Citing Joe Biden's complaint, delivered while he was issuing a massive pardon to his son Hunter for crimes committed, about unfair prosecutions, lawyers for President-elect Donald Trump pointed to that very factor in a case involving the president-elect before New York Judge Juan Merchan and insisted it be dismissed immediately.
The case was brought by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg and concerned business records from years ago. Those apparent violations would have been misdemeanors had they been brought before the statute of limitations expired.
But they weren't, so Bragg claimed they were felonies because they were in pursuit of another unidentified crime. It's described as the "hush money" case because it involved payments to a porn star for keeping claims of an affair private.
A report from Fox News said lawyers for Trump have demanded the case be dismissed "immediately."
"President Donald J. Trump respectfully submits this motion to dismiss the Indictment and vacate the jury's verdicts…," the lawyers wrote. "The Presidential immunity doctrine, the Presidential Transition Act, and the Supremacy Clause all require that result, and they require it immediately."
They noted Biden's claim that Hunter was prosecuted "unfairly" for his crimes, including gun charges on which he was convicted and tax violations to which he pleaded guilty.
"Yesterday, in issuing a 10-year pardon to Hunter Biden that covers any crimes whether charged or uncharged, President Biden asserted that his son was 'selectively, and unfairly, prosecuted,' and 'treated differently.' President Biden argued that 'raw politics has infected this process and it led to a miscarriage of justice.'"
In reality, the charged, it was this "same DOJ that coordinated and oversaw the politically-motivated, election-interference witch hunts targeting President Trump by disgraced Special Counsel Jack Smith, the other biased prosecutors in Smith's Special Counsel's Office ("SCO"), and others. This is the same DOJ that sent Matthew Colangelo to DA Bragg to help unfairly target President Trump in this empty and lawless case. Since DA Bragg took office, he has engaged in 'precisely the type of political theater' that President Biden condemned."
Trump spokesman Steven Cheung charged, "President Trump and his legal team have filed a powerhouse motion to dismiss once and for all the unconstitutional and politically motivated Manhattan DA Hoax. This lawless case should have never been brought, and the Constitution demands that it be immediately dismissed, as President Trump must be allowed to continue the Presidential Transition process, and execute the vital duties of the presidency, unobstructed by the remains of this, or any other, Witch Hunt."
The case proved to have one scandal after another, as Merchan repeatedly ruled against Trump as the judge's daughter was working with Democrats, raising money on the rulings her father made in the courtroom.
Further, the judge was known to have donated money to Democrats, and he refused to recuse himself despite the apparent conflicts of interest present in the case.
A school in Nevada has agreed to settle a lawsuit brought on behalf of a child in the district who was forced by officials to read pornography – out loud – in class.
The basis of the lawsuit was that officials in Nevada's Clark County School District had forced a child to perform a pornographic monologue in a theater class, the legal team explained.
"After significant testimony was revealed in depositions, CCSD settled with us, affirming the rights of parents and students in the face of inappropriate educational content," the ACLJ announced.
The case was over the forced performance by a 15-year-old student, and a judge had rejected the school's demand that the case be dismissed.
The next step, then, was discovery, during which even school officials expressed shock over what had happened.
One, for example, said, "The content that [the client] performed, I believe, was inappropriate. … The overall content and language was not something that I felt should have been there."
And another admitted, "I do remember the first time I read it, being in shock. … What was written was not appropriate to be read and performed in a school setting. … And so it crossed the boundary."
School officials said even if parental permission had been requested, the reading still "never" would have been approved.
The student's mother became the plaintiff in the lawsuit, and explained she was forced into the action in order to document that her daughter "had nothing to do with creating this … ."
The district, on social media, had offered a misleading statement, that, "The Clark County School District is investigating the circumstances surrounding a class assignment consisting of a student-generated writing exercise that produced content not conducive to student instruction."
That resulted in a hate campaign against the student.
The student's parents responded, "This was an especially difficult time for our daughter. The reason her Dad didn't come to the school board meeting with me was that he was deployed overseas with the U.S. military for a year, then sent to Ft. Bliss for an additional year & a half, recovering from injuries. As any military family will tell you, life can be very difficult for the kids whose parents are deployed. We try to do everything we can to keep their spirits up, but it's not always easy. Her teacher knew this, but I guess it didn't matter to her, and we feel she took advantage of a 15-year-old who just wanted to be a good student and get good grades. Our daughter never wanted to be in the public spotlight for something like this, just like most teens would not want that, so this was all very overwhelming and not an easy journey for her."
The student now is in her first year of college, writing and singing her own songs.
The ACLJ noted that the Nevada legislature subsequently adopted a law that defines "sexual impropriety" by a teacher to include "sharing pornographic or sexually explicit materials," which is expected to allow teachers in future situations to be held accountable.
Local governments can call themselves sanctuaries and say they won't allow a federal program to deport illegal aliens within their boundaries.
But it's likely nothing more than talk.
Denver's mayor recently claimed not only his police but 50,000 residents would line up to prevent the incoming administration of President-elect Donald Trump from deporting illegal aliens found in the city.
He rashly said he'd go to jail over the issue, and Trump's new border czar, Tom Homan, said that's where the mayor would be sent if he persisted.
Now there's another precedent that affirms the incoming administration's authority to run such a program.
A report at the Center Square describes how a three-judge panel at the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals struck down an attempt in Seattle by local officials to rein in deportation programs.
There, officials had ordered companies not to service airplanes being used for deportation during Trump's first administration.
The result is a ruling that the federal government can deport foreign nationals inside the U.S. illegally even over the objection of local authorities.
The report cited the ruling from Judge Daniel Bress, with judges Michael Hawkins and Richard Clinton concurring.
It was a 2019 executive order from King County Executive Dow Constantine that told county officials to ban fixed base operators on a county airfield near Seattle from servicing U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement charter flights used to deport illegal foreign nationals, the report said.
The Trump administration at that time sued, citing the Constitution's Supremacy Clause and other law.
The district judge ruled against Seattle, as has the appeals court now.
The ruling said the federal government had Article III standing to bring the action, and the injuries from the ban were traceable to the local officials' political agenda.
The local order, in fact, violated the intergovernmental immunity doctrine because it "improperly regulated the way in which the federal government transported noncitizen detainees by preventing ICE from using private FBO contractors at Boeing Field, and on its face discriminated against the United States by singling out the federal government and its contractors for unfavorable treatment," the report said the court found.
Fani Willis, a local prosecutor in Atlanta, Georgia, who assembled her claims of an organized crime scheme against now President-elect Donald Trump and other defendants with the help of a paramour she put on a taxpayer-funded salary, now is in more trouble.
Her case, hanging on by a threat at an appeals court, is essentially the only case remaining against Trump after he was elected last month and multiple other lawfare cases were dismissed.
But now, Judicial Watch confirms that she's been found by a court in default after refusing to comply with the Georgia Open Records Act.
Judicial Watch had sought, through the state's legal process regarding records, to obtain information about Willis' coordination with "special counsel" Jack Smith, appointed by the Department of Justice to carry that part of the Democrat Party's lawfare against Trump, cases that now have been dismissed.
Also, records were sought about Willis' coordination with ex-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's partisan January 6 investigating committee, which concealed exculpatory information about President Trump's involvement that day, and tried to portray the events as an actual insurrection against the U.S., when in fact it was a protest that turned into a minor riot with most of the aftermath involve repairs of vandalism.
Judge Robert C.K. McBurney in Fulton County Superior Court said Willis had a number of options in responding to the records case, but did "none of that."
"Plaintiff is thus entitled to judgment by default as if every item and paragraph of the complaint were supported by proper and sufficient evidence. O.C.G.A. § 9-11-55(a). Here, this means Plaintiff has established that Defendant violated the ORA by failing to either turn over responsive records or else notify Plaintiff of her decision to withhold some or all such records. In its complaint, Plaintiff sought the following relief: 1) a declaration that Defendant has violated the ORA; 2) an order for Defendant to search for all records responsive to Plaintiff's request without further delay; 3) an injunction ordering Defendant to cease withholding non-exempt public records responsive to the request; 4) an award of attorney's fees and costs pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 50-18-73(b); 5) a writ of mandamus, ordering Defendant to provide the requested records; and 6) any other relief the Court deems proper."
The judge wrote, "By finding Defendant in default, the Court has in effect declared that she has violated the ORA. The Court also hereby ORDERS Defendant to conduct a diligent search of her records for responsive materials within five business days of the entry of this Order. Within that same five day period, Defendant is ORDERED to provide Plaintiff with copies of all responsive records that are not legally exempted or excepted from disclosure. If Defendant is required or decides to withhold all or part of a requested record, she should follow the procedures set forth in the ORA (see O.C.G.A. § 50-18-71(d)). If the records are stored electronically, they may be produced electronically in a commonly used format such as PDF. The Court expects that such production will include the correspondence identified by Plaintiff in its complaint. If it does not, Defendant is further ORDERED to provide an explanation why such correspondence does not exist in Defendant's records (or why it is being withheld)."
Judicial Watch's request for fees and costs will be addressed during a Dec. 20 hearing.
Judicial Watch said its lawsuit, dating back to last March, came after Willis denied having any records responsive to the request for communications with Jack Smith and more.
The New York Post reported only days ago Willis' case against Trump isn't likely to survive much longer.
It noted her claims against Trump, accusing him alleged election interference in Georgia, likely will vanish soon.
The report said Willis "has remained defiant and ignored a subpoena in September from a special senate committee looking into the case, refusing to show up for a hearing when was supposed to testify. Last week, a Georgia appeals court abruptly canceled oral arguments scheduled for next month in the case and Trump's lawyers are likely cite the federal end to the election interference charges against him to get the Georgia case thrown out."
One Post source said, 'I would be shocked if it wasn't (dismissed) but Fani has an ego bigger than the entire state so who knows."
Willis appointed her then-paramour Nathan Wade as a special prosecutor in her case against Trump – and paid him hundreds of thousands of tax dollars.
He was ordered to leave the case earlier when a judge cited the appearance of impropriety in Willis' workings.
"Fani Willis is something else. We've been doing this work for 30 years, and this is the first time in our experience a government official has been found in default for not showing up in court to answer an open records lawsuit.," Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said.
"Judicial Watch looks forward to getting any documents from the Fani Willis operation about collusion with the Biden administration and Nancy Pelosi's Congress on her unprecedented and compromised 'get-Trump' prosecution."
A new report from the Institute for Justice is warning Americans that their banks – and the federal government – secretly are spying on their money, their spending habits, their banking accounts and more.
With the punishment up to and including closing those accounts if the owner strays from what the government approves.
Such as shopping at specific retailers, or making cash deposits just under $10,000.
The institute explained, "Most Americans have no idea their financial accounts are being monitored. And that's by design. The same federal law that mandates this surveillance also prohibits banks from telling customers about these reports."
That means the first indication that a consumer may have about a government bureaucrat's issue with their activity is when their accounts are closed.
The institute explained Bryan Delaney, a bar owner in New York City, learned the hard way in 2023 when his corporate and personal accounts were shut down.
It seems he offended Deep State members by often depositing cash amounts under $10,000 from his bar business.
The feds demand that such deposits over $10,000 are reported, and those under $10,000 are documented "because they do not trigger" that requirement.
"Bryan wasn't trying to avoid any $10,000 reporting requirement; his bar's revenue simply happened to fall below that threshold," the institute reported.
Other suspicious activities include regular cash deposits or withdrawals, overseas transfers, donations to "controversial" groups, purchases at gun shops or shopping at Dick's Sporting Goods or Cabela's.
The Institute explained, "This is called 'de-banking,' and it's far more common than you might think. Thousands of Americans have had their accounts closed with little warning or explanation."
It's all because of a federal law that imposes demands on bank to monitor accounts.
Actually, the institute said, "Federal law provides that any transaction can be 'suspicious' if the 'bank knows of no reasonable explanation for the transaction.'
"In other words, ordinary financial activities are presumed guilty until proven innocent."
And it gets worse, the IJ explained: "These surveillance laws more broadly harm Americans by creating a vast database of financial information that is susceptible to abuse by bad actors both within and outside government."
That's because federal, state and local – even foreign – agencies are given access to the reports without any warrant.
The IJ is fighting the schemes.
"The Fourth Amendment guarantees our right to be 'secure' in our 'persons, houses, papers, and effects.' That protection for 'papers' should, on its face, extend to the kind of sensitive financial information held by banks," the organization explained.
'These companies should only be maximizing returns for investors, not working to advance their radical climate change agenda by leveraging their holdings and pressuring American energy companies'
Multiple states have joined in a lawsuit against several major investors in the coal industry taking their climate change ideology too far – and threatening the nation's energy supply.
Fox News reports Wyoming, Texas, West Virginia, and eight other states have gone to court against BlackRock, State Street, and Vanguard, charging the industrial investing giants bought into and then used their leverage with various coal companies to "artificially" limit the industry.
"These companies should only be maximizing returns for investors, not working to advance their radical climate change agenda by leveraging their holdings and pressuring American energy companies," charged West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey.
According to the report, he warned his state stood to be directly harmed by the actions alleged as coal-fired power plants account for nearly 90% of Mountaineers' electricity generation in 2022.
Other states that are plaintiffs in the case include Alabama, Arkansas, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Montana, and Nebraska.
The West Virginia Office of Miners' Health & Safety reported that 55,000 West Virginians work in coal mines as of 2023.
Ken Paxton, the attorney general for Texas, said, "Texas will not tolerate the illegal weaponization of the financial industry in service of a destructive, politicized 'environmental' agenda.
"BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street formed a cartel to rig the coal market, artificially reduce the energy supply, and raise prices. Their conspiracy has harmed American energy production and hurt consumers. This is a stunning violation of state and federal law."
A report at Cowboy State Daily explained Wyoming's concerns.
The report said the lawsuit is over "three massive investors" who are accused of "colluding to downsize coal companies in the name of achieving net-zero carbon emissions, driving up energy prices for Americans, and monopolizing the market in the process."
The report explained the defendants "all acquired large percentages of major coal companies, then used their influence to bully the companies into cutting production."
A statement from Wyoming Gov. Mark Gordon's office said the defendants, each, "have individually acquired substantial stockholdings in every significant publicly held coal producer in the United States. Each thereby has acquired the power to influence the policies of these competing companies and significantly diminish competition in the coal markets."
The defendants in 2021 had confirmed they would be activists in the climate agenda, with goals of cutting coal out of the energy production industry as much as possible.
Gordon said, "Under the guise of ESG policies, (the investors) have leveraged their holdings and voted their shares to artificially constrain the supply of coal and significantly diminish competition in the markets for coal, which resulted in increased energy prices for American consumers and extraordinary profits for the asset managers."
The case seeks a court declaration the companies "violated an anti-monopoly federal law; to award damages to the states; to stop the investors from using their stock, proxy voting or other means to restrain coal output; and make the investors pay civil fines and penalties for violating a Texas business law, among other penalties," the report said.
The investors own about 30% of Peabody Energy, 34% of Arch Resources, and small portions of other coal companies, like Black Hills Corp., the report said.
Congress, since 1914, has banned acquiring stock where the effect is to substantially lessen competition.
The report explained, "From 2019 through 2022, Peabody Energy's production fell by 34.7 million tons or 25.5%, says the complaint. Its revenues rose by $358.5 million during the same period, and its profits soared by $1.593 billion, or 853.9%. Arch Resources' production fell by 9.4 million tons over that timeframe, or 11.7%, while its revenues rose by $1.448 billion and its profits skyrocketed by $1.097 billion, or 469.2%, says the complaint."
Political analyst Bill Maher says he "may quit" his "Real Time" show due to the return of Donald Trump to the presidency.
The celebrity pundit recently hosted leftist actress Jane Fonda on his "Club Random" podcast and explained it would be impossible to avoid talking about Trump because politics are central to the HBO broadcast.
MAHER: I'm sh***ing my pants.
FONDA: It's hard to believe.
MAHER: I mean, I may quit because I don't want to do another … I did all the Trump stuff before anybody.
I called him a con man before anyone else; he's a mafia boss. I said he wasn't going to concede the election.
I've seen this f***ing …
FONDA: Then how come he's so hostile to Jimmy Kimmel and not to you?
MAHER: He's very hostile to me! He tweets about me every week! I mean, I'm bored with it.
FONDA: So, find a new thing to do.
MAHER: The show is the politics; there's no other thing, and he's going to dominate the news like he always does!
Cullen Linebarger at the Gateway Pundit noted: "If Maher does follow through and quit, this may prove the start of other far-left late-night hosts, such as Kimmel and Stephen Colbert, throwing in the towel. The only things America would miss are the tears."
PALM BEACH, Florida – Chad Chronister, the Tampa-area sheriff nominated by President-elect Donald Trump to head the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration, or DEA, bowed out of consideration Tuesday evening after pressure from conservatives for his arrest of a Christian pastor during lockdowns amid the COVID pandemic.
The sheriff of Hillsbourough County said on X: "To have been nominated by President-Elect @realDonaldTrump to serve as Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration is the honor of a lifetime. Over the past several days, as the gravity of this very important responsibility set in, I've concluded that I must respectfully withdraw from consideration.
"There is more work to be done for the citizens of Hillsborough County and a lot of initiatives I am committed to fulfilling. I sincerely appreciate the nomination, outpouring of support by the American people, and look forward to continuing my service as Sheriff of Hillsborough County."
On Saturday, Trump nominated Chronister, saying he would work with his attorney general pick, Pam Bondi, "to secure the Border, stop the flow of Fentanyl, and other Illegal Drugs, across the Southern Border."
As reported Sunday, in March 2020, the Hillsborough County Sheriff's Office released a press statement revealing that they had arrested local Tampa Bay church pastor Dr. Rodney Howard-Browne on two second-degree misdemeanors for unlawful assembly and violation of public health emergency rules. In a post on X from the Libertarian Party of Mississippi, the group called out Chronister's decision to arrest Howard-Browne, leading Republican Kentucky Rep. Thomas Massie to respond as well.
"I'm going to call 'em like I see 'em. Trump's nominee for head of DEA should be disqualified for ordering the arrest a pastor who defied COVID lockdowns," Massie wrote on X.
Conservative podcasters the Hodge Twins and journalist Mike Cernovich also called out Trump's choice on X, highlighting Chronister's COVID-19 stances at the time of the incident.
Media personality John Cardillo wrote on X that he had deleted his original post praising the Florida Sheriff after remembering that he is a "COVIDian Sheriff who arrested a pastor during services because 'COVID' to be prosecuted by Andrew Warren, the Soros funded prosecutor DeSantis removed from Office."
While Chronister had taken to social media to publicly thank Trump for the nomination and stated that he is "deeply humbled by this opportunity to serve our nation," podcaster Tim Pool instead called for him to serve prison time.
At the time of Howard-Browne's arrest, Chronister stated that while faith is important and authorities "would never impede on someone's ability to lean on their religious beliefs as a means of comfort," those practicing their beliefs must do so "safely."
"His reckless disregard for human life put hundreds of people in his congregation at risk and thousands of residents who may interact with them this week in danger," Chronister said. "The River at Tampa Bay has an advantage over most places of worship, because they have access to technology that allows them to live stream their services over the internet and broadcast television for the more than 4,000 members to watch from the safety of their homes."
In addition to the local pastor's arrest, the Hillsborough County Sheriff's Office released 164 inmates in March 2020 to help slow the spread of COVID-19 at the county jail.
"We want to protect our employees here. We want to protect the remainder of the jail population. We also feel these low-level, non-violent offenders will be better served at home with their families," Chronister said at the time.
However, only a day after their release, one of the inmates, 26-year-old Joseph Edwards Williams, was arrested again on charges of second-degree murder in connection to a homicide along with charges of felony firearm possession, heroin possession and resisting arrest.
"There is no question Joseph Williams took advantage of this health emergency to commit crimes while he was out of jail awaiting resolution of a low-level, non-violent offense," Chronister said after the incident. "As a result, I call on the State Attorney to prosecute this defendant to the fullest extent of the law."
Dinesh D'Souza has issued an apology to a Georgia man who sued the conservative filmmaker after his "2000 Mules" movie wrongly identified him as a so-called mule repeatedly dropping off ballots.
D'Souza posted a lengthy statement online explaining the situation:
As those who have seen the film or read the book know, "2000 Mules" was based on cell phone geolocation data collected and reviewed by True the Vote. An analysis of this data revealed highly suspicious patterns of certain cell phones, which were recorded in the location of ten or more dropboxes. This data was the premise of the film.
During the production of this film, as a supplement to the geolocation data, True the Vote provided my team with ballot drop box surveillance footage that had been obtained through open records requests. We were assured that the surveillance videos had been linked to geolocation cell phone data, such that each video depicted an individual who had made at least 10 visits to drop boxes. Indeed, it is clear from the interviews within the film itself that True the Vote was correlating the videos to geolocation data.
We recently learned that surveillance videos used in the film may not have actually been correlated with the geolocation data.
I know that the film and my book create the impression that these individuals were mules that had been identified as suspected ballot harvesters based on their geotracked cell phone data. While all of these individuals' images were blurred and unrecognizable, one of the individuals has since come forward publicly and has initiated a lawsuit over the use of his blurred image in the film and the book. I owe this individual, Mark Andrews, an apology. I now understand that the surveillance videos used in the film were characterized on the basis of inaccurate information provided to me and my team. If I had known then that the videos were not linked to geolocation data, I would have clarified this and produced and edited the film differently.
Footage from '2000 Mules'
We operated in good faith and in reliance on True the Vote. We continue to have confidence in their work and also in the basic message of "2000 Mules," namely, that the 2020 election was not the "most secure election in US history"—far from it!—and that there was systematic election fraud sufficient to call the outcome into question. We also continue to have faith that True the Vote's underlying geolocation data and analysis uncovered highly suspicious cell phone travel patterns, including a significant number of cell phone IDs that were recorded at more than ten drop box locations. While the video in the film created an incorrect inference as to Mr. Andrews, the underlying premise of the film holds true.
Indeed, the accuracy of the general proposition of '2000 Mules" was publicly confirmed recently by the disclosure of a leading Democratic organizer, who admitted to an undercover journalist that the premise of "2000 Mules" is accurate.
Again, I apologize to Mr. Andrews. I make this apology not under the terms of a settlement agreement or other duress, but because it is the right thing to do, given what we have now learned. While I do not believe Mr. Andrews was ever identified by the film or book, I am sorry for any harm he believes he and his family has suffered as a result of "2000 Mules."
D'Souza is also critical of some news coverage of his apology, as Mediaite ran a story with the headline: "Dinesh D'Souza Quietly Admits 2020 Stolen Election Film Was Wrong, Apologizes to Man He Identified As a 'Ballot Harvester.'"
Dinesh D'Souza sporting one of his 'Let's Go Brandon' T-shirts (Courtesy Dinesh D'Souza Store)
The filmmaker responded to the Mediaite story, stating: "Contrary to the impression given here, I emphasize that the general conclusion of '2000 Mules' is sound. But the part of my statement that contradicts your headline has been quietly omitted from this article."
Christmas shopping was disrupted, and a traditional Christmas display was put in doubt by "pro-Palestine" protesters in Melbourne, Australia, recently.
Myer, an Australian retail giant, canceled the festive unveiling of its traditional Christmas window exhibit after "Pro-Palestine" protesters announced plans to hold a rally in front of the store. This was the 69th annual display and will remain until January.
The store released a statement explaining its decision:
"In light of recent developments and to ensure the wellbeing and safety of customers and team members, we will no longer hold an event on Bourke Street Mall for the unveiling of our Christmas windows," a spokesperson said.
"Myers' Christmas windows have long symbolized joy and community, and we remain committed to providing a safe and positive experience for all visitors."
In response, the protesters announced they would not hold their "Crash the Christmas Windows" protest, though a handful of flag-waving protesters continued to protest at the store in Melbourne's Central Business District, or CBD. Despite their announcement that they would not protest the unveiling on Sunday, a handful of protesters did attend, chanting, "While you're shopping, bombs are dropping," and "Shame on you" to passers-by.
Amy Settal, the protest organizer, explained their motives to the media.
"The intention was to interrupt the media spectacle and economic gain sought by Myer," Settal said. "The children coming to see the Myer Christmas windows were never a target because children are not a target."
"Pro-Palestine" group Disrupt Wars had shared the Crash the Christmas Windows event on its social media accounts.
"Christmas is canceled, and there will be no joy or frivolity while children in Gaza are massacred," a social media post read.
It is unclear what the connection is between Australian holiday retail and the war in the Middle East.
Jacinta Allan, the premier of Victoria, was furious over the decision, saying the group had "chosen to politicize a beautiful event for children."
"I'm just as mad at all the others who have quietly stoked this division and egged them on," she wrote on social media.
"Blocking the Christmas windows won't change a thing in the Middle East, but it will let down a bunch of kids in Melbourne. Who does that help?"
A 'Grinch' character on display at a Walmart in Stuart, Florida, Sunday, Nov. 13, 2022. (Photo by Joe Kovacs)
The premier said that while people had a "right to demonstrate," they did not have a "right to divide."
"We cannot let ugly protests ruin a beautiful Christmas tradition, and we cannot let violence, division and vilification ruin what makes Victoria great," Allan wrote.
Speaking on 3AW Radio, the premier singled out the Victorian Greens, accusing the political party of using "conflict in the Middle East to bring further division and conflict into Melbourne."
She said most Victorians were "sick of it."
In a related story, an antisemitic Tiktoker called on her 50,000 followers to "make Christmas Palestinian."
Fiona Ryan of Salisbury, England, was found guilty in September of posting anti-Semitic material. At her hearing at the Magistrates Court, she apologized but told District Judge Timothy Pattinson that the posts were not anti-Semitic. Her posts compared Ashkenazi Jews with Nazis and made false claims about Jewish doctors performing sex change procedures on children. She claimed her posts were protected as free speech.
Senior Crown Prosecutor Gavin Sumpter disagreed, stating,"Fiona Ryan sought to hide behind the right to freedom of speech, however, the court found that her posts and videos were grossly offensive."
"Her vile rhetoric reached a wide audience and has caused real harm in the Jewish community, the impact of which she was fully aware of," he added.
The judge ruled in favor of the prosecution, saying, "Any reasonable person would find all of this material featured in this trial grossly offensive" before finding her guilty on all four charges. Last week, she received a sentence of 20 weeks in prison, suspended for 18 months.
She responded to the sentence by posting a TikTok video urging her followers to "make Christmas Palestinian."
Ryan was wearing a keffiyeh, a traditional Arab head covering, around her neck. Popularized by Yasser Arafat, the Egyptian founder of the Palestinian Liberation Organization, the keffiyeh has come to symbolize a call for violence against Israel.
"What I think we need to do is make Christmas Palestinian as much as we possibly can," Ryan said in the video. "That means decorating your tree with perhaps some Palestinian decorations, maybe telling your family, your children about how Jesus was a Palestinian, and how Christmas is a Palestinian story."
"Mostly, it's about supporting Palestinian businesses, whether that's with presents, whether that's through donations, however you want to do it."
"The most important message that we get out this year is that Christmas is Palestinian. Make Christmas Palestinian again … Do this. Let's make this Christmas the most Palestinian Christmas that ever was."
Islam believes in Jesus as a prophet. However, according to Islam, Jesus was not crucified, did not die on the cross, and was not resurrected. Instead, He is depicted as having been miraculously saved by God and ascending into heaven. However, Muslims do not celebrate Christmas.
Jesus as a Palestinian was an invention of Yasser Arafat's adviser, Hanan Ashrawi, a Christian, who said in an interview with the Washington Jewish Week on Feb. 22, 2001, that "Jesus was a Palestinian."
This became the official PLO platform as evidenced by their frequent reference to Jesus as "the first Palestinian martyr" and whose annual Christmas statement reads, "Every Christmas, Palestine celebrates the birth of one of its own: Jesus." This year, the Palestinian Authority prohibited public celebrations of Christmas in Bethlehem.
This false claim has been incorporated into Christian theology in what is called Liberation Theology. This portrays Jesus as a secular social justice warrior fighting the "Occupation."
Liberation Theology portrays Jesus as a Galilean Jewish revolutionary figure, aligning him with the marginalized and oppressed groups rather than the religious elite. The article suggests that the typical Christian understanding of Jesus obscures His ministry's political and social dimensions. The temple-state in Jerusalem is portrayed as oppressive toward the common people, especially Galileans, imposing heavy burdens through taxation and religious regulations.
It suggests Zionism, like earlier empires, disconnects Palestinians from their biblical heritage and homeland. Liberation Theology defines Jesus as a Palestinian living under Israeli occupation. It represents Christianity as a human-rights movement.
Patriot News Alerts delivers timely news and analysis on U.S. politics, government, and current events, helping readers stay informed with clear reporting and principled commentary.
