This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Was the first lady of France actually born a man?
Brigitte Macron is now going to the highest court in France after being "devastated" by a lower court ruling last week that let off two women who claim she's actually male.
The pair had originally been convicted for spreading false information before the Paris appeals court on Thursday overturned the verdict. The initial ruling ordered the two women to pay $9,300 in damages to Brigitte Macron, and $5,800 to her brother.
France24 reports: "Brigitte Macron filed a libel complaint against the two women after they posted a YouTube video in December 2021, alleging she had once been a man named Jean-Michel Trogneux – who is actually Brigitte Macron's brother.
"In the video, defendant Amandine Roy, a self-proclaimed spiritual medium, interviewed Natacha Rey, a self-described independent journalist, for four hours on her YouTube channel.
"Rey spoke about the 'state lie' and 'scam' she claimed to have uncovered that Jean-Michel Trogneux had changed gender to become Brigitte, and then married the future president."
Jean Ennochi, the first lady's attorney, told Agence France-Presse on Sunday that her brother was also taking his case to the highest appeals court, the Court de Cassation.
The case has been followed closely by American political commentator Candace Owens, who is among those promoting the notion that Brigitte, 72, is a man.
Owens says she was personally phoned by U.S. President Donald Trump in February when French President Emmanuel Macron was visiting Washington, D.C., and says the commander in chief urged her to stop discussing Brigitte because it was interfering with talks on ending Russia's war against Ukraine.
In a video she released on June 30, Owens said of Trump's call: "It is hard to catch my breath to comprehend that four days ago I'm ending a series about Brigitte Macron, and now I'm speaking to the president of the United States and the topic of conversation no matter which way you wanna slice it is about Macron's wife's penis. I mean there's no other way to say it."
She continued: "I explained to him that she has had this amazing doctor who specializes in transgenderism surgeries or feminization procedures. I'm talking to the president of the United States about this, guys. This is crazy this wacky. … But I'm just trying to get him to understand the truth.
"And then I explained to him why I don't feel so great about this request, because that's the more important part."
"Like you are requesting that I really, and despite your reasoning, which is very sound, that I stop telling the truth. And I said to Trump, and I will be honest, that at that moment I realized that one day this is gonna go into my autobiography and so I got to say something funny, and I just said, I said to him, 'You know, respectfully, Mr. President, it's not my fault that he married someone with a penis.'"
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A judge appointed by Barack Obama has ordered the government to continue handing out taxpayer cash to the abortionists at Planned Parenthood on no legal basis, and at least one commentator has concluded that amounts to no more or less than "judicial terrorism."
It was commentator Nathan Stone at the Federalist who delivered that conclusion about Indira Talwani's decision last week to order the continued cash handouts to Planned Parenthood's abortionists.
That was despite the fact that members of Congress in the House and Senate adopted a provision that withheld federal tax money from the abortion industry giant, and it was signed into law by President Trump in the process under which "democracy," actually a representative republic, in America works.
"Indira Talwani, an Obama-appointed judge of the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts, ushered in the next chapter of judicial supremacy when she blocked the provisions of the 'big beautiful bill' which deprived Planned Parenthood and its affiliate organizations of Medicaid funds," Stone explains. "If Judge Talwani had 'found' those provisions 'unconstitutional,' or if she had found the whole reconciliation package 'illegal'" it would be another example of judicial usurpation. Business as usual. But she didn't do either. Talwani's temporary restraining order commands that the executive ignore the law and keep shoveling the Benjamins to feed abortions. As Dan McLaughlin said on X, 'You can't argue with the judge's reasoning because there isn't any.'"
The order from Talwani is part of a campaign on the part of judges at the entry level courts to the federal judiciary of opposing President Donald Trump's plans and agendas, even if delivered through ordinary and accept channels. The agenda already has prompted the Supreme Court to say those judges are exercising powers they don't have by repeatedly demanding they have their way on policies and practices of the executive branch, instead of letting the president run that branch, as the Constitution provides.
"The surface irony of this would be comedy gold in a movie. For the last 10 years, the left's bread and butter has been to paint Trump, his allies, his voters, and the Republican Party as fascists intent on destroying 'our democracy.' But, when the sacrament of abortion is in jeopardy, it does a 180 and orders the president to completely ignore a law that was duly passed and signed — textbook fascist behavior," the commentary said.
Further, it said, Talwani's writing "does not even try to pretend to be anything other than naked power that commands lawlessness for the sake of killing babies. Separation of powers, the rule of law, the legislative power, and the very ability of the American people to enact change through their duly elected representatives — one of the fundamental markers of self-governance — are all done away with a flick of Talwani's pen."
The charges against Talwani are that she makes democracy meaningless because she "or one of her clones will just put on their crowns, wave the imperial scepter of leftism, and say, 'You can't do that.'"
"Make no mistake: Judge Talwani is a legal terrorist. Her TRO is the judicial equivalent of an IED, which was supposed to destroy the administration by either disobeying the law or disobeying the judiciary. It's not about the country or an alternate vision. Now, it is only about destruction — pure and sweet."
Joining in the criticism of Talwani's ideological agenda was Margot Cleveland, also of the Federalist.
Talwani actually issued an injunction, with no legal reasoning or basis at all, early last week. When challenged, she dissolved that and issued another, confirming her thinking she's an "imperialist judge."
Her first order, Cleveland wrote, "failed to provide any legal justification for her decision requiring the Trump Administration to continue disbursing Medicaid funding to all Planned Parenthood organizations."
The Trump administration pointed out she refused to follow the "basic requirements" of such an order, so Talwani replaced her first with a second order.
Her first order was defective as it was entered on an ex parte basis without any considering of whether there was, or was not, irreparable injury or loss, any exigency requiring immediate action, and more.
"Judge Talwani attempted to rectify her errors on Friday by dissolving her initial TRO and entering an amended TRO that 'provide[d] the court's reasons for the emergency order.' But rather than remedy the defective TRO, Judge Talwani's reasoning confirms that she never should have entered a TRO in the first instance," Cleveland wrote.
"To obtain either a TRO or a preliminary injunction, a Plaintiff must establish '(i) the likelihood that the movant will succeed on the merits; (ii) the possibility that, without an injunction, the movant will suffer irreparable harm; (iii) the balance of relevant hardships as between the parties; and (iv) the effect of the court's ruling on the public interest.'
In issuing her amended TRO, Judge Talwani focused on the merits of only one of the abortion-giant's legal claims, namely, the Plaintiffs' argument that Section 71113 of the Big Beautiful Bill violates their First Amendment right of association by excluding Planned Parenthood 'affiliates' from Medicaid funding, even though some affiliates do not provide abortions. This provision punishes affiliates based solely on their association with other Planned Parenthoods, the Plaintiffs argued. Judge Talwani agreed, finding the Plaintiffs were likely to succeed on the merits of that First Amendment claim," Cleveland explained.
However, Planned Parenthood itself, the commentary explained, "does not distinguish between the federation and affiliates, commingling funds for purposes of financial reporting. As such, Congress could reasonably consider the entity as an undivided whole in making funding decisions."
In Talwani's "unhinged" claims, the judge made a mistake in protecting the flow of taxpayer cash to the abortion business based on the First Amendment, but also failed to recognize there was no evidence of any "irreparable harm."
The development was simply Talwani demanding to exercise "legislative and executive authority," the commentary said.
Naturally, a president wouldn't want people working under him who investigated him and his allies, so it's no surprise that President Donald Trump continues to purge DOJ staff members who did so under the previous administration.
More than 20 people who worked on then-Special Counsel Jack Smith's two cases against Trump were the latest to be canned this week, and a source in the administration said that 15 more people could be fired in the near future.
With around 15 previous firings, the total could reach 50 until it's all said and done.
Smith is long gone, and anyone who worked under him is soon to follow.
Sources said that among those fired in this wave were paralegals, finance and support staff, as well as the final two prosecutors in North Carolina and Florida.
The DOJ's "weaponization working group" established by Attorney General Pam Bondi right after she was confirmed to the positon identified the employees who were fired.
The working group was tasked with distinguishing "improper investigative tactics and unethical prosecutions" from "good faith actions by federal employees simply following orders."
One of the employees fired, public affairs specialist Patty Hartman, complained about the so-called retribution behind the firings to CBS in an interview.
"The rules don't exist anymore," Hartman said. "There used to be a line, used to be a very distinct separation between the White House and the Department of Justice, because one should not interfere with the work of the other. That line is very definitely gone."
Hartman may be a little off on her timeline for when the "retribution" started in Washington.
Trump was most definitely punished for daring to win office as a political outsider, threatening the status quo and bringing about change that a lot of people--even some Republicans--did not want.
The line she's talking about was pretty much destroyed when the DOJ under former President Joe Biden decided to use its power to prosecute a presidential candidate and nominee on specious charges that didn't end up holding water.
Why would Trump let people stay in his administration who think what was done to him is justice?
His actions make perfect sense and no one should have expected anything different.
President Donald Trump has thrown his support behind Attorney General Pam Bondi amid calls for her resignation after dropping a bombshell announcement about the Epstein client list case.
MAGA and members of the Trump administration want Bondi to step down after she announced that the infamous Epstein client list didn't exist, after telling Americans months ago that she had the client list on her desk.
Americans have been eager for the release of the client list as it promised to be a monumental moment in American history that would expose the rich and powerful people who were involved in billionaire sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein's sordid business.
One of the big reasons Trump gained such strong support in last year's presidential election is promises to expose the rich and powerful, including many powerful politicians, for their involvement or knowledge of Epstein's child sex trafficking operations.
Bondi's sudden announcement that the list didn't exist and there is no evidence of who was involved shocked America, and it's painfully obvious that there is a cover-up happening.
Despite the outrage against Bondi's act of cowardice, Trump is standing behind Bondi and has loudly declared his support for her. Trump's decision to support Bondi came as a shock because of how bad this situation looks for him.
In a post to Truth Social, Trump said, "What’s going on with my ‘boys’ and, in some cases, ‘gals?’ They’re all going after Attorney General Pam Bondi, who is doing a FANTASTIC JOB! We’re on one Team, MAGA, and I don’t like what’s happening."
Trump's appeal to unity seems to be completely missing the point. Americans do not care about unity, they care about finding out who the rich and powerful were that participated in the massive child trafficking operation Epstein ran for years.
Trump's post continued, "We have a PERFECT Administration, THE TALK OF THE WORLD, and ‘selfish people’ are trying to hurt it, all over a guy who never dies, Jeffrey Epstein." He capped off the post saying, "LET PAM BONDI DO HER JOB — SHE’S GREAT!"
Nowhere does Trump acknowledge the fact that releasing the Epstein client list was a major promise of his campaign as part of his mission to drain the swamp and bring the corrupt elite to justice.
Bondi's cowardly behavior has been met with outrage among some of Trump's closest allies who have worked for years to expose the swamp and Epstein's associates to justice.
FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino and FBI Director Kash Patel are at the forefront of this rebellion in the Trump administration, and there have been rumors that both are considering resigning unless Bondi either comes clear or resigns from her position.
Bongino has been especially zealous, reportedly telling White House correspondent Mary Margaret Olohan that he "won’t stay at FBI if she [Bondi] stays at DOJ.”
This situation has been catastrophic for Trump, and it is paramount that he make the right decision in cleaning up this mess before it fractures MAGA and his own administration.
Hunter Biden, who hasn't had the best couple of years aside from a sweet pardon deal by his father, former President Joe Biden, is now reportedly scrambling to find some funds to maintain his lifestyle.
According to reports, in the wake of his legal controversies and general public name toxicity, Hunter Biden is reportedly eying a path to collecting some of his father's $10 million fortune.
The reports indicated that Hunter Biden desperately attempted to strike it big in Hollywood with some producers gigs and a loan or two, but has obviously struck out on that front.
His paintings, which sold on average for about $54,000 each, are reportedly "collecting dust."
Earlier this year, as his father's first and only term came to an end in the White House, Hunter Biden reportedly admitted that he was drowning in debt, especially as his multi-million dollar mansion in California was deemed unlivable due to the fires.
In addition to his financial issues, Hunter Biden is being sued by a law firm that represented him last year in his felony cases, which likely won't end well for the former president's son.
An insider revealed that they believe Hunter Biden is headed home to Delaware to "stage a family coup" and leverage his dad's piggy bank.
"It’s desperation time, and he’s going back to Delaware to stage a family coup,” the insider reportedly told the outlet. "The way he sees it, it’s his only chance for redemption."
Such a move, at least at this point, would mean that Hunter Biden would have to overcome former First Lady Jill Biden and take over the role of Joe Biden's conservator.
The outlet noted:
Jill’s reputation has taken a nosedive in political circles after the recent revelation that Joe was diagnosed with prostate cancer that has spread to his bones.
Many believe the former first lady may have hidden her husband’s deteriorating condition during his administration and encouraged the Democrat’s ultimately aborted reelection bid while knowing he was unfit to serve.
The insider believes that Hunter Biden is plotting his path to dad's fortune, and already has a way to bypass Jill Biden's grip on her husband's assetts.
"Hunter means to take control of Joe’s business and financial affairs — and no doubt line his own pockets in the process," the insider reportedly said.
It wouldn't come as a surprise to see Hunter Biden squirrel his way into dad's estate.
He seems like just the type of son who would do that and not lose a wink of sleep in the process.
President Donald Trump's top law enforcement officials, including FBI Director Kash Patel and Attorney General Pam Bondi, are taking loads of heat over their assertion that there are no conspiracies around Jeffrey Epstein's death.
According to the Daily Wire, Patel responded to the backlash this week, doubling down in saying that there's nothing else being hidden and no wild conspiracies to speak of.
Breaking his silence on the matter came barely a week after it was announced that there was no official Epstein "list," and on the heels of the release of video surveillance footage from inside the prison where Epstein was held.
Many in the MAGA world are not happy with the official announcements and still believe there is something being hidden by the government -- this time, President Trump's government.
The issue has reportedly caused quite a bit of internal strife within the ranks of Trump's top officials.
It has been reported that Patel and Deputy FBI Director Dan Bongino are considering resigning if AG Pam Bondi continues to remain at her post, though the reports have been disputed.
The Daily Wire noted:
Bongino is reportedly furious over Bondi’s handling of the files, and allegedly stormed out of a closed-door meeting on the matter. A source told The Daily Wire on Friday that Bongino has threatened to not return to his post if Bondi remains as attorney general.
Patel addressed the Epstein situation in an X post, which unsurprisingly generated tons of backlash on its own, as many still very much believe that Epstein had a list of some of the most powerful, influential figures in the world who might have done illegal acts with him.
"The conspiracy theories just aren’t true, never have been," Patel said Saturday on X. "It’s an honor to serve the President of the United States [Donald Trump] — and I’ll continue to do so for as long as he calls on me."
The conspiracy theories just aren’t true, never have been. It’s an honor to serve the President of the United States @realDonaldTrump — and I’ll continue to do so for as long as he calls on me.
— Kash Patel (@Kash_Patel) July 12, 2025
Users across social media simply weren't buying what Patel was selling.
"You completely switched up your tone in every issue. When you were talking in a podcast, you sounded like you really were for the people, but now you’re just another crook," one X user wrote.
Another X user wrote, "You lied to the American people about the Epstein list."
Only time will tell if this really is the end of the issue or if there is more to be revealed down the road.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
In the wake of President Donald Trump's weekend comments about the Jeffrey Epstein files, investigative journalist Alex Jones is saying: "This is the mother of all scandals."
"President Trump now claims the Epstein list is real, but the Democrats have doctored it," Jones said on X, along with a video clip expressing his perplexity.
"After years of saying they were releasing the Epstein file or list, suddenly they're not going to. We're told it doesn't exist," Jones said.
"But then Trump comes out last night and says, well, it DOES exist, but the Democrats had control of it, manipulated it, which is actually true. They've had control of it, they would destroy anything they didn't want in there, leave what they wanted in there, that their investigators could plant.
"People say, 'Whose side are you on?' This is a giant fiasco. I'm trying to call balls and strikes. I'm trying to look at every angle of this and understand what's happening, understand why the Trump administration did a 180 the last few months and particularly last week, and did this and then blames loyal supporters who support the overall agenda as being traitorous for doing this.
"Now we all know what triggered this. It was Elon [Musk] two months ago, saying look, Trump's in the list, and that big break-up there. And then Trump wants it closed. He wants it shut down, which looks extremely, extremely incriminating. But from all of my deep research, I never saw Trump involved in any illegal activity with Jeffrey Epstein. …
"This is the big story," said Jones, "and this has put the Trump administration into a mega-massive crisis. And Trump at press conferences … saying don't ask questions … it's insane. So I don't know where in the world they're coming up with that plan."
His advice to Trump is to "release everything" because "this is not going away."
Jones was reacting to Trump's extreme displeasure with ongoing controversy over Attorney General Pam Bondi's refusal to release files on the convicted pedophile, amid reports FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino may resign over the issue.
In a lengthy post Saturday on Truth Social, Trump said: "What's going on with my 'boys' and, in some cases, 'gals?' They're all going after Attorney General Pam Bondi, who is doing a FANTASTIC JOB! We're on one Team, MAGA, and I don't like what's happening.
"We have a PERFECT Administration, THE TALK OF THE WORLD, and 'selfish people' are trying to hurt it, all over a guy who never dies, Jeffrey Epstein. For years, it's Epstein, over and over again.
"Why are we giving publicity to Files written by Obama, Crooked Hillary, Comey, Brennan, and the Losers and Criminals of the Biden Administration, who conned the World with the Russia, Russia, Russia Hoax, 51 'Intelligence' Agents, 'THE LAPTOP FROM HELL,' and more? They created the Epstein Files, just like they created the FAKE Hillary Clinton/Christopher Steele Dossier that they used on me, and now my so-called 'friends' are playing right into their hands.
"Why didn't these Radical Left Lunatics release the Epstein Files? If there was ANYTHING in there that could have hurt the MAGA Movement, why didn't they use it? They haven't even given up on the John F. Kennedy or Martin Luther King, Jr. Files. No matter how much success we have had, securing the Border, deporting Criminals, fixing the Economy, Energy Dominance, a Safer World where Iran will not have Nuclear Weapons, it's never enough for some people.
"We are about to achieve more in 6 months than any other Administration has achieved in over 100 years, and we have so much more to do. We are saving our Country and, MAKING AMERICA GREAT AGAIN, which will continue to be our complete PRIORITY.
"The Left is imploding! Kash Patel, and the FBI, must be focused on investigating Voter Fraud, Political Corruption, ActBlue, The Rigged and Stolen Election of 2020, and arresting Thugs and Criminals, instead of spending month after month looking at nothing but the same old, Radical Left inspired Documents on Jeffrey Epstein. LET PAM BONDI DO HER JOB — SHE'S GREAT!
"The 2020 Election was Rigged and Stolen, and they tried to do the same thing in 2024 — That's what she is looking into as AG, and much more. One year ago our Country was DEAD, now it's the 'HOTTEST' Country anywhere in the World. Let's keep it that way, and not waste Time and Energy on Jeffrey Epstein, somebody that nobody cares about. Thank you for your attention to this matter!"
An appeals court has overturned the conviction of Douglass Mackey, who was jailed after sharing memes against Hillary Clinton during the 2016 election, Fox News reported. The pro-Trump poster was convicted of conspiracy charges and sentenced to seven months in federal prison in 2023.
Mackey, who called himself an internet "troll" as he posted under the handle "Ricky Vaughn," had a moderately successful Twitter account with nearly 58,000 followers. He was a fan of Donald Trump, the GOP candidate at the time, and posted one meme telling prospective Clinton voters to cast their votes by text.
He was sentenced to federal prison by a Brooklyn jury for this, which many believed was outrageously unfair. On Wednesday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit agreed and reversed that verdict, finding that "no rational jury" should have convicted him.
The three-judge panel unanimously ruled that the misleading memes did not constitute the crime of conspiracy for which he was convicted and jailed. "The jury’s verdict and the resulting judgment of conviction must be set aside," wrote Chief Judge Debra Ann Livingston.
According to the New York Post, Mackey's online activity consisted of sharing memes, some of them misleading people about when and where to vote. He would sometimes tailor them to specific voting blocs, but they were only seen by a relatively small number of users.
Mackey also would sometimes enter chat rooms and attempt to persuade others to vote for Trump. After reviewing the lower court's ruling, the appeals court found that convicting the 36-year-old for this activity was incorrect, especially on the conspiracy angle.
"The mere fact that Mackey posted the memes, even assuming that he did so with the intent to injure other citizens in the exercise of their right to vote, is not enough, standing alone, to prove a violation of [federal law]. The government was obligated to show that Mackey knowingly entered into an agreement with other people to pursue that objective," Livingston wrote.
"This, the government failed to do," she added. Not only was the premise faulty, but the evidence they presented failed to support the conviction, aside from the memes Mackey shared.
The judge wrote that evidence "consisted of exchanges among the participants in several private Twitter message groups — exchanges the government argued showed the intent of the participants to interfere with others’ exercise of their right to vote," Livingston wrote. "Yet the government failed to offer sufficient evidence that Mackey even viewed — let alone participated in — any of these exchanges," she added.
Many Trump supporters agreed that the appeals court was correct to overturn the conviction in light of the evidence, or rather, lack thereof. Mackey celebrated the victory with a "HALLELUJAH!" in a post to X, formerly Twitter on Wednesday.
"Now we sue," Mackey promised. Others who weighed in on social media pointed out how wrong the government got this in the first place, including attorney and podcaster Eric Matheny.
"Douglass Mackey went to prison for posting (not even creating) a Hillary meme in 2016. It was one of the greatest injustices of the last 10 years. This is a victory, but it can never give him back the time and quality of life the US government stole from him," Matheny wrote.
Douglass Mackey went to prison for posting (not even creating) a Hillary meme in 2016.
It was one of the greatest injustices of the last 10 years.
This is a victory, but it can never give him back the time and quality of life the US government stole from him. pic.twitter.com/NHOIeNLwZh
— Eric Matheny 🎙️ (@ericmmatheny) July 9, 2025
Clinton and her minions were sore losers and are no doubt furious that Mackey has won the day. It's a very good thing that this wrong was righted, but it never should have happened in the first place.
U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi on Thursday characterized former DOJ whistleblower Erez Reuveni as a "disgruntled employee" and "leaker" who is telling false stories about the Trump administration's alleged internal dialogue that encouraged President Donald Trump to defy court orders when they interfere with his policies.
Reuveni told the New York Times in a story published Thursday that federal judge appointee Emil Bove made repeated suggestions about defying court injunctions and rulings that limited Trump's executive orders on immigration, one of which led to the deportation of Kilmar Abrego Garcia and hundreds of other illegal immigrants to CECOT in El Salvador.
The administration was "thumbing its nose at the courts" over the due process rights when it deported Abrego Garcia and the others to CECOT, Reuveni said.
"If they can do this sort of thing to Abrego Garcia, to 238 people that nobody knows, and send them to CECOT forever with no due process, they can do that to anyone," Reuveni told the Times. "It should be deeply, deeply worrisome … that the government can, without showing evidence to anyone of anything, spirit you away on a plane to wherever, forever."
Bondi pointed out that the timing of the Times story was very convenient; Bove's confirmation hearing to be a judge in the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals took place on Friday, the day after the story came out.
Bove previously served as one of Trump's criminal defense attorneys and was a top official in the Justice Department.
"We support legitimate whistleblowers, but this disgruntled employee is not a whistleblower — he's a leaker asserting false claims seeking five minutes of fame, conveniently timed just before a confirmation hearing and a committee vote," Bondi said on X.
"As Mr. Bove testified and as the Department has made clear, there was no court order to defy, as we successfully argued to the DC Circuit when seeking a stay, when they stayed Judge [James] Boasberg's lawless order. And no one was ever asked to defy a court order," she went on.
"This is another instance of misinformation being spread to serve a narrative that does not align with the facts. This 'whistleblower' signed 3 briefs defending DOJ's position in this matter, and his subsequent revisionist account arose only after he was fired because he violated his ethical duties to the department," her post concluded.
At issue are emails Reuveni released that he says show Bove favored rush deportations and suggested the DOJ might be forced to say "f*** you to court orders in order to implement Trump's executive orders.
There has been a very definite conflict playing out between the executive branch and the legislative one.
Trump was ordered to turn around planeloads of immigrants that were already in the air, but it did not happen.
Did Trump defy the order or did it come too late to do anything about the planes already in the air?
It's not out of reach for someone in the administration to say what Bove is alleged to have said, in the heat of the moment and sort of hypothetically.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
An expert is warning about possible danger ahead for American jurisprudence because of the cash – millions of dollars – that a foreign interest is putting into the pockets of justices on the U.S. Supreme Court.
The warning comes from Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, in a column reprinted at the Gatestone Institute.
The corporation is the German publishing giant Bertelsmann, who in America has brand names like Penguin, Random House, Doubleday, Ballantine, Knopf, Viking, Putnam, Bantam, Del Rey, Golden Books and more.
That German company, the column explains, is an "ex-Nazi foreign corporation" that is "pushing deeply destructive products."
"Even as parents tried to stop their children from being exposed to sexually inappropriate content, former CEO Markus Dohle went to war against them with a $500,000 legal fund," the report noted.
Its impact on the Supreme Court has developed over recent years, as Justice Ketanji Jackson "received a $893,750 advance for her memoir and is now reporting $2 million in profits last year" in deals connected to the conglomerate.
And Penguin Random House will be publishing Justice Amy Coney Barrett's book for which she received a $2 million advance, it said.
And "Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor had been previously criticized for not recusing herself in cases involving Penguin which had paid her over $3 million."
"Bertelsmann millions have gone mostly unexamined even as ProPublica, a leftist advocacy group, launched a smear campaign against Justice [Clarence] Thomas. The Thomas smears were repeated by every media outlet in the country which pursued the 76-year-old justice's 96-year-old mother to find out where exactly she lives and who paid the tuition for his grandnephew, yet shrug when the Supreme Court can't even form a quorum over millions from a multinational giant that has business before the court being directed to justices."
The warning noted that the millions are coming "from an avaricious foreign publisher which has deluged Supreme Court justices with millions of dollars in generous publishing deals."
"Penguin's payouts previously made headlines when five Supreme Court justices, including Jackson and Barrett, had to recuse themselves from a case involving allegations of plagiarism by racist Hamas supporter Ta-Nehisi Coates whose works, including a book describing 9/11 firefighters as 'not human to me', were widely backed and promoted by Penguin," the report explained.
"The current Supreme Court is so badly conflicted over its Penguin cash that it can no longer decide cases involving it," Greenfield explained.
That's even as Bertelsmann "has waged war on American parents, promoted racism and is trying to monopolistically gobble up all of American publishing. Ibram X. Kendi's 'How to Be an Antiracist', Robin DiAngelo's 'White Fragility', Ta-Nehisi Coates's 'Between the World and Me', and, during WWII, 'The Christmas Book of the Hitler Youth' all came out of Bertelsmann," he explained.
His warning continued, "Supreme Court justices used to write on mainly legal matters (with notable exceptions such as Taft and Douglas) and reserved their memoirs toward the end of their lives. Newly minted justices like Jackson signing memoir deals is an obvious cash-in and Justice Sotomayor, after publishing a memoir no one was asking for 'My Beloved World', began writing children's books.
"Would Penguin really be publishing Sotomayor's feeble efforts at writing children's books, 'Just Help!: How to Build a Better World', 'Just Ask!: Be Different, Be Brave, Be You' and (coming soon) 'Just Shine!: How to Be a Better You' if she weren't a Supreme Court justice?"
While "judges putting their names on things to make money is not illegal," Greenfield noted, "What happens when Bertelsmann triggers a court case with major legal implications and once again a quorum of justices can't be found to sit on it?
"Then the woke mega-publisher will have officially bought America's legal system."