Tag Archives: Lawsuit

A Victory For The First Amendment

Posted on by

On Monday,  The Alliance Defending Freedom posted an article about a recent lawsuit brought by a North Carolina high school student who was defending her First Amendment right to free speech.

The article reports:

To settle a lawsuit brought by a North Carolina high school student and her parents after school officials censored the student and repeatedly violated her constitutional rights, the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education agreed to adopt a new student speech policy, exonerate the student, and pay $95,000 in damages and attorneys’ fees.

Alliance Defending Freedom attorneys represent the Ardrey Kell High School junior, who seeks to share her Christian faith and values with others at school. After the assassination of free speech advocate Charlie Kirk last year, she felt inspired to use her voice to commemorate Kirk’s strong public defense of Christianity. She received permission from the school to paint a message on the school’s “spirit rock”—a large boulder on school grounds frequently used for the expression of various messages—in support of Kirk’s Christian message. Within hours, however, school officials ordered her message to be censored and then engaged in public efforts to humiliate her and the friends who helped her, prompting the lawsuit, G.S. v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education.

…The student had seen other messages on the rock—ranging from support of National Football League teams to Black Lives Matter—so last September, after receiving permission from school officials, the student, her parents, and two fellow students painted it with the words “Freedom 1776” and “Live Like Kirk—John 11:25.” Within hours, the student learned from social media that officials ordered the “Live Like Kirk—John 11:25” portion to be painted over.

The next day, school officials sent out a schoolwide e-mail accusing her of “vandalism” and said that law enforcement was conducting an investigation; the statement aired on a local news station as well. The day after that, officials called the student out of class to write an official statement describing her actions and forced her to show them her phone logs. School officials never obtained permission from parents to go through her phone, nor did they inform the students or parents about their constitutional right to remain silent and contact an attorney during a criminal investigation.

I hope she received enoughs of the settlement to make a serious addition to her college fund!

A Lawsuit I Can Get Behind

Posted on by

We all remember the execution of Peanut the Squirrel and his housemate, Fred the Raccoon by the State of New York. The execution was on shaky grounds at best, and seemed very cruel. Well, Mark Longo and his girlfriend Daniela Bittner have decided to take legal action against the State of New York.

On Monday, Red State reported:

During the 2024 presidential campaign, one story really seemed to hit home about government outreach, and that was of Peanut the Squirrel (also known as P’Nut) and his furry friend, Fred the Raccoon. The animals were rescued by Mark Longo and his girlfriend Daniela Bittner, where two little guys lived happily at his Freedom Farm Animal Sanctuary. P’Nut was even famous for numerous videos of his antics going viral.

That was until October 30, when the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation decided to raid the sanctuary, take Peanut and Fred, and promptly kill them. At the time, authorities alleged that the squirrel had bitten one of the DEC officials. Due to a rabies risk, both pets had to be decapitated and tested for rabies. 

On Monday, the New York Post reported that Longo and Bittner are now seeking justice for their late little fury friends, suing the state of New York. According to a lawsuit filed in the New York Court of Claims, the grieving couple is seeking $10 million after the state seized and euthanized Peanut and Fred. Subsequently, after the animals were dead and tested, the results came back negative.

The article notes:

The report read:

The killing of P’Nut and Fred was “not due to a fear of rabies” – but a “senseless act of violence” and “obscene demonstration of government abuse,” charge the new court documents, which list the state, the DEC and DOH as defendants. 

The allegations echo those outlined in a separate lawsuit filed by Longo and Bittner on June 27 in Chemung County Supreme Court, against the county, the City of Elmira and 36 individuals from every level of local and state government. 

That suit sought unspecified damages to be determined by a jury trial.

This was clearly a case of government overreach. Unfortunately, it will be the New York taxpayers who have to pay, but they are the people who elected their leaders.

The Insanity Continues

Posted on by

On Wednesday, KAKE posted an article sourced to CNN about a young man who was not allowed to attend a band concert because he was wearing a dress. The occurred in Mississippi where the high school principal stated, “Boys can’t wear skirts or dresses” and later said, “You can’t represent our school dressed like that.” The article reports that the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and ACLU of Mississippi have filed a federal complaint against the Harrison County School District on behalf of the  child’s mother because of the incident. This is insanity. The child’s mother needs to get the child the psychological help he needs to deal with his gender dysphoria. Wearing a dress is not a solution–it is part of the problem.

The article reports:

When presented with an ultimatum to have her mother bring “boys’ clothes” or not be allowed to participate, A.H. chose to change into a button-down shirt and dress pants and continue with the concert.

“A.H. felt utterly humiliated to be seen in clothing that was inconsistent with her gender identity,” said the complaint.

The Harrison County School District enforces a sex-based dress code that requires students to “follow the dress attire consistent with their biological sex,” according to the district’s student handbook.

The complaint states the school board added the “biological sex” provision to the dress code during a July 2023 meeting “in response to transgender and gender nonconforming students’ complaints about not being permitted to wear clothing associated with their gender identity and/or expression at school-sponsored events.”

This is a high school child. He is not old enough to smoke or drink. He cannot get his ear pierced without his parent’s consent. Why is his mother enabling him in a mental illness?

The article concludes:

In Mississippi and in other states, LGBTQ+ students are seeing their rights being chipped away. On Monday, Mississippi’s Republican Gov. Tate Reeves signed a bill that requires people to use restrooms and housing at public education institutions that corresponds to their gender assigned at birth.

People will only be allowed to use housing or bathrooms based on their “sex ‘determined solely by a birth,’ without regard to the fluidity of how someone acts or feels,” the bill states.

Rob Hill, state director for the Human Rights Campaign Mississippi, said all Mississippians deserve “a state that allows them to exist in peace – and a government focused on making life better for all of us.”

“Instead, Governor Reeves caved to MAGA politicians, stoking anti-trans panic, flinging the doors open to harassment and discrimination, and attempting to strip basic rights from LGBTQ+ people in our state.”

No bias here!

Transitioning is not a decision that should be made before age 21. Some of the steps taken are irreversible, and a teenager does not have the mental capacity to understand fully what that means. Parents also need to steer their children away from transitioning and help them find the root of that desire. Being a teenager is difficult. Adding irreversible surgery and drugs to the mix is not helpful.

 

Preparing For The Planned Cheating

Posted on by

There  are a number of people in high places who have admitted that the 2020 election results were seriously flawed. The sudden spike for Biden the morning after the counting was suspended is a statistical anomaly. There are also ballots trucked into Pennsylvania from other states and other strange events. Somehow the Department of Justice chose to overlook these things. Many of these things have not been corrected nor the people responsible held accountable. Therefore, we can expect them to occur again. Get ready.

On Friday, The Federalist reported:

The Associated Press (AP) admitted Friday that this week’s indictment of 18 Arizona Republicans is “part of a campaign” to “deter” Republicans from raising challenges and concerns about the integrity of the 2024 election.

Democratic Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes indicted 18 individuals, 11 of whom she claims acted illegally when they convened as alternate electors to certify the Arizona election in favor of Donald Trump while challenges to the tight election’s initial results were ongoing.

Under the headline “Charges against Trump’s 2020 ‘fake electors’ are expected to deter a repeat this year,” AP’s Nicholas Riccardi wrote the indictment of 18 people “could help shape the landscape of challenges to the 2024 election.”

“The indictment issued Wednesday is part of a campaign to deter a repeat of 2020, when Trump and his Republican allies falsely claimed he won swing states, filed dozens of lawsuits unsuccessfully challenging Democrat Joe Biden’s victory and tried to get Congress to let Trump stay in power,” Riccardi wrote.

The article concludes:

Even more analogous to the alternate Trump electors in 2020 was the situation in Hawaii during the 1960 presidential election between John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon, as noted by The Federalist’s Margot Cleveland.

The outcome of Hawaii’s election was debated for weeks, and even though the acting governor certified the election in Nixon’s favor in late November 1960, Democrats challenged the result. In December, both Democrat electors for Kennedy and Republican electors for Nixon cast separate votes for their respective candidates. Eventually, a judge determined Kennedy had won the election. As Cleveland noted, the judge “stressed the importance of the Democrat electors having met on Dec. 19, as prescribed by the Electoral Count Act, to cast their ballots in favor of Kennedy,” who ultimately ascended to the White House.

There are many of us who believe that the 1960 election was stolen due to the efforts of Joe Kennedy, but that remains for history to sort out. I expect there to be enough computer manipulation to give Joe Biden a victory in 2024 if he is the candidate. The question is whether or not Americans will believe that he actually won the election. The other missing piece of the puzzle is whether or not the Democrats will somehow put in a different candidate at their convention. Either way, this is going to be an interesting year.

 

Let’s Hold The Media Accountable For Their Malfeasance

Posted on by

On Monday, Townhall posted an article about a claim made about Republican Ohio Senate candidate Bernie Moreno during the closing days of the primary election.

The article reports:

Republican Ohio Senate candidate Bernie Moreno was slapped with nasty tricks during the primary’s closing days. Ohioans go to the polls on March 19 to decide whether Moreno, endorsed by Trump, Mike Lee, Ted Cruz, and JD Vance, will prevail over Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose or State Sen. Matt Dolan. The race has tightened to the point where even Democrats are starting to meddle. Yet, one attack was particularly slimy: Moreno signed up on Adult Friend Finder in 2008, seeking the company of young men. 

There are some that believe that if that were the case he would fit in perfectly with the Washington establishment.

The article continues:

It’s not true. The founder of Adult Friend Finder said when he analyzed the data, even though Moreno’s email address was used, it seemed to be an activity you’d see from a prank. Indeed, it was a prank, as a former intern already admitted as much. The Associated Press ran with the story, but even their communications director admitted they had nothing to corroborate it, opening the news outlet to a massive lawsuit. Jonathan Turley wrote if Moreno should file a lawsuit and it reaches the discovery phase; embarrassment can be re-directed at AP. Who wants some scalps?

The article adds that the AP could not corroborate the story and that Dan Ricci, a former intern, claimed to have created the account as a prank. Still AP ran with the story.

This is one of many reasons Americans do not trust the mainstream media. It would be nice to see the AP held responsible for this smearing of a candidate right before a primary election with no confirmation of the story.

Lady Justice Has Totally Lost Her Blindfold

Posted on by

On Friday, Issues & Insights posted an article about the lawfare that has been aimed at President Trump.

The article reports:

Was the $355 million fine against Donald Trump, for a “crime” that even the judge issuing the ruling admitted hurt no one, a bridge too far?

New York Gov. Kathy Hochul seems to think so, which is why she rushed out to say that other people doing business in New York have nothing to fear: “Law-abiding and rule-following New Yorkers who are businesspeople have nothing to worry about because they’re very different than Donald Trump and his behavior.”

What she should have said is: “if they are different from Donald Trump and his political views.”

Because nothing about this case, or the multitude of other unprecedented legal attacks against the former president — the attempts to kick him off ballots, the two bogus impeachments, the Russia hoax, the endless stream of media mis-reporting — has anything even remotely to do with “upholding the law” or “protecting Democracy.”

These attacks are all a message to anyone who would dare to run as a conservative. Do so, and we will stop at nothing to destroy you.

Because there was no actual ‘victim’ in this ‘crime,’ the money collected will go to the State of New York. Isn’t that special? A state struggling with expenses can simply take money away from one of its leading businessmen.

The article concludes:

What’s been happening since has been a public display of the left’s new, scorched-earth strategy for dealing with the political opposition. It started in the run-up to the 2020 election. As Time magazine so glowingly reported in early 2021, there was a “cross-partisan campaign” to defeat Trump, or as Time put it, “protect the election.”

Their work touched every aspect of the election. They got states to change voting systems and laws and helped secure hundreds of millions in public and private funding. They fended off voter-suppression lawsuits, recruited armies of poll workers and got millions of people to vote by mail for the first time. They successfully pressured social media companies to take a harder line against disinformation and used data-driven strategies to fight viral smears. They executed national public-awareness campaigns that helped Americans understand how the vote count would unfold over days or weeks, preventing Trump’s conspiracy theories and false claims of victory from getting more traction.

Since then, the left has added lawfare to its arsenal, which has now reached peak absurdity for the simple reason that Trump refuses to give in. But make no mistake, scalping Trump will only whet the left’s appetite for more scalps.

And who will be there to stop them?

This is where we are:

First They Came  by
Pastor Martin Niemoller

First they came for the Communists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Communist
Then they came for the Socialists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Socialist
Then they came for the trade unionists
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a trade unionist
Then they came for the Jews
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a Jew
Then they came for me
And there was no one left
To speak out for me.

Is This Legal?

Posted on by

Campaign finance laws require the candidates to list the names of their donors. Generally that works, although not all candidates follow the law. On Wednesday, The Daily Caller reported the following:

Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee, who is overseeing the case against former President Donald Trump, made a small donation of $150 to Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis’ campaign prior to his appointment.

McAfee, who was sworn in on Feb. 1, 2023 after being appointed by Republican Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp, made his donation in June 2020 while still working as an assistant U.S. Attorney for the Department of Justice (DOJ), according to financial disclosures. He will soon have to decide whether Willis should be disqualified over allegations that she financially benefited from appointing her romantic partner, Nathan Wade, to work on the Trump case.

McAfee also formerly worked under Fani Willis when she led the complex trial division in the Fulton County District Attorney’s Office, according to the New York Times.

Atlanta-based criminal defense attorney and legal analyst Philip Holloway told the Daily Caller News Foundation McAfee’s donation was “nominal,” but said it should still have been disclosed to the defendants so they could determine “whether they believed that amounted to a conflict of interest on the part of the judge.”

I agree that the judge should be able to donate whatever amount is legal to whatever candidate he chooses. However, I also agree that the defendants in this case should have been informed of his donations. Logically, they could have asked for a different judge.

From what I have seen of the legal cases against President Trump, I am not convinced of the honesty, integrity or intelligence of those bringing the cases. All of them are fraught with problems on the part of those pursuing them. In Georgia, Fani Willis is going to have her hands full with her own legal issues. In New York, the law was changed to allow Jean Carroll to bring her suit against President Trump. That seems questionable. And also in New York, major business leaders are pulling out of the State, and truckers are refusing to make deliveries there. I don’t think any of these lawsuits are going to have the desired impact and there may be some serious unintended consequences along the way.

Things The Media Left Out

Posted on by

On Saturday, Breitbart posted an article about the recent verdict in the defamation case against President Trump. In some ways the charge of rape against President Trump bears a striking resemblance to the charges brought against Justice Kavanaugh–the ‘victim’ can’t remember exactly when it happened, there is no corroborating evidence, there were no contemporary witnesses, and generally speaking there is no actual evidence. Somehow these cases were taken seriously while cases with contemporary evidence were not (Juanita Broderick, Tara Reade).

The article at Breitbart reports:

Here are some facts about Carroll’s story that the establishment media do not want the public to know:

1.  Bergdorf Goodman has no surveillance video of the alleged incident.

2.  There are zero witnesses to the alleged sexual attack.

3.  Carroll first came forward — conveniently — with the allegations while promoting her book What Do We Need Men For? in 2019, which featured a list of “The Most Hideous Men of My Life.”

4.  Carroll was unable to remember when this alleged attack even occurred. She told her lawyer in 2023, “This question, the when, the when, the date, has been something I’ve [been] constantly trying to pin down.” She has jumped years — originally beginning with 1994, then moving to 1995, and even floating to 1996. She cannot remember the season in which the alleged attack occurred either.

5.  The Donna Karan blazer dress she claims to have worn during the alleged incident was not even available at the time of her claims. Trump Attorney Boris Epshteyn told reporters, “She said, ‘This is the dress I wore in 1994.’ They went back, they checked. The dress wasn’t even made in 1994.”

“And that’s why the date’s moved around. This is the 80s. Is it the 90s? Is it the 2000s? President Trump has consistently stated that he was falsely accused, and he has the right to defend himself,” he added.

6.  She never came forward with these allegations over the years despite constantly being open about sexuality, posting things that were very sexual in nature on social media — many of which Trump has shared. They include remarks such as “How do you know your ‘unwanted sexual advance’ is unwanted, until you advance it?” and “Sex Tip I Learned From My Dog: When in heat, chase the male until he collapses with exhaustion … then jump him!”

7.  She said she was never raped, telling the New York Times’ podcast, The Daily, “Every woman gets to choose her word. Every woman gets to choose how she describes it. This is my way of saying it. This is my word. My word is ‘fight.’ My word is not the ‘victim’ word. I have not — I have not been raped,” she continued. “I have — something has not been done to me. I fought. That’s the thing.”

8.  She named her cat “Vagina.” “Her dog, or her cat, was named ‘Vagina.’ The judge wouldn’t allow us to put that in — all of these things — but with her, they could put in anything: Access Hollywood,” Trump told CNN.

9.  Joe Tacopina, an attorney for Trump, pointed out in May 2023 that Carroll’s entire story has incredible similarities to a 2012 episode of Law & Order: Special Victims Unit. In that episode, titled “Theatre and Tricks,” an individual talks about a rape fantasy in Bergdorf Goodman — the same department store where Carroll claims the incident took place.

10.  Speaking of shows, Carroll loved Trump’s show The Apprentice.

11.  Carroll made a joke associating sex with Bergdorf Goodman in a November 1993 edition of Elle, which was before the alleged Trump attack took place.

12.  Carroll is financially backed by anti-Trump Democrat megadonor Reid Hoffman, who has openly admitted to visiting convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein’s private island.

13.  Democrat party activists back her as well, as Breitbart News detailed:

14.  The lawsuit was only able to proceed after Democrats created the Adult Survivors Act in 2022. She conveniently pursued this suit in November following the law going into effect, which allowed her to avoid the statute of limitations for this case.

15.  Carroll once said, “Most people think of rape as sexy.”

We live in a dangerous world when a woman can simply accuse a man of a sexual crime with no evidence, circumstantial or otherwise and walk away with millions of dollars.

Filing A False Report To Get The Preferred Narrative

Posted on by

On Friday, The Epoch Times posted an article about the killing of Ashli Babbitt on January 6th, 2021.

The article reports:

Within a minute after firing the fatal bullet that struck Ashli Babbitt on Jan. 6, 2021, U.S. Capitol Police Lt. Michael Byrd broadcast a radio report claiming shots were being fired at him in the Speaker’s Lobby and he was “prepared to fire back,” a federal lawsuit alleges.

The previously undisclosed radio dispatch is also contained on an audio recording obtained exclusively by The Epoch Times of the “OPS2” dispatch channel used by Capitol Police on Jan. 6.

Information on the recording is contained in a federal lawsuit filed on Jan. 5 by Ms. Babbitt’s widower, Aaron Babbitt of San Diego. Mr. Babbitt, backed in his lawsuit by Judicial Watch, is seeking $30 million from the U. S. government for wrongful death.

According to the lawsuit, Mr. Byrd fired his Glock 22 .40-caliber pistol, striking Ms. Babbitt in the left shoulder, then announced that he was being fired upon and was ready to return fire.

“In fact, no shots were fired at Lt. Byrd or his fellow officers,” the lawsuit stated. “The only shot fired was the single shot Lt. Byrd fired at Ashli. He heard the loud noise of the gunshot. He saw her fall backward from the window frame.”

The article also notes:

The DOJ report absolving Mr. Byrd from culpability included numerous errors and incorrect statements.

The report says that after the glass in the doors leading to the Speaker’s Lobby was smashed out, rioters “were then able to reach through the broken glass and push the chairs off the top of the barricaded furniture.”

Video shot from the hallway does not show anyone toppling chairs from the makeshift barricade, either before or after Ms. Babbitt was shot.

The report quotes Jason Gandolph of the House Sergeant at Arms office saying he and several Capitol Police officers “attempted to keep the demonstrators from advancing toward the Speaker’s Lobby after the Capitol was breached.”

The article also includes a transcript of the Mr. Byrd’s conversation with dispatch. It also includes a timeline of the events related to the murder of Ashli Babbitt. Please follow the link to read the entire article.

 

When Racism Failed As A Weapon

Posted on by

Generally speaking, the political left can shut down any argument or win any legal case by claiming ‘racism.’ However, that is getting old, and many people are using common sense and good research to fight back against the bogus charge.

On Wednesday, The Gateway Pundit reported the following:

Officer Byron Evans and seven black Capitol Police Officers sued Brandon Straka and several Trump supporters under the KKK Act for “racist” attacks on him and seven other police officers on January 6, 2021.

Officer Evans sued Brandon Straka and Roger Stone who was not even at the US Capitol that day along with leaders of the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys and others.

Brandon Straka released video on Wednesday of Officer Byron Evans admitting he was watching the January 6 protests on a TV in a room in a secure location.

Please follow the link to read the entire article. It includes screenshots of a number of tweets from Brandon Straka explaining the actual source of the lawsuit and the research they did to discover the actual facts surrounding the events.

When Teachers Fight Back

Posted on by

On Sunday, The Gateway Pundit posted an article about a former teacher at a  middle school in Ludlow, Massachusetts, who was fired for informing a female student’s father that the school was secretly referring to his daughter as a boy.

The article reports:

A teacher fired over her concern for a student’s welfare is not going down without a fight.

Bonnie Manchester, whom MassResistance reported is a Christian, was sacked from a middle school in Ludlow, Massachusetts, back in 2021 after informing a female student’s father that the school was secretly referring to his daughter as a boy.

Two years on, Manchester is filing a $10 million lawsuit against Ludlow, its school board, current and former school district superintendents, and several former school employees.

One of the defendants, the school’s former librarian, is a woman who identifies as a man. She allegedly pushed books on children containing sexually explicit content, “either in the form of illustrations, explicit descriptions of sexual activity, or both.”

“Some promoted a gay lifestyle, others trans,” the lawsuit states. “All advanced a view wherein gender confusion, sexual experimentation, promiscuity, or all three were considered normal.”

It used to be that teachers were concerned about the moral character of students. Now it seems that many teachers are undermining the moral values that most children are being taught at home.

The article concludes:

When Manchester decided to inform the girl’s father of his daughter’s secret “gender transition,” the school launched an investigation into her behavior on the grounds that she had shared “confidential information.”

She was placed on administrative leave for several months as the investigation was carried out before eventually being fired after a decades-long career at the school. Her conduct, she was told, was “unbecoming a teacher.”

The school claimed Manchester had violated “a purely fictitious School policy of confidentiality that simply did not exist,” the lawsuit states, accusing the defendants of engaging in “invidious and egregious viewpoint discrimination violative of the First Amendment.”

The suit was filed on Nov. 11 in a Massachusetts federal court.

MassResistance reported that the parents of the female student also filed a federal lawsuit against the school district in April 2022. That lawsuit was dismissed but is on appeal, according to the outlet.

This case is taking place in Massachusetts, so it is in no way a sure thing that the teacher will win the lawsuit, but hopefully she will start a pattern of teachers being willing to tell parents what is going on with their children.

Will The Jury Listen To The Evidence?

Posted on by

On Thursday, The Epoch Times posted an article about the ongoing trial of President Trump in New York. It seems that the evidence doesn’t fit the charges.

The article reports:

“Financial reporting misconduct is a very important part of any course that I teach,” said Mr. Bartov (Eli Bartov, professor of accounting at NYU’s Stern School of Business and an award-winning researcher,). Being able to detect financial fraud early can be rather profitable, he explained, such as the famous case of Enron.

…Though the judge allowed him to testify as an expert in financial accounting and credit analysis, it came after lengthy objection from the state attorneys, who argued the professor had expertise in valuing publicly traded companies, not Deutsche Bank’s decisions. Mr. Kise commented that the state attorneys have objected to this one witness more than any of the others, “which tells me they’re terrified of this witness.”

Mr. Bartov said that after reviewing the lawsuit against the Trump Organization, “the most important evidence is the credit reports of Deutsche Bank.”

Those reports, rather than the Trump statements of financial condition (SFoCs), “really tell you the whole story,” he explained. “You can spin it any way you want, but everything is there.”

Mr. Bartov, who teaches students how to do credit reports just like the Deutsche Bank credit report on Trump Organization, said the person who prepared this report may well have once been his student.

“I am not going to provide an independent valuation of these because it’s not necessary, not because I can’t do it,” he explained. “My main finding is there is no evidence whatsoever of any accounting fraud.”

“The SFoCs over the years were not materially mistaken,” Mr. Bartov said.

The statement prompted the judge to ask if he meant that the attorney general’s “complaint had no merit.”

“This is absolutely my opinion,” he said. “You read the complaint: the complaint has numerous allegations of valuations of GAAP [generally accepted accounting principles]. There is no specific reference to a provision of GAAP that was violated.”

Mr. Bartov concluded:

Mr. Bartov, who teaches students how to do credit reports just like the Deutsche Bank credit report on Trump Organization, said the person who prepared this report may well have once been his student.

“I am not going to provide an independent valuation of these because it’s not necessary, not because I can’t do it,” he explained. “My main finding is there is no evidence whatsoever of any accounting fraud.”

“The SFoCs over the years were not materially mistaken,” Mr. Bartov said.

The statement prompted the judge to ask if he meant that the attorney general’s “complaint had no merit.”

“This is absolutely my opinion,” he said. “You read the complaint: the complaint has numerous allegations of valuations of GAAP [generally accepted accounting principles]. There is no specific reference to a provision of GAAP that was violated.”

Is the jury listening? Will the mainstream media report this? The answers to those two questions will tell us (if we don’t know already) whether or not this is a witchhunt.

Using The Law Against Your Political Opponents

Posted on by

The story below is one of the things that makes me wonder about the future of America. Somehow we have lost the concept of equal justice under the law and many legal actions have become totally political.

On Tuesday, The Washington Examiner reported the following:

A POLITICIZED, GROSSLY UNFAIR LAWSUIT AGAINST TRUMP. Former President Donald Trump testified Monday at the trial of the lawsuit, filed by New York Attorney General Letitia James, alleging that Trump inflated the values of his real estate properties to receive lower interest rates on loans. It’s important to note that Trump has already lost the case. The judge, Arthur Engoron, weeks ago pronounced Trump guilty of the actions alleged, and what is going on now in court is the penalty phase, in which Engoron will decide whether to confiscate Trump’s business empire.

The punishment will be extraordinary and unprecedented. This is how Axios has described it: “Former President Donald Trump is at risk of losing the New York real estate empire that the rest of his career was built on. Forcibly dismantling Trump’s company is so unusual that no one is quite certain how it would play out.”

Engoron could decide to cancel the business certificates of all of Trump’s companies. “If the business certificates were canceled,” Axios continued, “the relevant assets — which include Trump Tower, Trump Park Avenue, 40 Wall Street, and Trump National Golf Course Hudson Valley — would be put under the control of a court-appointed receiver, who operates much like an executor of an estate. The receiver would continue to manage the properties, but also could be allowed by the court to sell some — particularly if cash was needed to pay off legal penalties or creditors. Trump, who views himself as a consummate dealmaker, would not be at the negotiating table.”

That is a punishment so out of line with the behavior alleged in this case that it boggles the mind. It is made possible by two factors: a bad law and a hyperpoliticized attorney general. On the bad law, New York’s Executive Law 65(12), the former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy wrote: “The law doesn’t require a showing of harm. The state need not prove the defendant even intended to defraud anyone, much less actually defrauded someone. It need not be established that any creditor or financial institution even relied on the defendant’s misrepresentations, that those misrepresentations were material, or that anyone was actually fooled by them.” There need be no victim — after all, in this case, no bank or financial institution is suing Trump for cheating them, nor does there need to be any crime involved — in fact, prosecutors looked at the same evidence and declined to charge Trump.

Hopefully this case will eventually suffer the same fate as the case against former Virginia Governor Bob McDonald. However, the damage done in getting there will be immense and inexcusable.

Following The Legal Trail

Posted on by

Recently, President Trump was found guilty of sexual misconduct and defamation. The interesting part of this case is that the woman bringing the charges couldn’t even remember what year the incident happened. She accused the President of rape in a department store dressing room. Her description of the event described her entering a dressing room with the President and locking the door. If that account is true, what did she expect to happen? At some point, women need to take responsibility for doing stupid things. However, that is not the most interesting part of the story. Until recently, the case could not have been brought because the statue of limitations for the ‘crime’ had expired. A law was passed in New York that allowed the suit to be brought.

On Thursday, PJ Media reported the following:

One of the more curious aspects of this case was that the only reason Carroll was even able to sue Donald Trump was because of a law passed in New York in 2022 called the Adult Survivors Act. This legislation, signed by Democratic Gov. Kathy Hochul, introduced a “one-year lookback window for survivors of sexual assault” to legally pursue their alleged abusers, irrespective of when the abuse took place. Many argued it was passed specifically to let Carroll take her absurd allegations to court and punish Trump

It turns out those claims weren’t mere conspiracy theories. In a surprising revelation, E. Jean Carroll’s attorney, Roberta Kaplan, acknowledged that Carroll played a role in advocating for the passage of the aforementioned law.

“The fact that New York passed this law, the Adult Survivors Act,” CNN’s Poppy Harlow said while interviewing both Carroll and Kaplan. “They passed it just a few years ago. Were it not for that law, you never would have been able to bring this case.”

“Exactly. This would never — I would never have this window, this year of having the ability to bring a lawsuit for rape,” Carroll responded, then pointed to her attorney and said. “Robbie can explain it better.”

“Well, E. Jean actually helped to get that law passed,” Kaplan admitted. “It passed last year. We filed – it was Thanksgiving Day, the first day you could sue. We filed it just after midnight on Thanksgiving. And there are a lot of other women throughout the state and, hopefully, throughout this country, that they will get other laws like this passed in other states. And New York women should use this law while it’s still around, which is until next Thanksgiving.”

The article concludes:

So not only was the civil suit a politically motivated attack, but it was also an attack that required an act of the Democrat-controlled New York State legislature and the Democrat governor of New York to make it possible. Does that sit well with you? Just how corrupt is this conspiracy to get Trump? Among other things, we’ve seen the Russian collusion hoax, two impeachments, the bogus Bragg case, and now this.

Wow.

A Positive Move

Posted on by

On Friday, The Epoch Times reported that retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn has filed a lawsuit against the Department of Justice (DOJ), FBI, and others, alleging he was maliciously prosecuted. He is demanding at least $50 million in compensation.

The article reports:

“Defendant maliciously investigated and prosecuted General Flynn by initiating and continuing a baseless counterintelligence investigation and by filing a criminal information lacking probable cause,” says the suit, filed on March 3 with the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida (pdf).

The former head of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) under the Obama administration was investigated by the FBI starting in August 2016 for supposed ties to Russia. In 2017, he was charged with lying to the FBI during an interview earlier that year.

The suit alleges that the FBI, and later prosecutors from the office of special counsel Robert Mueller, investigated and prosecuted him for political reasons, considering him a threat.

“General Flynn—who already had a reputation as a hands-on disruptor at DIA, who had publicly excoriated the politicization of the intelligence community, and who had made clear his desire to overhaul the national security structure and the ‘interagency process’—was a direct threat, not only to the self-interest of entrenched intelligence bureaucracies and the federal officials involved, but to exposing their prior and ongoing efforts to derail and discredit President Trump,” the suit says.

The case against Flynn was riddled with contradictions and inconsistencies. FBI agents had already decided to close his case by early January 2017, but higher-ups intervened to keep it open on the justification that Flynn may have violated an obscure and antiquated law called the Logan Act by discussing with a Russian ambassador the priorities of the incoming administration during the transition period. DOJ officials at the time rejected the legal theory. The 1799 Logan Act, which prohibits certain kinds of unauthorized diplomacy, may in fact be unconstitutional, several lawyers previously told The Epoch Times. It has never been successfully prosecuted, much less aimed at an incoming national security adviser.

I would like to remind people that in 2018, CNN reported the following:

Gowdy (Oversight Chairman Trey Gowdy, a South Carolina Republican) also pushed Comey (former FBI Director James Comey) on comments he had made in a New York forum earlier this month, in which he told a moderator his decision to send two FBI agents to the White House without notifying the White House counsel’s office was something he “probably wouldn’t have done or maybe gotten away with in a more organized administration.”

“I’m just kind of hung up on the phrase ‘gotten away with,’ ” Gowdy told Comey on Monday in the private Capitol Hill interview, according to the transcript.

I am in favor of this lawsuit. I am also in favor of someone wiping that arrogant grin of James Comey’s face.

Now They Tell Us

Posted on by

On Tuesday, Just the News posted an article about some recent discoveries regarding Dominion voting machines.

The article reports:

Dominion Voting Systems employees have acknowledged serious problems with the company’s technology, saying, for example, that a bug led to “INCORRECT results,” according to discovery cited in the defense brief in Dominion’s defamation lawsuit against Fox News.

Dominion is suing Fox News for $1.6 billion for defamation after becoming a target of alleged conspiracy theories regarding its voting machines being hacked and flipping election results.

In a legal brief made public Thursday, the news outlet cited information obtained from Dominion through discovery. 

In a 2018 email Fox News obtained from Dominion Director of Product Strategy and Security Eric Coomer, he acknowledged the company’s technology was marred by a “*critical* bug leading to INCORRECT results.”

“It does not get much worse than that,” he later added.

…In another 2019 email, Coomer wrote, “we don’t address our weaknesses effectively!”

Less than a week before the 2020 presidential election, Coomer conceded in an email that “our sh-t is just riddled with bugs.”

Mark Beckstrand, a Dominion Sales Manager, testified in a deposition that “other parties ‘have gotten ahold of [Dominion’s] equipment illicitly’ in the past,” according to the defense brief.

“Beckstrand,” the brief continues, “identified specific instances in Georgia and North Carolina and testified that a Dominion machine was ‘hacked’ in Michigan” and “confirmed that these security failures were ‘reported about in the news.'”

After the 2020 election, “a security expert told the media that Dominion ‘software should be designed to detect and prevent th[e] kind of glitch’ experienced in Antrim County, Michigan,” according to the defense, and “Coomer told Dominion Vice President Kay Stimson: ‘He’s not entirely wrong.'”

A conspiracy is only a conspiracy until it turns out to be true.

When The Government Interferes With Medical Treatment

Posted on by

On Monday, Townhall reported on a lawsuit filed by a group of doctors against the Food and Drug Administration.

The article reports:

In a lawsuit filed earlier this month, a group of doctors sued the Food and Drug Administration and Department of Health and Human Services for “unlawfully” interfering with their ability to practice medicine and prescribe ivermectin for use in Covid-19 patients.

Specifically, the three doctors—Robert L. Apter, Mary Talley Bowden and Paul E. Marik—argue the FDA can’t ban use of an approved human drug for “off-label” use. 

“The FDA also can not advise whether a patient should take an approved drug for a particular purpose. Those decisions fall within the scope of the doctor-patient relationship,” the complaint says. “Attempts by the FDA to influence or intervene in the doctor-patient relationship amount to interference with the practice of medicine, the regulation of which is — and always has been — reserved to states.”

The article concludes:

In a statement, Bowden said “fighting the system has been a much bigger challenge than fighting the disease.“

“Despite my excellent track record treating COVID patients, the FDA’s smear campaign against ivermectin continues to be a daily hurdle to overcome,” she said. “I am fighting back – the public needs to understand what the FDA has done is illegal, and I hope this suit will prevent them from continuing to interfere in the doctor-patient relationship.”

The government’s handling of the use of ivermectin in concerning. It was proven early on that if you administered ivermectin to Covid patients early, the results were positive. The fact that the government opposed the use of ivermectin is puzzling. Hopefully the disclosure portion of this lawsuit will shed some light on that.

Good Idea

Posted on by

The cancel culture often hurts the people it claims to want to help. Well, some of the people recently cancelled have decided to fight back.

Just the News posted an article on Monday about a lawsuit brought against Major League Baseball by a group of Atlanta business owners.

The article reports:

A small business group on Monday evening sued Major League Baseball, its commissioner Rob Manfred and the head of professional baseball players union Tony Clark alleging their efforts to move this summer’s All-Star game from Atlanta to protest Georgia’s new election integrity law unlawfully inflicted “staggering” damages on businesses in the region.

The suit filed in U.S. District Court in Manhattan by the Job Creators Network alleges MLB violated the Klu Klux Klan Act of 1871 and committed “tortious interference” in business by canceling the game over a political matter.

It seeks damages of at least $100 million for the businesses of Atlanta as well as an order to restore the game this summer to the Atlanta Braves home stadium, Truist Park.

“MLB Defendants intended to punish Georgians because their state enacted a reasonable ballot-integrity statute and to coerce Georgia and its duly elected government to surrender Georgia’s sovereignty in our federal system,” the lawsuit charged.

It said the true victims were small businesses who spent money and made plans for two years to host the All-Star Game based on MLB’s promise, only to see it canceled.

Please follow the link above to read the entire article which includes a link to the complaint. The decision by Major League Baseball was based on faulty information and should be met with a lawsuit.

An Administration That Does Not Enforce The Law

Posted on by

On Tuesday Judicial Watch posted the following in its Corruption Chronicles section:

States Say ICE Stops Issuing Detainers for Illegal Immigrant Convicts, Revokes Them for Dozens

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has long complained about police in sanctuary cities that fail to honor its detainers, instead releasing serious criminals in the U.S. rather than turn them over to get deported. Now two states are suing the Homeland Security agency for failing to issue detainer requests for convicted felons in the country illegally, forcing local authorities to free them after completing their sentence rather than turning them over to the feds for removal. It seems that the tables have turned under the Biden administration, according to the lawsuit, filed this month by officials in Texas and Louisiana.

The states claim that ICE has reversed a Trump era policy and is not issuing detainer requests for dangerous illegal aliens imprisoned in their jurisdiction. “As a result, many convicted criminal aliens have been released to society after their sentences, contrary to Congress’s mandate that they be detained pending their removal from the United States,” according to their complaint, filed this month in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas Victoria Division. Besides ICE, the defendants include the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and its secretary, Alejandro Mayorkas, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and various officials at the DHS agencies. The lawsuit begins by stating that “the Biden Administration is refusing to take custody of criminal aliens despite federal statutes requiring it to do so.” Instead, the document reads, defendants “have issued and implemented unlawful agency memoranda that allow criminal aliens already convicted of felony offenses to roam free in the United States. Such aliens belong in federal custody, as Congress required.”

Adding insult to injury, officials in the Lone Star State reveal in the court document that the Biden administration has taken the extra step of revoking ICE detainer requests for a multitude of illegal immigrants convicted of felonies and serving sentences in prisons operated by the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. Many were found guilty in a U.S. court of serious drug offenses, including possession, manufacturing, and sale. “President Biden’s outright refusal to enforce the law is exacerbating an unprecedented border crisis,” said Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton in a statement announcing the lawsuit. “By failing to take custody of criminal aliens and giving no explanation for this reckless policy change, the Biden Administration is demonstrating a blatant disregard for Texans’ and Americans’ safety. Law and order must be immediately upheld and enforced to ensure the safety of our communities. Dangerous and violent illegal aliens must be removed from our communities as required by federal law.” In 2019 Texas housed nearly 9,000 undocumented criminal aliens at a cost of more than $152 million, according to the lawsuit.

In Louisiana ICE is not removing individuals subject to mandatory deportation, the complaint says, causing convicted felons incarcerated in state facilities to be released in local communities throughout the Bayou State. Louisiana, more than any other state, has greater risk due to the large number of local jails that are used to house detainees prior to removal, according to Attorney General Jeff Landry. “The President’s refusal to enforce the law only worsens an already dire border crisis,” Landry said. “Law and order must prevail; dangerous and violent criminal aliens must not be allowed to roam free in our communities.” Both states assert that the administration is violating binding agreements with DHS to assist in immigration enforcement and national security missions as well the Constitution, Immigration and Nationality Act and Administrative Procedure Act, which require the government to post proposed substantive rule changes in the Federal Register and allow the public to comment on them before enacting them.

For years ICE has slammed sanctuary cities nationwide for refusing to honor a local-federal partnership known as 287(g) that notifies the agency of jail inmates in the country illegally so that they can be deported after serving time for state crimes. Before Biden became president, ICE repeatedly issued statements reminding sanctuary cities and states that when law enforcement agencies fail to honor immigration detainers and release serious criminal offenders onto the streets, it undermines its ability protect public safety and carry out its mission. The agency even launched a billboard campaign seeking the public’s help in capturing felons released by one state’s sanctuary policy.

The actions of the Biden administration are not contributing to public safety. The lawsuit is necessary. Hopefully the states will win their case.

 

Will The Tenth Amendment Stand?

Posted on by

The American Spectator posted an article today about the recently passed coronavirus relief bill.

The article reports:

Well, that didn’t take long. The first major bill passed by the new Democratic congressional majority and signed into law by our new president on March 11 had already provoked a constitutional challenge by March 17. The attorney general of Ohio filed suit against the Biden administration last Wednesday in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, alleging that the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) unconstitutionally and coercively limits the right of states to manage their internal fiscal policies: “This suit challenges an unconstitutional provision in the American Rescue Plan Act — a provision that allows the federal government to commandeer state taxing authority.”

If the use of “commandeer” in this context seems vaguely familiar, it’s probably a vestigial memory of the Obama administration’s failed attempt to exert equally questionable control over state budgets using the mandatory Medicaid provision of Obamacare. Fortunately, in NFIB v. Sebelius, the Supreme Court ruled 7-2 that such coercion is unconstitutional. Ohio’s ARPA challenge involves a provision whereby $195.3 billion in fiscal recovery aid will be distributed among the states and the District of Columbia. Beyond its effect on the federal budget deficit, this doesn’t seem particularly pernicious. The real problem arises from the restrictions the provision imposes on the power of the states to reduce taxes:

A State or territory shall not use the funds provided under this section or transferred pursuant to section 603(c)(4) to either directly or indirectly offset a reduction in the net tax revenue of such State or territory resulting from a change in law, regulation or administrative interpretation during the covered period that reduces any tax (by providing for a reduction in a rate, a rebate, a deduction, a credit or otherwise) or delays the imposition of any tax or tax increase.

This constitutionally dubious language was inserted into the legislation by the Democrats at the last minute, the New York Times reports, for the express purpose of interfering with the ability of the states to make changes in their tax codes. It is a deliberate and insolent attack by the federal government on state sovereignty and the doctrine of federalism. As Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost puts it in his Motion for Preliminary Injunction, “The Tax Mandate thus gives the States a choice: they can have either the badly needed federal funds or their sovereign authority to set state tax policy. But they cannot have both. In our current economic crisis, that is no choice at all. It is a metaphorical ‘gun to the head.’ ”

The coronavirus relief bill actually punishes fiscally responsible states and rewards fiscally irresponsible states, so it is no surprise that the law would actually limit the ability of states to improve their economies by lowering taxes. In the world envisioned by the current Democrat party, we would all pay more taxes and government would have more control over our lives. Never in the history of America have Americans been given government guidelines as to their activities in their own backyards on Independence Day. I fear that this is only the beginning of the power grab by those currently in control of Washington.

Pettiness On Parade

Posted on by

The cancel culture’s attack on President Trump has soared to new heights since he left office. We have reached the point where in some circles it is probably a crime to mention his name in any positive way. This is not only ridiculous, it is not helpful in building unity in America. Half of the country (at least) voted for President Trump. Those in the media might do well to remember that.

Hot Air posted an article today that illustrates how ridiculous things have gotten.

The article reports:

We learned last month that New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio was cooking up a plan to cancel all of the Trump organization’s contracts with the city. Those contracts involve the operation of a golf course, the carousel in Central Park and two skating rinks. The contracts were set to expire in April anyway, but apparently, the city’s showboating mayor couldn’t wait that long. It was just announced that de Blasio wants the Trump-owned operations shut down and moved out by February 26. (In one week.) That means that operations will end tomorrow to give them time to pack everything up. So any children showing up to go skating this week will find the rinks closed for business.

First we keep the children out of school, then we deny them outdoor recreation, and then we wonder why they might be depressed.

The article continues:

This pathetic move by de Blasio is being done for partisan political reasons and he’s not even trying to hide it. One of his spokespeople said three weeks ago that “Trump has been impeached from operating the ice rink.”

Like a bad dart player who always misses the bullseye, Bill de Blasio has misfired yet again and hit the wrong target. He’s not doing all that much “punishing” of the Trump organization because they were going to be out in less than ten weeks anyway. But in his haste to generate another headline as a hero of the #RESISTANCE, the Mayor shut down the skating operations without having anyone lined up to take over and run them. So the rest of the skating season in Central Park has been “canceled” rather than Donald Trump.

As we discussed here when Bill’s plan was originally announced, Hizzoner has probably set the city up for some legal and financial problems while simultaneously icing out anyone who enjoys skating. Eric Trump had already made it clear that he would be going to court if de Blasio made good on his threat and terminated the contract early.

The Mayor claims that the contracts contain a provision allowing for early cancellation if the contractor is found to be engaged in “illegal activity.” The entire basis for his claim of illegal activity is the January 6 riot on Capitol Hill. But Donald Trump hasn’t been convicted of any crime related to that, nor even charged in a court of law. (Impeachment doesn’t count and he wasn’t convicted in that “court” either.) On top of that, Trump doesn’t personally operate the division of the company that runs the skating rinks. His son does.

The article notes that if Eric Trump sues the city and wins, the taxpayers will be on the hook for the damages. New York City has paid a high price for electing Mayor de Blasio, and it appears that the price is about to go higher.

 

Making Progress Two Weeks At A Time

Posted on by

Yesterday The Epoch Times reported:

A federal judge in Texas extended the suspension of President Joe Biden’s 100-day moratorium on deportations until Feb. 23.

U.S. District Court Judge Drew Tipton in the Southern District of Texas on Tuesday ruled that the federal government cannot make immigration enforcement changes without consulting Texas. As a result, he extended the temporary restraining order by another 14 days, asserting that the state of Texas would face more harm than the federal government if the extension wasn’t granted.

”The irreparable harm that would accrue to Texas if an extension of the [temporary restraining order] is not granted before consideration of its motion for a preliminary injunction is more substantial than any harm incurred by the defendants,” wrote Tipton in his ruling, adding that his ruling will give parties more time to “provide for a more fulsome record” to assist the court in “adjudicating Texas’s motion for a preliminary injunction.”

This is the information on the lawsuit that has resulted in the suspension:

Last month, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, a Republican, sued the Biden administration over its order to pause some deportations, asserting that the White House would violate its agreement with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which oversees Immigration and Customs Enforcement and U.S.-Mexico border security, and instead requires 180 days’ notice to change immigration policy.

“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. 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,” Paxton’s lawsuit said. “This unlawful reversal will cause Texas immediate and irreparable harm if it is not enjoined.”

So why is a secure border important? Well, Mexico has a high rate of the coronavirus–if Americans are being told to wear masks, socially distance, and get the vaccine, why are we letting unmasked, unvaccinated groups of illegals potentially create a ‘super-spreader’ event? Why are we letting the cartels bring drugs and human trafficking victims across the border unchecked? Why are we allowing potential terrorists into the country without being screened? The Biden administration’s immigration policy is not only a threat to the safety and security of Americans, it will also result in higher unemployment for Americans. We need more states to sue and more judges to stand up for the rule of law.

This Is Not Good For Our Country

Posted on by

John Hinderaker posted an article at Power Line Blog today about the lawsuit brought by the Trump campaign against the State of Pennsylvania. The law firm handling one aspect of the case has been pressured by anti-Trump types to withdraw from participation in the lawsuit.

The article reports:

A law firm representing the Trump campaign in its challenges to the Pennsylvania election results gave notice that it’s withdrawing from one of the cases.

Lawyers with Porter Wright Morris & Arthur LLP submitted a filing late Thursday stating they were withdrawing as counsel in a federal suit seeking to block Pennsylvania from certifying its vote. No reason was given. In a statement issued Friday, the firm confirmed the filing but did not say why it was exiting the case.

The Trump campaign issued the following statement:

“Leftist mobs descended upon some of the lawyers representing the President’s campaign and they buckled,” said Tim Murtaugh, communications director for the campaign. “If the target were anyone but Donald Trump, the media would be screaming about injustice and the fundamental right to legal representation. The President’s team is undeterred and will move forward with rock-solid attorneys to ensure free and fair elections for all Americans.”

The article concludes:

Not many years ago, every terrorist in Guantanamo Bay was represented by one of a group of America’s top law firms. For free. No one batted an eye. Now, the President of the United States is having trouble getting lawyers to represent him in asserting perfectly legitimate claims. Some dictator.

This is the latest instance of the most troubling trend in American culture, leftist bullying. Rare is the company (or, as in this case, the law firm) with the courage to stand up against it. It is a serious threat to the liberty of all Americans.

Regardless of your political leanings, you need to look at this carefully. If a law firm can be bullied into not representing someone because of political pressure, what chance do you and I have for equal justice under the law? These are mafia tactics that will only get worse if they are not stopped.

 

The Voters File A Lawsuit

Posted on by

The Epoch Times is reporting today that three Wisconsin voters have filled a lawsuit against three of the state’s counties.

The article reports:

Three voters in Wisconsin have filed a federal lawsuit seeking to exclude Nov. 3 election results in three of the state’s counties that helped push Joe Biden ahead of President Donald Trump. The action, if successful, would invalidate over 792,000 votes cast across the state.

The civil action (pdf), filed on Thursday, alleges that there is “sufficient evidence that illegal votes were counted” in Milwaukee, Dane, and Menominee counties “to change or place in doubt the results” of the presidential election in the counties. The voters asked the court to declare that the counties’ results “must be invalidated” and to block the counties from certifying their results.

All three counties lean heavily Democrat, with Milwaukee and Dane being among the most populous and heavily Democratic counties in the state. For the three counties, Biden holds a lead of 365,289 votes over Trump. In the state overall, Biden holds a lead of about 20,540 votes at 49.6 percent, compared to Trump at 48.9 percent as of Saturday. The Trump campaign has signaled it will request a recount.

The article includes some of the claims made in the lawsuit. One claim has to do with analyzing the data:

The lawsuit states that plaintiffs “possess advanced technical capability to conduct statistical analyses identifying errors and anomalies such [as] double votes, votes by non-registered persons, votes by persons who are deceased or moved out of state, and the like.”

“Plaintiffs have persons with such expertise and data-analysis software already in place who have begun preliminary analysis of available data to which final data, such as the official poll list, will be added and reports generated,” the suit said, suggesting that the results will show that “sufficient illegal ballots were included in the results to change or place in doubt the Nov. 3 presidential election results.”

They said that the expert report will “identify persons who cast votes illegally by casting multiple ballots, were deceased, had moved, or were otherwise not qualified to vote in the Nov. 3 presidential election, along with evidence of illegal ballot stuffing, ballot harvesting, and other illegal voting.”

The plaintiffs are seeking “immediate production of registration, election, and other data to conduct and present those analyses to the court.”

I have read other articles stating that there are statistical anomalies in some of the voting numbers in a few states. It will be interesting to see as this lawsuit continues exactly what those anomalies are and how they impact the total votes. I suspect we will see similar legal action on other states where the election totals are questionable.

This Is Becoming More Obvious

Posted on by

Yesterday Breitbart posted an article about a group of black pro-life people who have filed a lawsuit against Planned Parenthood charging the organization with racial discrimination.

The article reports:

According to an announcement released last week at Christian Newswire, the National Black Pro-Life Coalition filed the racial discrimination claim with the Office for Civil Rights (OCR) at the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services (HHS).

Catherine Davis, president of the Georgia-based Restoration Project, said in a statement:

Systemic racism and abortion intersect at the door of Planned Parenthood, an organization that has targeted Black women and their babies for almost five decades. These intentional actions violate the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which made it illegal for recipients of federal assistance to discriminate on the basis of race.

The article notes:

Walter Hoye, founder of the Issues4Life Foundation, observed abortion has become “the leading cause of death for Blacks,” an outcome that has led to a 1.8 fertility rate, less than the 2.1 rate needed to replace the population.

“At this rate, by 2050 the total Black fertility rate will be 1.3 or lower, a rate that is irreversible,” he said.

In recent months, some Planned Parenthood employees have accused the organization of a racist environment in some workplaces.

Alexis McGill Johnson, the CEO of Planned Parenthood, said in response to the accusations of “misconduct, abuse, racism and more, do not align with Planned Parenthood’s standards or our values.”

“We are taking steps internally to address” the allegations, she added. “[O]ur country is in the middle of a racial justice reckoning – one that includes Planned Parenthood.”

As you consider this lawsuit, there is something you need to keep in mind.

According to the Britannica website:

Planned Parenthood traces its beginnings to the birth control movement led by Margaret Sanger and her colleagues, who opened the nation’s first birth control clinic in 1916 in a poverty-stricken neighbourhood of Brooklyn, New York. Created to free women from the “chronic condition” of pregnancy and the dangers of self-induced abortion, the clinic was shut down by police after only 10 days. Sanger and the others were imprisoned for violating the anti-obscenity Comstock Act of 1873. Sanger’s continuing efforts led to the foundation of both the American Birth Control League in 1921 and the Birth Control Federation of America in 1939, which became Planned Parenthood in 1942.

Please investigate the writings of Margaret Sanger. The foundation of Planned Parenthood is based on her work and writings. Even a slight glance at her writings reveals a woman who believed that White, Anglo-Saxon Protestants in America were racially superior to other races and that other races should be limited in their right to reproduce.

This lawsuit has been a long time coming, but at last someone has decided to take action against racism in its most obvious form.