever to speak out against him or she would be responsible for the ‘millions of souls’ whose salvation would be lost if his reputation was damaged.”
  • “The four phones that Mr. Zacharias used and that RZIM provided to us for this investigation also provided significant, compelling evidence. For example, in the Notes application of one of Page 9 of 12 of his phones, Mr. Zacharias kept translations of certain words and phrases in Thai and Mandarin. The Thai phrases included ‘I miss you so much. I want to see your face’ and ‘little bit further.’ The Mandarin phrases included: ‘softer, lighter;’ ‘U R beautiful;’ ‘not enough;’ ‘I hope our love lasts forever;’ ‘I love you from the bottom of my heart;’ ‘I’d like to have a beautiful memory with you;’ ‘Life is so wonderful because [sic] I could meet you;’ ‘Your lips are especially beautiful;’ and ‘I love you darling.’”
  • “In 2014, Mr. Zacharias met and exchanged emails with a massage therapist who lived in Bangkok. They used pet names such as ‘sweetheart,’ ‘baby,’ ‘babe,’ ‘darling,’ ‘angel,’ ‘my precious little girl,’ and ‘honey;’ they exchanged selfies (the latest photograph of her is from 2019); and they discussed how much they loved and missed each other. During a May 2014 coup d’etat in Thailand, Mr. Zacharias expressed his worry that travel to Bangkok could be stopped. He told her: ‘I know more than ever that you have become the love of my life. I’m waiting to hold you close to my heart again. Please be safe my angel. I Love you and goodnight from here.’ He told her to keep him ‘as the only one in your heart. I love you my dearest xxxxxx.’”
  • “Their communications imply that their relationship had a physical component. They discussed not being able to wait until they can be together, that he is ‘longing to hold [her] close again.’ He further wrote: ‘Your face, your smile, your laugh, your touch, the way you love, your
    hard work, your heart, your care for me, your skill,’ and on and on and on. He called her ‘beautiful in heart and in body.’ She responded later: ‘I love you and kiss you everywhere xxxxxx.’ She said to him she was going to work out ‘to be fit and firm when I see you next month =).’ This woman received significant financial support from TOH [Editor’s note: RZIM slush fund].”
  • “In addition to communications, Mr. Zacharias’s phones contained over 200 photographs of women much younger than him—including six of Lori Anne Thompson—and dozens of photographs he took of himself.”
  • “Travel records confirm that Mr. Zacharias was in Malaysia at the time. Over time, more pictures of this woman appeared in Mr. Zacharias’s phone, most of which were relatively innocuous and show her fully clothed. However, the photographs grew increasingly more suggestive, culminating in two photographs showing her bare breasts dated October 27, 2018, and a video of her fully naked and touching herself dated January 8, 2019. Two other women told us that Mr. Zacharias asked for nude photographs, which they refused to provide.”
  • “In addition to finding alone time when he traveled with others, Mr. Zacharias traveled alone to Bangkok and other parts of Southeast Asia for substantial periods of time. RZIM staff described these as writing trips where he would work on his latest book. On such trips, he would stay for days and sometimes weeks alone. According to a text message to a Thai masseuse in February 2016, he spent his days writing and his nights receiving massage treatments.”
  • “We did consider his statements and actions when confronted with similar situations in the past, most notably the Thompson matter. Several RZIM staff reported to us his ‘shifting narrative’ as emails and other relevant facts were publicly leaked and he was forced to explain them. Rather than fostering an environment of truth-seeking and transparency, Mr. Zacharias was strident and inflammatory. He described his critics as ‘nasty people’ and ‘lunatics’ who were engaging in ‘satanic-type’ slander and falsehood.”
  • “Mr. Zacharias told certain members of his staff that the phone records and full, complete emails would exonerate him, but he did not give them access to these documents. Two high-level staff approached him directly asking for the phone records, since he claimed they would prove exculpatory. Both of these staff members told us Mr. Zacharias responded to this request with rage and threatened to resign from the organization.”
  • “Some therapists also reported that Mr. Zacharias paid very well or would leave large tips and gave gifts that were at times lavish, such as a Persian rug or a Louis Vuitton wallet with $500 inside.”
  • “Several RZIM staff reported to us that they were concerned about Mr. Zacharias traveling with a personal masseuse, not because they feared actual impropriety but because they feared the appearance of impropriety. A high-level RZIM staff member expressed concerns to Mr. Zacharias about it and encouraged him to stop traveling with her. In response, Mr. Zacharias grew angry and barely spoke to this staff member for a long period of time.”
  • “According to his text messages, at times he would meet the therapists in the hotel lobby and at other times he would direct them to come straight to his room. On one occasion in February 2016, he slipped his room key to a massage therapist by placing it in a book, directing her to come to his
    room ‘2 minutes after’ she got the book from him.”

_________________________________________________________________________

Thompson is the Canadian woman accused by Zacharias in 2017 of sending “unwanted” nude pictures to the late apologist in an attempt to extort him. (Zacharias died on May 19, 2020.) 

Yet according to the letter, the nude photos were not only wanted by Zacharias; they were invited. And they were the culmination of months of emails, phone calls, gifts, and other advances by a man who “sensed” Thompson’s “deficit and used it to his own end.

LORI ANNE THOMPSON'S VICTIM IMPACT STATEMENT ON VIDEO:

https://www.pscp.tv/w/1ynJOBNvdQyGR#

SEE ALSO: https://www.chvnradio.com/articles/victim-of-ravi-zacharias-breaks-silence-and-nondisclosure-agreement-with-victim-impact-statement

EXCERPTS:

The woman who says Ravi Zacharias coerced her into an inappropriate sexual relationship has released a video recounting how the alleged abuse has impacted her, despite a nondisclosure agreement still in place.

At the time, the Christian and Missionary Alliance, the denomination which held Zacharias' ministry credentials, said the "evidence does not provide the basis for formal discipline under the C&MA policy."

She recounted the grooming process that Zacharias conducted in a letter obtained by the Roys Report in 2020.

Zacharias later sued the woman and settled with her, which included the non-disclosure agreement. She has since attempted to be released from the NDA from Zacharias' family which they have denied.

In refuting the original claims, Thompson says that Zacharias (whom she refers to throughout the transcript of the statement as RZ) "used a former local church abuse experience where my husband and I had been victims of a financially and spiritually abusive cleric, to support his fantastical claim that we were a litigious couple who sued people for financial gain. 

_____________________________________________________________________

SEE ALSO: https://julieroys.com/ravi-zacharias-groomed-woman/

_____________________________________________________________________

WHAT THEY DIDN'T KNOW?

Kayleigh McEnany's Emotional Tribute To Ravi Zacharias

Vice President Mike Pence on Ravi Zacharias

 

 

 

CATHOLIC JESUIT Fordham UNIVERSITY Should Not Abuse Its Status as a Private Institution to Censor Free Speech

By THE OBSERVER EDITORIAL BOARD

SEE: https://fordhamobserver.com/60528/opinions/fordham-should-not-abuse-its-status-as-a-private-institution-to-censor-free-speech/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

On Dec. 22, 2016, the last day of the fall semester, then-Dean of Students Keith Eldredge sent an email that incited four long years of legal action and fees. In the email, the dean denied by Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) request to form a club after the United Student Government had already approved it. 

The dean wrote that he “cannot support an organization whose sole purpose is advocating political goals of a specific group, and against a specific country, when these goals conflict with … (the) values of the University,” all the while without specifying what values SJP contradicted.

In response, the members of SJP went to court, using a New York state law (article 78) that allows students to challenge a decision at a private school if the decision was contrary to the institution’s own rules, which SJP felt was the case.

The court’s decision demonstrates how profoundly Fordham’s label as a private institution has enabled it to restrict the rights of the student body.

On Dec. 22, 2020 — exactly four years after Eldredge’s letter — the New York State Appellate Court overturned the 2019 ruling and held that Fordham was actually within its rights to deny the club. The court added that SJP’s political activism could potentially be disruptive to student life and as a result, they are still fighting for recognition to this day.

The court’s decision demonstrates how profoundly Fordham’s label as a private institution has enabled it to restrict the rights of the student body. By silencing the political opinions of SJP, especially at a university where other partisan clubs exist, the Fordham administration has shown a concerning lack of support for the diversity of student opinions on campus.

Discussions and support for SJP’s case and cause have extended past campus and onto social media. The Instagram page @fordhamsjp provides its audience of 954 followers with updates on the court case, general information on the conflict between Israel and Palestine, and resources for other human rights movements. Its new posts receive hundreds of likes from the Fordham community and beyond, as the ongoing legal battle has brought the club national recognition.

@lc_sinners, a popular Instagram meme page that caters to Fordham students, has also backed SJP by posting multiple memes about Fordham’s censorship of the club, particularly attacking Fordham’s flimsy “private institution” excuse for silencing students. 

As student journalists, we at The Observer feel that free speech is crucial to the well-being of the university community. The student body cannot be expected to grow and learn in an environment where the only ideas that are permitted are those that the administration deems acceptable.

While Fordham is a private university, it still received $19.6 million in 2018 of a total of $933.5 million and $2.5 million in 2019 in government grants. When any private university receives federal funding, however minuscule, it should abide by federal law. Therefore, its students and their free speech should be protected from actions like those that Eldredge has started against SJP.

As long as this continues, it will suppress those student voices that are unsuitable for the image it wants to project.

When discussing freedom of speech at a private institution like Fordham, we would be remiss in not mentioning the case of Austin Tong. In a similar action to SJP, Tong attempted to challenge a disciplinary action in court, but his case was dismissed since it was decided that the university administration had reasonable grounds to believe that Tong’s behavior was hate speech. His case shows that SJP’s case is not the only target of Fordham censorship; however, his comments online sparked reactions of fear and condemnation within Fordham that SJP has not received.

Tong’s behavior was criticized heavily by many in the university community, and many people expressed “fears for their own safety.” Contrary to Tong, SJP has garnered a wide array of support from the Fordham community.

It is clear that Fordham has hidden behind its status as a private university — meaning that the vast majority (nearly 88%) of the revenue for the university comes from tuition and fees alone — and it abuses that power to play fast and loose with its First Amendment allowances. As long as this continues, it will suppress those student voices that are unsuitable for the image it wants to project.

As the first of its kind, SJP’s case has set the precedent for all of New York state’s private universities. College students in this state or anywhere should not be silenced for expressing their political views in a peaceful and nondiscriminatory manner, yet their freedom of speech is now in danger because of Fordham’s actions.

Moreover, all students are paying for the duct tape that Fordham is putting over SJP’s mouth. The legal fees for the SJP trial were included in our tuition bills, a shockingly improvident and uncompassionate use of money during a time when it could have been used to alleviate financial hardships wrought by COVID-19.

Is this use of funds, power and time truly in line with Fordham’s values?

________________________________________________________________________________

SEE OUR PREVIOUS POSTS ABOUT FORDHAM CENSORSHIP HERE:

https://ratherexposethem.org/?s=FORDHAM

______________________________________________________________________________

SEE ALSO:

https://fordhamobserver.com/52547/news/sjp-students-for-justice-in-palestine-face-fordham-in-court-once-again/

 

 

Supreme Court To Decide If Police Can Enter A Home To Seize Guns Without Warrant~Hold the Line PAC

A new case tests the limits of the “community caretaking exception” to the Fourth Amendment.

SEE: https://www.cato.org/legal-briefs/caniglia-v-strom

AND: https://www.supremecourt.gov/docket/docketfiles/html/public/20-157.html

AND: https://reason.com/2021/02/04/scotus-to-decide-if-cops-need-more-elbow-room-to-conduct-certain-warrantless-home-searches/

EXCERPT FROM THIRD ARTICLE ABOVE:

"The case is Caniglia v. Strom. It originated in 2015 when Cranston, Rhode Island, police paid a "well call" on 68-year-old Edward Caniglia. His wife had been unable to reach him after they had a fight and she was worried that he might be suicidal. So she called the authorities. The police took Caniglia to the hospital, where he was examined by a nurse and a social worker and discharged that same day. Meanwhile, the police entered his home without a warrant while he was gone and seized his two handguns. The present case centers on Caniglia's claim that this warrantless police action violated his Fourth Amendment rights."

BY LAUREN WITZKE

SEE: https://holdthelinepac.com/supreme-court-to-decide-if-police-can-enter-a-home-to-seize-guns-without-warrant/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

The 4th Amendment of the Constitution protects citizens against warrantless searches of their homes. A police officer cannot enter your home unless they have shown a judge that they have probable cause that they will discover specific evidence of a crime. There are “exigent circumstances” exceptions to this right. If a police officer is witnessing an assault or murder in the home, or if the officer sees that the person in the home is in need of “emergency aid” they may enter the home in good judgement. Overall, the 4th Amendment is supposed to protect a citizen’s private home above all other places.

The Supreme Court has just announced that it will hear arguments next month on the case Caniglia v. Strom. The Caniglia v Strom is a case that involves the police untruthfully telling the wife of Mr. Caniglia that her husband had given them permission to seize his guns, and searched the home of Mr. Caniglia without obtaining a warrant. Mr. Caniglia sued for the violation of his 4th Amendment right to privacy and his 2nd Amendment right to keep handguns in the home for self-protection.

The 1st Circuit Court of Appeals sided with the police, and the Supreme Court is going to be reviewing Caniglia v Strom to possibly overrule the lower court’s decision.

Where’s the Outrage? Biden Fires 56 Trump U.S. Attorneys

BY RICK MORAN

SEE: https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/rick-moran/2021/02/10/wheres-the-outrage-biden-fires-56-trump-appointed-u-s-attorneys-n1424466;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

In what most of the media is characterizing as “a routine” event, Joe Biden has asked 56 U.S. attorneys appointed by Donald Trump to resign.

Indeed, it used to be a routine announcement. It’s part of the transition and shouldn’t draw any scrutiny. In with the new, out with the old, farewell, and good luck.

Except when Trump did it in 2016, you’d think it was the end of democracy. This was the headline story on the MSNBC website after Trump asked for the resignations on March 13, 2017.

Trump sparks new controversy with U.S. Attorney dismissals. Ten years after the last Republican White House had a U.S. Attorney scandal, Donald Trump has one of his own.

What “scandal”? The U.S. attorney for New York, Preet Bharara, threw a tantrum because he says Trump promised he could stay. He refused to resign and was promptly fired. The media blew this tantrum into a clash between the executive branch and the judicial branch.

But when Biden does it, it’s “routine.”

Federalist:

And then there was CNN’s Wolf Blitzer, who complained of Trump, “one would have thought they’d have handled it better.” Blitzer’s colleague, Jim Acosta, complained, “They’re off to a very slow start… So it’s not surprising they’d do it in this fashion.”

The New York Times headlined its coverage, “Trump Abruptly Orders 46 Obama-Era Prosecutors to Resign.” One can still be looking for the Biden announcement on the Times’s website.

The media misconduct remained consistent with Trump Derangement Syndrome. Routine practices were always criminal for the big bad orange man, while remaining admissible for Democrats.

In Biden’s “routine” firing of U.S. attorneys, he allowed two of them to stay on.

Fox News:

The U.S. attorneys will begin transitioning out of their roles, with the exception of the prosecutor overseeing the federal tax investigation into Hunter Biden, David Weiss for Delaware. John Durham, the U.S. attorney for Connecticut, will resign from his position as U.S. attorney but will stay on as special counsel to continue his now years-long investigation into the origins of the Trump-Russia probe.

White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki on Tuesday was asked about Weiss and Durham, and said that those “decisions were made in order to fulfill his promise of maintaining independence.”

It was politically smart for Biden to continue the Hunter Biden probe. He really didn’t have any choice because it may eventually lead back to him. But he could have taken the risk and asked for Weiss’s resignation too. That he didn’t is significant in that he wants to keep the focus on Trump impeachment and his pandemic relief bill.

For all the machinations of the media to destroy Trump’s presidency, none of it mattered in the end. All they ended up doing was destroying what was left of their credibility with the vast majority of the American people. And it’s things like this that sealed their fate.

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Biden Purging DOJ: Trump-appointed U.S. Attorneys Must Resign by End of Month

BY LUIS MIGUEL

SEE: https://thenewamerican.com/biden-purging-doj-trump-appointed-u-s-attorneys-must-resign-by-end-of-month/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

The Left’s march through the institutions continues. 

As a further part of Joe Biden’s effort to purge the executive branch of any vestige of Trumpism, his Department of Justice has now asked U.S. attorneys appointed by Donald Trump to step down from their posts by the end of the month.

According to a senior Biden administration official who spoke to Fox News, 56 U.S. attorneys have been given until February 28 to resign.

“We are committed to ensuring a seamless transition,” said Acting Attorney General Monty Wilkinson in a statement. “Until U.S. Attorney nominees are confirmed, the interim and acting leaders in the U.S. Attorneys’ Offices will make sure that the department continues to accomplish its critical law enforcement mission, vigorously defend the rule of law, and pursue the fair and impartial administration of justice for all.”

Earlier this year, the Biden Justice Department said that “nearly all presidential appointees from the previous administration offered their resignations, though U.S. Attorneys and U.S. Marshals were asked to temporarily remain in place.”

The DOJ also said that before the start of the transition process, approximately a third of the U.S. Attorneys’ Offices were being directed by acting or interim leadership.

The department further stated that Biden will make an announcement related to nominations to be confirmed by the Senate “as that information becomes available.” 

Current U.S. attorneys will begin transitioning out of their roles. This does not include David Weiss, the prosecutor in charge of the Hunter Biden federal tax investigation.

John Durham, the U.S. attorney for Connecticut, will step down from his U.S. attorney role but remain in the DOJ as special counsel to continue his investigation of the origins of the Trump-Russia probe.

Asked about Weiss and Durham on Tuesday, White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki said that those “decisions were made in order to fulfill his promise of maintaining independence.”

Hunter Biden, the son of Joe Biden, is reportedly a subject/target of a grand jury investigation. Per a source, a “target” who has a high probability of having committed a crime, whereas a “subject” is someone who is, as yet, unknown to have committed a crime.

Suspicious foreign transactions (from “China and other foreign nations,” according to one source) were reportedly what gave rise to the investigation of Hunter Biden, which apparently began in 2018.

In another pending change-up, the Biden Justice Department wants Michael Sherwin, acting U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, to leave his current post but remain as some sort of special prosecutor to continue his work overseeing the prosecution of those involved in the January 6 Capitol breach. Sherwin has vowed to “bring the most maximum charges we can based upon the conduct.”

The feds have thus far charged over 150 people in the Capitol siege.

The news of the DOJ’s “de-Trumpization” should serve as a reminder to Americans that Democrats are playing for keeps; they want to leave no available avenue for citizens to turn to have their constitutional liberties protected against growing usurpations by the Left.

If President Trump vowed to drain the swamp, Joe Biden is filling it back up.

Sadly, when Democrats are in power, they tend to be much more effective than Republicans in ensuring that the government is staffed by people who share their vision and will not attempt to sabotage their program from within. 

While President Trump achieved much during his time in office, he would have done well to take a few more pages out of the leftist playbook and purge the executive branch more completely of establishment hacks appointed by past presidents.

Of course, the mainstream media always plays a role. The major outlets hardly bat an eyelash as Biden seeks to totally transform the Justice Department. Meanwhile, anytime President Trump attempted to fire a holdover from the previous administration, the media screamed bloody murder.

This writer has regularly noted the importance of working at the state and local level now that the Marxist Left has a growing stranglehold on the federal government. The recent case of Oklahoma Governor Kevin Stitt nullifying a Biden executive order with an order of his own is one example of the model to follow.

 

Trump’s Defense Brief Eviscerates the Democrats’ Case for Impeachment

★★★ THE POPULIST REVOLT HAS JUST BEGUN ★★★

Media is absolutely SHOCKED as the Second Impeachment Trial is Making President Trump Even STRONGER! In this video, we’re going to take a look at a number of pundits who are admitting that Trump is winning impeachment all over again, how his base continues to get even stronger, and why the globalist attempted reset is guaranteeing a worldwide populist surge like never before, you are NOT going to want to miss this!

BY TYLER O'NEIL

SEE: https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/tyler-o-neil/2021/02/08/trumps-defense-brief-eviscerates-the-democrats-case-for-impeachment-n1423968;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

On Monday, former President Donald Trump’s lawyers, Bruce L. Castor Jr., and David Schoen, filed the official defense brief for his second impeachment trial, which begins on Tuesday. The brief makes five powerful arguments for the president’s acquittal, eviscerating the Democrats’ case.

“One might have been excused for thinking that the Democrats’ fevered hatred for Citizen Trump and their ‘Trump Derangement Syndrome’ would have broken by now, seeing as he is no longer the President, and yet for the second time in just over a year the United States Senate is preparing to sit as a Court of Impeachment, but this time over a private citizen who is a former President,” the brief notes.

Trump’s lawyers argue that “through this latest Article of Impeachment now before the Senate, Democrat politicians seek to carve out a mechanism by which they can silence a political opponent and a minority party. The Senate must summarily reject this brazen political act.”

In the brief, Team Trump makes five arguments against the Democrats’ impeachment case.

1. The Senate cannot try a private citizen for impeachment

The defense brief echoed Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and the 44 other Senate Republicans who voted against holding the impeachment trial, claiming that it is unconstitutional for the Senate to try a former president and therefore a private citizen.

“The Senate is being asked to do something patently ridiculous: try a private citizen in a process that is designed to remove him from an office that he no longer holds,” the brief argues. It claims that if the Senate were to bar Trump from holding public office in the future, that would constitute a bill of attainder, “a legislative act which inflicts punishment without a judicial trial,” violating Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution.

The brief argues that the Founders did not explicitly give the Senate the power to try former officials and that the Senate failed to impeach former Senator William Blount and Secretary of War William Belknap. It also notes that Congress refused to impeach Richard Nixon after he resigned. While it notes that British law allows for post-office impeachment, it claims that the Founders did not.

Democrats have made a strong argument that there is no “January exception” for impeachable behavior, but Trump’s team may respond that there are other ways to punish behavior after a president has left office, such as censure.

Tellingly, Team Trump warns that if the impeachment managers have their way in arguing that a person may be impeached at any time after he or she leaves office, “a future House could impeach former Vice President Biden for his obstruction of justice in setting up the Russia hoax circa 2016. While he could not be removed from the Vice Presidency because his term ended in 2017, he could be barred from holding future office. The same flawed logic the House Managers advance could apply to former Secretary of State Clinton for her violations of 18 U.S.C § 793 [by mishandling classified information].”

Trump Eviscerates Democrats’ Impeachment Charges

2. Trump’s First Amendment rights

The brief argues that the Democrats’ impeachment would violate Trump’s First Amendment rights as a public official. The Democrat impeachment managers argue that “the First Amendment does not apply at all to an impeachment proceeding,” citing two cases concerning appointed public employees. Team Trump powerfully combats this claim with central free speech precedents.

“The Supreme Court of the United States has long held that the First Amendment’s right to freedom of speech protects elected officials such as Mr. Trump,” the brief explains. It cites the case Wood v. Georgia (1962), in which the Supreme Court ruled that Sheriff James Wood, an elected official who spoke out about voting patterns, “had the right to enter the field of political controversy. … The role that elected officials play in our society makes it all the more imperative that they be allowed freely to express themselves on matters of current public importance.”

“The House Managers have built their case against the First Amendment upon the  proverbial foundation of sand, and have no support for their argument that Mr. Trump lacks  protection under the First Amendment as all Supreme Court authority is directly contrary to their assertion.”

“Even political speech that may incite unlawful conduct is protected from the reach of governmental punishment,” the brief argues, citing Lorillard Tobacco Co. v. Reilly (2001). “Indeed, ‘[e]very idea is an incitement,’ and if speech may be suppressed whenever it might inspire someone to act unlawfully, then there is no limit to the State’s censorial power.”

“Rather, the government may only suppress speech for advocating the use of force or a violation of law if ‘such advocacy is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action,'” (emphasis original) the brief notes, citing Brandenberg v. Ohio (1969).

The Trump Team argues that a plain reading of Trump’s speech on January 6, 2021, counters the Democrats’ claim that he “incited” the crowd to violence, much less insurrection. Trump said, “I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard” (emphasis original).

Tom Cotton Suggests It’s Unconstitutional to Impeach Trump After January 20

3. Democrats’ “incitement”

In order to bolster Trump’s free speech defense, the brief notes that Trump’s metaphorical use of the term “fight like hell” is well-established. In fact, the brief cites examples of Democrats’ rhetoric that would also constitute “incitement” by the standard of the impeachment article.

“It is truly incredible that House Democratic leadership is feigning horror at the President’s choices of words considering some of their own members' recent public comments,” the brief notes.

Team Trump cites House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-Calif.) statement, “I just don’t even know why there aren’t uprisings all over the country. Maybe there will be.”

“Was she advocating violence? Sending a silent dog whistle to radical protesters? Should she be held accountable for her extremist rhetoric and removed from office?” the brief asks.

The document also cites Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.), who said, “there needs to be unrest in the streets” as the Black Lives Matter protests devolved into violent and deadly riots. “Should we hold her liable to pay for all of the businesses that were destroyed when people heeded her call and removed from office?” the brief asks.

Finally, Team Trump cited Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.), who infamously encouraged leftist demonstrators to harass Trump administration staff in public places.

“For those who would say that those quotes must be understood in their greater context, i.e., that they were clearly meant to be political speech- we say exactly. The truth is that both … Mr. Trump’s speech and these comments are acceptable political free speech; it is the double standard at play here that is entirely unacceptable, and Mr. Trump [asks] that the Senate reject it in no uncertain terms,” Team Trump argues.

4. Due process

Team Trump notes that House Democrats rushed the impeachment process after originally calling on Vice President Mike Pence to invoke the 25th Amendment to remove Trump from office. Bizarrely, Democrats waited five days before introducing the impeachment on January 11 and passing the impeachment on January 13.

“House Democrats completed the fastest presidential impeachment inquiry in history and adopted the Article of Impeachment over strong opposition and with zero due process afforded to Mr. Trump,” without an impeachment inquiry or a formal investigation into the Capitol riot.

“No exigent circumstances under the law were present excusing the House of Representatives’ rush to judgment, as evidenced by the fact that they then held the Article for another 12 days,” the brief notes.

Trump Responds to Second Impeachment With Strong Condemnation of Political Violence

5. “Structurally deficient”

Finally, Team Trump argues that “by charging multiple alleged wrongs in one article, the House of Representatives has made it impossible to guarantee compliance with the Constitutional mandate in Article 1, Sec. 3, Cl. 6 that permits a conviction only by at least two-thirds of the members. The House charge fails by interweaving different allegations rather than breaking them into counts of alleged individual instances of misconduct.”

This constitutes a sleight of hand in order to push conviction and removal, Team Trump argues.

These arguments build on claims in the president’s answer to the charges of the impeachment article. Together, they build a strong case for the former president’s acquittal.

While Trump’s arguments about the unconstitutionality of a Senate trial for a former president may be largely moot after the Senate voted 55-45 to take up the case, Team Trump was wise to cite those arguments because they provide Senate Republicans an easy case to make to the American people. While some Republicans may not wish to proactively defend Trump’s statements before the Capitol riot, Team Trump is also right to point out Democrats’ hypocrisy in claiming that Trump’s political speech constitutes incitement while theirs does not.

Democrats are gambling that the trial will make Trump look bad and tie Republicans to him, while Team Trump will use the opportunity to expose Democrats’ hypocrisy on political violence.

Tyler O’Neil is the author of Making Hate Pay: The Corruption of the Southern Poverty Law Center. Follow him on Twitter at @Tyler2ONeil.

House Votes to Impeach Trump a Second Time
Democrats Move to Impeach Trump for ‘Incitement of Insurrection’
VIP: Trump’s Impeachment Defense Has One Major Flaw
Democrats Make No Bones About Their Ultimate Goal in Impeachment

My Pillow CEO Mike Lindell Releases Documentary on Election Steal~”PROGRESSIVE” NEWSMAX INTERVIEWER ABUSES HIM, ABRUPTLY LEAVES

BOB SELLERS WALKS OUT INSISTING NEWSMAX HAS NOT SEEN ANY PROOF OF ELECTION FRAUD

"RIGHT OF CENTER" PROGRESSIVE LEANING NEWSMAX EXPOSED FOR THEIR LEFTIST "JOURNALISM" WHICH PURPORTS TO BE CONSERVATIVE-SOMETIMES!

WATCH: My Pillow CEO Mike Lindell Releases Documentary on Election Steal

BY WILLIAM F. JASPER

SEE: https://thenewamerican.com/watch-today-my-pillow-ceo-mike-lindell-releases-documentary-on-election-steal;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Unstoppable. Irrepressible. On-fire. Passionate. Mike Lindell is on a mission and he’s not going to let the cancel culture censors at Big Tech, Big Media, or Big Business — or even his “friends” at Newsmax and Fox — stop him. Today, Friday, February 5, he has released his two-hour documentary, “Absolute Proof,” which he says shows “100 percent” the theft of our election by China and other countries.

In a rousing promotion for the new documentary aired over The Revival Channel of the Word Broadcasting Network (WBN) on Tuesday, the millionaire entrepreneur and enthusiastic Trump supporter repeatedly stressed that he has assembled damning evidence that conclusively shows the election was stolen from President Trump and the American people.

The documentary is available to view on his own website, MichaelJLindell.com, and, reportedly, on the One America News Network (OANN), and other sites to be announced. The New American has posted Lindell’s “Absolute Proof” video here for your convenience:

“Thou Shalt Not!” – Big Tech’s Censorious Commandments

The Orwellian censors at Twitter banned Lindell on January 26 for promoting what the Fake News Media repeatedly refer to as “baseless claims” of voter fraud. “Twitter has permanently banned My Pillow CEO Mike Lindell’s account after he continually perpetuated the baseless claim that Donald Trump won the 2020 U.S. presidential election,” the Associated Press reported on January 26.

Of course, Twitter’s Ministry of Truth had already banned President Donald Trump a couple of weeks earlier — along with tens of thousands of other Americans who had one way or another stepped over Big Tech’s arbitrary and ever-changing political correctness line-in-the-sand. Among the “Thou shalt not” absolutes now being ruthlessly enforced by the Big Tech oligarchy: any mention of election fraud; any mention of COVID-19 fraud; any opposition to COVID-19 lockdowns; any opposition to COVID-19 mask mandates; any questioning or challenging of COVID-19 vaccines; any opposition to mandatory vaccines; any challenge to LGBTQ political correctness; etc., etc., etc.

But political correctness is not in Mike Lindell’s DNA. The outspoken businessman is a fervent evangelical Christian whose drug addict-to-CEO life story is a remarkable and inspiring example of the power of grace, prayer, and heroic perseverance. After years of alcohol and drug abuse, he invented the “My Pillow” pillow in 2004, and has grown it into a bedding company with over 100 products and hundreds of employees.

In 2020, Mr. Lindell served as the state chairman of President Trump’s campaign in Lindell’s home state of Minnesota, and he is a staunch supporter of the president’s efforts to expose massive voter fraud and election cyber warfare by China.

Lindell is an ardent pro-life, pro-family advocate and reportedly contributed $1 million for the movie Unplanned, the true biopic about Abby Johnson, the director of a large Planned Parenthood abortion center who converted to Christianity and has become a pro-life crusader. At the end of the movie, Lindell has a cameo role as the driver of the bulldozer that knocks down the Planned Parenthood sign.

All Not Well at Newsmax

Now he is fighting an even bigger battle against even bigger odds, while being censored and de-platformed by the liberal-left media and social media companies. As if all that isn’t bad enough, Lindell also faced a hostile “interview” and censorship on the conservative network Newsmax on February 2, during which anchor Bob Sellers repeatedly interrupted Lindell, then got up out of his chair and stormed off the set. Sellers insisted that Newsmax was not going to allow Lindell to discuss election fraud, asserting that the election had been certified and settled. Sellers’ outrageous treatment of Lindell and his insistence on adopting the Big Media/Big Tech party line of unquestioning acceptance of the official election results reportedly caused considerable blowback from Newsmax viewers. In a subsequent episode, Sellers apologized for his over-the-top reaction and referred to Lindell as “a friend of the network.”

The Sellers escapade adds to other concerns that Newsmax may be drifting the way of Fox. The hiring of disgraced former ABC/NBC pundit Mark Halperin has been cause for concern. As the result of charges of sexual harassment by multiple women, Halperin was bounced from NBC in 2017. Although he denied some of the particular charges, he apologized for “inappropriate” behavior and said he was going to “properly deal with this situation.” However, aside from Halperin’s status as “damaged goods,” there is his left-wing persuasion and pedigree. His father, Morton Halperin, is a notorious far-left/pro-communist activist who has worked for the ACLU, the Carnegie Endowment, the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), and the Center for American Progress. Morton Halperin is currently a senior advisor to George Soros’s Open Society Foundations and has been closely involved with the subversive Institute for Policy Studies and the pro-communist National Lawyers Guild.

Mark Halperin’s father, Morton Halperin, and his brother, David Halperin, are members of the globalist Council on Foreign Relations. In 2019, Mark Halperin came out with a campaign-themed book entitled How To Beat Trump: America’s Top Political Strategists On What It Will Take. A gaggle of left-wing Democrats assisted him in this effort to rehabilitate his career: Donna Brazile, James Carville, David Axelrod, Jennifer Granholm, Kathleen Sebelius, Bob Shrum, Anita Dunn, Karen Dunn — and others.

Then there’s the troubling political “evolution” of Newsmax founder and CEO Christopher Ruddy. Not only has he given $1 million to the Clinton Foundation, but has also become something of a buddy of and cheerleader for Bill Clinton, opining that Clinton “was a pretty good president in a lot of ways.” Ruddy the executive has come a long way since his investigative journalism days tracking Bill and Hillary Clinton’s crime spree. His 1997 book The Strange Death of Vincent Foster was a damning indictment of the Clintons — and of the media and government cover-up of the Foster murder, which (like the Jeffrey Epstein death) has been officially ruled a suicide. Now Ruddy calls himself a “moderate conservative” and has adopted Fox News founder Rupert Murdoch’s modus operandi of cozying up to both political parties.

Are the Bob Sellers/Mike Lindell dust-up, the Mark Halperin hiring, and Chris Ruddy’s political “mellowing” signs that Newsmax may be drifting in the same leftward direction as Fox, even while staking out a conservative-sounding agenda to lure in Fox defectors? Something to think about.

Related videos and articles:

VIDEO: Big Tech Censorship

VIDEO Watch The Banned Video: Bio-warfare & Weaponization of Medicine Amid Covid

“Unplanned” Ordeal Again Highlights Big Media & Big Tech’s Leftwing Bias & Censorship

Exploiting COVID19, Big Tech Censors Become Big Brother

Is “Statistics Shadowbanning” the Latest Big-Tech Salvo Against Conservatives?

Big Tech’s Iron Boot: Trump Moved to Parler; Now It’s Set to Go Dark at Midnight After Big Tech Attack

As Trump Confronts Censorship Big Tech Targets The New American

Big Tech Censors Alex Jones. Who’s Next?

ChiComs Buying Up U.S. Political System

Twitter Permanently Bans Trump; Why Do Hillary Clinton, Jimmy Carter, Harry Reid Get a Pass?

Project Veritas Video Exposes Twitter as Part of “American Pravda”

National Review, CNN, WSJ: Backstabber Liz Cheney Is New “Hero,” “Conscience of GOP”

FULL EXPOSURE: NeverTrump Neocons Kristol and Schmidt Reach Out to Biden, AOC

The Great Wakeup Call for Fox Loyalists

National Review’s Neocons and The Bulwark’s Bidenistas: Reviling Trump, Rejoicing in Biden

sarah corriher: 10 Years in Prison for a Meme?

The Department of Justice is showing that it has become a political weapon in the earliest days of the Biden Presidency. The F.B.I. has arrested a pro-Trump meme maker (artist), who now faces a 10-year sentence for posting a comical image four years earlier. They are outright beginning to arrest people for political speech. Get reliable notification options and further information at Sarah's home site: https://SarahCorriher.com/

Blue-Check Lib FREE, While Meme Poster Faces PRISON Time!

Florida Man Arrested and Charged for Posting 2016 Hillary Clinton Meme, DOJ Calls it 'Disinformation Campaign'

BY NICK KANGADIS

SEE: https://www.mrctv.org/blog/florida-man-arrested-and-charged-posting-2016-hillary-clinton-meme-doj-calls-it-disinformation;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

It’s amazing to watch the federal government devolve into authoritarian levels of censorship that we typically see from places like the U.K. and China. But when the federal government begins arresting people because of “memes,” it’s time to take notice because “tyranny” is here. Essentially, the feds are moving ahead with punishing the American public in different ways because their pre-approved presidential candidate didn’t win in 2016.

Florida resident and “conservative journalist” Douglass Mackey, 31, was arrested and charged with “conspiring with others in advance of the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election to use various social media platforms to disseminate misinformation designed to deprive individuals of their constitutional right to vote,” according to a Department of Justice (DOJ) press release.

The simple response is that Mackey didn’t deprive anyone of anything.

Here’s what the DOJ is reporting about Mackey:

As alleged in the complaint, between September 2016 and November 2016, in the lead up to the Nov. 8, 2016, U.S. Presidential Election, Mackey conspired with others to use social media platforms, including Twitter, to disseminate fraudulent messages designed to encourage supporters of one of the presidential candidates (the “Candidate”) to “vote” via text message or social media, a legally invalid method of voting.

For example, on Nov. 1, 2016, Mackey allegedly tweeted an image that featured an African American woman standing in front of an “African Americans for [the Candidate]” sign.  The image included the following text: “Avoid the Line. Vote from Home. Text ‘[Candidate’s first name]’ to 59925[.] Vote for [the Candidate] and be a part of history.”  The fine print at the bottom of the 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 [Candidate] for President 2016.”

The tweet included the typed hashtags “#Go [Candidate]” and another slogan frequently used by the Candidate. On or about and before Election Day 2016, at least 4,900 unique telephone numbers texted “[Candidate’s first name]” or some derivative to the 59925 text number, which was used in multiple deceptive campaign images tweeted by the defendant and his co-conspirators.

The DOJ did everything they could in this press release to make Mackey sound super scary, but it leaves a couple of questions. So Mackey was arrested because people were stupid enough to believe a meme that told them to text their vote? How is that his fault? Mackey didn’t “deprive” anyone of anything.

Oh yeah, I almost forgot. You know why they’re really going after Mackey? Because the “Candidate” whose name was redacted by the DOJ was non-other than failed presidential nominee, former senator and former First Lady Hillary Clinton.

As Fox News host Tucker Carlson said in a segment concerning Mackey on Wednesday evening, “Mockery online is now illegal when it’s aimed at the wrong people. Doug Mackey hurt their feelings, so they put him in jail.”

Bingo! Everything the current federal government is instructed to do and will continue to do is based on identity politics and to see who can virtue signal the most. Remember those "lists" the left kept talking about after the 2020 presidential election.

This should scare you, folks. It shouldn’t scare you to the point that you should watch what you say, it should scare you to the point that you have no choice but to keep speaking.

________________________________________________________________________

JUDGE BRUCE REINHART: 

Judgereinhartfromcourtblog300x400

Biden Justice Department arrests and charges man for anti-Hillary social media posts from 2016 election

SEE: https://www.michaelsmithnews.com/2021/01/biden-justice-department-arrests-and-charges-man-for-anti-hillary-social-media-posts-from-2016-elect.html;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Arrested and charged for "amusing or interesting items through social media".

Screen Shot 2021-01-28 at 1.49.53 pm

Screen Shot 2021-01-28 at 1.49.53 pm

Screen Shot 2021-01-28 at 1.49.53 pm

 

A Florida man was arrested this morning on charges of conspiring with others in advance of the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election to use various social media platforms to disseminate misinformation designed to deprive individuals of their constitutional right to vote.

Douglass Mackey, aka Ricky Vaughn, 31, of West Palm Beach, was charged by criminal complaint in the Eastern District of New York. He was taken into custody this morning in West Palm Beach and made his initial appearance before U.S. Magistrate Judge Bruce E. Reinhart of the Southern District of Florida.

“According to the allegations in the complaint, the defendant exploited a social media platform to infringe one the of most basic and sacred rights guaranteed by the Constitution: the right to vote,” said Nicholas L. McQuaid, Acting Assistant Attorney General of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division. “This complaint underscores the department’s commitment to investigating and prosecuting those who would undermine citizens’ voting rights.”

“There is no place in public discourse for lies and misinformation to defraud citizens of their right to vote,” said Seth D. DuCharme, Acting U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York. “With Mackey’s arrest, we serve notice that those who would subvert the democratic process in this manner cannot rely on the cloak of Internet anonymity to evade responsibility for their crimes. They will be investigated, caught and prosecuted to the full extent of the law.”

“Protecting every American citizen’s right to cast a legitimate vote is a key to the success of our republic,” said William F. Sweeney Jr., Assistant Director in Charge of the FBI’s New York Field Office. “What Mackey allegedly did to interfere with this process – by soliciting voters to cast their ballots via text – amounted to nothing short of vote theft. It is illegal behavior and contributes to the erosion of the public’s trust in our electoral processes. He may have been a powerful social media influencer at the time, but a quick Internet search of his name today will reveal an entirely different story.”

The complaint alleges that in 2016, Mackey established an audience on Twitter with approximately 58,000 followers. A February 2016 analysis by the MIT Media Lab ranked Mackey as the 107th most important influencer of the then-upcoming Election, ranking his account above outlets and individuals such as NBC News (#114), Stephen Colbert (#119) and Newt Gingrich (#141).

As alleged in the complaint, between September 2016 and November 2016, in the lead up to the Nov. 8, 2016, U.S. Presidential Election, Mackey conspired with others to use social media platforms, including Twitter, to disseminate fraudulent messages designed to encourage supporters of one of the presidential candidates (the “Candidate”) to “vote” via text message or social media, a legally invalid method of voting.

For example, on Nov. 1, 2016, Mackey allegedly tweeted an image that featured an African American woman standing in front of an “African Americans for [the Candidate]” sign.  The image included the following text: “Avoid the Line. Vote from Home. Text ‘[Candidate’s first name]’ to 59925[.] Vote for [the Candidate] and be a part of history.”  The fine print at the bottom of the 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 [Candidate] for President 2016.”

The tweet included the typed hashtags “#Go [Candidate]” and another slogan frequently used by the Candidate. On or about and before Election Day 2016, at least 4,900 unique telephone numbers texted “[Candidate’s first name]” or some derivative to the 59925 text number, which was used in multiple deceptive campaign images tweeted by the defendant and his co-conspirators.

The charges in the complaint are allegations, and the defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.

Assistant U.S. Attorneys Erik Paulsen and Nathan Reilly of the Eastern District of New York, and Trial Attorney James Mann of the Criminal Division’s Public Integrity Section are prosecuting the case.

ENDS

 

2021.01.22 Mackey Complaint... by Michael Smith

Hamas-linked CAIR sues US government, claiming terrorism watchlist is unconstitutional

BY ROBERT SPENCER

SEE: https://www.jihadwatch.org/2021/01/hamas-linked-cair-sues-us-government-claiming-terrorism-watchlist-is-unconstitutional

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

“They said many Americans experience such delays during travel, often at random.”

Yes, and often not at random: American Airlines, for one, is far more hostile to foes of jihad terror than to Sharia supremacists and advocates of Sharia-based oppression of women and others.

Anyway, this case has a good chance of succeeding given today’s political climate, but the Terrorism Screening Database is unlikely to be scrapped altogether; it will just be filled up with opponents of Biden’s handlers’ regime.

“Is the Terrorism Watchlist Legal? Appeals Court Hears Virginia Case,” Associated Press, January 27, 2021 (thanks to Henry):

FALLS CHURCH — On Tuesday, a panel of federal appellate judges expressed concerns about ordering wholesale changes to a government terrorism watchlist. A lower court previously found the list of roughly 1 million individuals was constitutionally flawed.

The 4th US Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond heard arguments Tuesday on the constitutionality of the watchlist, also known as the Terrorism Screening Database.

Government lawyers urged the judges not to intervene in the executive branch’s administration of the list and its national security judgments.

Fundamentally, they said the problems encountered by those on the list, like enhanced screening at airports and delays at border crossings, were too insignificant to merit intervention on constitutional grounds. They said many Americans experience such delays during travel, often at random.

‘Far From Insignificant’
Gadeir Abbas, a lawyer with the Council on American-Islamic Relations, which brought the suit on behalf of roughly two dozen Muslim clients, said the burden faced by those on the list is far from insignificant. He cited accounts from plaintiffs of being shackled and having guns pointed at them in front of their children at border crossings when agents encountered their names in the database.

“They are not just inconveniences,” Abbas said.

But J. Harvie Wilkinson, one of three judges who heard the case, said that while some plaintiffs experienced significant issues, others experienced only minor problems. He suggested it might be better for individual plaintiffs to file suits based on their own experiences, rather than just attacking the watchlist as a whole.

He also questioned whether the judiciary branch was able or qualified to require revisions to a program that the government insists is vital to national security….

Unite and Heal With Show Trials and Fascist Purges~Enjoy unity at gunpoint in the Bidenist banana republic.

BY DANIEL GREENFIELD

SEE: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2021/01/unite-and-heal-show-trials-and-fascist-purges-daniel-greenfield/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.

Joe Biden has called for “unity” and “healing”. And nobody knows as much about healing as Joe whose wife has a doctorate in education from the university that hosts his Biden Institute and the Beau Biden Foundation which was charging $3K for lessons on preventing online child sex grooming even as Hunter’s laptop with the Foundation’s sticker allegedly showed him doing it.

Except maybe Joe’s brother who took out $650,000 in personal loans from a company that bankrupted local hospitals while trading on his brother’s name and connections to his campaign.

"I think it has to happen," Biden said, mandating the show impeachment trial of his predecessor.

Once upon a time, impeachments were rare things. These days, Democrats aren’t considered truly progressive if they don’t impeach a Republican president twice in one term. President Trump is back in Florida, but that won’t stop the Democrats from impeaching him anyway before they move on to impeaching the presidents like Washington and Lincoln whose statues their insurrectionist mobs were toppling all summer and fall back when insurrection was still cool.

When asked how he defines unity, Joe Biden, with the help of three teleprompters and a small staff communicating with him through his earpiece and a series of frantic signals and hoots, explained that, “If you pass a piece of legislation that breaks down on party lines but it gets passed, it doesn't mean there wasn't unity -- it just means it wasn't bipartisan.”

Like most ideas that travel the circuitous route between his handlers, his brain, and his mouth, it may be impossible to understand what Joseph Robinette Biden Jr. said, but it’s pretty clear what the senile hack ruling a city under the shadow of military occupation and political terror meant.

Unity is when Democrats get their way. Unity is when no one opposes them. Unity is when they terrorize their political opposition into submitting and keeping their mouths shut.

Or as Speaker Pelosi put it, “I don't think it's very unifying to say, 'Oh, let's just forget it and move on.' That's not how you unify."

How do you unify? The same way every great democratic people’s regime did from France to Russia to China to San Francisco -- with show trials and purges of the enemies of the people.

Nothing says unity like a city full of barbed wire and soldiers. Not to mention a one-party system that is obsessed with criminalizing its political opposition using a fake state of emergency.

"There can be no unity, federal or other, with liberal-labor politicians, with disruptors of the working-class movement, with those who defy the will of the majority," Vladimir Lenin wrote. "There can and must be unity among all consistent Marxists."

The only unity on display is the unity of “consistent Marxists” who claim to represent the will of the majority, or those parts of it willing to trade harvested ballots for a fruit basket and $25 gift cards, as they move to heal the country by eliminating women, suburbs, and the economy.

The show trial of President Trump and the city full of soldiers is just the opening act to the Great Purge of a domestic terrorism crackdown on anyone who ever retweeted the wrong meme.

Biden will embed a domestic terrorism office in the NSC, making the NSC's former abuses under Obama routine as a system meant to track foreign enemies is instead used to surveil domestic political opponents. Heading the effort will be Joshua Geltzman who had formerly falsely claimed, "No, Black Lives Matter is not a terrorist organization."

Inside of a month, Democrats had redefined riots and election challenges from the highest form of patriotism to an attack on democracy. And by “democracy”, they mean the Democrat Party.

Popular leaders don’t take their false oaths of office in a deserted city surrounded by barbed wire and military checkpoints manned by 25,000 troops. Nor do they engage in show trials of their predecessors or unroll massive efforts to surveil, arrest, and silence their opponents.

That’s not the stuff of healing, but it is how you unite a country at gunpoint under your rule.

After four years of vowing to remove President Trump by any means from massive riots to illegal eavesdropping to coups, the Democrats declared an emergency because a few Republicans had done 10% of the things they had been doing, but without dressing up as human genitalia.

Democrats had been collecting bail fund donations for mass arrests in post-election protests and even a “separate fund to raise money for the families of anyone killed in violence on or around Election Day.” And then they pivoted from prepping body bags to declaring that insurrection was a national emergency which will require the National Guard to sleep in parking lots where they won’t annoy Democrat House members until Biden sees his own shadow.

That or the show trials wrap up before they get around to mandating that all future elections take place at Democrat campaign offices preceded by poll tests about equity and white privilege.

Meanwhile, the Democrat media went from writing sympathetic pieces about BLM lawyers throwing molotov cocktails at the police to demanding a thorough purge of every single person who had ever questioned the idea that Joe Biden might not be the most popular politician ever.

"Marxist philosophy holds that the law of the unity of opposites is the fundamental law of the universe," Mao had argued. " Under this system, the people enjoy extensive democracy and freedom, but at the same time they have to keep within the bounds of socialist discipline."

The bounds of socialist discipline, like a black hole, sucks things in without letting them out.

Democrats aren’t proposing that Americans unite under the Constitution. There’s no room in the Constitution for criminalizing political opposition or impeaching presidents after they leave office.

The Democrats want to make sure we stay within the shrinking bounds of socialist discipline.

Unity just means bringing the opposition into the dialectic and then making sure that it plays by the new rules of the game even if they were invented last week by way of convenience.

The new rules of unity are that no one may question an election that the Democrats claim to have won, no one may say anything that Big Tech doesn’t like, and no one may suggest that Biden’s Assistant Health Secretary is a middle-aged man in a dress and a flowing blonde wig.

(Now there’s a man who knows a lot about healing. Just ask the 8,400 seniors who died in Pennsylvania nursing homes while Dr. Rick ‘Rachel’ Levine, Biden’s new Assistant Health Secretary, withdrew his mother, but forced facilities to accept infected coronavirus patients.)

Questioning an election has become incitement to insurrection. To suggest that there’s anything illegitimate about Biden is sedition. Unity means believing that Joe Biden legitimately won an election for which Democrats changed the rules beforehand, then declared a national emergency, and inaugurated him behind barbed wire and lines of soldiers authorized to shoot.

That and believing that his assistant health secretary is a woman.

Believing implausible things is the essence of party discipline. If you want to understand how hardened Communists could shout, “Long live Stalin” just before they were shot in the gulags, it’s because they had spent a generation being conditioned to believe whatever they were told.

“The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command,” George Orwell wrote in 1984.

When slavery is freedom, and ignorance is truth, then repression becomes healing. The dialectic unites opposites, turning lies into truth, and flattening all contradictions. The message of the party becomes a gnostic mystery whose paradoxes are overcome by political faith.

The evidence of our eyes and ears is more valuable than ever in an environment of lies.

And that ocular and aural testimony finds scant evidence of unity, but plenty of repression. Americans aren’t coming together, they’re being driven further apart under the guise of a manufactured emergency being declared by insurrectionist rioters suddenly turned patriots.

D.C. isn’t the epicenter of unity and healing, but of a wave of political purges targeting everyone from President Trump to ordinary Americans whose political views are being criminalized.

There’s no healing to be found in show trials and political purges. Only the unity that comes from eliminating the political opposition in your very own Bidenist banana republic.

Texas: Man converts to Islam, plots jihad massacres at CIA, FBI and DEA headquarters

BY ROBERT SPENCER

SEE: https://www.jihadwatch.org/2021/01/texas-man-converts-to-islam-plots-jihad-massacres-at-cia-fbi-and-dea-headquarters;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:
KSAT reported last September that “the two men discussed where attacks on U.S. soil would take 
place, at which point Matthews said he preferred hitting economic centers and government 
buildings, including CIA headquarters, the FBI and DEA headquarters.”

All the major Muslim organizations in the U.S. condemn the Islamic State (ISIS). So why, when Jaylyn Molina converted to Islam, did he fall prey to its supposedly twisted and hijacked understanding of Islam? Why wasn’t the peaceful, tolerant, true Islam that everyone assumes converts to Islam are taught in mosques in the U.S. able to withstand challenge from the supposedly un-Islamic vision of ISIS? Why isn’t Molina’s mosque being investigated? Why am I the only person in the country asking these questions?

“Texas Man Pleads Guilty to Conspiracy to Provide Material Support to ISIS,” Justice Department, January 25, 2021 (thanks to Henry):

In San Antonio today, 22-year-old Cost resident Jaylyn Christopher Molina, aka Abdur Rahim, admitted to conspiring to provide material support to the designated foreign terrorist organization Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham/Syria (ISIS)…

Appearing before U.S. Magistrate Judge Richard Farrer, Molina pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to provide material support to ISIS and one count of receiving child pornography. By pleading guilty, Molina admitted that since May 2019, he conspired with 34-year-old South Carolina resident Kristopher Sean Matthews, aka Ali Jibreel, and others to provide services to ISIS by administering an encrypted, members-only chat group for persons who supported ISIS ideology; by collecting, generating and disseminating pro-ISIS propaganda; by attempting to recruit individuals to join ISIS; and by disseminating bomb-making instructions.

Molina also pleaded guilty to one count of receiving child pornography. On Sept. 18, 2020, federal authorities executing a search warrant at the defendant’s residence seized his cell phone, which contained 18 images depicting child pornography.

Molina faces up to 20 years in federal prison on the conspiracy charge and up to 20 years in federal prison on the child pornography charge. He remains in federal custody pending sentencing….

 

Judge Blocks Biden’s Deportation Moratorium~

SEE: https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/tyler-o-neil/2021/01/26/not-so-fast-judge-blocks-bidens-deportation-moratorium-n1411638

EXCERPT: On the very first day of Joe Biden’s presidency, acting Homeland Security Secretary David Pekoske ordered the Department of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) not to deport any illegal aliens except in limited circumstances such as terrorism or espionage. Attorney General Ken Paxton (R-Texas) challenged the order in court and on Tuesday, a federal judge barred the federal government from enforcing the deportation moratorium.

Stephen Miller Explains Biden's Immigration Order

Former Trump Aide Stephen Miller Details How Awful Biden's Immigration Order Actually Is

SEE: https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/stacey-lennox/2021/01/26/former-trump-aide-stephen-miller-details-how-awful-bidens-immigration-order-actually-is-n1411009

EXCERPT: Former Trump administration staffer Stephen Miller appeared on Tucker Carlson Tonight to detail the impact of President Joe Biden’s Executive Order on immigration enforcement. While Biden billed the order as a temporary halt on deportations for 100 days, it appears to include much more. Biden may not be abolishing Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE); he is just ensuring they have nothing to do.

 

Trump Should Have Pardoned This Pro-Family Hero~He Didn’t

Philip Zodhiates is a Christian who was aggressively railroaded for a phony "crime" by the Obama Justice Dept, the LGBT lobby, and the SPLC.

ALT TEXT

ABOVE: Philip Zodhiates and his wife Kathie Lee Zodhiates

Note: This article first appeared in American Thinker.

BY BRIAN CAMENKER

SEE: https://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen4/21a/Free-and-pardon-Philip-Zodhiates/index.html;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

We have all seen the corrupt US Justice Department aggressively prosecute and imprison political opponents such as General Michael Flynn and former Texas Congressman Steve Stockman on the flimsiest of “crimes.” Meanwhile, left-wing figures such as Hillary Clinton and Hunter Biden, who commit serious crimes remain untouched. The full truth is worse than most people are aware. Here is just one case we’re familiar with.

Philip Zodhiates is recognized as one of America’s best direct-mail professionals for conservative and Christian non-profits. His company, Response Unlimited, has sent out tens of millions of fundraising letters regarding the homosexual agenda and other anti-Christian movements. (Several years ago his company helped us!) Prior to and during the Obama administration his company sent out over 80 million fundraising letters targeting various suspect issues concerning Barack Obama, including his status as a “natural born citizen” and his ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. In addition, Zodhiates operated the Conservative Petitions website that generated impactful feedback and millions of email messages opposing leftist programs.

Zodhiates is a committed Christian who adopted six children from Central America and has generously donated money to, and volunteered for, Christian causes.

On Sept. 21, 2009, Zodhiates gave a young woman he knew from church, Lisa Miller, a car ride from Virginia (where they all lived) to New York. At the time, Miller was under emotional stress and was accompanied by her 7-year-old daughter Isabella.

That was the beginning of Zodhiates’ nightmare. The Obama Justice Dept. and major liberal and LGBT groups used the incident to manufacture an outlandish charge against him, leading to a tremendously expensive trial, and landing him in federal prison where he is today.

But the story began almost ten years earlier. It’s not surprising that a “gay rights” dispute is involved.

In December 2000, Lisa Miller and another young woman, Janet Jenkins, were in a lesbian relationship. They traveled from home in Virginia to Vermont to enter into a “civil union” which was not legally recognized in Virginia.

Lisa wanted to have a child and was artificially inseminated. Janet did not participate in that. In April 2002 when Isabella was born, Janet was not listed as a parent on the baby’s birth certificate. Since then, Jenkins also declined to adopt Isabella on at least two occasions, according to published documents.

In July 2002, the couple and child moved from Virginia to Vermont. But in September 2003, the relationship broke up and Lisa and Isabella moved back to Virginia. In November 2003, the domestic partnership was dissolved. After that, according to documents, Janet only saw Isabella once in 2003 and twice in 2004. Soon after, Lisa became a Christian. In 2004, a Virginia judge officially recognized Lisa as Isabella’s sole parent. Lisa decided not to allow Janet to have any further visits with Isabella. And according to published papers, Janet expressed little interest in Isabella.

Then the LGBT movement stepped in.

The ACLU along with the Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund sought to make it a test case to establish that same-sex partners in civil unions could have “parental rights” over children – even if they were not biologically related and had never legally adopted them. In addition, according to documents, the Southern Poverty Law Center convinced Janet to allow them to make this case the precedent-setting attempt to nullify the Virginia Marriage Amendment and the Federal Defense of Marriage Act.

Starting in 2007, these groups funded Janet Jenkins’ protracted custody battle over Isabella in the courts of Virginia and Vermont. A Vermont judge ordered that Janet should be allowed unsupervised overnight visits with Isabella, even though at that time she had not seen Isabella for 2½ years.

Lisa initially complied with these orders. But then she noticed that Isabella was acting very disturbingly after these visits. According to published documents, after one visit in 2007 (when Isabella was 5 years old) Lisa noted (published later in an affidavit):

Isabella has been crying at night asking me to promise that she doesn’t have to take a bath or shower with [Janet] … Since I picked her up on Sunday, Isabella has been exhibiting severe behaviors of stress, including pushing a comb against her stomach and telling me she is going to kill herself. She has been excessively and openly masturbating since she returned on Sunday and at one point tried to put a pen in her vagina.

When Lisa could see that Isabella was obviously being sexually abused during the visits with Janet, she declined to yield to the orders of the Vermont court. She continued trying to fight, but the massive legal force of the national groups was no match for Lisa’s meager resources.

Three licensed social workers in Virginia submitted affidavits stating that they believed Isabella was in danger with these visits, but that did not sway the courts. The Vermont court would not even allow those affidavits to be introduced as evidence.

The Virginia courts were persuaded to go along with the Vermont decision on visitation. In 2008, Lisa fought it all the way up to the Virginia Supreme Court. The court ruled in favor of continuing visitation rights for Janet!

Lisa still refused to comply. In 2009 a judge warned that if Lisa did not allow the visitations, he would transfer full custody of Isabella to Janet. In November 2009, the judge followed through with his threat and ordered Lisa to hand Isabella over to Janet.

But by then it was too late. Lisa and Isabella had left the country.

On Sept. 21, 2009, Lisa asked her friend from church, Philip Zodhiates, to drive her to Buffalo, NY. The next day Lisa and Isabella took a taxi across the border to Canada. They apparently flew from there to Central America, but their exact whereabouts are still unknown, according to reports.

At that point, the LGBT groups got the Obama Dept. of Justice (DOJ) to get involved, which they did with enthusiasm. They charged Zodhiates with International Parental Kidnapping and Conspiracy. The two-week jury trial was largely a sham. Among other things:

  • The DOJ got the jury trial moved from conservative Lynchburg, Virginia to liberal Buffalo, New York. But the supposed “kidnapping” took place in Virginia. Buffalo was simply the endpoint of the ride.
  • Lisa had full legal custody of Isabella, they had legal passports, and there were no travel restrictions.
  • Virginia's Defense of Marriage Amendment to its Constitution forbade the Virginia courts from recognizing the Vermont civil union, and Isabella's Virginia birth certificate lists Lisa as her only parent. Lisa lived in Virginia when Isabella was born.
  • The trial was largely on ad hominem characterization, not points of law. During the trial, the SPLC helped introduce “evidence” that Zodhiates was a horrible Christian bigot. But the judge refused to allow evidence of Zodhiates’ philanthropy and charitable work.
  • The jury never heard any evidence of the horrible sexual abuse regarding Isabella (or the affidavits from the social workers) which was the reason Lisa was escaping with her daughter. More important, fear of sexual abuse is a legal defense for alleged “parental kidnapping.” But Zodhiates’ lawyers purposefully chose not to tell the jury about that – an act of apparent legal malpractice which Zodhiates brought up in his appeal.

By any normal measure, Philip Zodhiates committed no crime. And certainly, by the normal standards of today’s legal system, he wouldn’t have been charged even if he had. But that’s not how things turned out.

The massive DOJ, SPLC, and LGBT legal team was too overwhelming, and Zodhiates’ lawyers were frankly unimpressive. The jury convicted Zodhiates.

The appeal was also shameful. The court rejected all of the problems with the trial that Zodhiates brought up. Petitions to the US Supreme Court were also rejected. In 2018 he was sentenced to three years in federal prison, where he sits now until the end of 2021. They would not even let him out early for Covid, even though thousands of other inmates were released.

Philip Zodhiates is also hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt for legal fees and lost income. It is likely that the SPLC will bankroll a further lawsuit against him on behalf of Janet for “damages.”

In December 2019, Zodhiates filed a Petition for Pardon to President Trump. Since then, there were numerous letters and emails from the Trump administration. On Dec. 23, 2020, President Trump pardoned 15 people and commuted the sentences of 5 others. Then on Jan. 20, 2021, President Trump granted 73 pardons and commuted the sentences of an additional 70 people. Philip Zodhiates was not among them.

Many of these people had been convicted of drug trafficking, securities fraud, and similar crimes. A friend of a famous rapper got pardoned.

But no one who got pardoned, that we could determine, had committed a transgression against the LGBT movement. We have a disturbing feeling that President Trump – or his staff – did not want to offend that “constituency.” It’s a terrible shame, and bad for America.

Facebook Twitter Email Print

Please help us continue to do our uncompromising work!

Our successes depend on people like you.

Donate to MassResistance

Your support will make the difference!




Texas Files First Major Lawsuit Against Biden Administration FOR VIOLATING DEPORTATION OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS CONGRESSIONALLY ENACTED LAWS

SEE: https://www.newsmax.com/politics/law-northam-pol-us/2021/01/22/id/1006835/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

Texas sued the U.S. government for ordering a halt to most deportations of undocumented immigrants, the first major lawsuit challenging President Joe Biden’s policies just two days into his term and a likely sign of what’s to come from other Republican-led states.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton claims the directive from the Department of Homeland Security violated federal law by failing to seek input from the state. Paxton also accused the administration of failing to enforce immigration laws and granting a “blanket amnesty.”

“On its first day in office, the Biden Administration cast aside congressionally enacted immigration laws and suspended the removal of illegal aliens whose removal is compelled by those very laws,” Paxton said in the complaint, filed Friday in federal court in Victoria, Texas. “In doing so, it ignored basic constitutional principles and violated its written pledge to work cooperatively with the State of Texas to address shared immigration enforcement concerns.”

The suit highlights the clash between Biden’s pledge to reverse the efforts of Donald Trump’s former administration to clamp down on people in the U.S. illegally and Republicans who want to continue those policies. Biden plans to eventually offer a path to citizenship to the almost 11 million undocumented immigrants in the U.S., which will likely trigger additional litigation.

Paxton, who is under federal investigation for bribery and abuse of power allegations made by former aides, led a failed legal challenge by Republican attorneys general that sought to prevent Biden from taking office based on bogus allegations of election fraud. In his new lawsuit, the Texas official claims the current administration is failing to remove immigrants even after they’ve had “full and fair” hearings.

“The Constitution, controlling statutes, and prior Executive pledges prevent a seismic change to this country’s immigration laws merely by memorandum,” Paxton said in the suit.

The Department of Homeland Security’s press office declined to comment and referred questions to the White House. The White House didn’t immediately return messages seeking comment.

The case is State of Texas v. U.S., 6:21-cv-00003, U.S. District Court, Southern District of Texas (Victoria).

 

Senate Prepares for Star Chamber Trial of Donald Trump

Why it's unconstitutional.

BY JOSEPH KLEIN

SEE: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2021/01/senate-prepares-star-chamber-trial-donald-trump-joseph-klein/;

republished below in full unedited for informational, educational & research purposes:

The U.S. Senate is preparing to put Donald Trump on trial after he has already left office at the end of his term and has become a private citizen once again. If the Senate proceeds with this star chamber proceeding, it will be acting in a blatantly unconstitutional manner.

Trump was impeached while still serving as president, on the grounds of alleged “incitement of insurrection.” The charge flowed from the mob attack on the Capitol building on January 6th, which followed Trump’s speech at a peaceful “Save America” rally at the Ellipse near the White House. However, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi did not immediately send the article of impeachment to the Senate, which is necessary to trigger the Senate to proceed with the trial. In any event, the Senate has been on recess and is not returning until January 19th. The Senate is not planning to take up Trump’s trial until he is already out of office and the Democrats assume control of the Senate.

To begin with, there is no merit to the insurrection incitement charge against Trump. In his January 6th speech, the centerpiece of the House’s impeachment article, Trump said to the rally attendees: "We have come to demand that Congress do the right thing and only count the electors who have been lawfully slated, lawfully slated. I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard." (Emphasis added)

Trump was asking his listeners to exercise their First Amendment right to peacefully assemble, protest and petition their government. There was nothing in what Trump said in his speech about storming the Capitol, committing violence, looting, vandalism or the like. The House impeachment article takes words Trump used like “fight” completely out of context. They did so in a desperate attempt to link Trump to what appears to have been an attack on the Capitol that was pre-planned well before Trump spoke. The rioters acted on their own and should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

Incitement, assistance, or participation in a rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States and its laws is a federal crime. A violation of the law can result in fines, imprisonment and disqualification from “holding any office under the United States.” Once Donald Trump leaves office, if any federal prosecutors are foolish enough to believe that Donald Trump committed such a crime, they are free to try bringing criminal charges against him in a court of law.

A trial of a private citizen, including Donald Trump after he leaves office, for allegedly committing the crime of inciting an insurrection, whenever it allegedly occurred, belongs exclusively in the courts. It is only in the courts where the accused is afforded all constitutionally required due process protections.

The Senate is a political body, with limited jurisdiction to try cases of alleged “treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors” against the president, vice president and all civil officers of the United States while they are still in office. The Senate is limited to imposing the political punishment of removing the convicted official from office and only then declaring that such official is ineligible for federal office ever again.

Article I, Section 3 of the Constitution vests the power in the Senate alone to “try all Impeachments.” It goes on to say that “[W]hen the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside.” Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution states: “The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.”

The Constitution’s text does not confer any power on Congress to indict, convict and punish a former president after he has left office. It speaks in the present tense of when “the President of the United States is tried.” The punishment upon conviction is that “[T]he President…shall be removed from office.” (Emphasis added).

Alexander Hamilton, who certainly knew a thing or two about what the Founding Fathers had in mind, said in Federalist #65 that the Senate was limited in its removal and disqualification powers to the  “dismission from a present, and disqualification for a future, office.” (Emphasis added)

The Constitution’s text could not be clearer. The text alone should end the discussion as to whether Trump can be tried and convicted by the Senate during his successor’s presidency and after Trump has once again become a private citizen. However, those seeking a Senate conviction claim it is still necessary to ensure that Trump can never occupy any federal office again. They cite another clause in the Constitution and historical precedent to support their argument. They fail on both counts.

The proponents for a Senate trial of private citizen Donald Trump point to a sentence in Article I, Section III of the Constitution, stating that “[J]udgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States.” Stephen Vladeck, for example, argues in a New York Times op-ed article that this clause is “the key,  because it drives home that the Senate has two decisions to make in impeachment cases: First, it must decide whether an officer should be removed. Then it must decide whether this person should be disqualified from holding any future federal office.”  Vladeck then argues that since Senate disqualification follows the president’s removal, it must mean that “disqualification, at least, is itself necessarily a vote about a former (as opposed to current) officer.” Trump can, the argument goes, be disqualified from holding federal public office by the Senate after he has left office at the end of his term, as if he had already been “removed” from office.

This is a ridiculous theory to say the least. Leaving office after one’s term has ended in the normal course is not the same as being involuntarily “removed” from office before the end of the term as a result of a Senate conviction. And such removal following conviction by the Senate must precede a vote on future disqualification. If the Senate does not convict, remove and disqualify President Trump before he becomes private citizen Donald Trump, there is no constitutional authority for the Senate to do so retroactively following the end of his term. If there were such authority, a partisan House and Senate could seek revenge on any political enemy long gone from office and prevent that person from ever again becoming a federal officeholder or continuing to receive federal benefits.

The extraordinary power of Congress to impeach and remove a president was not intended as an instrument of revenge. Rather, it was intended as a check against a president still in office and in a position to wreak more havoc on the body politic unless removed. If Trump-haters want to ensure that Trump cannot be re-elected as president in 2024, their sole recourse to seek a conviction for alleged incitement of insurrection is through the courts.

Hold on, say the Senate trial proponents who believe that history is on their side. They point to the case of a secretary of war, William Belknap, who had resigned his position in 1876, just minutes prior to a vote by the House on his impeachment. The House proceeded anyway to impeach Belknap, followed by a trial in the Senate.

Belknap did go on trial before the Senate, but he was acquitted. Why? As Vladeck himself acknowledged, some senators voted to acquit Belknap “because he was no longer in office.” Vladeck argued nevertheless that the Senate as a body had passed a resolution declaring it was authorized to put Belknap on trial for acts that he allegedly committed while serving as secretary of war even though he had resigned prior to being impeached. Since Belknap was acquitted, however, this self-serving assertion by the Senate is a moot point. It remains only an assertion untested in the courts and, as such, has no precedential value.

Not only the Constitution’s text, but plain old common sense leads to just one logical conclusion. The Senate’s constitutional authority to act as judge and jury must be applied narrowly to only current federal officeholders. After a government official, from the president on down, leaves public office, he or she is a private citizen like the rest of us. This person is protected under the 5th Amendment from being “deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.” Being excluded from holding a future public office is a deprivation of liberty. Only an independent judiciary can guarantee such due process.

As a political body, the Senate is not designed to guarantee due process and impartiality. The impeachment trial process, Alexander Hamilton wrote, “can never be tied down by such strict rules, either in the delineation of the offense by the prosecutors, or in the construction of it by the judges, as in common cases serve to limit the discretion of courts in favor of personal security. There will be no jury to stand between the judges who are to pronounce the sentence of the law, and the party who is to receive or suffer it.”

The constitutional case against putting Donald Trump on trial in the Senate after he leaves office as the means to disqualify him from holding a future public office is clear-cut. The Senate will be doing a great disservice to the country by fueling more dangerous political divisiveness while wasting valuable time and resources in the process.

 

POLICE STATE New Jersey: AUTHORITARIAN DICTATOR GOVERNOR MURPHY prepares for armed protest at state Capitol WITH STATE & LOCAL POLICE TO CRUSH ANY & ALL RIOTERS

The New Jersey Statehouse and Capitol Building In Trenton

New Jersey State Police Superintendent Pat Callahan takes questions during a recent press briefing.

1 2 3 6